Skip to content


Here’s the start of how they destroy America



Muslims Running in Upcoming Elections


Recently a friend of mine came across info on an anti police, anti Trump, Muslim who is running for Mayor of Denver, Co. Another friend posted to Facebook about a Muslim woman running for U.S. Senate in AZ. After hearing about this, I started wondering, just how many Muslims are running in upcoming elections? I decided to look into it…Here’s what’s been found so far…

Muslims running in upcoming elections:

Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is a Muslim man whose parents are immigrants from Egypt. Some people call him the “next Obama” or “Obama 2.0.” Some say he has been groomed by George Soros. On his social media accounts he has photos of himself with Bill Clinton, Maxine Waters, and Linda Sarsour. Elizabeth Warren is campaigning for him. He is running for Governor of Michigan. The primary election is August 7, 2018 and general election is on November 6, 2018.

Asif Mahmood is a Muslim immigrant from Pakistan. He is a long time Clinton contributor. He and his wife have held fundraisers at their home for Clinton, which Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin attended. Mahmood is anti Trump and calls himself a “triple threat” to President Trump. He openly says he will go against President Trump. His name is found on Wikileaks. He and Podesta have emailed each other. He is running for lieutenant governor of California. UPDATE: Asif Mahmood has dropped out of the race for lieutenant governor and is now running to be California’s next Insurance Commissioner.

Deedra Hill Abboud is a Muslim convert. She is married to Ali Abboud, an immigrant from Iraq. She has worked with terror linked groups CAIR & MAS. Deedra’s campaign slogan is “United, We Rise.” She is running for U.S. Senate in Arizona. The primary election is on Aug. 28th 2018 and general election is on Nov. 6th 2018.


Kayvan Khalatbari is an Iranian-American. He is pro drugs, pro sanctuary cities, anti police and anti Trump. He has photos of himself on social media, licking the American Flag. He is running for Mayor of Denver Colorado in 2019.

Deeqo Jibril is a refugee from Somalia. She is anti Trump and anti Travel ban. She is founder of the Somali Community & Cultural Association. She was also a community outreach organizer for the campaign of Elizabeth Warren in 2012. She is running for District 7 representative on the Boston City Council in Massachusetts. UPDATE: Jibril was defeated in the primary election on September 26, 2017.

Asima Azam is a Muslim woman and daughter of immigrants from Pakistan. She is married to Dr. Moeed Azam.  She is running for District 3 Commissioner in the City of Orlando, Florida. UPDATE: Azam was defeated in the general election on November 7, 2017.

Bushra Amiwala is a 19 year old Muslim woman whose parents immigrated from Pakistan. She is running for County Board Commissioner, Cook County, Illinois, District 13. UPDATE: Amiwala was defeated in the primary election.

Regina Mustafa is the founder of Community Interfaith Dialogue on Islam of Rochester, MN. She is a Muslim immigrant running for the 1st Congressional District, Minnesota. UPDATE: Mustafa dropped out of the race in October 2017 and is now running for Mayor in Rochester Minnesota.

Zahra Suratwala is a Muslim woman who is running for DuPage County Board in District 1. The primary is March 20, 2018.

Fayrouz Saad is seeking election to the U.S. House to represent the 11th Congressional District of Michigan. According to Saad’s website, Fayrouz is an economic development advocate, a community organizer, and a public servant who worked for the Obama administration and most recently served Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan. The primary election takes place on August 7, 2018.

Amir Malik is running for Minnesota State Representative for 37B.

Kayse Jama is running for Oregon State Senator for District 24. The election is May 15, 2018.

Dilara Sayeed is a candidate for District 5 of the Illinois House of Representatives. The primary election is being held on March 20, 2018. The general election will take place on November 6, 2018. UPDATE: Sayeed was defeated in the primary election.

Kaisar Ahmed is a 2018 Democratic candidate seeking election to the U.S. House to represent the 31st Congressional District of California.  The primary election takes place on June 5, 2018.

Nadia Hashimi is a 2018 Democratic candidate seeking election to the U.S. House to represent the 6th Congressional District of Maryland. The primary election takes place on June 26, 2018.

Ismail Mohamed is running for District 25 of the Ohio House of Representatives. The primary election is being held on May 8, 2018. The general election will take place on November 6, 2018.

Sameena Mustafa is running for US Representative for Illinois District 5. The primary election takes place on March 20, 2018. UPDATE: Mustafa was defeated in the primary election.

Johnny Martin is a Muslim convert running for office for Arizona house of representatives for district 25. Martin is a 24 yr old activist. Martin has volunteered and advocated for DACA and Black Lives Matters. The primary election takes place on August 28, 2018 and the general election will be held on November 6, 2018.


Now, I know some of you are going to say “Big deal. They wont win.” So let me list Muslims who have ALREADY won in previous elections in the United States:

Keith Ellison is a Muslim convert  and Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives representing Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District. Ellison was first elected to the House in 2006. He won re-election in 2012. Ellison won re-election in 2016

Ilhan Omar is a somali refugee and Democratic member of the Minnesota House of Representatives, representing District 60B. She was first elected to the chamber in 2016.

Nadeem Mazen was the first Muslim ever elected to a Massachusetts governing body and the City Council’s youngest member.

Amir Omar is a Muslim man and the City Councilman for Place 7 in Richardson, Texas.

André Carson is the U.S. Representative for Indiana’s 7th congressional district.

Larry Shaw is a Democratic member of the North Carolina General Assembly representing the state’s twenty-first Senate district.

And lets not forget, we had a Muslim in the White House for 8 years!

