“We’ll Level Tel Aviv”: Iran Responds To Israel ‘Preparing’ Strike Plans Against Nuclear Sites

BY TYLER DURDEN

SUNDAY, MAR 07, 2021

Iran has responded to Fox News interview from late last week wherein Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz said that Israel is currently updating its plans to strike Iran’s nuclear program and is prepared to act independently if the United States is not willing. The interview was unusually blunt even for Israel in terms of the defense chief openly stating war plans.

Iranian Defense Minister Amir Hatami promptly fired back with a counterthreat on Sunday. He said Iran’s military will level Tel Aviv and Haifa should Israel do anything “out of desperation”.

 Sometimes, the Zionist regime [Israel] out of desperation makes big claims against the Islamic Republic of Iran to allegedly threaten it,” Hatami said as cited in The Times of Israel via Iranian state media.

“It must know that if it does a damn thing, we will raze Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground,” he followed up with according to an English translation. Hatami was addressing a military ceremony.

He further assured that Iran possesses all the power it needs to “maintain the stability of the country” and said the Islamic Republic can strike close to Israel also via “resistance groups” – which is no doubt a reference to Lebanese Hezbollah and militia groups that have been fighting in Syria.

During Gantz’s Fox News statements two days ago, the defense chief had spelled out to the American correspondent that “If the world stops them [Iran] before, it’s much the better. But if not, we must stand independently and we must defend ourselves by ourselves.”

“The Iranian nuclear aspiration must be stopped… We must defend ourselves by ourselves,” Gantz had asserted.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has also issued similar warnings recently, however, Gantz’s words were the most specific and forceful thus far. He had even handed the Fox reporter what was purported to be a classified target list against Iranian assets that Israel prepared.

Gantz had also touted that Israel stands ready to attack Hezbollah positions throughout Lebanon and Syria – the latter country has been on the receiving end of Israeli airstrikes on a near weekly basis for much of the past year. The defense minister claimed that Hezbollah has “hundreds of thousands” of missiles aimed at Israel and is bent on the Jewish state’s destruction.

Transgender Activist Says ‘Little Girls are Kinky’ to Defend Bathroom Invasion

SEX CRIME

The LGBT movement has a pedo problem.

on Mar 7, 2021

ByShane Trejo

A far-left Twitter page called “Women’s Voices” is promoting transgenderism and offering the perspectives of these severely mentally ill predators who are targeting children for induction into their depraved lifestyle.

A transgender activist, Alok Vaid-Menon, said that “little girls are kinky” to defend the sexualization of young children.

“These days the narrative is that transgender people will come into bathrooms and abuse little girls. The supposed “purity” of the victims has remained stagnant,” Vaid-Menon said, apparently defending the abuse of the innocent.

“There are no princesses. Little girls are also kinky. Your kids aren’t as straight and narrow as you think,” he added.

Other transgender activist shared their opinions on the page to show exactly how disgusting and reprehensible they are.

“While I never really believed the cliché about women being good for only one thing, that sentiment kept creeping into my fantasies. It’s called forced feminization… transforming the loss of male privilege into the best f*ck ever,” wrote trans-identifying author Julia Serano.

“Pornography is what it feels like when you think you have an object, but really the object has you. It is therefore a quintessential expression of femaleness. Getting f*cked makes you female because f*cked is what a female is,” wrote trans-identifying academic Andrea Long Chu.

“Autogynephilia describes… the basic structure of all human sexuality. The assimilation of any erotic image is, by nature, female. To be female is, in every case, to become what someone else wants. At bottom, everyone is a sissy,” Chu added.

“I think there are a lot of gay men out there who are gay men as a consolation prize because they couldn’t be women. That was certainly true of me,” wrote trans-identifying author Juno Dawson.

Juno Dawson used to be known as “James Dawson” and announced their transition after pushing a book depicting graphic sex acts on children. This allowed him to avoid some of the criticism he was receiving for his “pedophile behavior,” as one mother described it.

“There is something about being treated like shit by men that feels like affirmation itself, like a cry of delight from the deepest cavern of my breast… To be the victim of honest, undisguised sexism possesses an exhilarating vitality,” wrote trans-identifying academic Grace Lavery.

“Women around the world have been treated as sexual objects. Yet if sexual objectification is so categorically awful, then why do I want it so badly? The idea that being seen as a ‘sex object’ is universally a bad thing is too simple, like many tenets of feminism,” transgender author Jacob Tobia wrote.

Now that these individuals are no longer shunned by society, they are coming out of the closet and explaining their inner thoughts and feelings. Their own words prove the Christian right to be correct about the LGBT societal menace.

FALSE PROPHET POPE FRANCIS ARRIVES TRIUMPHANTLY IN IRAQ TO CLAIM ABRAHAM AS THE FOUNDATION OF HIS END TIMES ONE WORLD RELIGION OF CHRISLAM

The joint statement recalls that in the Holy Father’s latest Encyclical, Fratelli tutti, he writes that religions have a role to play at the service of fraternity in the world. In the same vein, the Abu Dhabi Document on Human Fraternity underscores that “faith leads a believer to see in the other a brother or sister to be supported and loved” and believers are called to express fraternity through safeguarding creation and supporting all people, especially the poorest and those most in need.

pope-francis-lands-in-iraq-claim-abraham-as-basis-one-world-religion-chrislam-abrahamic-family-house-abu-dhabi-end-times-king-james-bible-prophecy-nteb

by Geoffrey GriderMarch 5, 2021

Several faith-based organizations operating in Iraq have issued a joint interreligious statement welcoming Pope Francis’ Chrislam Apostolic Journey to the country which is scheduled from 5 – 8 March.

For all you end times lovers of bible prophecy, what is happening right now on the ground in Iraq, in Ur of the Chaldees, is a stunning fulfillment of 2,000 year old words spoken by the prophets and apostles for us who are alive right now in these last days. If you were waiting for “something to start”, you’re about a year too late, it’s not only begun but for us who are saved, will soon be over. Flight #777 beckons, is your seat book for the coming trip to the clouds? Now let’s get the update on Chrislam in Iraq with the False Prophet Jorge Bergoglio.

