Google Scrubs Politically Incorrect Sites from Searches

Google, the world’s biggest Internet search engine provider, has decided it should “help” readers determine whether or not a search result is “safe” by applying “quality ratings.” In its latest move along the censorship path, Google is now using independent contractors to tag search results that may be “‘offensive or upsetting.” Not surprisingly, sites discussing alternative views of history, including of the Jewish “Holocaust,” are considered especially concerning.  

By Dave Gahary

The most visited website in the world, whose unofficial slogan was “Don’t be evil” until it was replaced by “Do the right thing,” is certainly not doing the right thing and is also acting quite evil. Google, the U.S. multinational technology company best known for its ubiquitous, eponymous search engine, is in a new business: tagging the Internet’s search results of alternative views of the historical event known as the “Holocaust.”

But it’s not just “Holocaust” revisionists Google’s after, but all “Jew haters,” “white supremacists,” and “racists”—or at least trying to ensure that Internet searches do not end up at websites Google has classified as such.

The UK’s Guardian reported on March 15, “Google is using a 10,000-strong army of independent contractors to flag ‘offensive or upsetting’ content, in order to ensure that queries like ‘did the Holocaust happen’ don’t push users to misinformation, propaganda, and hate speech.”

Although Google’s contractors have been utilizing a manual, titled “Search Quality Rating Guidelines,” at least since 2013, “describing every potential problem they could find with a given search query,” a new update to the book orders the censors to “flag” search results that could be “upsetting” or “offensive” to Web surfers.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Speaking of whiners, NBC News interviewed head-whiner of the hopelessly corrupt Southern Poverty Law Center, Heidi Beirich, who moaned to Google a few months ago “to update its algorithm to remove a result from a neo-Nazi website questioning whether the Holocaust happened.”

She told the fake news outlet about Google: “They’re moving away from self-reporting, relying on the public to tell you where there’s problems, and they’re talking about a systematic policy.”

The new system will not affect search results, but will, according to Google, be “used by Google to help judge the success of algorithm changes and . . . to train its machine-learning systems.” Yup, that’s right, artificial intelligence systems that ban human critical thinking.

Google—already scorned for its abuse of privacy, tax avoidance, antitrust behavior, censorship, and search neutrality—has been under additional pressure lately by critics claiming that its searches “promote extremist content.” The UK’s Guardian and Observer published a series of articles promoting this view recently, as well as complaining that it fails “to keep fake news and propaganda off the top of search results.” Of course, “fake news” is in the eye of the beholder.

Founded in 1996 and valued last year at over $133 billion, Google is now the largest subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., which has acquired over 200 companies since last December. Alphabet’s most well-known brand besides Google is YouTube, the video sharing tech company, acquired in 2006. YouTube is also notorious for its censorship of videos that threaten the powers-that-be.

It certainly is a brave, new world we are all on the precipice of, one that rejects free expression and personal responsibility and where those who cry the loudest prevail.

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s “Underground Interview” series. See www.americanfreepress.net for more.




Israeli Teen Arrested for Making Bomb Threats to Jewish Centers

According to reports, a 19-year-old Jewish Israeli man has been arrested in Israel and is being charged with making “most” of the bomb threat calls to Jewish institutions since Jan. 1.

By John Tiffany

Since Jan. 1, over 100 bomb threats have been made against Jewish institutions, such as schools and community centers, around the world, including in the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. The establishment immediately insinuated that “hateful Trump supporters” were terrorizing the Jewish community. Now, it turns out a 19-year-old Jewish man living in Israel, who holds dual citizenship in America and the Middle Eastern state, stands accused of making most of the threats.

The “cyberattack unit” of Israel’s fraud squad arrested the teenager March 23, it was reported in Ha’aretz, an Israeli newspaper. The arrest was based on information received from the FBI and other non-Israeli law enforcement agencies.

The motives of the crime are as yet unknown, said an Israeli police spokesman.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Israeli cops seized computers and other equipment the “primary suspect” allegedly used to make it hard for police to track the culprit to his lair. The suspect will remain in custody for at least the next seven days while the investigation continues.

Israeli Judge Amit Michles said, “. . . reasonable suspicion already exists at this stage that convincingly links the suspect to the calls that have been attributed to him . . . to different institutions around the world . . . some of which have led to panic.”

It is looking as if something like an insanity defense is contemplated.

The prisoner’s lawyer, Galit Bash, said: “This is a young man without a criminal record who from a young age suffers from severe medical problems. There is concern that his medical condition affects his cognitive functioning. Therefore, we asked the court to order that the young man be referred to a medical examination. The court accepted our claims and instructed the police to examine the young man’s medical condition.”

The 19-year-old was never enlisted in Israel’s usually mandatory army service because he was determined to be unfit to serve.

The waves of bomb threats all turned out to be hoaxes.

In “at least three” instances, bomb threats were also reportedly accompanied by destruction at Jewish cemeteries, including one in which more than 500 headstones were broken or toppled in Philadelphia. However, in one case in Brooklyn, vandals never toppled gravestones. Instead, dozens of grave stones fell due to neglect and the fact that no one was taking care of them.

In a related case, a former Chicago reporter named Juan Thompson, 31, was arrested recently for his “role” in a number of bomb threats against Jewish centers. Allegedly, he did this “as part of an ongoing attempt to shame his former girlfriend,” Ha’aretz reported. It is not known at this time whether the two suspects are linked in some way other than coincidence.

Thompson was charged with making at least eight threats against Jewish institutions in the United States, and a bomb threat to New York’s so-called Anti-Defamation League.

John Tiffany writes exclusively for AMERICAN FREE PRESS.




Congress’s Probe Into Possible Trump-Russia Ties Fizzles

Yesterday the directors of the FBI and the National Security Agency testified before a congressional committee about a U.S. investigation into allegations of ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Bizarrely, citing no evidence of aggression, congressmen and top U.S. officials claimed Russia continues to be a threat to the United States.

By Mark Anderson

The first day of the House Select Committee on Intelligence’s highly anticipated probe into alleged Russian involvement in influencing U.S. elections and policy saw FBI Director James Comey and National Security Agency chief Mike Rogers testify in a spotty manner, going into often-speculative details and yet refusing to elaborate most of the time, under cover of “objectivity.”

Considering the conspiracy theories being pushed by most Democratic lawmakers and some Republicans that Trump administration appointees and allies privately met with Russian officials for the purpose of molding U.S.-Russian relations “off the grid,” you’d expect some kind of evidence. Instead, it was all speculation, but none of that matters for those who just assume that Russia is a dangerous arch-enemy of the United States.

It helps to sit back and take an objective look at the world stage. Russia’s entire western front consists of NATO member-nations or would-be NATO states, which, if they don’t proceed willingly, are prodded into joining NATO.

Montenegro recently became NATO’s latest member, as the U.S.-led alliance pushes ever eastward toward Russia while conducting periodic large-scale military exercises, right at the Russian border in many cases.

Imagine if Russian forces, complete with tanks and columns of soldiers, were in Canada along the U.S. border.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Members of Congress before and during the March 20 committee meeting continued to repeat the timeworn story that Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula, when “the other side of the story,” backed up by several AFP reports over the last three years, is that, in a public referendum, Crimean residents voted to align with Russia—right when a U.S.-backed overthrow of Ukraine’s leadership took place.

High-level State Department official Victoria Nuland was involved in serious on-the-ground collusion in Ukraine, far beyond what the Trump White House or campaign is accused of. This helped to foster the overthrow of Russian ally Viktor Yanukovich as Ukraine president and the installation of Western stooge Petro Poroshenko.

Today, Poroshenko stands accused of launching brutal military strikes against east Ukrainians, who traditionally have been allied with Russia.

This all means that Russia reacted to aggression by the West. And when outgoing President Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats in late December, Russian leader Vladimir Putin kept a cool head and did not respond in kind. That’s the mark of a true statesman.

You’d think that such perspectives—blotted out by the mainstream press—would at least be briefly considered at the committee hearing, if only in the interest of thoroughness.

Yet committee members singled out Russia Today (“RT.com”) as a highly untrustworthy government-linked news source that’s allegedly trying to influence Western opinion subversively.

However, all Comey and Rogers had done is concede that there is an investigation into Russia-Trump “ties.” But the overall “story” peddled to the American people is that this Russian matter is potentially so serious that the FBI and NSA are setting aside protocol and “breaking their silence” about the existence of the probe.