#Thanks Obama

If you’re wondering my point with this article, here it is – Getting into positions of power is all part of the Muslims goal to enforce sharia law. Muslims do not want to assimilate, they want to take over. They do not want to be your friend, they want to kill you. There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim and there never will be. If we do not speak out, educate people and vote against these people, this will no longer be America.

Please share!


Article Comments  at the bottom of the article….



NO WAY. Here’s the start of how they destroy America…NO ONE LISTENS…keep voting for these people…you will see what happens…just look at Europe!

Posted by Judge Jeanine Pirro has Fans on Monday, May 14, 2018



Iran lawmakers shout ‘death to America,’ burn U.S. flag after Trump nixes nuclear deal



Iranian lawmakers shouted “death to America” and set fire to a paper U.S. flag during angry scenes at the country’s parliament in Tehran, a day after President Trump pulled out of the nuclear deal.

The protest came as Iranian officials, including parliament speaker Ali Larijani and President Hassan Rouhani, said Wednesday they hoped European leaders will work with them to preserve the deal between Tehran and world powers — without the U.S. — but stressed that the nation could now decide to resume its nuclear program.

“If necessary, we can begin our industrial enrichment without any limitations,” the Iranian leader said. “Until implementation of this decision, we will wait for some weeks and will talk with our friends and allies and other signatories of the nuclear deal, who signed it and who will remain loyal to it. Everything depends on our national interests.”

Iran’s supreme leader, who has the final say on all state matters, struck a more defiant tone. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei directly challenged Trump, saying “you cannot do a damn thing” after Trump announced he was renewing sanctions on Iran.

During the demonstration in parliament, lawmakers held up the flaming U.S. flag as their fellow parliamentarians joined in anti-American chants. They also burned a piece of paper representing the nuclear deal and stomped on the papers’ ashes. Larijani, according to the Iranian Students’ News Agency, said Trump lacked “mental capacity.”

Later Wednesday, Trump warned Iran against resuming its nuclear weapons program.

“I would advise Iran not to start their nuclear program,” Trump told reporters when asked about the potential consequences. “I would advise them very strongly. If they do there will be very severe consequence.”

European diplomats meanwhile insisted that the 2015 accord would not suddenly collapse despite the U.S.’s withdrawal. Hans Dietmar Schweisgut, the European Union’s representative to China said Wednesday during a press briefing in Beijing that the EU strongly believes “that this is an agreement which belongs to the international community. This is not an agreement that will fall apart if you just walk away.”

France’s foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told French radio that the deal “wasn’t dead yet” and that European countries would hold talks over how to keep it alive.

Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia were all signatories to the 2015 accord under which Iran pledged to limit its stockpile of enriched uranium for 15 years and its number of centrifuges for 10 years. Both are needed to make nuclear weapons. The EU, U.S. and United Nations lifted economic sanctions as part of the deal.

Eastern European countries deport all Muslim immigrants and refugees for security reasons



Eastern European countries Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Slovakia called EU quotas on migrant distribution unhelpful for unacceptable.
Just look at the immigration crisis in Europe, millions of immigrants from all over Asia, Africa and the Middle East used the war in 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.



They banned Islamic immigration.
Do you support their right to defend themselves? Yes or No

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Tuesday, May 1, 2018




Muslim migrants leave Germany “We did not get free stuff. Nothing is free here”

This is what will happen if these so called “Refugee’s” are allowed into the USA!

All they want is to spread Sharia Law and take!!  They Contribute NOTHING!!!

Every month the Iraqi embassy in Berlin issued nearly 1,000 travel permits for the return of their citizens. Every week a plane leaves from Berlin’s Tegel airport to Iraq.
This proves that they are not refugees but illegal immigrants who want to invade Europe and exploit the welfare system of the European countries at the expense of the taxpayers.
Germany can not provide free housing, money and food to millions of illegal immigrants from all over the world.
Every country has the right to defend itself to close its borders and to 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.




 photo IMG_20171209_1702361.jpg


 photo IMG_20171208_1251231.jpg


 photo taqiya21.jpg


 photo real_sharialaw.jpg



This proves that they are not refugees but illegal immigrants who want to invade Europe and exploit the welfare system

Posted by ‎Support Israel – תמיכה בישראל‎ on Sunday, April 29, 2018




Stop the Invasion: America Is Not Obliged to Take the Refuse of Failed Nations




“As a backup measure, I say trained, armed patriots should be prepared also to defend our nation against unlawful invasion…”

Finally, a President leads this country who is dedicated to this country. Finally, a man who is not guilt-conflicted and who acts only in the nation’s best interest. Finally, someone with the good sense to say, effectively, “You will not topple this nation from within, using invading hordes from foreign countries.”

The sheer madness of the response from the Left to President Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops to the southern border, to stop a “caravan” of illegal aliens from entering our country, speaks volumes about the hatred the Left holds toward this country.

Their disregard for our sovereignty is breathtaking. What’s even more stunning is they think we patriots will sit quietly by as they manipulate current suicidal laws. Laws that enable the least productive from other countries to violate our sovereignty. If laws exist that not only do not ensure our survival against an enemy, but also actively lend to our demise, those laws are in need of suspension. Prime example, the Asylum law.1

Such laws may have been beneficial during an earlier time in our nation’s history, but today they are being used against us.


This latest leftist fiasco has even brought former President of Mexico Vincente Fox out from under his rock to tell us how to run our country. That the media even prints the garbage this man spews is an insult to all patriots.

We have reached a point where either the patriots who want to preserve this nation as a Constitutional Republic will run it, or the socialist secularists who want to transform it will run it. It cannot be both. There is no sharing of leadership when worldviews are at opposite ends of the spectrum. And anybody in this country who is not aware by now that the progressive Left are enemies of this nation’s survival as a Constitutional Republic, is delusional. Thankfully, President Trump is not among them.