“For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.” 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 (KJB)

Pope Francis swaggered off the jet this morning, receiving a conquering hero’s welcome in Iraq for his visit to the birthplace of Abraham, Ur of the Chaldees. And no, that was not metaphor or hyperbole, the Roman pontiff today claimed Iraq for the Vatican, and is there to take the mantle of Abraham as the centerpiece of his Chrislam One World Religion he officially started in February of 2019 back in Abu Dhabi. We strongly urge you to refresh your memory by clicking on the disgusting image below of the False Prophet kissing Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb on the mouth sealing the Chrislam covenant.

Dispensationally speaking, yes, we are still in the Church Age, such as it is, and yes, we will be removed before the start of the time of Jacob’s trouble. All that remains true and the end times timeline is still on track. But listen to me now, and I pray you listen well. What is happening in Iraq right now, at this very moment, is another giant step in the creation of the One World Religion of Chrislam warned about in Revelation. We are so close that time period that the set-up is right now underway as our dispensation of the Church Age is literally overlapping with the formation of the time of Jacob’s trouble.

“Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves: Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.” Isaiah 28:15,16 (KJB)

The Timeline Of The Vatican And Pope Francis In Creating Chrislam Known As The Abrahamic Faiths Initiative

Last August, when the release of the Abraham Accord from President Trump and Jared Kushner, I did an article showing you the whole Chrislam timeline that brought everything to a head. Please click on the link below and read all of it, and when you’re done, and you look at what is happening right now in Iraq, you will see that prophecy is literally leaping off the pages of your King James Bible and onto today’s headlines.

Iraq: faith-based organizations welcome Pope’s visit and message of fraternity

FROM VATICAN NEWS: The Tuesday joint statement, co-signed by 29 organizations – both Catholic and non-Catholic – expressed collective anticipation of the papal visit, joyful that it will bring with it, a message of fraternity and dialogue to the middle eastern nation.

RECOUNTING THE HISTORY OF IRAQ – “THE BIRTHPLACE OF ABRAHAM, FATHER OF MANY IN FAITH,” THE STATEMENT HIGHLIGHTS THAT IS A BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY OF RICH CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY WITHIN WHICH MANY ETHNIC AND FAITH COMMUNITIES HAVE LIVED SIDE BY SIDE FOR MANY CENTURIES. HOWEVER, RECENT DECADES HAVE BEEN MARKED BY WAR, INSECURITY AND THE RISE OF THE SO-CALLED ISLAMIC STATE (ISIS) WHICH HAVE “DEEPLY STRAINED RELATIONS BETWEEN COMMUNITIES AND DAMAGED THE COUNTRY’S SOCIAL FABRIC.”

Still yet today, “Iraq still faces daunting challenges,” said the organizations. “Among the 1.2 million Iraqis who continue to be internally displaced and approximately 4.8 million returnees, many are in dire need of help.” All these, coupled with a worsening economic crisis, further exacerbated by the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, is “pushing many into poverty and depriving the government of resources need to assist its own people.”

Pope Francis’ message of universal fraternity

The joint statement recalls that in the Holy Father’s latest Encyclical, Fratelli tutti, he writes that religions have a role to play at the service of fraternity in the world. In the same vein, the Abu Dhabi Document on Human Fraternity underscores that “faith leads a believer to see in the other a brother or sister to be supported and loved” and believers are called to express fraternity through safeguarding creation and supporting all people, especially the poorest and those most in need.

Inspired by these, the organizations express their support for the “message of fraternity and dialogue that Pope Francis is bringing to Iraq” adding, that they believe “it represents a necessary way forward to heal past wounds and build a future for the country’s diverse communities” as they continue to collaborate with authorities to help communities “reconcile, rebuild peace, and reclaim their collective rights to safety, services and livelihoods.”

At the same time, the organizations reiterated their commitment to continue to serve and empower people without discrimination on the basis of their needs, and respect others’ cultural values and religious convictions while rejecting all forms of sectarianism and proselytism, strengthen. They also promised to strengthen inclusive initiatives and approaches that foster social cohesion, as well as intensify collaboration between themselves in the service of those in need.

Finally, the faith-based organizations urged the international community to “remain engaged in supporting the Iraqi people to overcome their current challenges, in a true spirit of human fraternity and solidarity.”

The GayBC‘s are In, Dr. Suess is Out

By MICHAEL BROWN Published on March 7, 2021 

More than a decade ago, I purchased a number of gay-themed books for children, wanting to see what parents and educators were reading to their little ones. Recently, I became aware of The GayBC’s, by M. L. Webb, published in 2019 and as extreme as any children’s reader I have seen. Yet these days, books like this are celebrated while the beloved Dr. Seuss is deprecated.

The blurb for Webb’s book joyfully proclaims, “The GayBCs is perfect for fans of A Is for Activist and Feminist Baby — showing kids and adults alike that every identity is worthy of being celebrated.” 

The suggested reading age is children 4-8, and the book contains lines like this: “Bi is for bi” (as in bisexual) and “C is for coming out” and “D is for drag” and “N is for non-binary” and “Q is for queer” and “S is for sashay.”

I’ve even seen a video of a child well under four going through the pages of this book, pages which he had clearly memorized. What kind of madness is this? And what little child on the planet can possibly understand the meaning of these words and terms? Yet one professional reviewer stated, “The GayBCs should be required reading for all children.”

This is shameless – and dangerous – indoctrination. 

Yet books like this are considered fine and acceptable for our children, while Dr. Seuss must be purged. Talk about an upside down world.

The American Library Association can even celebrate Drag Queen Reading Hour – for toddlers, no less – but Dr. Seuss’s illustrations are too dangerous for children to view, with six of his books virtually erased. Seriously?

Growing More Entrenched and Extreme By the Hour

Back in 2017, I appealed to Christian leaders to address LGBTQ issues with clarity, courage, and compassion. 

To paint a picture of what was happening in our society, I wrote:

  • Drag queens are reading stories to our two-year-old children in libraries. 
  • Kindergarteners are learning about being trans. 
  • Middle-schoolers are encouraged to come out as gay without their parents knowing. 
  • College students have to share their PGPs (Preferred Gender Pronouns) at the start of each semester (as in, “I’m Shannon, and my preferred gender pronouns are ze and zir.”). 