While addressing the committee, the two meandered through questions on whether Putin and the Russian state are really evil and whether Russia truly sought to keep Hillary Clinton from becoming president and helped catapult Trump into the White House.

While Comey and Rogers dodged many if not most questions—saying they did not find it proper to speculate on the cusp of their probe—they both claimed that Russia is indeed a foe of the U.S. And both said, yes, Russia sought to undermine U.S. “democracy” during the 2016 elections—all of which is highly biased when you consider that the two had already said that speculation is a bad thing at this juncture.

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) opined during the hearing that Russia’s election hacking was like a shot over America’s bow.

“I actually think that their engagement was an act of war, an act of hybrid warfare,” Speier stated.

In response, Comey declined to choose the word “war” to describe Russia’s supposed interference in the election. But he did say, “I think they engaged in a multi-faceted campaign of active measures to undermine our democracy and hurt one of the candidates and hope to help one of the other candidates.”

Rogers agreed with Comey’s allegation, larded as it was with the words “I think.”

So much for avoiding speculation at such a pivotal time for the FBI and its presumably objective view of Russia’s actions with regard to the U.S. election and policy.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor.




Is Congress Pushing Obamacare Repeal or Obamacare 2.0?

The current crop of House Republicans is promoting a healthcare scheme to replace Obamacare. But is it any better, when it comes to individual liberty, than what we’re forced into now?

By Ron Paul

The House of Representatives is expected to vote on a Republican bill soon that supposedly repeals Obamacare. However, the bill retains Obamacare’s most destructive features.

That is not to say this legislation is entirely without merit. For example, the bill expands the amount individuals can contribute to a health savings account (HSA). HSAs allow individuals to save money tax-free to pay for routine medical expenses. By restoring individuals’ control over healthcare dollars, HSAs remove the distortions introduced in the healthcare market by government policies encouraging over-reliance on third-party payers.hat

The legislation also contains other positive tax changes, such as a provision allowing individuals to use healthcare tax credits to purchase a “catastrophic-only” insurance policy. Ideally, health insurance should only cover major or catastrophic health events. No one expects their auto insurance to cover routine oil changes, so why should they expect health insurance to cover routine checkups?

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Unfortunately, the bill’s positive aspects are more than outweighed by its failure to repeal Obamacare’s regulations and price controls. Like all price controls, Obamacare distorts the signals that a freely functioning marketplace sends to consumers and producers, thus guaranteeing chaos in the marketplace. The result of this chaos is higher prices, reduced supply, and lowered quality.

Two particularly insidious Obamacare regulations are guaranteed issue and community ratings. As the name suggests, guaranteed issue forces health insurance companies to issue a health insurance policy to anyone who applies for coverage. Community ratings forces health insurance companies to charge an obese couch potato and a physically fit jogger similar premiums. This forces the jogger to subsidize the couch potato’s unhealthy lifestyle.

Side Effects: Death

Obamacare’s individual mandate was put in place to ensure that guaranteed issue and community ratings would not drive health insurance companies out of business. Rather than repealing guaranteed issue and community ratings, the House Republicans’ plan forces those who go longer than two months without health insurance to pay a penalty to health insurance companies when they purchase new policies.

It is hard to feel sympathy for the insurance companies since they supported Obamacare. These companies were eager to accept government regulations in exchange for a mandate that individuals buy their product. But we should feel sympathy for Americans who are struggling to afford, or even obtain, healthcare because of Obamacare and who will obtain little or no relief from Obamacare 2.0.

The underlying problem with the Republican proposal is philosophical. The plan put forth by the alleged pro-free market Republicans implicitly accepts the premise that healthcare is a right that must be provided by government. But rights are inalienable aspects of our humanity, not gifts from government.

If government can give us rights, then it can also limit or even take away those rights. Giving government power to enforce a fictitious right to healthcare justifies government theft and coercion. Thievery and violence do not suddenly become moral when carried out by governments.

Treating healthcare as a right leads to government intervention, which, as we have seen, inevitably leads to higher prices and lower quality. This is why, with the exception of those specialties, like plastic surgery, that are still treated as goods, not rights, healthcare is one of the few areas where innovation leads to increased costs.

America’s healthcare system will only be fixed when a critical mass of people rejects the philosophical and economic fallacies justifying government-run healthcare. Those of us who know the truth must continue to work to spread the ideas of, and grow the movement for, liberty.

Ron Paul, a former U.S. representative from Texas and medical doctor, continues to write his column “Texas Straight Talk” for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.




Federal Courts Say Foreigners, Not Citizens, Entitled To Due Process

How is it that federal courts in the U.S. can block an executive order on foreign immigration issued by the president because it’s unconstitutional, but they are unwilling to grant the same rulings when it comes to Americans’ rights?

Paul Craig Roberts

The Constitution applies to U.S. citizens, and the amendments known as the Bill of Rights guarantee due process as a protection of U.S. citizens’ civil liberties. That’s the theory but not the practice.

Trump’s travel ban applies to non-U.S. citizens, primarily to refugees from the Bush/Obama bombings of numerous Muslim countries. Some of these refugees, whose families and countries were destroyed by American troops, could harbor feelings of revenge against Americans. The Ninth Circuit Panel’s injunction against Trump’s executive order gives the Constitution’s protection of U.S. citizens to non-citizens, apparently on the basis of due process and religious discrimination arguments. The panel of judges said that Trump’s executive order “runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.”

So too does bombing numerous Muslim countries over the course of the past 16 years, about which nothing has been done. One would think that, with the Democratic Party’s merger with Identity Politics and with the liberal/progressive/left leaning of the Ninth Circuit, more of a stink would have been raised about bombing Muslims gratuitously than on placing a mere ban on their entry into the U.S. But it all depends on who does the bombing and who does the ban. Identity politics requires “America’s first black president” to be supported at all costs, and Trump, a white, heterosexual, male billionaire, to be hated at all costs.

__________________________

__________________________

Dear readers, note that the U.S. federal courts roll out the Constitution in order to protect non-citizens from a president’s executive order preventing their entry into the U.S., but refused to protect the constitutional rights of American citizens from arbitrary indefinite detention and execution without due process.

The fact that constitutional rights no longer apply to citizens, only to non-citizens, has evoked no comment from the liberal-progressive left, from the Democratic Party, from Harvard Law School, from the American Bar Association, or from the Federalist Society. Not from anyone, and for my reward for telling the truth Harvard University Library has published a large list of “False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and Satirical ‘News’ Sources” on which paulcraigroberts.org is included.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Harvard’s library does not say where the list came from or why the list is credible. I am on the list for “bias” and “conspiracy.” The “bias” means that I do not accept the ruling establishment’s self-serving explanations, and “conspiracy” means that I report on the findings of the 3,000 high-rise architects and structural engineers who comprise A&E for 9/11 Truth, the Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, and the Scientists for 9/11 Truth, all of whom are far more knowledgeable about 9/11 than the Harvard librarian or the Harvard faculty.

Americans, and apparently Harvard’s library, are unaware that hardly any of the experts who have chosen to speak out about the official 9/11 story, including those first responders inside the two towers, believe a word of the official story. Harvard’s librarians are apparently so ill-read that they are unfamiliar with books by the 9/11 Commission’s chairman, vice chairman, and legal counsel, who wrote that information was withheld from the 9/11 Commission and that the commission was “set up to fail.” Harvard’s librarian is apparently unfamiliar with the testimony of demolition experts that the buildings came down as a result of controlled demolition. Harvard’s librarian is apparently ignorant of the panel of scientists headed by a University of Copenhagen nano-chemist who reported finding both reacted and unreacted nano-thermite in the dust of the twin towers and who offered their samples for confirmation by other scientists.

Harvard University has no interest in truth. Harvard’s sole interest is to remain a member of the ruling establishment. As that requires telling lies, Harvard will tell lies. Lies bring Harvard riches, making Harvard so rich that, as Ron Unz argues, Harvard does not need to charge tuition and does so only out of greed.

Decades ago my University of California, Berkeley economics professor became dean of arts and sciences at Harvard. My term paper for the course had been published in the prestigious journal Classica et Medievalia. Years later, when he learned that my book, The Supply-Side Revolution, had passed the peer-review process of Harvard University Press and was slated for publication, he sent for me.

He said that he wanted to have me appointed to the Harvard economics faculty, because the university’s belief in econometrics had proven false and the economics faculty needed a broad-based person such as myself to bring the subject back to life in the real world. I wished him good luck and wondered how a dean this naive had survived at Harvard.