The President has directed Defense Secretary James Mattis to deploy troops to the southern U.S. border, as any strong leader would do when sovereignty is threatened. And every one of those 4,000 troops (an estimate) should be armed to show that this President is serious. Currently, Secretary Mattis has approved troops with weapons for self-defense only. They will leave enforcement duties to the Border Patrol. The Secretary leaves open, however, the possibility he could approve such involvement in the future if necessary.2

As a backup measure, I say trained, armed patriots should be prepared also to defend our nation against unlawful invasion.

To show he means business, the President has also directed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to prevent the illegals from crossing our border as a matter of national security. I am certain some traitors ensconced in the federal bureaucracy (Obama leftovers) are working overtime to thwart the success of that directive. But if the Homeland Security Secretary is worth her salt (and there is no guarantee she is), she will do her part to ensure that the invaders will not be allowed to enter.

I am hearing blather from so-called legal experts about what President Trump can and cannot do about this matter. Frankly, I’m sick of laws being used to hamstring people who have this nation’s best interest at heart, as President Trump does. Suicidal laws that say we must take people from anywhere if they can qualify for asylum have no place in a strong nation, not if that nation wants to remain strong.

We know these people have been prompted by traitorous lawyers and open-borders operatives to lie about their circumstances, to get into our country. And when they are in, they disappear into the populace to sponge off of American citizens, natural born and naturalized legal immigrants.

I, like President Trump and many other citizens, have had it with twisted arguments about our duty to assist people who scheme to enter our country. Those who advance these pernicious arguments are preying on the ignorance and idiocy of “bleeding hearts.” Enough with this insanity. The Left wants this nation overrun with third-world people who offer no real value to our country, so that these people will vote for the Democrats’ socialist agenda. That fact is incontrovertible.

It’s time the “conservatives” in positions of leadership stop playing pansies and man up to the fact that we are at war (albeit not yet “hot”).

Admittedly, we are still up against folks on our side, like Dinesh D’Souza (noted author and political commentator), who think we are all one big national family. We must, therefore, not look upon our progressive brethren too harshly. They merely have a different perspective on how we go about doing what’s in the best interest of the country, so they say.

That kind of thinking will turn this nation into a socialist hell-hole, for sure, because you can bet the Left does not view patriots and conservatives as “brethren.” In their eyes, we are the enemy. Like the loathsome character Barack Obama, who set this nation on a path of “transformation” into a hell-hole, his leftist minions remain set on carrying out his wishes regardless of a plurality of patriotic citizens saying, “No you will not!”

Fellow America patriots, we are at war. The sooner that reality sinks in, the more likely we can win it.


1 From the Homeland Security Web site, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services:

Every year people come to the United States seeking protection because they have suffered persecution or fear that they will suffer persecution due to:
· Race
· Religion
· Nationality
· Membership in a particular social group
· Political opinion
If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States.

2 Defense Secretary James Mattis deploys National Guard troops along the U.S. southern border.

© Sylvia Thompson









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

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





How Rockefeller Founded Big Pharma And Waged War On Natural Cures..

How Rockefeller Founded Big Pharma And Waged War On Natural Cures

“How Big Oil Conquered the World” is a brilliant piece of investigative journalism presented by James Corbett,1 revealing the immense extent to which the oil industry has shaped and is ruling the world as we know it.
“From farm to pharmaceutical, diesel truck to dinner plate, pipeline to plastic product, it is impossible to think of an area of our modern-day lives that is not affected by the petrochemical industry.
The story of oil is the story of the modern world. And this is the story of those who helped shape that world, and how the oil-igarchy they created is on the verge of monopolizing life itself.”

Corbett carefully details the sordid back story of today’s “oiligarchy.” While most people are well-acquainted with the Rockefeller name, few probably know the true history of the Rockefellers’ rise to power.

Big Oil — An Industry Founded on Treachery and Deceit

As noted by Corbett, certain details of the Big Oil story are well known. Others are more obscure. The story begins in rural New York state in the early 19th century, with William Avery Rockefeller, an authentic “snake oil salesman” going by the fictional name of “Dr. Bill Livingston.”
While neither a doctor nor a cancer specialist, Rockefeller, aka “Dr. Livingston,” aka “Devil Bill,” traveled the country’s back roads conning people into buying his “Rock Oil” tonic for cancer — “a useless mixture of laxative and petroleum that had no effect whatsoever,” according to Corbett.

Get your Free copy of The Wicked Good Ketogenic Diet Cookbook
This free cookbook is jampacked with 148 delicious ketogenic recipes that will help you burn fat like crazy!
William Avery Rockefeller fathered numerous children with three women, and took the name Livingston after being indicted for rape in 1849. One of those children was John D. Rockefeller, who became the world’s first billionaire after founding Standard Oil.
As noted by Corbett:
“When he wasn’t running away from them or disappearing for years at a time, [William Avery Rockefeller] would teach his children the tricks of his treacherous trade. He once bragged of his parenting technique: ‘I cheat my boys every chance I get. I want to make ’em sharp’ …
The world we live in today is the world created in ‘Devil’ Bill’s image. It’s a world founded on treachery, deceit, and the naïveté of a public that has never wised up to the parlor tricks that the Rockefellers and their ilk have been using to shape the world for the past century and a half.”