And that was in 2017.

Things have become even more entrenched and extreme today, with stiffer penalties for those who dare to resist this agenda.

That is what makes the purge of these Dr. Seuss books all the more absurd. 

As Al Perrotta commented on The Stream, “The Woke Police are also not happy that, of Dr. Seuss’ human characters, only a small percentage are people of color. And yes, it is true that the few human characters of color are in stereotyped subservient roles. Not good. But not surprising for the times.

But isn’t that our first clue to how far into the surreal their hunt goes for the scalp of Dr. Seuss?  They have to distinguish ‘human’ characters in his fantastical works from animals and creatures in order to cancel him. (While ignoring his consistent message that all should be treated as equals.)

And this leads to an obvious question. Is it more dangerous for a little child to see pictures which might be possibly be considered racist – and perhaps only with explanation – than to be taught that being bisexual is cool? That drag queens are special? That they might be trans themselves? 

Babies Can Be Racist

We’re now being warned that babies could be racist, while elementary school children are instructed about the sinful degrees of whiteness

That’s why the Dr. Seuss books must be removed from circulation, lest these impressionable children see racist images and become racist themselves. After all, what might happen to a child who sees pictures of Chinese-looking people eating with chopsticks? What kind of bigoted monster might he or she turn out to be?

At the same time, it is perfectly fine – in fact, it is commendable – for these same, impressionable little children to be indoctrinated in the major LGBTQ activist talking points.

Someone might say, “Have you seen the pictures for yourself? They really are quite racist.”

The truth be told, I haven’t, since the books are no longer available. Dr. Seuss has not just been shushed. Six of his books have been banished. Purged. Cancelled. Disappeared. 

You cannot even buy these books on e-Bay, not because they have all been sold but because eBay has banned their sale. Banned! Like a deadly poison, the general public cannot have access to something this dangerous. 

God forbid that eBay should play any role in making such highly toxic material available. Surely, books like Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which are readily available for purchase on eBay, are far less offensive than Dr. Seuss. 

We Mustn’t Lose Our Minds

This is the madness of today’s PC culture, a culture that celebrates a teenager like Jazz getting sex-change surgery on reality TV – thereby doing irreparable, lifetime harm to herself – while zealously cancelling Dr. Seuss. 

This is the same culture that defends children who identify as transgender receiving potentially harmful hormone blockers. A culture that encourages trans-identified teenage girls to get full mastectomies. Yet a culture that is hyper-concerned about the slightest possible race-based offense.

By all means, let us continue to grow in our honoring of all races and ethnicities, and let us learn from any mistakes in the past. But let us not lose our minds in the process, subjecting our kids to LGBTQ activism shortly after they emerge from the womb while decrying the now evil Dr. Seuss.

LA Teacher’s Union Under Fire For Effort To Racially Classify Critics

Communist Teachers Union Preaching Critical Race Theory to keep schools closed.

United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) is under fire after Maryam Qudrat, a mother of Middle Eastern descent, was asked by the UTLA to identify her race after criticizing the union’s opposition to reopening schools despite overwhelming science that it is safe. The response of the UTLA was evasive to the point of incomprehension. However, the controversy is fueled by recent efforts to portray parents demanding a return to school as racist or examples of white privilege, including recent controversial comments from the UTLA President.

Qudrat was contacted by the UTLA after she spoke out against the opposition to resuming classes in Los Angeles. She has a seventh-grade child and has been calling for the union to follow the science. Instead, they contracted her with an email from a union research who noted that she has been quoted twice by the LA Times in eight months and the union wants to know her race. The email notes that her name sounds Iranian but the researcher does not want to assume her race with a “legitimate method.”

The concern however is why the union is trying to racially classify critics. The fact that Qudrat was quoted twice in the LA Times would not yield any broader demographic information on the range of parents who want their kids back in school. Instead, the email is intimidating when opposition to the closings is being used by some to claim racism. That issue arose recently with the public statements of UTLA President:

“Some voices are being allowed to speak louder than others. We have to call out the privilege behind the largely White wealthy parents driving the push for a rushed return. Their experience of this pandemic is not our students’ families’ experiences.”

Myart-Cruz has also criticized “Middle Eastern” parents in joining “white parents” in seeking school re-openings.

In response to the latest controversy, UTLA issues this statement:

“The email in question is from a UTLA researcher who was attempting to ascertain the race of individuals quoted in order to assess whether or not that is a factor we could evaluate. This outreach by the researcher was not authorized and nothing from that outreach is contained in the report. We understand this type of email could be taken out of context.”

What exactly does that mean? The researcher was working for UTLA “to ascertain the race of individual quoted in order to assess whether or not this is a fact we could evaluate.” Read that over a couple of times.  “Assess whether . . . we could evaluate”? Moreover, what are you evaluating? This sounds more like opposition research. What would it matter is the small number of people quoted in a newspaper have a particular ethnic background? It would not establish the make up of families holding that position. While the union says “we understand this type of email could be taken out of context,” it does not explain the context or purpose. It does not deny that it was researching the race of anyone who opposes the union effort to keep the schools closed.

In reality, there are many minority parents who have spoken out about the need to re-open and the science is clear on the issue. Indeed, it was clear when the Trump Administration was pushing for re-opening last year despite ads calling such efforts “attempted murder” before the election.

Obviously, the claims of racism from the UTLA will chill other parents from speaking out. Indeed, we recently discussed a leading researcher who stopped his work on Covid-19 due to threats and harassment for showing minimal risk from school openings. That is the “context” that many of us are concerned about when reading this email.

The Christian Left: The New Referee of Morality?

By FRANK TUREK & LUCAS MILES Published on March 5, 2021 

Only in the twisted ethos of today’s Christian Left is a maskless man considered a cold-hearted murderer, while an abortionist is celebrated as a heroic social justice warrior. With seemingly no regard for the scales of justice, the spiritually ‘woke’ Democratic Party is willfully bending the rules of right and wrong to favor their own ethically bankrupt agenda and to ensure it triumphs in the state — no matter the cost. Although they claim to be religiously devout, the Left ignores natural law and has abandoned the Judeo-Christian foundations on which our nation is built.