For the dean at Harvard, my work was a strong point. I was the first to explain the Soviet economy both as an organizational system and in terms of the original Marxist aspirations. I had reformulated the Pirenne Thesis, and my reformulation had been included into reading texts used in courses in medieval history and urban economics. I had produced new insights into economic policy and had identified regulation as a factor of production. My macroeconomic contributions had corrected the Keynesian deficiencies and extended the role of relative prices into macroeconomics. This seminal work had passed the peer-review process of Harvard University Press and resulted in the publication of my book, The Supply-Side Revolution, recently republished in the Chinese language in China, but still derided by American ignoramuses as “trickle-down economics.”

Harvard University Press kept The Supply-Side Revolution in print for decades. Despite this fact, even people I highly respect, such as Michael Hudson and Lewis Lapham, have no idea what supply-side economics is about and misrepresent it as some kind of preferment for the rich, which shows the power of the establishment to control the understanding of even highly intelligent people.

To get back to the story, my appointment to Harvard’s economic faculty was blocked by the economics department’s resistance on the basis that I was too disruptive of the orthodoxy. Me and Michael Hudson.

The orthodoxy has a large investment in human capital in protecting the rights of the 1% to plunder the rest of us. Those academics who support this plunder are the ones who prosper in the American academy, just as the presstitutes who lie for a living do in the American media.

So here I am, a peer-reviewed and published Harvard University Press author and peer-reviewed Oxford University Press author, whose books are now available in Chinese, Russian, German, Czech, Turkish, French, Spanish, and Korean, a person who has held the highest security clearances and once had subpoena power over the CIA, who has the French Legion of Honor, who has the U.S. Treasury’s Silver Medal, who has letters of thanks from President Reagan for my contributions to U.S. economic policy, who is asked to speak all over the world, who was Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University for decades, the William E. Simon Chair of Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University for 12 years, assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury, associate editor of The Wall Street Journal, columnist for Business Week and the Scripps Howard News Service, etc., and so on, and some dumbshit at the Harvard library posts a list that says I am a suspect source of information.

This is the world we live in.

Even the most prestigious institutions are utterly corrupt. No one is there for the American people or for truth, or for anything or anyone except the 1%. Americans are shot down in the streets, whites along with blacks, by militarized police trained to see the people who pay their salaries as enemies. Muslims are bombed into the Stone Age. Reformist Latin American governments are routinely overthrown. European countries are intimidated, bribed, and reduced to vassal status. Aggression is displayed toward Russia, China, and Iran. America has become a great collection of evil. The good in the country is voiceless and without power. Evil rules us.

This is why this site is important. If you do not support it, you are bringing about your own demise.

__________________________

__________________________

I don’t have to write. My writing brings me insults from narcissistic, ignorant egomaniacs, puts me on black lists, makes overseas travel difficult, and possibly negatively impacts my relatives. The United States has devolved into a police state where truth is “the enemy of the state,” which makes me suspect. Why should I write without your support? If you aren’t willing to support the fight, for whom am I writing?

NOTE: The Harvard Library website, perhaps in response to my criticism, has now identified Melissa Zimdars as an assistant professor of communication at Merrimack College. The library still has a link to Zimdars’ list of fake news websites, but the link opens to something else.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan and was associate editor and columnist at The Wall Street Journal. He has been a professor of economics in six universities, and is the author of numerous books available in American Free Press‘s Bookstore.




Why Is McCain Hijacking Trump’s America First Foreign Policy?

What has happened to the foreign policy that Americans voted for on Nov. 8 with the election of Donald Trump, to include peace with Russia, an end to U.S. wars in the Middle East, and having rich allies pay for the cost of their own defense?

By Patrick J. Buchanan

“The senator from Kentucky,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), speaking of his colleague Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), “is working for Vladimir Putin . . . and I do not say that lightly.” What did Paul do to deserve being called a hireling of Putin? He declined to support McCain’s call for a unanimous Senate vote to bring Montenegro into NATO as the 29th member of a Cold War alliance President Donald Trump has called “obsolete.”

Bordered by Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo, and Albania, tiny Montenegro has a population roughly that of D.C., and sits on the western coast of the most volatile peninsula in Europe.

What strategic benefit would accrue from having Montenegro as an ally that would justify the risk of our having to go to war should some neighbor breach Montenegro’s borders?

Historically, the Balkans have been an incubator of war. In the 19th century, Otto von Bismarck predicted that when the Great War came, it would come out of “some damn fool thing in the Balkans.” And so it did when the Austrian archduke was assassinated in Sarajevo June 28, 1914 by Serbian ethnonationalist Gavrilo Princip.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Aflame with ethnic, civil, and sectarian war in the 1990s, the western Balkans are again in political turmoil. Milo Djukanovic, the longtime Montenegrin prime minister who resigned on election day in October, claims that he was targeted for assassination by Russia to prevent Montenegro’s accession to NATO.

Russia denies it. But on the Senate floor, McCain raged at Rand Paul: “You are achieving the objectives of Vladimir Putin . . . trying to dismember this small country which has already been the subject of an attempted coup.”

But if Montenegro, awash in corruption and crime, is on the verge of an uprising or coup, why would the U.S. issue a war guarantee that could vault us into a confrontation with Russia—without a full Senate debate?

The vote that needs explaining here is not Paul’s.

It is the votes of those senators who are handing out U.S.-NATO war guarantees to countries most Americans could not find on a map.

Is no one besides Paul asking the relevant questions here?

What vital U.S. interest is imperiled in who comes to power in Podgorica, Montenegro? Why cannot Europe handle this problem in its own back yard?

Has Trump given McCain, who wanted President George W. Bush to intervene in a Russia-Georgia war—over South Ossetia—carte blanche to hand out war guarantees to unstable Balkan states?

Did Trump approve the expansion of NATO into all the successor states born of the bloody breakup of Yugoslavia?

Or is McCain hijacking U.S. foreign policy on NATO and Russia?

Trump should tell the Senate: No more admissions to NATO, no more U.S. war guarantees, unless I have recommended or approved them. Foreign policy is made in the White House, not on the Senate floor.

Indeed, what happened to the foreign policy America voted for—rapprochement with Russia, an end to U.S. wars in the Middle East, and having rich allies share more of the cost of their own defense?

It is U.S., not NATO defense spending that is rising to more than $50 billion this year. And today we learn the Pentagon has drawn up plans for the insertion of 1,000 more U.S. troops into Syria. While the ISIS caliphate seems doomed, this six-year Syrian war is far from over.

An al-Qaida subsidiary, the Nusra Front, has become the most formidable rebel fighting group. Syria’s army, with the backing of Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, and Shiite militias from across the Middle East, has carved out most of the territory it needs.

The Turkish army is now in Syria, beside its rebel allies. Their main enemy: Syria’s Kurds, who are America’s allies.

From our longest war, Afghanistan, comes word from U.S. Gen. John Nicholson that we and our Afghan allies are in a “stalemate” with the Taliban, and he will need a “few thousand” more U.S. troops—to augment the 8,500 President Barack Obama left behind when he left office.

Some 5,000 U.S. troops are in Iraq, helping to liberate Mosul from ISIS. In Kabul, Baghdad, and Damascus, terrorist bombings are a weekly, if not a daily, occurrence.

Then there is the U.S. troop buildup in Poland and the Baltic, the U.S. deployment of a missile defense to South Korea after multiple missile tests in the North, and Russia and China talking of upgrading their nuclear arsenals to counter U.S. missile defenses in Poland, Romania, and South Korea.

In and around the waters of the Persian Gulf, United States warships are harassed by Iranian patrol boats, as Tehran test-fires anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles to send the Americans a message: Attack us and it will not be a cakewalk war.

With the death of Communism, the end of the Cold War, and the collapse of the Bushite New World Order, America needs a new grand strategy, built upon the solid foundation of America first.

Pat Buchanan is a writer, political commentator and presidential candidate. He is the author of The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority and Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM



Convicted for Self Defense Against BLM Thugs

A conservative video journalist and blogger, who drew his legal handgun to scare off a rampaging crowd during a recent protest in Portland, has been convicted of felony charges.

By John Friend

A recent court decision involving a political activist’s attendance at a Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest last summer demonstrates just how tyrannical America has become in an era of political correctness, hostility toward the Second Amendment, and a glorification of minorities and leftist activists.

In Portland, Ore., Michael Strickland, a 37-yearold conservative blogger, journalist, and activist who maintains the popular YouTube channel “LaughingAtLiberals,” was recently found guilty of 21 felony and misdemeanor charges stemming from his presence at a BLM protest in early July of last year.

