Saturday, June 30, 2018

Don't Fall for the Civil War Rhetoric: Let the Left Own the Violence


Is America really on the verge of another civil war? Has the political divide become so deep that conservatives and liberals can find no other alternative to settle their differences that they must be settled through violence? Some people would have you believe this to be the case, people with an agenda that is. Allowing ourselves to fall for this propaganda gives the elites all the excuse they need to put the final nail in the coffin and institute a full blown, technocratic police state. The infrastructure is all in place, all they need now is the consent of a scared public, and a barbaric civil war would do the trick.

The goal of the left is to rip the nations morality apart and create conditions where people see their solutions as the only alternative to the tumultuous events unfolding around them. In Brainwashing: A Synthesis on the Russian Manual of Psychopolitics Lavrentiy Beria, chief of the Soviet secret police, explains this by saying the following-

By Psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, distrust, economic depression, and scientific turmoil. At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses.

For years now, we have listened to the hysterics of the left claim that the right represents an ideology of violence and intolerance despite the overwhelming fact that it is the left who organizes unruly mobs in protest of whatever outrage is motivating them into action. Occupy Wall Street, Antifa, and Black Lives Matter all epitomize the idea that violence against an imperialistic nation such as the United States, where white supremacism allegedly permeates the institutions, is justified. The communist left is operating from a list of declared forty-five goals they established to bring this country down, violent protests were among these established objectives. This list of goals was not only published in the book The Naked Communist, they were made part of the congressional record in 1963. In other words, congress is aware of what is happening in our country.

Goal #19 Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations that are under Communist attack.

Goal #42 Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special interest groups should rise up and make a "united force" to solve economic, political or social problems.

 The latest display of emotional virtue in which the left is displaying orchestrated indignation is the immigration debate. Massive protests are once again being utilized to feint moral umbrage towards the Trump administration, even though he is merely enforcing current immigration law. The end goal of course is the elimination of America’s lawful borders and an unending flow of immigrants who have no interest in sustaining our culture of liberty.

These issues which cause conflict among Americans are deliberately being thrust into the public exclusively for that purpose, to cause conflict. The Hegelian Dialectic is used to cause problems, get the public to demand a solution, then implement the one that’s been waiting in the shadows. Americans were supposed to see the reasonableness in liberalism and accept it as an alternative to conservatism, which is always presented as selfish and aristocratic. American’s have rejected it outright with the election of Donald Trump and in desperation, the left is working to cause as much chaos as they can to bring us to our knees. Make no mistake, the left is using everything they can, the Russian investigation, immigration, gun control and other contentious issues to keep us divided. They invent labels while insisting that their positions are morally superior, and that opposing viewpoints to collectivism should be shouted down. Leftwing politicians like Pelosi and Waters have been instigating violence by suggesting people form groups and become disruptors or surround people from the opposite political party and publicly shame them.

If there were to be another civil war in this country it would be because the left wants one. They have become so intolerant of anything other than their mystical, fabled delusions of utopia that they are enthusiastic about the prospects of staging violent protests and even setting off bombs to get their way. They have been pushing for decades to transform America into a socialist paradise and they have largely failed to bring it to fruition. They are desperate, delusional and angry, and they are operating from an ends justify the means mentality that makes it all the more dangerous.

Violence breaking out on a large scale would drive the public to demand a solution from the government to foster in a sense of safety and normalcy. This is what the desired outcome is, so before you let the violent rhetoric of the left push you to achieve their ends, realize that your reaction is what they need to control you.




at No comments:

Monday, June 25, 2018

Means and Ends Moralists Part 3: Immigration and an Unhinged Left


The left is using the issue of illegal immigration to push for open borders and the elimination of America’s national identity. They are also using it to discredit Donald Trump as he is being portrayed as a heartless dictator who is locking up poor children seeking asylum in the United States. The two Alinsky rules the left are using here are numbers eight and ten.

Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions and utilize all events of the period for your purpose. (Alinsky, 1971)

The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. (Alinsky, 1971)

What President Trump is currently dealing with is an overwhelming problem of illegal immigrants crossing our border because the left has virtually made it legal to do so. The Hegelian dialectic is in play here as this issue has been allowed to grow out of control for several decades to create a public demand for a solution, and that solution is being presented as amnesty.