Arguments from Silence

Responding on TikTok to the question of “Isn’t the Bible against abortion,” a self-identifying “queer lady pastor” answers, “No, not really. The Bible doesn’t say much. Jesus definitely doesn’t say anything [about abortion].” Using what is referred to in philosophical and historical analysis as an argument from silence, this female TikTok pastor attempts to reject the notion that Christianity necessitates a pro-life position due to her claims that the Bible fails to mention abortion. Arguments from silence offer notoriously poor reasoning and little logical proof for her cause.

Although they claim to be religiously devout, the Left ignores natural law and has abandoned the Judeo-Christian foundations on which our nation is built.

For instance, suppose in the next Super Bowl a receiver gets behind the coverage and Tom Brady hits him in stride. As the receiver sprints toward the end zone, the beaten defender pulls out a gun and shoots him in the back five yards short of the goal line. Imagine the uproar if after the referees confer among themselves regarding a flag on the play for pass interference, the final call were presented as, “Upon further review, since nowhere in the rule book does it explicitly say that you can’t shoot a player at the five-yard line, we’re going to assume the commissioner approves of the defender’s freedom to choose. The play stands as called.”

While the rulebook might not explicitly mention that the murder of another player is against the rules, everyone in the stands possesses an innate knowledge that such behavior is not only against the rules — it’s a crime against humanity!

Obvious Sophistry

The Christian Left might claim to be very “devout,” but such reasoning demonstrates, much like the referees in the example on the field above, that they aren’t fit to determine right from wrong. It is as if they pretend not to know what the rule book says about the most important matter of the law — the protection of life — and then assume, contrary to the evidence, that God supports their egregious behavior.

This kind of reasoning is obvious sophistry.

While it’s true that the Bible doesn’t explicitly mention abortion, this doesn’t at all mean that it’s permitted. Even a brief glance at the scriptures reveals that it was unthinkable to the God-fearing Hebrews to kill a child (children were a blessing from the Lord) and abortion was already prohibited by the 10 Commandments (i.e. “You shall not murder.”) Likewise, the Bible doesn’t explicitly mention felony home invasion either, but it is already prohibited by “You shall not steal.” You have to be willfully blind to think otherwise.

Self-appointed Referees

Religious conservatives understand that the primary role of government is to protect its citizens from evil. Government is not commanded to insert itself in every aspect of life or provide services that individuals normally do (the government may do those things, but that’s not its primary charge). Paul writes, government “rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.”Please Support The Stream: Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day.

Ironically, the Left, as the self-appointed referee of morality, eagerly embraces this role to punish the wrongdoer by assuming they themselves — and not scripture, natural law or the Constitution — are able to define what is wrong and what is right. Take for instance calls from the Left recently to pressure cable providers to “punish” conservative media outlets by removing them from their platforms. Rather than protecting the unborn or defending First Amendment rights, the Left is busy silencing and fighting free speech!

Promoting Evil

With their support for government paid abortion, the Left is actually promoting evil. After all, what could be a greater evil than murder? Rulers who don’t want to prevent murder — and actually want to pay for it — are failing in their primary mission. That’s why being pro-life is a necessary, but not the only, condition for our vote. Being pro-life doesn’t necessarily qualify someone as a ruler; but being pro-abortion necessarily disqualifies them.

Likewise, religious progressives who elevate debatable and less critical issues to supreme importance, while simultaneously offering support of abortion, stand as co-conspirators in the deaths of the unborn. To the Christian Left, climate change trumps abortion, as if allowing the possibility of the river next to the stadium rising two inches a hundred years from now is a graver sin than allowing 800,000 babies to be murdered this year. Jesus would charge them, like he did the politicians of his day, with “neglecting the more important matters of the law.”

The Christian Left is Unleashing Chaos

The job of a good referee is not to affect the outcome of the game one way or the other, but to ensure the game is played fairly by the established rules. The rules are in place to allow fair competition among the players while protecting the players from unnecessary harm. One could imagine what would happen to the game of football if out-of-bounds were overlooked, so that fans could walk on and off the field as pleased; if there were quotas on players based on sex and race; and if the players were fined based upon the penalties of their predecessors. It would be chaos. Yet, this is exactly what the left is doing to this country.

All of this is being sold by the Christian Left as some kind of biblical social justice. There is nothing just or biblical about abortion (same could be said about illegal immigration and the redistribution of wealth). While we cannot question their good intentions, there is no doubt about their inevitable bad results.

If our nation hopes to recapture even a semblance of true justice, as well as our founding freedoms, we must reject the empty ethics of the Left, and revisit the spiritual and ethical guidelines found within our Judeo-Christian roots and the Constitution.

NEW STARTUP BITELAB HARVESTS HUMAN TISSUE TO MAKE MEAT PRODUCTS LIKE SALAMI IN STUNNING HARBINGER OF THE CANNIBALISM FOUND IN THE TRIBULATION

Here’s how it will work, according to the BiteLabs website. A sample of tissue containing myosatellite cells (the type of cells that help repair and regrow damaged muscle) will be taken from a person during a biopsy. Those cells are multiplied in a lab using a medium that acts as an artificial blood to grow muscle. Once the cells are mature enough, they will be ground and mixed with different kinds of meat, spices, fats and oils for flavor using one of the company’s “time-honored recipes for the creation of fine cured meats.” It will then be stuffed into casings, seasoned again then dry aged and cured before packaging for distribution.

bitelabs-celebrity-salami-cannibalism-great-tribulation-jacobs-trouble-jews-tithe-teil-tree-king-james-bible-prophecy-end-times-nteb

by Geoffrey GriderMarch 4, 2021

It may sound like the makings of a bad science fiction movie: A company that harvests human tissue to make meat products such as salami. But a new start-up called BiteLabs is claiming to want to make human test-tube meat a reality. And they want to use celebrities to do it.