Strickland, known for his coverage of radical leftist events, was filming a BLM protest in downtown Portland on the evening of July 7 when he was confronted by a large group of hostile BLM protesters, some of whom were masked, armed with flag poles, and making threats against Strickland while advancing toward the citizen-journalist.

It must be noted that radical leftist protesters, often masked, violently assaulted their political opponents—and even innocent bystanders—repeatedly throughout the 2016 election season, causing personal injury and private property damage on numerous occasions. Additionally, BLM protests often devolve into riots, where violence, looting, and destruction take place on a massive scale.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Fearing for his safety and being completely outnumbered, Strickland briefly drew his Glock semiautomatic handgun to ward off the hostile crowd that was hounding him. Amateur video footage of the protest and confrontation shows Strickland retreating while being pursued by a group of BLM protesters before eventually brandishing his firearm, for which he had a legal concealed carry permit, only to quickly reholster his weapon after the situation was de-escalated and the crowd backed off.

“What happened was there were about 10 or 12 people that surrounded me,” Strickland explained at the time. “They started pushing and shoving me. They were using their flag staffs as weapons. I’m backing up, they kept coming toward me. . . . That’s why I drew. . . . I was outnumbered, they were pushing and shoving me. . . . I feared for my life, because I was outnumbered, and they had weapons.”

__________________________

Video of Michael Strickland Drawing His Legal Firearm

___________________________

Shortly after the confrontation, a SWAT team arrived and Strickland was apprehended and taken into custody, charged with menacing and disorderly conduct.

At Strickland’s recent trial, Judge Thomas Ryan found the conservative activist guilty of 10 counts of unlawful use of a weapon, 10 counts of menacing, and one count of second-degree disorderly conduct for brandishing his legally concealed firearm at protesters that fateful evening.

While Strickland argued he was acting in self-defense, prosecutors contended he did not have a legitimate fear of being in imminent danger or of being physically hurt.

Strickland is scheduled to be sentenced in May.

The reaction to Strickland’s conviction from Second Amendment and free speech activists has been justifiable outrage.

“Given all the violence that we’ve seen at Black Lives Matter and other leftist demonstrations, Strickland clearly had cause to fear for his life,” Chris Cantwell, a leading libertarian and gun rights activist, writer, and host of “The Radical Agenda,” a popular podcast, recently explained to AFP in an email exchange.

“He displayed his weapon in its holster and warned the demonstrators as he walked backward, and they continued to pursue him as he retreated, so he pulled out his gun and pointed it at his assailants without firing a shot. He showed extraordinary restraint, and if the self defense laws of Portland, Ore. do not allow for this kind of measured defensive posturing, then they will certainly—and almost certainly already have—gotten people killed. If a gun owner has to wait until his assailants are on top of him to draw his weapon, then at that point he has little choice but to fire. George Zimmerman comes to mind. Strickland may have saved a lot of lives that day, not least of all his own.”

Unfortunately, Strickland’s case has received little mainstream coverage, a fact recently pointed out by Mark Walters of “AmmoLand.com,” a pro-Second Amendment website.

This is a clear-cut case of “self-defense, so compelling that the nation needs to see and hear it, yet it is blatantly and intentionally neglected by the ‘dominant’ and failing ‘mainstream media,’” Walters recently wrote.

After reviewing the footage of the confrontation, an objective viewer would have to find Strickland’s actions were entirely justifiable given the circumstances in which he was operating.

As readers of this newspaper know all too well, BLM protests are often violent, and those viewed as hostile or unsympathetic to the movement are regularly targeted by radical leftist activists. Strickland was one such example.

Cantwell believes Strickland should be praised, not condemned, for his actions that day. “He shouldn’t just be set free; he should be praised for his courage and his restraint,” Cantwell told AFP.

John Friend is a writer who lives in California.




College Student Threatened for Filming Teacher’s Anti-Trump Racist Rant

A 19-year-old college student faced disciplinary action at a college in California for the crime of filming his professor’s ridiculous anti-Trump tirade. The good news: The institution has since backed down on the threat, but it is still concerning, as the establishment and liberal elites continue to attack anyone who supports the president.

By Dave Gahary

In February, American Free Press reported on the ongoing case of tenured professor and award-winning media analyst Dr. James F. Tracy, who was fired last year from Florida Atlantic University (FAU) for blogging on his own time. Now, a student clear across the country is in the crosshairs of school administrators for exercising his right to free speech. Like Tracy, he’s fighting back.

In a surreal twist that highlights the grasp the liberal left has on possibly all college campuses across the country, a psychology instructor who went on a wild verbal rampage, spewing anti-Donald Trump comments to her students, will not face any disciplinary action, but the student who filmed the inappropriate invective was threatened with disciplinary action.

Caleb O’Neil, 19, a California freshman student at Orange Coast College (OCC), who secretly filmed Olga Perez Stable Cox’s rant, was threatened with suspension from the college for an entire semester unless he apologized.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

However, on Feb. 23, the board of directors of the college overruled school administrators, ordering them to revoke the suspension. O’Neil “will continue to attend classes without interruption,” read a statement issued by OCC.

The student, who wore pro-Trump attire regularly, said he began filming Ms. Cox “because I was honestly scared that I would have repercussions with my grades because she knew I was a Trump supporter.”

After it was discovered O’Neil had filmed the teacher, he faced suspension for a full semester and the summer term, reported the local Orange County Register newspaper. “Before being readmitted, he must write a letter of apology to Cox and a three-page, double-spaced essay explaining his actions and provide his analysis of the aftermath.”

When O’Neil anonymously sent the video to the College Republicans club and they put it online, a barrage of complaints against Ms. Cox followed, sending her “into hiding to avoid the criticism, including death threats.”

Ms. Cox, who is a lesbian, told the Orange County Register: “My privacy has been demolished. And that’s awful. I’m a very private person. And it’s very scary.”

Ms. Cox and “her longtime partner, who asked not to be identified . . . left town for about a week last month because . . . they feared for Cox’s safety following angry emails and threats, including one that displayed her home address. Her last week of classes was canceled. The couple disconnected their home phone. They are considering a safety alarm system,” added the Register.

Ms. Cox, who is 66 years old, was born in Cuba and immigrated to the U.S. in 1961. She has been an instructor at OCC for 42 years and obviously felt comfortable intimidating those students who didn’t share her particular views.

Here’s what she told students in her human sexuality class a week after Trump’s stunning electoral victory, which shed light upon her warped mental state:

[Trump is] a white supremacist and a vice president that is one of the most anti-gay humans in this country. . . . Our nation is divided. We have been assaulted. It’s an act of terrorism. . . . We are way beyond Republicans and Democrats, and we’re really back to being [in] a civil war. And I don’t mean it in a fighting way, but our nation is divided as clearly as it was in Civil War times, and my hope is that we will get some good leadership to help us to overcome that. . . . We are the majority; more of us voted to not have that kind of leadership, and we didn’t win because of the way our Electoral College is set up, but we are the majority. . . . One of the things I’m doing to cope is to look for positive messages and glimmers of hope.

In the related case, Tracy has also had a positive turn in his case. On Feb. 21, the U.S. district judge assigned to Tracy’s lawsuit issued an order denying FAU’s motion to dismiss the case, requiring the defendants to answer Tracy’s amended complaint within seven days. “Great news,” wrote Tracy’s attorney to this reporter when he emailed the order, the same day as the decision. [1]

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, is the host of AFP’s “Underground Interview” series. See www.americanfreepress.net for more.




Farrakhan Draws 4,000 for 9/11 Truth

Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam may have done more for the 9/11 truth movement than any other person. His recent symposium on the events of Sept. 11 drew more than 4,000 attendees, quite a feat considering that the most popular 9/11 truth meetings typically only draw a few hundred people.

By Dr. Kevin Barrett

The best-known African-American of our time is undoubtedly Barack Obama. But the man who generates the most excitement, speaks the most truth as black people see it, and can get the most African-Americans to rally in Washington, D.C. is the honorable minister Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.

A mesmerizing public speaker, Farrakhan’s messages resonate through the black community and beyond. His organization, the Nation of Islam, is a major player on the American political scene.