For years, the Obama administration, according to the Dailymail.com[1], had been sending leaflets to Mexico advising people that they can get free food stamps and other benefits in America without admitting they are in the country illegally. As a result, millions of people are rushing to cross the border to get their fair share of the free ride. The left is taking the opportunity to discredit President Trump because of policies which have been in place for two decades which separates children and their families at the border while a determination is made pertaining on what to do with them. The debate currently rages over whether there is a federal law requiring such an action. President Trump has made the claim that Democrats passed this law. In 2002, a Democrat senate majority voted in favor of Public Law 107-296[2], which was a bill following the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks. George W. Bush was president at the time, so he would have had to sign the bill into law. This bill does give authority to place illegal immigrants under the age of 18 into a detention facility; however, there is nothing in this law which specifies the separation of families. In any case, families have been separated at the border for decades, even under the Obama administration[3]. Even MSNBC was forced to admit that the policy took place under the Obama administration.[4] Whatever the case may be, the Democrats are clearly showing their hypocrisy on the issue while pulling the heart strings of the ignorant. For years, when it suited them, they advocated for strong border policies and tougher laws on illegal immigration. Many people likely remember the time when the Clinton administration sent armed Immigration and Naturalization officers to seize Elian Gonzalez from his family’s home in Miami [5]. Gonzalez was brought to the United States from Cuba under the same conditions which Democrats now champion and encourage illegal immigration. To escape the harsh realities of living under oppressive rule and third world economic conditions. The Clinton Administration made no apologies for this pre-dawn raid where they snatched young Elian from his uncle’s arms at gun point.

The left is now using this issue to present Trumps actions as morally reprehensible, so they can get their voting base worked up and mobilized. While doing so they have once again shown the world just how low they are willing to go to present something as a crisis which must immediately be solved. Time Magazine, on the cover of their July issue, has run a photo of a little girl screaming at the border and President Trump hovering over her while saying the words “welcome to America.” As stressed many times throughout this blog, the left’s job is to discredit the country, so this cover makes America look like a mean and nasty place. You must wonder though, if they thought the country was such a mean and nasty place then why are they encouraging people to cross the border illegally, only to be separated from their families and be treated like animals? Shouldn’t they be encouraging the people oppressed by white privilege and imperialism to cross the border into Mexico where everyone is of such higher virtue? The truth of this photo is that the girl was never separated from her family and that her mother was not an asylum seeker. Rather, her father claims that the mother hired a smuggler to bring her across the border, leaving the father behind, and that she was looking for work.  According to an article published in the Washington Times by Stephen Dinan,[6] the mother, Sandra Sanchez was deported from the United States under the Obama administration. Dinan further argued that because she left other children behind she has no justifiable claim to asylum in the United States. If she had fears of being persecuted she would not leave other loved family members behind. This is how the left plays, they take advantage of any opportunity to discredit their opposition even before finding out any facts.

Another shocking revelation that has become known, one that of course the left is trying to use against Trump, is the fact that many of these children are being force fed powerful anti-psychotic drugs once they have been separated from their families. A report from Revealnews.org[7] reveals that immigrant children have been sent to shelters which have a history of abusing their guests with psychotropic medications since 2003. One such shelter, Shiloh, received 5.6 million dollars from the federal government and has been housing these children since 2013. Children have complained of being forced to take up to ten different medications at a time. This author, during an internship at a child welfare office can attest to this as he was witnessing shelters who engage in the practice of drugging the children after they have been taken from their parents. Ironically, many of these children were of Hispanic origin and the year was 2013. It is unknown if there is a connection between these shelters and those involved in housing illegal immigrants.

Another image that has sent shockwaves through the lefts emotional outrage machine was one of a little boy being locked in a cage, crying. It turns out that the photo was part of a staged protest where left wing agitators put themselves in a cage to demonstrate their outrage over families being separated at the border[8]. That brings us to another Alinsky rule, one that has been employed many times before.