If you were thinking that there would come a time when man in all his self-perceived glory would finally outsmart that ‘dusty, old and archaic’ King James Bible, I am here to tell you that today is not that day. No, in fact with this article we present for your consideration, you will see that the trusty KJB warned you about humans consuming humans in the great Tribulation found in the time of Jacob’s trouble thousands of years ago. We are finally catching up with the bible, please allow me to introduce you to demonic tech startup BiteLabs and their celebrity salami.

Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, And the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.” Isaiah 6:11-13 (KJB)

The tithe is something that God gave to the Jews, and in the bible, the tithe is something you eat, Malachi calls it ‘meat’ for God’s ‘storehouse’, it is not money. But the tithe, or ten percent, is also a prophecy that will be fulfilled in the time of Jacob’s trouble as a tithe, or a tenth, of the Jews in Israel will be slaughtered by the armies of Antichrist and eaten from the altar. The verses I gave you from Isaiah 6 lay it out clear, plain and simple, but there are dozens more in the bible.

“And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities.” Nehemiah 11:1 (KJB)

The One World Religion of Chrislam that Pope Francis has been so busy, and successfully I might add, building will be the end times religion of Antichrist, no question about it. The bible tells us that in Luke 21:20 that the armies of Antichrist will take Jerusalem, and Antichrist will sit in the rebuilt Temple as God. Revelation 20 shows us Jews who get beheaded for refusing the Mark of the Beast, and Psalm 16:4 shows us their blood offered as a sacrifice to Satan and drank from a cup.

“Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I, even I, am against thee, and will execute judgments in the midst of theein the sight of the nations. And I will do in thee that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all thine abominations. Therefore the fathers shall eat the sons in the midst of thee, and the sons shall eat their fathers; and I will execute judgments in thee, and the whole remnant of thee will I scatter into all the winds.” Ezekiel 5:8-10 (KJB)

What does all this have to do with celebrity salami from BiteLabs? Plenty. It gets you comfortable with the idea of putting human flesh in your mouth, which is wicked sin, in preparation for the coming time of Jacob’s trouble after the Pretribulation Rapture of the Church takes place. I will never, ever, knowingly eat any of this demonic garbage including the fake meat being pushed by New World Order minion Bill Gates. This unsaved world we see all around us is right now preparing themselves to meet Antichrist, we who are saved are preparing to meet Jesus Christ on Flight #777. We will leave behind the most dreadful time in human history, aren’t you glad you’re saved? If you’re not and want to be, click here to seehow to have all your sins paid for before that day comes.

For thus saith the LORD; We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness? Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.” Jeremiah 30:5-7 (KJB)

Ellen DeGeneres salami? One company’s quest to make meat from celebrity tissue samples

FROM THE LA TIMES: “At the moment, our primary goal is to provoke discussion and debate around topics of bioethics and celebrity culture,” said Martin from the BiteLabs team. He says he wishes to remain anonymous at this time, due to the controversy surrounding the focus of the company. “We see inefficiencies, environmental hazards, and ethical problems in the world’s food production and distribution. There are exciting opportunities to disrupt these industries while opening new ways to consume celebrity culture.”

DO WE BELIEVE THAT? THIS IS MORE LIKELY THE WORK OF PROVOCATEURS WHO WANT TO START A LAB MEAT DISCUSSION AND NOT ACTUALLY USE KANYE WEST TO MAKE CURED MEAT.

Here’s how it will work, according to the BiteLabs website. A sample of tissue containing myosatellite cells (the type of cells that help repair and regrow damaged muscle) will be taken from a person during a biopsy. Those cells are multiplied in a lab using a medium that acts as an artificial blood to grow muscle.

Once the cells are mature enough, they will be ground and mixed with different kinds of meat, spices, fats and oils for flavor using one of the company’s “time-honored recipes for the creation of fine cured meats.” It will then be stuffed into casings, seasoned again then dry aged and cured before packaging for distribution.

The company outlines how this type of test-tube meat would eliminate environmental and ethical concerns associated with livestock production, claiming its celebrity meat production would require less than 1% of the land used in traditional farming. The site also notes, the lab meats will not be affected by growth hormones or come into contact with any pesticides or chemicals. And as far as the celebrity angle, BiteLabs is hoping they can use celebrities to warm people up to the idea of consuming the meat.

“THAT IS OUR HOPE, TO GET CELEBRITIES ON BOARD, SAMPLE THEIR CELLS, AND THEN USE THEM TO MASS PRODUCE ARTISANAL SALAMI,” SAID MARTIN. “WE’RE IN AGILE MODE RIGHT NOW, SCALING OUR USER BASE AND ATTRACTING CELEBRITIES AS PARTNERS.”

BiteLabs has sample celebrity meat descriptions on its website written by BiteLabs representative Kevin and food designers on the BiteLab team. There are sample descriptions for James Franco, Kanye West, Jennifer Lawrence and Ellen DeGeneres. None of these celebrities are actually affiliated with the company.

In case you’re wondering, DeGeneres’ salami is described as “black pepper and garlic with a playful kick of mustard give the Ellen salami a highly approachable and well-rounded flavor.” The description notes DeGeneres’ meat would be blended with ostrich and finished with a hint of brandy and shallots. 

Jerry Nadler Defends Radical Trans Surgeries By Saying ‘God’s Will Is No Concern Of This Congress’

Nadler confirms that God’s will has no place in the Democrat-controlled Congress.

byTOM PAPPERTFebruary 27, 2021 

Rep. Gregory Steube (R-FL) began to quote the Bible when speaking against the Democrats’ Equality Act, which would increasingly normalize transgenderism and force the government to fund abortions in the House of Representatives. Within seconds, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) interrupted him, explaining that God has no place in the Democrat-controlled Congress.

It’s not clothing or personal style that offends God, but rather the use of one’s appearance to act out or take on a sexual identity different from the one biologically assigned by God at birth. In His wisdom, God intentionally made each individual uniquely either male or female. When men or women claim to be able to choose their own sexual identity, they are making a statement that God did not know what He was doing when He created them.

He then began to quote from Dr. Tony Evans’ commentary on a passage of scripture, which explained that the “gender confusion” present in 21st century American culture is a “clear rejection of God’s good design.

