KKK’s official newspaper supports Donald Trump for president

KKK’s official newspaper supports Donald Trump for president

© AP Photo/Andrew Harnik Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump greets members of the audience after speaking at a rally at Valdosta State University in Valdosta, Ga., Monday, Feb. 29, 2016.

Before we say ANYTHING, keep in mind that we’re not endorsing ANY candidate of this election. We are aware that there are diverse perceptions regarding politics and almost everything you read on touchy subjects. We do however condone talking about things society considers “controversial” and tell you NOT to talk about. Well we do here because you’re intelligent enough to hear the other side of the argument, agree to disagree, yet respect each others opinions and points of views. This is nothing to do with being “American”, this is EVERYTHING to do with being human on this planet with ideas, thoughts, and beliefs that you take to heart while allowing others to do the same.

So we wanted to play with this a little bit and give us your thoughts after;

Among the small number of American newspapers that have embraced Donald Trump’s campaign, there is one, in particular, that stands out.

It is called the Crusader — and it is one of the most prominent newspapers of the Ku Klux Klan.

Under the banner “Make America Great Again,” the entire front page of the paper’s current issue is devoted to a lengthy defense of Trump’s message — an embrace some have labeled a de facto endorsement.

“‘Make America Great Again!’ It is a slogan that has been repeatedly used by Donald Trump in his campaign for the presidency,” Pastor Thomas Robb wrote in the Crusader. “You can see it on the shirts, buttons, posters and ball caps such as the one being worn here by Trump speaking at a recent rally. … But can it happen? Can America really be great again? This is what we will soon find out!”

“While Trump wants to make America great again, we have to ask ourselves, ‘What made America great in the first place?'” the article continues. “The short answer to that is simple. America was great not because of what our forefathers did — but because of who our forefathers were.

“America was founded as a White Christian Republic. And as a White Christian Republic it became great.”

The Trump campaign sharply and swiftly criticized the article. “Mr. Trump and the campaign denounces hate in any form,” the campaign said in a statement Tuesday evening. “This publication is repulsive and their views do not represent the tens of millions of Americans who are uniting behind our campaign.”

What we’re wondering is what’s so hateful about the word “white”, let along “white Christian Republic”?

We can see white in many ways; white snow, white crayons, white sand, white sugar, white flour, white doves, white teeth, white paper, white—out. And if people are referring to “white people”, the last time we saw them they were all dead; blood and fluids drained out. So white people from every ethnicity (including black, Asian, Natives, etc) can’t technically be offended by anything because they’re in the morgue if not already buried or cremated.

Now if you consider “Christian” being hateful, it depends on how you see it. Hell sounds like a very “hateful” place you’re doomed to go if you’re not “Christian” and be punished by God. And almost every war in the world started based on different religious beliefs including Christianity (sometimes called “Crusaders for Christ). According to historical data, you either converted to this religion, confessed you believed in it, or was tortured and/or killed (just ask Joan of Arc and the Salem Witches in the 1690s).

“Republic” sounds like some form of religion in politics. It has differen meanings according to those who claim they live in one; (DPRK Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Islamic Republic of Iran, USSR, The People’s Republic of China, The United States of America), I can go on and on. Are these countries “hateful”?

Reached by phone, Robb told The Washington Post that while the Crusader wasn’t officially endorsing Trump, his article signaled the publication’s enthusiastic support for the Republican billionaire’s candidacy.

“Overall, we do like his nationalist views and his words about shutting down the border to illegal aliens,” Robb said. “It’s not an endorsement because, like anybody, there’s things you disagree with. But he kind of reflects what’s happening throughout the world. There seems to be a surge of nationalism worldwide as nationals reclaim their borders.”

The 12-page quarterly newspaper calls itself “The Political Voice of White Christian America!” and has a well-known white supremacist symbol on its front page. The latest edition includes articles about Jewish links to terrorism, black-on-white crime and a man who claims to be Bill Clinton’s illegitimate child. An article near the end of the paper says that Trump’s candidacy is “moving the dialogue forward.”

The publication’s website says that its “number one goal” is to “stop white genocide.”