A good tactic is one your people enjoy. If your people are not having a ball doing it there is something very wrong with the tactic. (Alinsky, 1971)

The left has fun doing many of the things they do. They especially like to incite riots against conservatives in their attempts to portray conservatism as selfish, bigoted, and hateful. On Sunday, June 24, 2018, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, attempting to whoop up hatred against Republicans encouraged her voters to harass and intimidate Trump supporters[9] to protest the immigration issue. This is despite many of the issues she is trying to bring attention to have been proven false.

This is all indicative of the means the Alinsky moralists are willing to employ to discredit and destroy their opposition. The sad thing is that they feel no shame for doing so, they have elevated their morality with the false notion of being virtually superior to us. As mentioned in earlier articles, they have no morality except that of being willing to corrupt themselves to create their cherished Utopia. They will only come out and admit they are wrong if they fear public opinion demands they do so. In many cases, they will still find a way to justify the use of misinformation or lying to prove a point. In the case of Waters, her voters believe, because of the lies pushed by the media in collaboration with the education system, that the Republicans truly are bigoted and are working feverishly to keep the poor children from their families.

Maxine Waters isn’t the only Democrat who has become unhinged in her calls for action. MSNBC commentator Donny Deutsch[10] took to the airwaves on Saturday, June 23, 2018, to suggest that all Trump voters are to blame for child separations. In fact, he suggested that voting for Trump is comparable to standing on the border and ripping children away from their parents.

What has to happen now is this can no longer be about who Trump is. It has to be about who we are, if we are working towards November. We can no longer say Trump’s the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you’re the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you are ripping children from parents’ arms. The mistake that we’ve made in the past, is “Look at that bad guy over there. Look at that bad guy.”

What the Democrats have to do is make the next election a referendum on not who Trump is, but who you are. That’s the big difference. You can no longer now as a voter — because it’s not about taxes, it’s not even about some abstract term of immigration or nationalism; if you vote for Trump then you, the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border, like Nazis, going “You here, you here.”

And I think we now have to flip it and its a given, the evilness of Donald Trump. But if you vote, you can no longer separate yourself. You can’t say, well he’s okay, but — and I think that gymnastics and I think that jiu-jitsu has to happen. (Deutsch)

The desperation to retain voters and discredit the truth is boiling over to dangerous levels and if it is not tamed by a respect for humanity, could very well result in someone getting hurt.

at No comments:

Monday, June 18, 2018

The American Medical Association Hides its Own Failures by Pushing Gun Control


The American Medical Association is jumping on board the gun control band wagon by organizing a massive push to lobby law makers to enact stricter gun laws. Among some of these proposals are a ban on so called assault weapons, high capacity magazines, licensing and registration of all firearms, and laws which prohibit anyone under the age of twenty-one from purchasing any type of weapon.  Currently, people under twenty-one are already prohibited from owning handguns. These new proposals, mirroring Florida’s new gun control measures, would make purchasing any type of rifle or shot gun illegal by anyone under the age of twenty-one. Imagine the hypocrisy of such laws, eighteen-year old’s fight for our freedom only to be denied the freedoms they believe they are fighting for. The second amendment was written to guarantee everyone’s inalienable right to self-defense. The American Medical Association has no authority to offer policy initiatives on this subject.

The American Medical Association is attempting to present gun ownership as a public health crisis. This began under President Obama’s Surgeon General Vivek Murthy. Murthy is responsible for organizing a group called Doctors for Obama and helped lobby congress for the passage of Obamacare. This group has already pressed for these gun control laws under the misguided notion that banning guns is a part of medicine and would result in a healthier America.

While labeling gun ownership as a public health crisis may seem far fetched to some, the fact is that conservatism have been labeled as a potential mental illness for quite some time.  In the article Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition, the authors argue that a conservative’s unwillingness to change is a sign of a mental disorder. They also argue that the right generally shows a favorable attitude towards inequality while the left pushes for total equality, meaning that conservatives are intolerant bigots. This, according to the authors, is because the right believes in a hierarchal structure for society. This of course, is non-sense. The right believes in equality of opportunity, not forced out comes. In any case, the label of mental illness is being associated with political conservatism. Soon, those showing an unwillingness to accept the idea that gun ownership is creating a public health crisis could be considered mentally ill as well.