“Whenever a nation’s laws no longer reflect the standards of God, that nation is in rebellion against Him, and will inevitably bear the consequences,” Steueb said, after first being interrupted by Democrats. He was ultimately allowed to continue for a few seconds before being interrupted by Nadler.

Nadler, apparently angered by the mention of God, loudly yelled into his microphone, “God’s will is no concern of this Congress.”

As Insurrection Narrative Crumbles, Democrats Cling To It More Desperately Than Ever

BY TYLER DURDEN

FRIDAY, MAR 05, 2021 – 19:40

Authored by Glenn Greenwald via greenwald.substack.com,

Twice in the last six weeks, warnings were issued about imminent, grave threats to public safety posed by the same type of right-wing extremists who rioted at the Capitol on January 6. And both times, these warnings ushered in severe security measures only to prove utterly baseless.

 Democrats Debate Biden’s Relief Bill as Deadline LoomsFirst we had the hysteria over the violence we were told was likely to occur at numerous state capitols on Inauguration Day. “Law enforcement and state officials are on high alert for potentially violent protests in the lead-up to Inauguration Day, with some state capitols boarded up and others temporarily closed ahead of Wednesday’s ceremony,” announcedCNN. In an even scarier formulation, NPRintoned that “the FBI is warning of protests and potential violence in all 50 state capitals ahead of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration.”

The resulting clampdowns were as extreme as the dire warnings. Washington, D.C. was militarized more than at any point since the 9/11 attack. The military was highly visible on the streets. And, described The Washington Post, “state capitols nationwide locked down, with windows boarded up, National Guard troops deployed and states of emergency preemptively declared as authorities braced for potential violence Sunday mimicking the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob of pro-Trump rioters.” All of this, said the paper, “reflected the anxious state of the country ahead of planned demonstrations.” 

But none of that happened — not even close. The Washington Post acknowledged three weeks later:

Despite warnings of violent plots around Inauguration Day, only a smattering of right-wing protesters appeared at the nation’s statehouses. In Tallahassee, just five armed men wearing the garb of the boogaloo movement — a loose collection of anti-government groups that say the country is heading for civil war — showed up. Police and National Guard personnel mostly ignored them.

All over the country it was the same story. “But at the moment that Biden was taking the oath of office in Washington, the total number of protesters on the Capitol grounds in Topeka stood at five — two men supporting Trump and two men and a boy ridin’ with Biden,” reported The Wichita Eagle(“With Kansas Capitol in lockdown mode, Inauguration Day protest fizzles). “The protests fizzled out after not many people showed up,” reported the local Florida affiliate in Tallahassee. “The large security efforts dwarfed the protests that materialized by Wednesday evening,” said CNN, as “state capitols and other cities remained largely calm.”

Indeed, the only politically-motivated violence on Inauguration Day was carried out by Antifa and anarchist groups in Portland and Seattle, which caused some minor property damage as part of anti-Biden protests while they “scuffled with police.” CNN, which spent a full week excitedly hyping the likely violence coming to state capitols by right-wing Trump supporters, was forced to acknowledge in its article about their non-existence that “one exception was Portland, where left-wing protesters damaged the Democratic Party of Oregon building during one of several planned demonstrations.”

Completely undeterred by that debacle, Democrats and their media spokespeople returned with a new set of frightening warnings for this week. The date of March 4 has taken on a virtually religious significance for the Q-Anon movement, announced NBC News’Ben Collins, who was heard on NPR on Thursday speaking through actual, literal journalistic tears as he recounted all the times he called Facebook to plead with them to remove dangerous right-wing extremists on their platform(tears commence at roughly 7:00 mark). Valiantly holding back full-on sobbing, Collins explained that he proved to be so right but it pains and sorrows him to admit this. With his self-proclaimed oracle status fully in place, he prophesized that March 4 had taken on special dangers because Q-Anon followers concluded that this is when Trump would be inaugurated.

This is how apocalyptic cult leaders always function. When the end of the world did not materialize on January 6, Collins insisted that January 20 was the day of the violent reckoning. When nothing happened on that day, he moved the Doomsday Date to March 4. The flock cannot remain in a state of confusion for too long about why the world has not ended as promised by the prophet, so a new date must quickly be provided with an explanation for why this is serious business this time.

This March 4 paranoia was not confined to NBC’s resident millennial hall monitor and censorship advocate. On March 3, The New York Timeswarned that “the Capitol Police force is preparing for another assault on the Capitol building on Thursday after obtaining intelligence of a potential plot by a militia group.” All this, said the Paper of Record, because “intelligence analysts had spent weeks tracking online chatter by some QAnon adherents who have latched on to March 4 — the original inauguration date set in the Constitution — as the day Donald J. Trump would be restored to the presidency and renew his crusade against America’s enemies.”

These dire warnings also, quite predictably, generated serious reactions. “House leaders on Wednesday abruptly moved a vote on policing legislation from Thursday to Wednesday night, so lawmakers could leave town,” said the Times. We learned that there would be further militarization of the Capitol and troop deployment in Washington indefinitely due to so-called “chatter.” NPR announced: “The House of Representatives has canceled its Thursday session after the U.S. Capitol Police said it is aware of a threat by an identified militia group to breach the Capitol complex that day.”

Do you know what happened on March 4 when it came to violence from right-wing extremists? The same thing that happened on January 20: absolutely nothing. There were no attempted attacks on the Capitol, state capitols, or any other government institution. There was violent crime registered that day in Washington D.C. but none of it was political violence by those whom media outlets warned posed such a grave danger that Congress has to be closed and militarization of Washington extended indefinitely.

Perhaps the most significant blow to the maximalist insurrection/coup narrative took place inside the Senate on Thursday. Ever since January 6, those who were not referring to the riot as a “coup attempt” — as though the hundreds of protesters intended to overthrow the most powerful and militarized government in history — were required to refer to it instead as an “armed insurrection.”