The Birth of the Oil Industry

Another character with a similarly dubious background is “Colonel” Edwin Drake, an unemployed railroad conductor who managed to secure himself a job with the Pennsylvania Rock Oil Company after running into the founders, George Bissell and James Townsend, at a hotel.
The title “Colonel” was bestowed on him by Bissell and Townsend, who thought it might help him “win the respect of the locals” as he went about the company’s business, collecting Seneca oil, which the company distilled into kerosene (lamp oil).
His mission was to collect enough Seneca oil to make the business profitable — a task that turned out to be more difficult than expected, as mere gallons could be collected using the standard collection methods.
Eventually, he tried drilling through the shale bedrock to reach greater reservoirs of oil, and on August 28, 1859 — literally the day he’d used up the last of his funds — the oil began to flow from the ground. And with that, a new industry was born.
It didn’t take long before homes and factories around the world were using lamp oil refined from crude, and prospectors from around the country flocked to Pennsylvania in search of the “black gold.”
Among them was John D. Rockefeller, a Cleveland bookkeeper who, according to Corbett, had two ambitions in life: “To make $100,000 and to live to 100 years old.” With a $1,000 loan from his father, “Devil Bill,” John D. Rockefeller set off to make his fortune.

The Standard Oil Monopoly

After a series of partnerships and mergers over a seven-year period, John D. Rockefeller eventually incorporated Standard Oil of Ohio in 1870. According to the report:
“The next year, he quietly put what he called ‘our plan’ — his campaign to dominate the volatile oil industry — into devastating effect. Rockefeller knew that the refiner with the lowest transportation cost could bring rivals to their knees.
He entered into a secret alliance with the railroads, called the South Improvement Company. In exchange for large, regular shipments, Rockefeller and his allies secured transport rates far lower than those of their bewildered competitors.
Ida Tarbell, the daughter of an oil man, later remembered how men like her father struggled to make sense of events: ‘An uneasy rumor began running up and down the Oil Regions,’ she wrote.
‘Freight rates were going up. … Moreover … all members of the South Improvement Company — a company unheard of until now — were exempt. … On every lip there was but one word and that was ‘conspiracy.’”
By the time he was 40, John D. Rockefeller controlled 90 percent of the global oil refineries. Within another few years (early 1880s), he also controlled 90 percent of the marketing of oil, and one-third of all oil wells. His power and influence cannot be overstated at this point.
He had an international monopoly on what was to become the most important commodity in the world economy.
Following in Rockefeller’s footsteps were a handful of other wealthy families, including the Nobels, the Rothschilds, the Dutch Royal family, and millionaire William Knox D’arcy, who was the first to strike oil in Persia.
These early “oil barons” became enormously wealthy. And as billions of people became increasingly dependent on oil for virtually every aspect of life, they gained tremendous power and influence.
However, oil could have been replaced by other resources, were it not for the shrewd manipulation by these early “oiligarchs.”

The Death of the Electric Car, and Other Lucky Breaks

The advent of the electric light bulb took a good chunk out of the lamp oil market and temporarily threatened the oil monopoly. But lamp oil was quickly replaced by the need for gasoline to run the two-stroke internal combustion engine, invented by German engineer Karl Benz.
In 1888, Benz Motorwagen became the first commercially available automobile, and with that, the petroleum industry’s profits were again secured. But even then their ongoing monopoly was not guaranteed. The first electric car had been built in 1884, and by 1897, electric cars were gaining popularity in London. In the early 20th century, 28 percent of cars sold in the U.S. were also electric. As noted by Corbett:
“The electrics had advantages over the internal combustion engine: they required no gear shifting or hand cranking, and had none of the vibration, smell or noise associated with gasoline-powered cars. Lady Luck intervened again on January 10, 1901, when prospectors struck oil at Spindletop in East Texas.
The gusher blew 100,000 barrels a day and set off the next great oil boom, providing cheap, plentiful oil to the American market and driving down gas prices. It wasn’t long before the expensive, low range electric engines were abandoned altogether and big, loud, gas-guzzling engines came to dominate the road …”
Interestingly, the event that made John D. Rockefeller into the world’s first billionaire was supposed to rein in his unbridled power. He’d come under intense scrutiny as his wealth increased and, on May 15, 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court declared Standard Oil a monopoly “in restraint of trade” and ordered its dissolution.
But by dissolving the company into multiple entities, shares of Standard Oil tripled in value, and in a few short years, Rockefeller’s worth equaled nearly 2 percent of the total U.S. economy.
“For the oiligarchy, the lesson of the rise and rise of Rockefeller was obvious: the more ruthlessly that monopoly was pursued, the tighter that control was grasped, the greater the lust for power and money, the greater the reward would be in the end. From now on, no invention would derail the oil majors from their quest for total control. No competition would be tolerated. No threat to the oiligarchs would be allowed to rise.”

The Continued Squashing of Competition

While the electric car had been successfully eliminated, thereby securing Big Oil profits, another competing resource was on the horizon: alcohol.
Henry Ford designed his Model T automobile to run on either gasoline or alcohol, stating that just about anything that could be fermented could be used for fuel, predicting the future of fuel was wide open to a number of alternatives. However, the oil industry succeeded in eliminating the competition yet again, this time by supporting the anti-alcohol movements and the formation of the Prohibition Party in 1869.
While Rockefeller avoided alcohol, his chief concern was not to uphold morality in the U.S. The prohibition served his agenda by creating burdensome restrictions on ethanol producers, and as ethanol became more costly, its attraction as an alternate fuel ceased.
Also, as detailed in my previous article about Clair Patterson’s fight to eliminate leaded gasoline, once the high compression engine was invented, car manufacturers started running into performance problems. General Motors diagnosed the problem, realizing that the problem originated with the fuel. General Motors tried about 15,000 different combinations of elements to find a solution to the engine knocking.