So by choosing to go all out for 9/11 truth, the Nation of Islam has significantly increased the chances of a breakthrough that could help America stop its headlong plunge into war, tyranny, and economic and moral bankruptcy, and instead turn toward peace, prosperity, liberty, and sustainability.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

On Feb. 18, the Nation of Islam put on what may be the biggest and most explosive event in the whole history of the 9/11 truth movement. “The War on Islam: 9/11 Revisited, Uncovered, and Exposed” brought more than 4,000 people to the Cobo Center in Detroit.

You can watch the video archived at “NOI.org.”

“The War on Islam” situated 9/11 in the history of false-flag operations, zoomed in on some of the slam-dunk proof that 9/11 was an inside job, and finally pointed the finger at the main suspects: neoconservative Zionists bent on dragging the U.S. into an endless war on Israel’s enemies.

Full disclosure: This writer opened the event with a brief overview of false-flag operations. Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth followed with evidence that the Twin Towers and WTC-7 were brought down in controlled demolitions.

But is 9/11 still relevant? The fact that this, the biggest and boldest 9/11 truth event ever, took place now, in 2017, more than a decade and a half after the September 2001 tragedy, suggests that the issue is not going away—and for very good reason. All of the worst aspects of our present reality are pure products of 9/11: endless debilitating wars in the Muslim world, pervasive NSA surveillance of our lives and communications with raw NSA data sent to Israel, a hobbled economy sapped by military spending, rampant Islamophobia and xenophobia, and a public beaten down by fear into a state of hopelessness, ignorance, and apathy. None of these problems can even be meaningfully addressed, much less solved, until we as a nation finally face a full reckoning with the truth of 9/11.

Thanks to its clout in the black community, the Nation of Islam is in a position to pose a significant challenge to the 9/11 gatekeepers. Will they ignore Saturday’s event? Attack it? Smear it with their favorite thought-stopping ad hominem slurs, “anti-Semitic” and “conspiracy theorist”? None of these approaches will work on the black community, which is largely immune to such appeals due to its historically hard-earned skepticism.

And the rest of America is waking up—and catching on to the pervasive propaganda lies of the power elite. The mostly white Americans who elected Donald Trump no longer believe in official reality any more than black Americans do.

As the Detroit 9/11 event was kicking off, the media was tearing its collective hair out over Trump’s latest tweet: “The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCnews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American people.”

Trump’s ability to get elected despite—or perhaps because of—his hostile relationship with the media is another pure product of 9/11 and the cognitive dissonance it created. While only about one-third of Americans openly declare their 9/11 skepticism in most polls, depending on the wording that figure can rise to as high as 84%. Clearly, a large majority of Americans knows or senses, consciously or unconsciously, that there is something very wrong with the official narrative. No wonder Trump can get away with blasting the “fake news” media and even declare them the enemies of Americans.

But will Trump ever be able to follow in the footsteps of Farrakhan and tell the full truth about why the media is our enemy? Will he find the courage to explain that the media is completely controlled by corporate money in general and Zionist money in particular? Will he explain that Zionists, plutocrats, and corrupt members of our own military-industrial complex, with the full complicity of senior members of the Bush administration, staged 9/11 as a “new Pearl Harbor”?

No way.

Trump is too tight with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and too comfortable with plutocracy.

He won’t do it unless we force him to. So please help us apply the necessary pressure. Do what the Nation of Islam just did: Find a way to spread the truth in your community.

Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., is an Arabist-Islamologist scholar and one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. From 1991 through 2006, Dr. Barrett taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin. In 2006, however, he was attacked by Republican state legislators who called for him to be fired from his job at the University of Wisconsin-Madison due to his political opinions. Since 2007, Dr. Barrett has been informally blacklisted from teaching in American colleges and universities. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, public speaker, author, and talk radio host. He lives in rural western Wisconsin.




Jewish American Says ‘Trump No Anti-Semite’

AFP recently sat down with a pro-Israel Jewish-American supporter of Donald Trump to get his views on, among other things, the mainstream media and the recent charges that anti-Semitism is growing in America under the billionaire populist president. Interested readers can get even more details by listening to the audio of this provocative interview.

By Dave Gahary

After a “reporter” asked President Donald J. Trump a question at an impromptu press conference on Feb. 16, the fake news media launched an attack against the America-first billionaire-turned-politician, pulled right from the pages of their rotten playbook.

What topic was so compelling and important that the elite media felt it was absolutely imperative to devote page after page of their publications on? The answer is anti-Semitism.

_________________________________

_________________________________

When Trump fielded a question toward the end of his 77-minute press conference from “Jake Turx” of Ami (“My people”) magazine—which caters to the Orthodox Jewish community in the U.S. and Israel—things got ugly, at least according to the fake news media.

The “reporter,” whose real name is Abraham Jacob Terkeltaub, was born in Brooklyn, N.Y. He is a humorist and satirical writer, and the first Hasidic Jew to become a member of the White House press corps.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Turx stated at the press conference in part: “What we are concerned about and what we haven’t really heard you address is the uptick in anti-Semitism and how you intend to take care of it.”

Turx was alluding to a rash of alleged “bomb threats” against Jewish community centers across the country. Out of the 69 “threats” directed to 54 of these centers in 27 states, all have been hoaxes.

After Turx rambled a bit more, Trump said, “OK, sit down. I understand the rest of your question.”

That was all the fake news media could stomach.

“Trump clashes with Jewish reporter over anti-Semitism question,” lied The Hill. “Anne Frank Center slams Trump: ‘Do not make us Jews settle for crumbs of condescension,’ ” screamed The Washington Post. “ADL Head: Speak Up Now Against Anti-Semitism, Mister President,” ordered The Jewish Daily Forward. “Trump’s long-tangled history of anti-Semitism,” later changed to “Trump too late in denouncing anti-Semitic acts, critics say,” squawked USA Today. And on and on and on.

In his speech before Congress on Feb. 28, however, Trump cleared up any confusion as to where he stands on the issue of anti-Semitism. That seemed to pacify the fake media, at least for now anyway.

However, in order to find out what a man on the street thought about all this nonsense, American Free Press interviewed Steven I. Marcus, a 74-year-old pro-Israel Jewish man, who voted for Donald Trump. Marcus worked in the construction and development business, where he met Trump on at least two occasions, the first of which was an unpleasant one.

_________________________________

Listen to AFP’s exlusive interview with Marcus by clicking the image below:

_________________________________

“In 1977, I was with a large development and construction company in New York City, and Trump was converting a hotel into condominiums on 42nd Street,” Marcus explained to AFP. “That was one of his first jobs on his own, I think.”

Marcus explained where he met Trump.

“I walked into my office on a Friday morning and Trump was [there],” he began. “I’ll tell you the truth: He was a skinny kid with dirty blonde hair in those days. And he had his feet across my desk, and he’s on the phone. I said to him, ‘Excuse me, this is my office. Can I have my phone back? Hang it up.’ He says, ‘Wait. I’ll just be a couple of minutes.’ I said, ‘No, you’re getting out of my office now,’ and I used a couple of explicit words. I said, ‘If you don’t get off, I’m gonna throw you through the window.’ I had a bad temper.”

Trump left, but it wasn’t over for Marcus.

“Five minutes later the chairman of the board of the parent company called me up and said, ‘What the hell are you doing? This is one of our customers!’ I said, ‘You know what? Let him go in your office and put his feet up on your desk. I don’t want them on my desk.’ ”

Marcus was destined to meet the future president again.

“About eight-and-a-half years later on a job I ran into Donald and he was very nice,” said Marcus. “Of course, when I mentioned to him what had happened eight-and-a-half years ago, he didn’t remember it. Whether he really didn’t remember it or not, that’s what he said.”

Marcus, who worked in the same industry as Trump, is in a unique position to counter the fake news media’s lies about Trump.

“Guys who went to work for me in the company called Titan, when they left, they went to work for [Trump],” explained Marcus. “He paid them fantastic salaries, gave them cars, and everybody I spoke to who worked for him said, ‘He’s the best boss I ever had.’”

Marcus added: “Contrary to what [the fake news media says], he loves women executives that work for him. He said they’re tougher than the men. And he pays them top-dollar.”

AFP asked Marcus his views on the mainstream media.

“The liberal press absolutely lies about him and distorts it,” he said. “It’s disgusting. It really is. I don’t read a newspaper anymore. The only thing I watch [is] the Fox News channel, because it’s the only one where I feel I get to know what’s going on that’s real. The rest of it is all made up, with all these liberal people.”

He said, “Today these liberals, guys like this [George] Soros, who’s spending all this money, hiring these people—when you see it on television, and you see these people at marches against Trump, it’s all paid.”