This formulation was crucial not only for maximizing fear levels about the Democrats’ adversaries but also, as I’ve documented previously, because declaring an “armed insurrection” empowers the state with virtually unlimited powers to act against the citizenry. Over and over, leading Democrats and their media allies repeated this phrase like some hypnotic mantra:

 But this was completely false. As I detailed several weeks ago, so many of the most harrowing and widespread media claims about the January 6 riot proved to be total fabrications. A pro-Trump mob did not bash Office Brian Sicknick’s skull in with a fire extinguisher. No protester brought zip-ties with them as some premeditated plot to kidnap members of Congress (two rioters found them on a table inside). There’s no evidence anyone intended to assassinate Mike Pence, Mitt Romney or anyone else.

Yet the maximalist narrative of an attempted coup or armed insurrection is so crucial to Democrats — regardless of whether it is true — that pointing out these facts deeply infuriates them. A television clip of mine from last week went viralamong furious liberals calling me a fascism supporter even though it did nothing but point out the indisputable facts that other than Brian Sicknick, whose cause of death remains unknown, the only people who died at the Capitol riot were Trump supporters, and that there are no known cases of the rioters deliberately killing anyone

(Two FBI operatives have since anonymously leaked that it is looking at a “suspect” who may have engaged with Sicknick in a way that ultimately contributed to his death. But nothing still is known; Sicknick’s mother claims he died of a stroke while his brother says it was from pepper spray; and all of this is worlds away from the endlessly repeated media claim that a bloodthirsty pro-Trump mob savagely bashed his head in with a fire extinguisher.)

What we know for sure is that no Trump supporter fired any weapon inside the Capitol and that the FBI seized a grand total of zero firearms from those it arrested that day — a rather odd state of affairs for an “armed insurrection,” to put that mildly. In questioning from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) on Thursday’s hearing, a senior FBI official, Jill Sanborn, acknowledged this key fact:

(The “one lady” who died referred to by this FBI official was Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed Trump supporter who was killed when she was shot point blank in the neck inside the Capitol on January 6 by an armed Capitol Police Officer).

The key point to emphasize here is that threats and dangers are not binary: they either exist or they are fully illusory. They reside on a spectrum. To insist that they be discussed rationally, soberly and truthfully is not to deny the existence of the threat itself. One can demand a rational and fact-based understanding of the magnitude of the threat revealed by the January 6 riot without denying that there is any danger at all.

Those who denounced the excesses of McCarthyism were not insisting that there were no Communists in government; those denouncing the excesses of the Clinton administration’s attempts to seize more surveillance power after the Oklahoma City courting bombing were not denying that some anti-government militias may do violence again; those who objected to the protracted and unhinged assault on civil liberties by the Bush/Cheney and Obama administrations after 9/11 were not arguing that there were noMuslim extremists intent on committing violence.

The argument then, and the argument now, is that the threat was being deliberately inflated and exaggerated, and fears stoked and exploited, both for political gain and to justify the placement of more and more powers in the hands of the state in the name of stopping these threats. That is the core formula of authoritarianism — to place the population in a state of such acute fear that it acquiesces to any assertion of power which security state agencies and politicians demand and which they insist are necessary to keep everyone safe.

There is, relatedly, a massive political benefit from convincing the population that the opponents and critics of those in power do not merely hold a different ideology but are coup plotters, insurrectionists, domestic terrorists. That is the same political benefit that accrued from trying to persuade the population that adversaries of the Democratic Party were treasonous Kremlin agents. The more you can demonize your opponents as something monstrous, the more political power you can acquire.

And as Democrats and liberals now gear up to demand a new War on Terror, this one domestic in nature, it should be no surprise that the rhetorical leaders of their effort now are the same lowlife neocon and Rovian slanderers — Bill Kristol, David Frum, Steve Schmidt, Nicolle Wallace, Rick Wilson — who demonized everyone who questioned them as part of the first War on Terror as traitors and terrorist-lovers and subversives. It is not a coincidence that neocons are leading the way now as liberals’ favorite propagandists: they are the most skilled and experienced in weaponizing and exaggerating terrorism threats for political gain and authoritarian power.

Ultimately, if this “armed insurrection” and threat of domestic terrorism are so grave, why do media figures and politicians in both parties — from Adam Schiff to Liz Cheney — keep lying about it and peddling fictions? Politicians and media figures do that only when they know that the threat, in reality, is not nearly as menacing as they need it to be to fulfill their objectives of political gain and coercive power.

Fake Definitions and Hypocrisy: Blowing the Whistle on America’s Thought Police

By FRANK WRIGHT Published on March 5, 2021 

Frank Wright

Deep in the false and fevered swamps of fake news and fake history resides a third mendacious denizen — fake definitions. Appearing first with a hiss in the Garden of old (“Did God really say?”), fake definitions have become the mother’s milk of Leftist progressives.

Their aim is to recast generally understood words and cultural concepts — treating the common understanding as pejoratively as possible. The Left’s targets are those things not conforming to their political agenda. Therefore, efforts at fiscal responsibility are labeled “draconian” and “mean-spirited.” Those seeking to preserve historic moral imperatives and a biblical understanding of marriage and human sexuality are “homophobic.” Those adhering to a biblical ethic of human life (especially toward the unborn) are “sexist” or “anti-woman.” Those recognizing America’s spiritual heritage are “religiously intolerant” or “xenophobic.”

At the same time, hard Left voices like Maxine Waters and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are exalted as mainstream. Sure, mainstream. Like Lois Capps who proposed “mainstream” legislation to remove the words husband and wife from federal law.

Among other terms lost to fake definitions are:

Pro-choice (with no choice offered to the baby)

Reproductive health (certainly not the health of the baby)

Discrimination (as measured by outcomes not actions)

Diversity (including varied ethnicities and viewpoints — just not yours)

Tolerance (you get to tolerate them; they persecute you)

Equality (meaning economic redistribution and gender privilege)

Undocumented (once deemed illegal, now apparently meaning future unregistered Democrat voters)

Racist/Hater (anyone not agreeing with the Leftist agenda)

Using the fraudulent manipulation of language, Leftist progressives aim to advance their political, environmental, quasi-scientific, and socialistic agenda. English novelist and social critic George Orwell anticipated all of this when he wrote:

Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give the appearance of solidity to pure wind.