That word “genocide” is very powerful to most people. We see genocide as killing a particular “gene”. Academia and cultures have taught people to see genes according to the pigmentation of skin instead of seeing it as a human code. So when a mass murder is happening, or has happened regardless of ethnicity or culture, we consider killing massive amount of humans as genocide. Referring to our version of “white”, we all can die right now, but there will still remain white snow, white crayons, white sand, white sugar, white flour, white doves, white teeth, white paper, and white—out.

Image

Since the earliest days of his presidential bid, Trump has attracted the support of prominent white nationalists across the country, setting off fears that a dormant fringe faction of the GOP base — one steeped in xenophobic and white supremacist rhetoric — would be folded back into mainstream politics.

In the early months, white nationalists said they were reluctant to publicly throw their support behind the controversial billionaire for fear of harming his strengthening campaign. But white nationalists said as Trump became more emboldened, they did too.

In January, Jared Taylor — editor of the white nationalist magazine American Renaissance — lent his voice to a robo-call recording urging registered voters in Iowa to back Trump. Those potential voters, Taylor told The Post, are part of a silent majority who are tired of being asked to celebrate diversity but are afraid of being labeled bigots.

A month later, Trump was embraced by former KKK grand wizard David Duke, which led to a controversial exchange between CNN’s Jake Tapper and the Republican candidate. Asked by Tapper to “unequivocally condemn” Duke, Trump pleaded ignorance.

“Just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke, okay?” Trump said.

Tapper pressed him several more times to disavow Duke and the KKK, but Trump again declined.

“I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists,” Trump said. “So I don’t know. I don’t know — did he endorse me, or what’s going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.”

He just said he know nothing about this dude, nor this practice.

So this part is extremely important because it goes to perception. If I know nothing about a person, place, thing, or organization personally, I’m not going to have an opinion about them, nor agree or disagree with what they say because I never asked them to elaborate. Trump is saying he knows nothing about them or “white supremacy”, so of course he can’t disavow them or anybody he know nothing about. I’m the same way; I’d be considered a black man to “society”, but because I never met the KKK in person, I have no opinions about them either, nor can I condemn anything they say based on what someone else say about them. This goes for Hitler, Nazism, socialism, communism, Mao, Stalin, or anyone I’ve never met, sat down with, and talked to in person.

That same month, Rachel Pendergraft — the national organizer for the Knights Party, a standard-bearer for the Ku Klux Klan — told The Post that Trump’s campaign offered the organization a new outreach tool for recruiting new members and expanding their formerly dwindling ranks.

The Republican presidential candidate, Pendergraft said at the time, provided separatists with an easy way to start a conversation about issues that are important to the dying white supremacist movement.

“One of the things that our organization really stresses with our membership is we want them to educate themselves on issues, but we also want them to be able to learn how to open up a conversation with other people,” Pendergraft said.

Using Trump as a conversation piece has been discussed on a private, members-only website and in “e-news, stuff that goes out to members.”

In addition to opening “a door to conversation,” she said, Trump’s surging candidacy has electrified some members of the movement.

“They like the overall momentum of his rallies and his campaign,” Pendergraft said. “They like that he’s not willing to back down. He says what he believes and he stands on that.”

In August, the American Nazi Party’s chairman, Rocky Suhayda, agreed, declaring on his radio show that Trump offers “real opportunity” to build the white nationalist movement.

More recently, Trump’s rallies have been marred by a series of racially charged incidents.

Last week, a black Trump supporter was booted from a North Carolina rally after he was mistaken for being a protester. Trump’s security detail escorted a man out of the rally as the audience cheered.

“You can get him out,” Trump said, making a sideways motion with his thumb. “Get him out.”

The person in question turned out to be C.J. Cary, a North Carolina resident, who claims to be a longtime Trump supporter.

Cary, in a phone interview, said Saturday that he had gone to the rally because he wanted to hand-deliver a note to the Republican presidential nominee. He made his way to about 20 to 30 feet from the stage and shouted “Donald!” while waving his note around to try to catch his attention.

“Everyone else is waving Trump signs and I’m waving this white letter,” Cary, 63, said. He said that, coupled with the fact that he was wearing sunglasses during an evening rally to deal with his sensitivity to light, may have been what set people off.