Adding benzene from coal to gasoline was found to work. Ditto for adding grain alcohol. Adding 10 percent alcohol to gasoline raised the quality of the fuel, causing less knocking in the engine. It also had other benefits, including clean combustion, which eliminated soot emissions, and increased horsepower without engine knocking.
But as research continued, General Motors determined that adding lead to the gasoline produced “an ideal anti-knock fuel” — ideal mostly because manufacturing the lead additive, tetraethyl lead, would allow them to make the greatest profits. Were they to add alcohol to the gasoline, the oil industry stood to lose a large amount of petroleum sales, anywhere from 10 to 20 percent, depending on how much alcohol was added.
By adding lead, the oil industry had a product it could again control in its entirety. So Standard Oil partnered with General Motors, creating a joint corporation known as Ethyl Corporation. Leaded gasoline became the norm, and over the next 80 years, countless people were sickened and harmed by this neurotoxic fuel additive, thrust upon the people for no other reason than it created the greatest profits.

Big Oil Secretly Buys Up and Dismantles Public Transportation System

In 1936, Standard Oil and General Motors also took part in the reformation of public transportation. Only 10 percent of Americans owned a car, and most city dwellers relied on electric trolley networks. By replacing the electric streetcars with gasoline-guzzling buses, the oil industry secured an even greater foothold within the U.S. economy. As detailed in Corbett’s report:
“The cartel had been careful to hide their involvement in National City Lines, but it was revealed to the public in 1946 by … Edwin J. Quinby … He uncovered the oiligarchs’ stock ownership of National City Lines and its subsidiaries and detailed how they had step by step bought up and destroyed the public transportation lines in Baltimore, Los Angeles, St. Louis and other major urban centres…
[I]n 1947 National City Lines was indicted for conspiring to form a transportation monopoly and conspiring to monopolize sales of buses and supplies. In 1949, GM, Firestone, Standard Oil of California and their officers and corporate associates were convicted on the second count of conspiracy.
The punishment for buying up and dismantling America’s public transportation infrastructure? A $5,000 fine. H. C. Grossman, who had been the director of Pacific City Lines when it oversaw the scrapping of LA’s $100 million Pacific Electric system, was fined exactly $1.”
Next came the undermining of the railway system. In 1953, General Motor President Charles Wilson was appointed Secretary of Defense, and Wilson, along with Francis DuPont, Chief Administrator of Federal Highways, set into motion the largest public works project in U.S. history with the creation of the interstate highway system.
As a result, railway travel declined by 84 percent between 1945 and 1964, while private car ownership soared, and along with it, gasoline sales, which rose 300 percent in that same time frame. Similar social engineering feats took place in Europe, further securing the future of the oil business as a primary force to be reckoned with.
The report also goes into the details behind the gas shortages that sent the U.S. into a financial tailspin in the early 1970s, revealing how the secretive Bilderberg Group, created by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands in 1954, successfully created a new financial system based on the petrodollar — a system that granted the oiligarchs unprecedented control over the economy.

The Rockefeller Transformation

In his day, John D. Rockefeller was a despised man. This all changed when he hired Ivy Ledbetter Lee, who essentially invented the public relations industry as we now know it.  John D. was filmed handing out dimes to the poor, and was publicly portrayed as a kind and warm-hearted man. While hokey by today’s standards, such simple stunts worked. Yet, Rockefeller needed to go even further to truly gain the public’s trust.
As Corbett notes:
“In order to win the public over, he was going to have to give them what they wanted. And what they wanted wasn’t difficult to understand: money. But just as his father, Devil Bill, had taught him to do in all his business dealings, Rockefeller made sure to get the better end of the bargain. He would ‘donate’ his great wealth to the creation of public institutions, but those institutions would be used to bend society to his will.
As every would-be ruler throughout history has realized, society has to be transformed from the ground up. Americans in the 19th century still prized education and intellectual pursuits … with a remarkable 93 to 100 percent literacy rate.
Before the first compulsory schooling laws in Massachusetts in 1852, education was private and decentralized, and as a result … a solid grounding in history and science was widespread. But a nation of individuals who could think for themselves was an anathema to the monopolists. The oiligarchs needed a mass of obedient workers…”

The Takeover of Education

John D. Rockefeller’s first great act of charity was the establishment of the University of Chicago, followed later by a $180 million donation to the establishment of the General Education Board. But contrary to what you might think, these acts of generosity were not to further education, but to control and impoverish it.
Frederick Taylor Gates became a trusted ally, and in “The Country School of Tomorrow,” Gates lays out Rockefeller’s plan for the education of future Americans:
“In our dream, we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand. The present educational conventions fade from our minds; and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or science.
We are not to raise up from among them authors, orators, poets, or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians. Nor will we cherish even the humbler ambition to raise up from among them lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we now have ample supply.”

The Effective Strategy That Eliminated Natural Medicine

Other oil-backed schemes to mold and reshape the American education system followed, including a scheme to alter the teaching of American history to promote a view of collectivism, as well as a program culminating in the transformation of the practice of medicine.
Naturopathic-based herbal medicine was the norm, and Rockefeller set out to shift the medical industry toward using oil-derived pharmaceuticals. To this end, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research was established in 1901, headed up by Simon Flexner.
“His brother, Abraham, was an educator who was contracted by the Carnegie Foundation to write a report on the state of the American medical education system. His study, ‘The Flexner Report,’ along with the hundreds of millions of dollars that the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations were to shower on medical research in the coming years, resulted in a sweeping overhaul of the American medical system.
Naturopathic and homeopathic medicine, medical care focused on unpatentable, uncontrollable natural remedies and cures was now dismissed as quackery; only drug-based allopathic medicine requiring expensive medical procedures and lengthy hospital stays was to be taken seriously …
The fortunes of Carnegie, Morgan and Rockefeller financed surgery, radiation and synthetic drugs. They were to become the economic foundations of the new medical economy … The oiligarchy birthed entire medical industries from their own research centers and then sold their own products from their own petrochemical companies as the ‘cure.’”