“The populace must be brought into the belief that every individual within it who rebels in any way, shape, or form against efforts and activities to enslave the whole, must be considered to be a deranged person whose eccentricities are neurotic or insane and who must have at once the treatment of a psychopolitician.” (Beria, Manual on Psychopolitics)

The AMA may be seeking to treat gun ownership as a public health crisis; however, in doing so they appear to be hiding some of their own public health problems. For instance, a report released in 2016 by John Hopkins Medicine reveals that medical errors and malpractice are now the third leading cause of death in America. According to John Hopkins safety experts, more than 250,000 people per year die of medical errors. This far surpasses the three hundred and seventy-six people murdered by rifles in 2016. It is amazing because the AMA cites the devastating human toll of so called gun violence without mentioning a word about the numbers killed by their own errors.

Another point the AMA is failing to mention is the number of people killed annually using prescription drugs, namely anti-psychotics. Over fifteen thousand people died because of psychiatric drug use in 2014, this is more than the number of deaths due to heroin addiction. Yet, the AMA is directly involved in marketing these drugs through advertising campaigns designed to make people think the drugs are designed just for their specific symptoms. These ads play daily on television, depicting a normal everyday family suffering the effects of some illness wondering what they can do about it. The chosen drug is marketed directly to individuals who may feel they are experiencing these symptoms. Unfortunately, the list of potential (side) effects, in many cases include suicidal and homicidal behavior. It is a well-established fact that many of the mass shootings recently witnessed in America were committed by people taking these types of medications. The AMA then, appears to be pushing gun control to divert attention away from the fact that they are profiting from one of the probable causes of gun violence.

The AMA also employs a subtler tactic of using standardized billing codes. As a student in social work this author was taught this as a common method of collecting payment from Medicare. Service providers, whether they be physicians, or mental health counselors are forced to give a diagnosis and prescribe a drug and assign it a billing code to receive payment. The Diagnostic Statistical Manual on Mental Disorders, for example, is nothing but a list of billing codes for hundreds of so called mental disorders for which people are prescribed drugs. The AMA established this method to establish communications between providers and insurance companies. Now, it has just become a source of income for the pharmaceutical industry whose profits are in the billions.

The AMA can push gun control all they want. It is apparent that they are doing so to hide the atrocities committed by their own greed. There are over two million defensive gun uses annually in the United States, a finding incidentally, which was hidden from public view by the Centers for Disease Control. By jumping aboard the gun control wagon, the AMA is only re-affirming the lefts commitment to leave good people helpless while empowering those who have the inclination to prey on others. The idea of gun ownership being a public health crisis without addressing the root causes of violent behavior does absolutely nothing to keep people safe. Britain found out the hard way. First they surrendered their guns, now the government is demanding people surrender their knives.








at No comments:

Sunday, June 3, 2018

Killing Us With Our Own Rules: Means and Ends Moralists Part Two




One of Alinsky’s most effective strategy’s, one that we see play out daily, can be found in the chapter entitled Tactics. This chapter highlights twelve rules of tactics, and one of them sticks out because it encourages those pushing for social change to use our own rules against us in a way that discredits everything we do.


“The fourth rule of tactics is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian Church can live up to Christianity.” (Alinsky, 1971)


What this comes down to in its most basic elements is that the left doesn’t believe that men can be free and self-governing, and that the system that allegedly believes in “justice for all” has failed. In order then, to re-organize society to their liking they must use our system against us to show that it has been a massive failure. This is akin to the discussion on means and ends morality because what they seek to do is use our morals against us in a way that makes us appear hypocritical in our most fundamental beliefs. They employ this to destroy the constitution as well as the Christian religion.