Cary said a security official noticed he appeared to be a supporter but said he should not have disrupted the rally.

“He asked me, ‘What happened? You have on a GOP badge,’ ” Cary said. “I said, ‘I’m yelling at Donald, and he thinks I’m a protester.’ ”

This reminds me of something. Maybe the Crips and Bloods learned something here;

You reppin yo flag nigga?

Political correct translation;

You’re wearing your GOP badge? But sorry you got shot at because you look like a Beaner trying to be a Yakuza.

Days later, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, forcefully disavowed a supporter as “deplorable” for chanting “Jew-S-A!” at a weekend rally, the latest incident of anti-Semitic rhetoric used by some of the GOP nominee’s backers, according to Post reporters Jose A. DelReal and Sean Sullivan.

Can someone tell me what’s the difference between being “anti-Semitic” and just being “racist”? I’m really confused about these two, and I know there are billions of different opinions and definitions regarding the two. Or is it?

“[The man’s] conduct is completely unacceptable and does not reflect our campaign or our candidate. Wow,” Conway said during an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “That man’s conduct was deplorable. And had I been there, I would have asked security to remove him immediately.”

The Saturday afternoon incident in Phoenix was captured on video that showed a man confronting reporters at the rally with shouts and a three-fingered hand gesture that resembled hate symbols flagged by the Anti-Defamation League.

“You’re going down! You’re the enemy!” the man yelled. As the rest of the crowd broke into a chant of “USA! USA!,” the man repeatedly chanted, “Jew-S-A! Jew-S-A!”

Could there be a reason why he said that?

According to some conspiracy theorists (and I don’t say that in a negative manner), most Fortune 500 and major multinational corporations including banks are controlled by what they call the “Zionist Jews” cabal, which is allegedly separate from real Jews (who so happened to be against Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and the human rights violation of Palestinians).

So according to many researches, America’s government is controlled by the influence of these Zionist Jewish corporations. This answers the question of why mainstream media and religion is a staunch supporter of the State of Israel, why they condemn any hint of “anti-Semitics” and even violate freedom of speech and expression here to suppress any criticism of the Jewish state, and its treatment of the Palestinians — because the media is owned by these same corporations?

That’s like Fox News criticizing Rupert Murdock of News Corp. and CBS making a news special on the corruption of Sumner Redstone’s family.

There’s even concerns of the whole Holocaust stories being a hoax to cover up the real reason behind Nazi Germany, Hitler’s true intentions to protect Germany, its people (including Jews there) against this Zionist cabal and their Allies in Britain and the United States, and what the word Holocaust REALLY mean. This coverup was believed to maintain the status quo in America to complete an agenda of corporate control over the masses. Which also makes sense because (according to Sigmund Freud) the masses don’t think for themselves, and buy everything under the sun to fill a void. If this is true, then the alleged Zionist Jews agenda will happen. No one force the masses to buy their products.

After doing research, this has showed us how misunderstandings of cultures, and a society who only speak American English can defend Israel and the Zionist Jews on knee jerk reaction based on a story they’ve heard instead of understand Latin, Greek, German, and seeing for themselves why this gentleman would chant “Jew-S-A”.

Could it be that the Zionist Jews own the U.S.A.?

If this is true, and you have a problem with this allegation — wouldn’t it be best to start your own business and/or start buying local? Just a thought.

Conway agreed when CNN’s Jake Tapper asked whether the man’s behavior was “deplorable” — a reference to controversial comments made last month by Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who was criticized for casting “half of Trump’s supporters” as a “basket of deplorables.” Clinton later expressed regret for suggesting that half of his supporters were racist or xenophobic.

As DelReal and Sullivan reported, the “Jew-S-A” incident revived long-standing anxieties about xenophobic and white supremacist rhetoric used by a fringe faction within the GOP nominee’s base.

Like this wasn’t a concern 8 years ago with the whole Barack Osama presidential gig? (I wrote that on purpose for a reason).

I saw and witnessed fringe groups of some blacks forming military style tactics to intimidate others into voting for this man. I even saw a side of my family that gave me an outer body experience. So could it be their turn?