The Takeover of America’s Financial System and the Creation of a Food Monopoly

The financial power of these oil industry giants is by now near-unfathomable, but the aim was to control the entire financial system. This was effectively accomplished with the creation of the Federal Reserve, established in 1913 following a secret meeting on Jekyll Island, during which the details were ironed out. Attendants at this meeting included John D. Rockefeller Jr.’s father-in-law, Senator Nelson Aldrich, and various banking representatives.
Later, in the 1950s, James Stillman Rockefeller, the grandson of John D.’s brother, became the head of National City Bank, while David Rockefeller, John D.’s grandson, took over Chase Manhattan Bank. Still, they were not satisfied.
“Springboarding from success to success as they consolidated monopolies across every field of human activity, the oiligarchs’ ambitions became even larger. This time, their goal was to consolidate control over the very food supply of the world itself, and once again they would use philanthropy as the cover for their business takeover,” Corbett explains.
The Rockefeller Foundation funded the Green Revolution that led to the introduction of petroleum-based agricultural chemicals, which quickly transformed agriculture, both in the U.S. and abroad. President Lyndon Johnson’s “Food for Peace” program actually mandated the use of petroleum-dependent technologies and chemicals by aid recipients, and countries that could not afford it were granted loans from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
The “Gene Revolution” was next, and as noted by Corbett:
“The players involved in this ‘Gene Revolution’ are almost identical to the players in the Green Revolution, with I.G. Farben offshoots Bayer CropScience and BASF Plant Science mingling with traditional oiligarch associate companies like Dow AgroScience, DuPont Biotechnology and, of course, Monsanto, all funded by the Rockefeller Foundation …”

The Final End Game: Monopolizing Life

In his usual style, Corbett manages to squeeze in an incredible amount of information in as compact a timeframe as is humanly possible, and I highly recommend taking the time to watch the video in full. What I’ve included here is but a summary overview of the many details he brings forth in this fascinating report.
Those who are ignorant of history are bound to repeat it, and if this story tells us anything, it is that unless we realize what has been done, we’ll be deceived again and again, because the oil oligarchy’s end game is yet to be realized — if we let them. As Corbett notes in closing:
“The takeover of education, of medicine, of the monetary system, of the food supply itself, showed that the aim was much greater than a mere oil monopoly: it was the quest to monopolize all aspects of life, to erect the perfect system of control over every aspect of society, every sector from which any threat of competition to their power could emerge … But the oiligarchs are not done yet.
Their next project, launched in the late 20th century, is almost too ambitious to be comprehended … It is about the monopolization of life itself. They have spent decades preparing the path for this takeover and marshaled their mind-boggling resources in service of the task. And the vast majority of the world’s population, still playing the shell game that the oiligarchs perfected and abandoned long ago, are about to fall right into their hands yet again.”



About Me

My photo


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

View my complete profile

Jews and gun control

Jews and gun control

If necessary, it is moral to kill an aggressor in defense of innocent life

“…the act of self-defense may have two effects, one is the saving of one’s life, the other is the slaying of the aggressor. Therefore this act, since one’s intention is to save one’s own life, is not unlawful, seeing that it is natural to everything to keep itself in ‘being,’ as far as possible. And yet, though proceeding from a good intention, an act may be rendered unlawful, if it be out of proportion to the end. Wherefore if a man, in self-defense, uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repel force with moderation his defense will be lawful, because according to the jurists [Cap. Significasti, De Homicid. volunt. vel casual.], ‘it is lawful to repel force by force, provided one does not exceed the limits of a blameless defense.’ Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense in order to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.”

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Q. 64 murder, Article 7

Disarming the goyim

After you understand who disarmed and then killed over 60 million Christians, notice who is promoting gun bans in the USA.


Government-Sponsored Domestic Terrorism Targets American Public Schools

State of the Nation, February 18, 2018

Zionist Jews Are At The Forefront Of Advancing Gun Control In The United States

by Lee Rogers, Blacklisted News, May 12, 2013

Jews and Jewish organizations lead the gun control campaign

by Kevin MacDonald, The Occidental Observer, January 1, 2013

Jews and Gun Control: A Reprise

by Andrew Joyce, The Occidental Observer, August 2, 2014

Jews as a Hostile Elite

Bloomberg gun-control group targets more than 12 states

by Fredreka Schouten, USA Today, December 2, 2014

Report: Gun-Grabber Michael Bloomberg Willing to Spend $1 Billion to Win White House

by AWR Hawkins, Breitbart, January 25,2016

Soros-funded ‘National Gun Control Movement’ is all about starting an American civil war

State of the Nation, February 21, 2018

Democratic Financier George Soros Invested In Firearm Companies While Backing Gun Control Groups

by Andrew Perez, International Business Times, January 25, 2016

Soros, Bloomberg & Planned Parenthood Funding David Hogg’s Anti-Gun Student Protests

Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg each pledge $500,000 to gun control march by Florida students [North American Federation of Temple Youth] Teens Are Leading the Way on Gun Violence Prevention

by Zachary Herrmann , 2/27/2018

“We are mobilizing in a wide variety of ways, both locally and nationally, for sensible gun laws. This is a moment unlike any in recent memory – and all over the U.S., Reform Jewish teens are leading the way. We take pride in this remarkable leadership, but pride is not enough. We need teens, young adults and the entire Movement to join NFTY, the Reform Jewish Youth Movement, and participate in powerful initiatives on the local, state and national level.”