Marcus continued: “These liberals can’t accept the fact that Hillary lost. God, I don’t know what this country would be like if she had won. I tell you the truth, I think she would have wound up being worse than Obama, who was an abortion.”

Marcus feels the Republicans in Congress should get behind the president.

“My only worry is that the Republicans in Congress have the backbone to back him,” he said. “They gotta realize, the fate of this country lies in what this guy can do. If they don’t back him, we’re not even gonna be a country anymore. I strongly believe we need the wall. We need more than the wall, but the wall is a good beginning. Keep these people out and get rid of all these rapists and criminals who are being hidden. And I want to see him pull the federal money from every one of these states that won’t abide by federal law.”

AFP asked Marcus—who’s experienced real anti-Semitism—about the Jewish attack on Trump, and whether he believes attacks against Jews are as serious as the fake news media claims they are.

“I personally am saddened that so many stupid Jews are loyal Democrats,” he began. “My own sister, you can’t argue with her. And the joke is—and it’s not even a joke—Trump’s daughter converted to Judaism, his son-in-law is a Jew, his three grandchildren are being raised as Jews, and to call him anti-Semitic is asinine. He’s anything but that.”

Marcus touched on his experience with true anti-Semitism.

“My first major job in construction, I was working for a company, they were basically Catholic,” Marcus explained. “I was the only Jew working there, but the owner didn’t care because I produced. But the people I worked with were not crazy about Jews. And I wound up making it bad for them, because I worked twice as hard. And the boss kept saying, ‘Why is Marcus doing all this work and you people aren’t following him?’ ”

Marcus continued: “So I fought anti-Semitism. You know what? It is what it is. I don’t care. Nobody’s ever come after me to kill me, thank God, or anything else. You can’t make the whole world love you. And, unfortunately—now, I’ll be very blunt—a lot of Jews go off the deep end. They’re sick people, these ultraliberals. You know, my father used to say, ‘The definition of a conservative is a liberal whose daughter gets raped.’ They’re all great at telling you and me how to live, except that they don’t follow the same. Nobody can love everybody. People hate the Irish. People hate the Italians. They hate the Germans. They hate this. There’s always going to be people hating different people for different reasons. It doesn’t bother me.”

AFP also asked about the Jewish groups spreading the lie that hatred against Jews is running rampant.

“You know what they want?” he asked. “They’re raising money. They’re more interested in themselves than the fact that they’re supposedly protecting Jews. These groups have their own agenda. They’re all ridiculous.”

He added: “They [should just] shut up and forget about it. Everybody doesn’t have to love me because I’m a Jew. You don’t have to love a person because he’s an Italian. Everybody has their different thoughts. But if you start running around carrying signs, all you’re gonna do is make people hate you more. So I don’t put any weight on any of this stuff. People want to be anti-Semitic, they can be anti-Semitic.”

Marcus summed up his feelings about Trump and America.

“I may be a weird Jew because I’m a conservative, but I believe in America,” he said. “This is my country, and my religion and everything else is secondary and third. I’m an American, and I believe in Donald Trump. I know sometimes he talks from the hip. Who cares? That’s why we elected him. He says what he believes.”

Dave Gahary is a writer for AFP and lives in Florida.




President Puts America First in Address to Congress, Nation

In his speech last night before both houses of Congress, Donald Trump sounded more presidential than ever, championing middle-class America in his tough talk about financial responsibility and law and order. In direct contrast to decades of presidents selling free trade, Trump said he is going America-first and make the country great again.

By Mark Anderson

Even ABC News, a frequent Trump antagonist, had to admit that Donald Trump sounded more presidential than ever Tuesday night at his first address to Congress. One key remark by Trump that surprisingly earned some media recognition right after the address was: “My job is not to represent the world; my job is to represent the United States of America.”

In a world harmed by attempts to abandon the idea of the nation-state and consolidate and centralize power in fewer and fewer hands—a process which the big media has long supported—it’s ironic but welcome that Trump’s pledge to back away from a world imperium and put America first is earning him some media accolades.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Trump’s assertion to Congress that he’s not a would-be world ruler followed his observation that, for way too long, America’s struggling middle class has been tied to the whipping post while the U.S. government has pursued expensive, often dead-end global projects, such as spending $6 trillion in the Middle East over 15 years. In the process, Trump said that the U.S. has protected every nation’s borders but its own.

Trump added that past U.S. efforts under other administrations to be the world’s governor have led to leaky borders. That, he said, has allowed drugs to pour into the U.S. in record amounts, leading to crumbling inner cities and spiking crime.

From there, Trump said to Congress that he planned to:

  • Repeal and replace Obamacare while covering pre-existing conditions.
  • Continue arresting and deporting illegal aliens who commit crimes while finishing the border wall.
  • Support NATO but make sure the other alliance members carry a larger share of the costs.
  • Support fair trade, while invoking Abraham Lincoln’s approval of protectionist economic measures.
  • Ensure constitutional literalist Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.
  • Make sure veterans get the medical care they deserve.
  • Spend a trillion dollars on crucial infrastructure upgrades—though such upgrades could have been done five times over with the money frittered away in Middle East military misadventures.
  • Finish the Dakota and Keystone oil pipelines, although Trump has been silent on the fact that many Nebraskans, South Dakotans, tribal members, and others have strong concerns that a burst pipeline could pollute the Ogallala Aquifer and other bodies of water, not to mention property rights infringements that have occurred and will continue to occur as pipeline sections are laid.

Trump did not directly mention U.S. relations with Russia, a nation that the collusive mainstream media-intelligence apparatus insists, without evidence, is a permanent enemy of the U.S. However, he did reiterate that “radical Islamic terrorism” is a foe that he will vanquish, though he shied away from directly lambasting Iran.

A chief challenge for Trump is how he’s going to pursue better Russian relations—a goal suggested in general terms by remarks he has made in other speeches—while at the same time crushing ISIS within the borders of Russian allies like Syria.

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

Trump pledged to reduce excessive domestic regulations that hamper economic growth.

He also stole a lot of thunder from Democrats in Congress and beyond by calling for paid maternity leave and making sure women can get capital to start businesses.

And with Trump pledging to put millions of Americans gainfully back to work—at a time when Democrats are already a minority in both chambers—the Democratic Party’s traditional image of working-class hero is being transferred to the GOP under Trump, a seismic shift that likely will weaken the Democratic Party even more as it tries to live down the “Hillary syndrome.”

“I’m not sure I’ll ever be a Democrat again,” a Bay City, Mich. resident told NBC’s “Today” show the morning of March 1, in a segment called “In Trump They Trust” that sounded quite upbeat compared to the usual dire media fare about Trump served to the American people.

Even a two-time Obama voter with progressive values told NBC that he liked Trump’s speech to Congress, both in content and in its “regular-guy” tone.

The background was Bay City itself, a former industrial powerhouse in a state of relative decline. The Bay City residents interviewed by NBC believe their city will see a rebound under Trump.

One Bay City man told NBC that he even sees some parallels between Trump’s economic views and the views of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Interestingly, while Democratic members of Congress (especially women members wearing white during Trump’s speech to symbolize their defense of women’s rights) stayed seated and rarely cheered Trump’s points, Sanders, a former Democratic president candidate, was seen clapping when Trump pledged to make it a lot easier for U.S. companies to stay here and create jobs and make it a lot harder for them to leave the U.S.

A few days before Trump’s address to Congress, in an almost forgotten 45-minute speech on Feb. 24 at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor in Maryland, Trump addressed Republicans directly, going a lot further in backing away from a U.S.-led world government.

“Global cooperation, getting along with other countries, is good; it’s very important,” he said in Maryland. “But there is no such thing as a global anthem, a global currency or a global flag. This is the USA that I’m representing. I’m not representing the globe.”

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor.




Trump Agrees: The Media is the Enemy

The mainstream media has been waging a relentless campaign not just on the credibility of President Donald Trump but on any news outlet that treats the billionaire populist leader fairly and honestly. For over a decade, AFP has been saying the “media is the enemy.” It’s nice to know there is a president that finally agrees with us.

By Paul T Angel

Donald J. Trump has singlehandedly knocked the bought-and-paid-for press off its exalted throne as the self-appointed czars of “real news.” That’s right. He said it. “The media is the enemy.”