One of the best examples to point to is the mainstream media. One would think that after the constant exposure as liars and partisan hacks, along with the massive ratings drop that they would wake up and see the light. What if their agenda goes beyond simply being partisan hacks for the Democrat party? What if their purpose is to completely discredit the first amendment to the constitution by deliberately lying and hiding behind it? If this was the case, eventually people would come to see the first amendment as something that enables people to lie cheat and steal as opposed to using it for its intended purpose, which is to hold government accountable and seek truth. This would be another application of the Hegelian Dialectic discussed earlier. Create the problem so that the people demand a solution, thus ensuring the consent of the governed. In some instances, this has already proven to be the case when it comes to the issue of regulating the internet. Earlier this year we saw the issue of censorship on social media. Facebook, Twitter, Google, and YouTube have all been found to be targeting conservative views and censoring them through a change in their algorithms. This has resulted in far less people being able to access conservative sites. In fact, it led to a dramatic reduction in traffic to conservative based sites, which included sites dealing with political campaigns. Sites dealing with liberal issues or Democrat candidates saw no reduction in their traffic.[1]

“President Trump’s engagement on Facebook posts dropped 45 percent. In contrast, potential left-wing presidential candidates Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) did not see drops. Fox News had a drop of 26 percent in its Facebook engagement, whereas CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post saw virtually no change. The only left-leaning sites that appear to be affected were clickbait sites.

Right Wing News, which has over a million fans on its page, saw such a decrease in traffic that owner John Hawkins said it was no longer profitable to keep running. He shut down the page and site (it’s still online but is not updated). IJ Review, another popular site on the right that got much of its traffic from Facebook, was forced into layoffs last week. Three other sites are depending heavily on Facebook. Young Cons, Western Journalism and Sarah Palin, saw huge decreases in website traffic in January. Some sites had to switch domain names to survive. Western Journalism renamed its domain Western Journal. Even the most popular sites on the right were affected, like Breitbart.” (Alexander, 2018)

Another tactic being employed by social media giants was the re-direction from conservative based sites to liberal ones like the associated press. According to Alexander, an article published by The Gateway Pundit featuring a pro-second amendment position by the father of two Parkland shooting survivors was flagged and re-directed in this manner. What we are witnessing is an all-out attempt to control the public’s perception of reality and what they believe. Could there be another agenda? The conservative reaction to this was to demand that the government get involved and regulate the internet to ensure everyone’s viewpoint is heard equally.[2] They are effectively using the first amendment against us in ways that could have probably never been imagined. Some will argue that Facebook, and YouTube, for example, are private entities who themselves have a first amendment right to determine what is appropriate to post on their media platforms. The result however, is the demand from a group that historically has unabashedly argued for unrestricted free speech demanding the government do something. The same is being accomplished through the television media. There is a demand to hold the major, liberal run media organizations accountable for their constant lying and attacks upon conservative beliefs. Essentially, by demanding a government solution we are giving them what they want, power over us.  What they want is a demand to end freedom, a demand to implement government control and a belief that the experiment in individual liberty and natural rights has failed.

“There’s another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.” (Alinsky, 1971)

What Alinsky is essentially arguing is that by controlling the system from the inside the conditions of hopelessness can be created, thus leading to a demand for change from the people who created the hopelessness in the first place. In the case of the mainstream, and social media, the goal is to completely eradicate the concept of free speech while hiding behind it. If they can make people believe that the first amendment leads to nothing but lying, and that people’s speech must be controlled, then the work of eliminating free speech from our society is all but completed for them. 

The 2017 football season saw the war on free speech rise to new levels as players, in attempt to portray themselves as oppressed victims of American imperialism, took a knee during the Star-Spangled Banner. This tactic enraged and isolated much of the NFL fanbase as ratings took a massive hit; however, the actions of players like Colin Kaepernick were lauded by liberal outlets as heroic and courageous. The left is portraying this as an example of the exercise of free speech while many on-lookers took offense to it. Of course, anything the left takes offense to must immediately become a national televised issue with panels of talking heads telling us to be offended. When the right takes offense to something we are often called bigots and presented as people unwilling to tolerate other people’s worldviews. Here-in lies the brilliance of the tactic of using our own rules against us, how can we claim to support freedom of speech if we don’t tolerate an expression that differs from our own? That is why the left continually wins the narrative. What if the right just learned to collectively ignore the immature antics of the left and let them express themselves without the fan-fare spectacularism pushed by the media? Would any of these tactics ever become mainstream if we didn’t pay attention to them? It is doubtful. In any case, the non-sense is sure to continue into the 2018/2019 football season as the NFL has officially made it their policy that there will be no kneeling during the national anthem while players are on the field.[3] They are free however, to remain in the locker rooms if they choose. The following line from this MSNBC article proves that this is an effort to label conservatives as intolerant and hypocritical.