…but this same “NFTY” Jewish teen group that lobbies nationally to disarm goyim, funds trips to Israel to teach Jewish teens to shoot machine guns. Master Race hypocrites!

I Learned To Shoot An Assault Rifle — At My Jewish Youth Group

by Madeline Winard, March 19, 2018

‘I’ll Speak for My Lost Friend’ Teens Who Survived Parkland Shooting Prep for Gun Control Rally in Israel

Three survivors of the high-school massacre will be in Israel on March 23, at a demonstration calling for stricter gun control in the U.S. ‘I hope a lot of people come so we can share what we need to share,’ says Eden Hebron, 14…

This Jewish Lawmaker’s Speech Helped Pass Florida’s New Gun Law

March 18, 2018 By Ron Kampeas

Dem Rep Wasserman Schultz Introduces Legislation Requiring Background Checks on Ammunition Buyers

by Pam Key, Breitbart News, March 26, 2018

U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz introduces Ammunition Background Check Act of 2018

Senator Chuck “Shomer Yisrael” must be Replaced by a Senator who will “Shomer” the U.S.

Jews and U.S. Gun Control Legislation, 1968-2018, partial list

  • 1968: The Gun Control Act of 1968 comes from Jewish Rep. Emanuel Celler’s House bill H.R. 17735. It expands legislation already attempted by the non-Jewish Sen. Thomas Dodd. America’s biggest and most far-reaching gun law came from a Jew.

  • 1988: Senate bill S. 1523 is sponsored by Jewish Senator Howard Metzenbaum. It proposes legislation turning every violation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 into a RICO predicate offense, allowing a gun owner to be charged with federal racketeering offenses.

  • 1988: Senator Metzenbaum co-sponsors a bill — S. 2180 — to ban, or limit/restrict, so-called “plastic guns.”

  • 1990: Jewish Senator Herbert Kohl introduces bill S.2070, the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which bans gun possession in a school zone. The law will later be struck down in court as unconstitutional.

  • 1993: Senate bill S.653 is sponsored by Sen. Howard Metzenbaum. It bans specific semiautomatic rifles, but also gives the Secretary of the Treasury the power to add any semiautomatic firearm to the list at a later date.

  • February, 1994: The Brady Law, which requires waiting periods to buy handguns, becomes effective. Senator Metzenbaum wrote the Brady Bill. Metzenbaum sponsored the bill in the Senate. The sponsor of the bill in the House was Jewish Rep. Charles Schumer.

  • 1994: Senator Metzenbaum introduces S.1878, the Gun Violence Prevention Act of 1994, aka “Brady II.” Rep. Schumer sponsored “Brady II” sister legislation [H.R. 1321] in the U.S. House of Representatives.

  • September, 1994: The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 goes into effect, including a provision that bans the manufacture and possession of semiautomatic rifles described as “assault weapons.” [Note: true assault weapons are fully automatic, not semiautomatic]. That gun-ban provision was authored in the Senate by Jewish Senator Dianne Feinstein and authored in the House by Congressman Schumer.

  • 1995: Jewish Senators Kohl, Specter, Feinstein, Lautenberg and others introduce the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1995, an amended version of the 1990 school-zone law which was struck down in court as being unconstitutional.

  • February 1995: Sen. Dianne Feinstein announces her goal of “…an outright ban [of all firearms], picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America turn ’em all in.…”

  • September, 1996: The Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation provision becomes law. It is part of a larger omnibus appropriations bill. It was sponsored by Jewish Senator Frank Lautenberg. It bans people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence from ever owning a gun.

  • 1997: Senate bill S. 54, the Federal Gang Violence Act of 1997, proposes much harsher sentences for people violating minor gun laws, including mandatory prison sentences and forfeiture of property. It was introduced by Dianne Feinstein and a non-Jewish Senator [Hatch], among others. It returns the idea of turning every violation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 into a RICO predicate offense.

  • January, 1999: Jewish Senator Barbara Boxer introduces bill S.193, the American Handgun Standards Act of 1999.

  • January, 1999: Senator Kohl introduces bill S.149, the Child Safety Lock Act of 1999. It would to require a child safety lock in connection with transfer of a handgun.

  • February, 1999: Senator Frank Lautenberg introduces bill S.407, the Stop Gun Trafficking Act of 1999.

  • February, 1999: Senator Lautenberg introduces S.443, the Gun Show Accountability Act of 1999.

  • March, 1999: Senator Lautenberg introduces bill S.560, the Gun Industry Accountability Act of 1999.

  • March, 1999: Senator Feinstein introduces bill S.594, the Large Capacity Ammunition Magazine Import Ban Act of 1999.

  • May, 2000: Senate bill S. 2515, Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2000, is submitted by Senators Feinstein, Senator Barbara Boxer, Sen. Lautenberg and Sen. Schumer. It is a plan for a national firearms licensing system.

  • January, 2001: Senate bill S.25, Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2001, is sponsored by Feinstein, Schumer, and Boxer. It is a nation-wide gun registration plan [apparently there were two versions of that Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act bill].

  • May, 2003: Senators Feinstein, Schumer, Boxer and others introduce legislation that would reauthorize the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, and, close a loophole in the law that allows large-capacity ammunition magazines to be imported into the U.S. The ban is scheduled to expire in September, 2004.

  • October, 2003: Senators Feinstein, Lautenberg, Levin [also Jewish] and Schumer co-sponsor bill S.1774, designed to stop the sunset [ending] of the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988.