Now the elite media is scrambling frantically to try to explain to viewers why anyone should be listening to them at all. They have been humiliated. And, to make matter worse for them, the president continues to take his message straight to the American public, bypassing the cringing gatekeeps of “truth” who formerly had a monopoly on what you could hear or watch or read. They are like the emperor with no clothes—hoping desperately nobody notices they are altogether in the raw—birthday-suit, buck-naked bare for all to see.

Right now, the masters of the controlled media are frantically lashing out with all the ammo they have in their once formidable arsenals in a vain attempt to hold their slipping grip on whatever diminishing shred of relevance they can to maintain their lucrative dominance of the news business.

Fortunately for that segment of the American public that thinks with their brains and not their buttocks, they realize the bombs and bullets being fired at Trump are duds. Their con game is over.

And even as they try to tell us Trump is the liar, another massive news outlet has been caught running with a story that none of their reporters bothered to check. This latest example of shoddy reporting comes from Germany.

The tabloid Bild, with the eighth-largest circulation (2.5 million) of any newspaper worldwide, apologized to its readers for an article that claimed “a ‘mob’ of Arab men had sexually assaulted women . . . in a Frankfurt restaurant.” The police admit they can find no evidence of the event.

Following the Frankfurt police confession, Bild was forced to make its public mea culpa. Bild pledged an internal review and emphatically apologized for this fake report, but their credibility is ruined. Even worse, though, Bild failed to reiterate that dozens, if not hundreds, of immigrants from the Mideast and north Africa had in fact attacked, robbed and, in some cases, sexually molested dozens and dozens of innocent German men and women in Cologne, Hamburg, Dortmund, Düsseldorf, Stuttgart, and Bielefeld last New Year’s Eve.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

In Stockholm, Sweden, events there involving immigrants further embarrassed the entrenched media and, as a result, vindicated their favorite target of late, Donald Trump, after he evoked the consequences of allowing unchecked immigration into Western nations at a Florida rally. “You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening in Sweden. . . . Sweden!

Who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers [of immigrants]. They’re having problems like they never thought possible,” Trump said.

Trump’s statements unleashed a firestorm of vitriolic attacks against him. The U.S. news media in particular was slavering to make him look like a racist xenophobe and convince listeners the America-first president was lying, and that all was just dandy in Sweden. Their celebration was short lived.

Just several days after his Florida comments, violent riots broke out in a “refugee” suburb of Stockholm after an immigrant drug dealer was stopped by police and shots were allegedly fired. Outraged immigrant hooligans set cars ablaze, looted local stores, and threw rocks at cops, injuring several officers, Swedish officials confirmed.

These riots—as well as statistics—back up Trump’s claims. Reports of rapes in Sweden jumped 13% in 2016 compared to 2015, and reports of sexual assaults were up 20%, according to data from the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention.

Liberals claim this is because more people are required to report sexual assaults. They insist that no real rape or immigrant problem exists in Sweden. Who are they kidding? Not you nor me.

THE MEDIA IS THE ENEMY

The same day as Trump’s Florida rally, White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said during an interview with CBS’s “Face the Nation” that his boss should be taken seriously when he calls the media “the enemy.” Trump had tweeted: “The FAKE news media . . . is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American people!”

Readers of this newspaper have known for years that this was a slogan of the late, great Michael Collins Piper, who used it not only in his own writings, but in promotional material for American Free Press. He wrote more than 15 years ago:

The Media is the Enemy. In the old Soviet Union, the government controlled the media. Not a word of substance could be published without prior approval from the Bolshevik commissars. Today, in the U.S., the situation is starkly similar. But most Americans don’t know it. In America today, it is a select handful of super-rich families and tightly knit financial interests—a plutocratic elite—who own the Big Media and who control the government through their ownership of that media. . . .

Every single one of the major media outlets is controlled by this powerful interlocking combine. When Sebastian Lukacs Gorka, a legal immigrant to this country now serving as a deputy assistant to President Donald Trump, was asked by a BBC reporter during an interview about the president’s plans regarding the controlled press, he said:

We are going to continue to do what we did very, very successfully [during the campaign] . . . which is to break your . . . monopoly on the news. . . . The mainstream media no longer gets to monopolize news, and we are going to go straight to the audiences, whether it’s through Twitter, whether it’s through YouTube, it doesn’t matter. We are not going to put up with [the] distortions of people who believe they have a monopoly on the truth simply because they have 60 years of a letterhead above them.

That’s right, folks. The media is the enemy. And for the first time we can remember, the president of the United States has said so in public.

 TIME FOR A BOYCOTT

AFP urges you to boycott all mainstream news outlets—TV, radio, and Internet sites. Boycott Hollywood films that promote perversion (almost all do). Don’t listen to these far-left, out-of-touch, multimillionaire stars or latenight idiotic comics like Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel et al. Boycott everything that has CNN, ABC, NBC or CBS on its masthead (for starters). Their stranglehold on the dissemination of information must be broken. We believe it’s time to circle the wagons around Trump.

Will we give Trump a free pass on everything? No. We can’t do that. That’s not the job of an honest press. But when he’s right, we’ll tell you so. And when he’s wrong, we’ll tell you about that, too.

There’s a real war going on. In this instance, Donald Trump is on the side of truth, not the fake news presstitutes spewing their venom 24 hours a day. Help him win this battle. Help us win this battle. It’s an important one we must not lose.

Paul T. Angel is a writer and designer for AFP and lives in Virginia.




Radical Left Targets Alternative Media

Internet giants have been working hand-in-hand with thought censors to shut down independent news outlets around the world like American Free Press. Targeting the news organizations they disagree with, companies like Google and PayPal are squeezing conservative voices in an effort to silence and ultimately shut them down.

By John Friend

AdSense, the online advertising giant owned by Google, has cut ties with two politically incorrect media outlets, one of which is this newspaper’s website, following pressure from Media Matters, a leftist media watchdog group financed in part by George Soros.

In addition to AFP’s website, Counter-Currents Publishing, a white nationalist book publishing company that also maintains a website featuring blog posts and longer essays from various contributors, had its AdSense account terminated, according to a recent monthly newsletter written by Greg Johnson, the editor-in-chief of the company.

On Jan. 30, Media Matters, which has close ties to many of the leading personalities that ran Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, including John Podesta, published an inflammatory article entitled, “How Anti-Semitic and Holocaust-Denying Websites Are Using Google AdSense for Revenue.”

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

The article highlighted four independent media outlets— American Free Press, Counter-Currents Publishing, The Right Stuff, and “Veterans Today”—that used Google’s AdSense program to place online advertisements on their respective websites to generate income.

The article argued that “some of the worst purveyors of anti-Semitism on the Internet” were using AdSense to generate advertising revenue, and that these independent media outlets were “seemingly in direct violation” of AdSense’s program policy of prohibited content.

“Google believes strongly in the freedom of expression, but also recognizes the need to protect the quality of the AdSense network for users, advertisers, and publishers,” according to AdSense’s prohibited content policy. “Google ads may not be placed on pages that contain harassing or bullying content, or on content that incites hatred or promotes violence against individuals or groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity. Additionally, Google ads may not appear on content that incites or advocates for harm against an individual or group.

However, pages containing educational, documentary, historical, scientific, or artistic content related to such subjects are permitted to participate in AdSense.”

Any objective reader of this newspaper and its online platform will fully recognize the fact that American Free Press has never and would never publish articles or opinion pieces that “contain harassing or bullying content” or content that “incites hatred or promotes violence” against any individual or group for any reason whatsoever.

This is just the latest attempt by the left and the enforcers of political correctness to shut down or otherwise limit free expression on the Internet. Politically incorrect media outlets and personalities are regularly targeted for “hate speech” violations on social media, resulting in their accounts being terminated. Major Internet giants such as PayPal, Amazon Affiliates, and AdSense often consult with leftist activist organizations—including Media Matters, the SPLC, and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)—to determine which organizations or individuals to target for censorship.

This writer, for instance, had his PayPal account permanently shut down in late November 2014 following pressure from the SPLC and ADL. To this day, I remain banned as an individual from utilizing PayPal’s services. Other writers, activists, and online content producers have also had their PayPal accounts permanently limited.

These actions have severely hampered the ability of independent media outlets and journalists to solicit donations and raise much-needed revenue.

Unlike many European nations, which jail political dissidents and those who engage in “hate speech,” those with politically incorrect views cannot be legally discriminated against by the state in America. However, private entities and corporations, such as Google, AdSense, PayPal, Twitter, Facebook, and other Internet giants, can and do discriminate against those daring to challenge the sacred dogmas of the left, often at the behest of radical leftist activist organizations.