The Wind of Fake Definitions

Speaking of pure wind, let’s turn our attention to the fake definition of “hate group” proffered by the folks at the Southern Poverty Law Center. In the interest of full disclosure, our nearly three-year-old defamation suit against the SPLC (for placing us on their so-called hate map) is currently before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

In its defense, the SPLC argues that the First Amendment allows them to have their own definition of hate group. In this assertion, what constitutes a hate group is a matter of opinion. You can have your opinion; I can have mine. But this is sophistry on the level of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. The SPLC publicly states that D. James Kennedy Ministries is a hate group. This statement implies an assertion of objective fact, and in published statements the SPLC makes clear it intends for individuals, government agencies, and businesses to rely on it as fact. However, when pushed in a court of law, the SPLC claims that its implied assertion of fact is merely opinion.

At the heart of the matter is the SPLC’s responsibility to recognize the “reasonable man” (or woman) standard in the law, with the central questions being: How does an average reasonable person understand the “hate group” accusation applied so wantonly and recklessly by the SPLC? Is it intended as fact or mere opinion?

This is critically important as only a tiny fraction of Americans will ever see or hear the SPLC’s proprietary definition of a hate group. Yet the false and defamatory label it applies to organizations with which it disagrees travels far and wide — especially so in the era of fake news. So then, what is the commonly understood definition of hate group? It’s not all that complicated.

Hate groups are about actions — not thoughts. We call it criminal behavior because it’s an action not merely an idea.

Thomas Jefferson deftly articulated this distinction in his oft-cited letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802, where he wrote: “The legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions.”

Protected Speech

Opinions are protected speech. My strong opinions, emotions, and frustration may overflow in the face of single-digit IQ drivers who endanger everyone around them by their selfish aggressive driving. I might even use words to describe them that demand of me a subsequent repentance — but that is not necessarily an expression of hate. We can see this more clearly in considering hatred’s polar opposite.

Love is not primarily a state of mind or an emotion, but a set of actions flowing from heart inclinations. If I proclaim my love and concern for the widow, orphan, or poor without any benevolent action to make it tangible, where is the love in that? Opinions and inclinations are not enough. In fact, in most cases inclinations alone are meaningless. The Apostle James writes in the same manner about tangible faith:

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? (James 2:14-16)

It’s the tangible action that gives genuine love its veracity. In February, Ryan Sively braved a Texas ice storm to rescue 150 stranded motorists. John Powell, a Houston-area pastor stopped to help a motorist whose car was ablaze as the result of an accident. He was struck and killed by a semi-truck. The actions of both men gave eloquent and indelible meaning to the inclinations of their hearts.

Words without actions are like wind without rain, fire without warmth. Such expressions are what the poets call a velleity — a wish or an inclination not strong enough to lead to any observable action to make it so. Put in a more homespun fashion: Saying isn’t doing. Genuine love is always expressed in actions. Just so with genuine hate.

Fake Hate Groups

When hate is limited to an emotion, attitude or thought based upon a particular bias, it’s essentially an opinion. Such opinions, no matter how disagreeable, are protected speech. They are not crimes. And this is where the wheels come off the SPLC’s definition of hate group.

From its own website, the SPLC defines hate group as:

An organization or collection of individuals that — based on its official statements or principles, the statements of its leaders, or its activities — has beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics (emphasis added).

This is a definition of hate group based purely on the opinions or core beliefs of a group. What are practices but expressions of belief. The SPLC makes this clear by insisting that “an organization does not need to have engaged in criminal conduct or have followed their speech with actual unlawful action to be labeled a hate group” (emphasis added).Please Support The Stream: Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day.

With this rhetorical sleight of hand, the mask comes off. The SPLC makes a fortune by “attacking and maligning” the speech of others — suggesting, incidentally, that the SPLC is ripe for hoisting on its own petard, since it nicely meets its own “hate group” definition. At any rate, how the SPLC is singularly qualified to evaluate the speech of others, across a wide range of religious, social, and cultural issues, escapes the notice of most neutral observers. But herein lies the genius of progressive thinkers: If the viewpoint in question is different than theirs it must be hate speech.

All of this reveals the SPLC to be little more than the Thought Police depicted in George Orwell’s 1984 — where the thought itself is the crime. And remember, the SPLC’s “hate group” designations are steadfastly advanced as “fact” in their voluminous direct mail letters, digital distribution, and public statements. Yet, when they must look a judge or jury in the eye — “Well, Your Honor, these are just our opinions.”

In Search of the Reasonable Man

Which leads us back to the “reasonable man” standard of the law and D. James Kennedy Ministries’ quest to be heard before a jury of our peers. The reasonable man understanding of hate group is: malice or bias bent on bodily harm. The defining characteristic of a genuine hate group is violence. Anger is not necessarily hateful. Frustration is not necessarily hateful. Neither are strong opinions different than your own. The difference is violence. How do you know some group hates you? They try to hurt you. Think KKK, skinheads, Nazi Brownshirts, and radical Islamists flying jet fuel-laden planes into buildings.

To have the SPLC characterize as “hate” the work of Christian ministries — those defined by their love for God and their fellow man — is an admixture of Orwellian newspeak cross-bred with Freudian projection. It’s both false and defamatory. And here is the grand irony. While it’s inarguable that violence is the watermark of authentic hate groups, where are the violent Leftist groups on the SPLC’s so-called hate map? Antifa? Black Lives Matter? The Occupy Movement? They are nowhere to be found. They must all be busy with “fiery but otherwise peaceful protests.”

In his work, Through the Looking Glass, Lewis Carroll may have perfectly captured our cultural moment:

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’

The SPLC sees itself as “master” and has publicly pledged to “destroy” those with whom it disagrees. That sounds a lot like promising violence — and suggests that the SPLC itself traffics in hate. A reasonable question here is: Why do our businesses, government agencies, and news media so thoroughly embrace and endorse the questionable judgment of an organization that wants to destroy others simply because they disagree?

My own opinion is that the SPLC doesn’t really believe we are haters. They know better. Yet they are happy to use the epithet as a form of reputational terrorism. The goal is to silence the opposition. The goal is viewpoint discrimination — all through fake definitions.