  • March, 2005: Senator Lautenberg introduces bill S.645, “to reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act,” in other words, to reinstate the 1994 assault-rifle ban [also known as the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994″] which expired in late 2004.

  • March, 2005: Senator Feinstein introduces bill S.620, “to reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act,” in other words, to reinstate the 1994 assault-rifle ban [also known as the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994″] which expired in late 2004.

  • July, 2005: Senator Dianne Feinstein introduces bill S.A.1621 – Fifty-Caliber Sniper Weapons. This amendment would convert all .50 BMG firearms to NFA weapons.

  • July, 2005: Senator Dianne Feinstein introduces bill S.A.1622 – Fifty-Caliber Exclusion to S.397. This amendment would modify S.397 to allow suits when the firearm involved was a .50 caliber weapon.

  • July, 2005: Senator Barbara Boxer introduces bill S.A.1633 – BATFE Safety Standards. This amendment allows law suits to continue/be brought if the product did not meet the safety standards as defined by the BATFE.

  • July, 2005: Senator Barbara Boxer introduces bill S.A.1634 – ‘Sporting Use’ on Domestic Handguns. Applying ’sporting use’ clause requirements to domestic handguns could, almost completely, dry up the handgun availability in the United States.

  • November 2017: Senator Dianne Feinstein introduces “Assault Weapon Ban of 2017,” S. 2095, the most far-reaching gun gun ban ever introduced in the US Knesset…er, Congress. Among the cunningly expansive definitions of “assault weapon,” the definition of pistol grip even implicates traditional wooden hunting rifle stocks.  Shortly after introducing her ban, she leaked classified information and, when exposed, blamed her crime on “slow mental facilities” [sic] due to a cold.

  • March 2018: U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz introduces Ammunition Background Check Act of 2018

  • etc., etc., etc.

sourced from

So who is really behind gun control? Liars!

Jeremias 8:7-10; Osee (Hosea) 4:1-2; John 8:44, 55; Apocalypse 3:9, 22:16; Titus 1:13-14

osh SugarmannFounder, Violence Policy CenterCommunications Director, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

Josh Sugarman is the Founder of the Violence Policy Center, notorious for producing sensational “factoids” (factoids sound like facts, but are carefully crafted deceits). Consistent with Judaism’s encouragement of lying to gentiles, Sugarmann confessed the utility of his deceit: “The public’s confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is presumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.” Josh Sugarmann, Violence Policy Center,

Brazen in using such bold lies, it is no surprise that Sugarmann’s group also uses more subtle deceits, such as statistical cherry-picking. When a long-term trend shows a decrease in gun violence, Sugarmann’s group and others like him, will use a short-term reversal of the trend to craft a sensational “increase in gun violence.” A recent example: Cherry-Picking Statistics: How the Violence Policy Center Manipulates Data to Advance their Cause

NRA-ILA, January 26, 2018

The peer-reviewed professional literature is not spared such hasbara deceits. Though not outed as Jews, several of the most high-profile Jewish gun ban proponents have been justly and severely criticized in the professional literature for their Pandemic of Propaganda and the related Failure of Peer Review. Junk science, errors of fact, design, and interpretation, crafting sensational statistical factoids, and outright lying are their stock in trade—and of course the Jewish media are accomplices in disseminating the lies—just iterations of lying to Gentiles.

So who is really behind gun control? Hypocrites!

Matthew 6:2, 5; 15:7; 22:18; 23:13, 14, 15, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29; Mark 7:6; Luke 13:15


Trump calls to stop immigration from "s—hole countries" – Do you agree with him?



The left wing media and all of the left wing politicians have been in meltdown mode ever since it has been leaked to the press that Trump lamented immigration from “s—hole countries” in Oval Office negotiations with lawmakers.

“Why are we having all these people from s—hole countries come here?” the president said.
One of the main policies of the Trump administration is to enforce a rigid vetting of immigrants into the US to prevent terrorist attacks.

Do you agree with him?


Do you agree with him? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.



Here is why Western countries should adopt Trump’s Travel Ban:
Trump, as a candidate, called in 2015 for a ban on refugees from terror-laden countries.
Trump is correct, Just look at what has been happening to Europe in recent years since the beginning of the immigration crisis.
Here are only few examples:

3 June 2017 – London: Eight people were killed when three Muslim terrorists drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge.

22 May 2017 – Manchester: Suicide bomber Salman Abedi detonated a bomb at Manchester Arena as fans were leaving an Ariana Grande concert, killing himself and 22 others.
7 April 2017 – Stockholm: Muslim terrorist drove stolen truck into a crowd in the Swedish capital, killing four people and wounding 15 others.

19 December 2016 – Berlin: Muslim terrorist drove a truck into a crowded Christmas market in central Berlin, killing 12 people and injuring 56 others.
Hundreds of innocent people have been killed in terrorist attacks in France, Germany, Britain, Finland and even Sweden.
After Millions of illegal immigrants and refugees have infiltrated into Europe thanks to the EU’s open borders policy.

According to British media, London is now more dangerous than New York City. According to crime statistics, crime across the U.K. was up 13%, with much of it in London.
Rape, robbery, Acid attacks, honor killings and violent offenses have surged dramatically. Figures like these have risen in many European countries, with Sweden becoming “Europe’s rape capital,” Germany’s steep rise in violent and crimes, and Paris’s frequent terror attacks.
EU, Australia, US, UK, and even Canada must close their borders.

A country without borders is a country without security.

If you support Travel Ban, Share this post!







Important to know article above, just click on the image! or Here! for More!