Engaging in meaningful political dissent, challenging the officially sanctioned narratives of history as well as current events, and publishing information and perspectives that run contrary to the wishes and dictates of the powers that be is a risky business in America, despite the First Amendment and longstanding tradition of freedom of thought and intellectual inquiry. Readers would be wise to support the efforts of independent media outlets, especially American Free Press—America’s last real newspaper—while limiting their support and business dealings with the top Internet monopolies, which have proven over and over again their willingness to become the enforcers of political correctness at the behest of the radical left.

John Friend is a writer for American Free Press and lives in California.




Are Hate Crimes Really on the Rise in America?

There’s been a quiet but not surprising way that radical leftist groups and their advocates in government account for so-called “hate.” Instead of labeling them “crimes,” which are investigated by police and often disproven, they are now logged as so-called “hate incidents” with no questions asked as to their veracity.

By John Friend

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and other leftist activist organizations, “hate” is on the rise in America. They’re blaming President Donald Trump and his America-first populism, but is this just another example of fake news that’s being promoted by the radical left and the mainstream media?

A major theme throughout the 2016 presidential election was the alleged rise in “hate incidents” and “hate groups” purportedly targeting minorities, topics the SPLC has made its living on by hyping and exaggerating for decades now.

The spring 2017 edition of the Intelligence Report—a quarterly publication written and produced by the SPLC, which “provides comprehensive updates to law enforcement agencies, the media and the general public” about the “radical right” in America—argues that the number of “hate groups” operating in the U.S. has risen for the second consecutive year. According to the report, “hate incidents” are also on the rise, fueled largely by Trump’s presidential victory and his populist, America-first policy positions on immigration.

The report goes on to argue that hate incidents against Muslims and other immigrants have risen dramatically, driven largely by Trump’s rhetoric concerning illegal immigration and the threat of radical Islamic terrorism.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

But what exactly constitutes a hate incident is largely open for interpretation.

As this newspaper has covered extensively, so-called hate crimes are, in many cases, exaggerated and even faked by individuals and a complicit mainstream mass news media. On the other hand, so-called hate incidents need not be investigated by law enforcement. They are merely an accounting of someone’s claim that a person was the victim of someone’s “hate.”

For instance, according to a local NBC affiliate in D.C., Montgomery County, Md., which sits just north of the nation’s capital, allegedly saw a dramatic spike in hate incidents in 2016. The report notes that 94 “biased incidents” were reported in the county during 2016, a 42% increase in such incidents from the previous year.

“The spike in hate crimes was a direct correlation to the kind of campaign that was run for the president of the United States,” County Council President Roger Berliner told reporters. “It unleashed an energy that is very destructive.”

Incredibly, one example of a “hate crime” cited in the report included Trump supporters’ being called nazis or cars being vandalized with swastikas, which runs contrary to Berliner’s line of thinking.

In fact, Trump supporters—or perceived Trump supporters—were violently attacked and abused throughout the presidential campaign season, a fact that is rarely, if ever, brought to light by leftist groups. In comparison, violence allegedly committed by Trump supporters is regularly hyped, exaggerated, and, in some cases, entirely invented by groups such as the SPLC and their enablers and supporters in the mainstream mass news media.

Similarly, some Jewish groups have argued that “anti-Semitism” and “hate” are on the rise as well.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) recently published a list of the top 10 manifestations of “anti-Semitism” in 2016, which included Jewish journalists being called bad names on the Internet in addition to the rise of the alt-right, an increasingly popular political dissident movement driven largely by nationalist and racialist ideas.

Adding to this claim, the ADL also released a report saying that Jewish community centers had received around 50 bomb threats in the last two months.

Hurt feelings aside, the FBI is reportedly investigating the bomb threats but has not released any specifics on these bomb threats, which all turned out to be hoaxes.

It’s worth noting that, while Jewish community centers may have received 50 bomb threats in two months, in 2016, schools across the U.S. averaged over 100 bomb threats every month, or over 1,200 for the entire year—a startling statistic that shows, overall, American schools regularly face four times the number of threats as compared to Jewish community centers.

John Friend is a writer for AFP and lives in California.




Immigrants Will Overwhelm America

Whether legal or illegal, the U.S. cannot handle millions more immigrants. When it comes to illegal aliens, every year, 500,000 illegal aliens violate America’s borders. If you multiply 33 years times 500,000 people, that adds another 16.5 million people by 2050. Once this immigration storm hits, no one will be able to escape its consequences.

By Frosty Wooldridge

Every morning, noon, and night, you hear the weather report forecast in your specific area. Meteorologists warn you of approaching tornados, rainsqualls, or blizzards. They warn you of breezes or high winds. You know the temperatures in order to dress correctly or not to drive that day. Because of those forecasts, you make daily choices with knowledge and understanding. You protect yourself and your family.

Do you ever notice the evening news with cars piled up in 20-car crashes because they drove into a blinding snow storm? What about a cluster of 18-wheelers that drove into a fog bank only to create multiple deaths? As you look at the traffic standing still in your city, why did all those people drive their cars into such a gridlocked mess?

As you sit there watching the evening news, you wonder, “Why did so many people make such stupid choices? Why did they drive into a blinding snow storm? Why didn’t they pull over and park? Why didn’t they stay home?”

But what about your future, the future of your community, the future of your state, and ultimately, the future of your country—if you don’t get to see a forecast about a gathering storm across America in the form of endless immigration?

IMMIGRATION STORM

While no one can change the weather, each of us can change the future of our country by stopping the “immigration tsunami” bearing down on our 50 states.

As a forecaster, I can tell you this: Once this immigration storm hits, no one escapes its consequences.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

The 1965 Immigration Reform Act drives this “perfect storm” bearing down on the U.S. At that time, Congress increased legal immigration to 1.2 million annually. That single act added 100 million people to the U.S. in 40 years. If allowed to continue, it will add 138 million more people within 33 years. We stand 28 million into that 138 million in 2017.

Let’s look at the numbers.

According to the Pew Research Center, NumbersUSA.org, the U.S. Census Bureau, and the Fogel/Martin Population Projections, legal immigration is expected to jump the U.S. population by 100 million people, net gain, by 2045 or sooner.

That includes immigrants, their births, and their chain-migrated relatives. The other 38 million will be U.S. births by U.S. mothers at two children per woman on average. The baseline population was 300 million in 2006.

Dr. Steve Camarato of the Center for Immigration Studies tells us that 500,000 illegal aliens violate our borders annually. If you multiply 33 years times 500,000 people, that adds another 16.5 million people. That would take us from the projected 438 million to 454.5 million in 2050. You can find more from the Center for Immigration Studies at “CIS.org.”

That equates to doubling the size of our 40 most populated cities within the United States. This means New York City jumps from 8.3 million to 16.6 million, Los Angeles increases from 11 million to 22 million, Chicago from 5 million to 10 million, and on down the line.

Florida is expected to jump from 18 million to 36 million. Texas increases from 26 million to 36 million. California accelerates from 38 million to 58 million.

How do you water, feed, warm, transport, house, employ in an increasingly robotic world, and provide resources for in excess of another 154.5 million people?

With all the problems we face today—47 million Americans subsisting on food stamps, 8.7 million unemployed, our inner cities rotting into chaos, our air pollution rates exploding off the charts, our gridlock traffic immobilizing our cities, our water pollution in places like Flint, Mich. and dozens of other U.S. cities—how in the living daylights will we survive the first part of this storm?

My long-time colleague, Dr. Albert Bartlett, said, “Can you think of any problem in any area of human endeavor on any scale from microscopic to global, whose long-term solution is in any demonstrable way aided, assisted or advanced by further increases of population, locally, nationally or globally?” (Bartlett manages “AlBartlett.org,” which is his own website.)

The answer: Nothing will get better. Everything will get worse. No one will be immune. Everyone will suffer.

You can take action today by supporting new immigration initiatives sponsored by Washington. Also, you can join these organizations for free: NumbersUSA (1400 Crystal Drive, Suite 240, Arlington, Va. 22202), Federation for American Immigration Reform (25 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Suite 330, Washington, D.C. 20001), and Carrying Capacity Network, Inc. (1629 K Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20006). And, of course, get people to subscribe to AMERICAN FREE PRESS.

Frosty Wooldridge lives in Golden, Colo. He is a population, immigration, and environment specialist and has spoken at colleges, civic clubs, and conferences around the world on these topics. Woolridge has also biked across six continents.