“The league that wraps themselves in the flag but doesn’t honor the first amendment its showing its true colors.” (Kluwe, 2018)

They are working to portray the NFL, an allegedly patriotic, pro-American organization as unable to live to the values they espouse by not allowing their players to freely express themselves as they should be allowed under the first amendment. In all truth they should let the players take a knee, they look like idiots. Nowhere else in the world can people, no matter their skin color, be paid millions of dollars a year to play a ball game professionally. By taking a knee during the national anthem these players are in a roundabout way, biting the hand that feeds them. They make millions of dollars while the very people fighting to protect their rights to do so make pennies in comparison. This is what angers NFL fans, not they are taking a knee, but that they are ignorant in the reason they are doing so.

This tactic, of employing our rules against us, is employed in almost all aspects of society to make conservative morals look hypocritical. Our constitution states that all men are created equal and that we are all endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights. What this means of course is that we are all created in the eyes of God with the same rights and we are entitled to equal treatment under natural law. It does not mean that we are all equally capable of achieving the same things. This is the definition that the left has given equality to destroy the constitution and present its writers as selfish elitists.  The left knows that there is no way everyone can be made completely equal; however, they use this as their rallying call against our system claiming that the constitution guarantees equality and that it is a value we hold dear as Americans.

One thing that the Obama Administration was able to do, which is the epitome of this type of strategy, was put in place a rule which allowed the government to waive the ninety-day residency requirements for new immigrants to obtain firearms, this was rule 1140-AA44[4] signed by Eric Holder. This rule virtually allowed an illegal immigrant to come into the country and legally purchase a firearm. Technically, it applied to only immigrants here legally; however, given the fact that several states give illegal immigrants drivers licenses that would enable them to purchase a firearm under this rule.

“Rule 1140-AA44, originally signed by Eric Holder, “would finalize an interim rule published on June 7, 2012 that removes the 90-day state residency requirement for aliens lawfully present in the United States to purchase or acquire a firearm.

Rule 1140-AA05 will “require a firearms purchaser’s affirmative statement of his or her state of residence”–although with states like California, New York and even Georgia providing drivers licenses to illegal aliens, a person could enter the country illegally and then purchase a gun on the same day.

Another rule, 1140-AA08, opens the door for nearly unrestricted importation of firearms and ammunition by non-immigrants, i.e., aliens that are in the country temporarily.

Generally, the importation of firearms or ammunition by non-immigrant aliens is prohibited by law. Yet the exemptions provided by 1140-AA08 would make sidestepping this prohibition as easy as being admitted to the United States for lawful hunting or sporting purposes, or by simply filling out a permit application and affirming that one is not in the country on a non-immigrant visa.”[5]

This was done for discrediting the belief that we are all entitled to equal unalienable rights because conservatives rightfully argue that only citizens of the United States should be entitled to these rights. The left is again portraying the conservative beliefs as being unable to stand up to scrutiny. Conservatives are unable to live up to their values therefore; the constitution is invalid because it isn’t working to ensure equality for all. That is the left’s argument. It isn’t that the conservatives don’t believe that immigrants don’t have rights, they believe there should be a certain amount of assimilation into the culture to understand where those rights are derived from. According to the Washington Times,[6] the Obama administration had also eliminated the required oath of new citizens to be willing to bear arms in defense of the nation, yet they are going to allow them the right to exercise the second amendment? Again, this is being done to turn our system against us and it works perfectly. As long as people are afraid of being labeled as a hypocrite, or accused of not standing up for the values they claim to stand for this tactic will continue to work against us.  















at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Analyzing the Attempts to Normalize Pedophilia.

  December 18, 2023   by  David Risselada Sometimes I find myself at a loss. The past few years have been quite an experience for me as I ha...