Then I started studying the psy-op technique of controlled oppositions. I saw how profitable it is to deploy this program. That’s when everything came together and I saw the game.

Anti-Semitic slogans and language, they wrote, have become common among self-identified members of the “alt-right,” a fringe conservative movement that fashions itself as a populist and anti-establishment alternative to the mainstream Republican Party. Many within the alt-right have enthusiastically embraced Trump’s campaign message, which has included calls for mass deportations of undocumented Latino immigrants and for barring foreign Muslims from entering the United States.

Many of Trump’s critics have accused him and his campaign of stoking racial grievances as a political tool. Those accusations have intensified since Stephen K. Bannon stepped away from running Breitbart News — which he has called a “platform for the alt-right” — to become the Trump campaign’s chief executive.

“I wouldn’t want to tar and feather every Trump supporter with the anti-Semitic comments of one person, but it is the case that the Trump campaign has been embraced by the radical right in an unprecedented way this season,” said Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Trump came under fire over the summer for retweeting an image of rival Hillary Clinton alongside $100 bills and a Jewish star bearing the words “most corrupt candidate ever!” Trump later claimed that it was a sheriff’s star.

Trump’s son, Donald Jr., also drew attention for doing an interview with a white-nationalist radio host this year; he later told Bloomberg News that he did not realize the interviewer was going to be looped into the conversation. He was also blasted for posting an image on social media he said he got from a friend that included Pepe the Frog, a figure that has been appropriated by white supremacists. He told ABC News that he did not know about the association.

What’s your thoughts on this?

Article credit: The Washington Post

VIDEO: Valedictorian Reveals Illegal Immigration Status

VIDEO: Valedictorian Reveals Illegal Immigration Status
I stay away from this immigration debate, however out of curiosity…
Some of the tweets claim their “tax dollars” (remember to ask for a balance sheet for proof) paying for this criminal to go to college, who achieved a valedictorian status, preparing to go to college (Yale), so that she can contribute to America’s health to become a neurosurgeon.
BUT—they don’t mind having their “tax dollars” pay for the incarceration of Bernie Madoff and the Boston Marathon’s “alleged” bomber. Not mentioning rapists, murderers, you know the whole shabang?
So let me get the word “criminal” clear:
The government creates criminals when they pass a law to outlaw certain actions or products. So if alcohol was illegal during prohibition and you consumed alcohol, you was a criminal. And if you smoked weed, you were a criminal.
So let me get most of Americans clear here…..
They’d rather pay taxes to lock Bernie Madoff and Boston “alleged” bomber up in federal prison in the name of “JUSTICE”…….
But refuse to pay, and be angry towards this young lady choosing to pursue a career in medicine and contribute—-I can’t even finish this….
So there’s your Prison Industrial Complex. THERE’S your future….
PAY FOR A SWINDLER FOR THREE MEALS A DAY
while….
VERBALLY PUNISHING THIS “CRIMINAL” FOR BEING THE TOP OF HER CLASS AND GOING TO COLLEGE.
Really America? Really?
TURN THAT FUCKING TV OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And for those tweets that called her a criminal, I’m curious if they saw and heard the entire speech first*

*I do want to make note that I wasn’t there, so this is allegations that I believe half what I hear and see. But let’s say it’s real. Congratulations.

Yes, we are ALL humans. That does NOT dismiss my questioning everything, which leads to this…

The other half I’m questioning is if she was planted by the government to insight heated debates (which cause division among the country), and invoke emotions towards immigration, rather in a positive or negative light. Is she a distraction?

I question EVERYTHING, and don’t leave NO stone un-turned.

Regardless of the “hidden” agendas, we would never know. However, what we CAN know is having unconditional love for ourself AND all humanity so that this profitable “immigration debate” no longer matters anymore.

OH, one last thing:
Did the alleged “founding fathers” (which were undocumented immigrants from Europe) ask for citizenship from the Native Americans? Wondering.
 
I guess you should’ve built that wall after all Pocahontas…
CREDIT: rebloggy.com
 SHARE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW

Mad About Rigged Elections? Mainstream Media Says YOU Are the Problem

Mad About Rigged Elections? Mainstream Media Says YOU Are the Problem

Mad About Rigged Elections? Mainstream Media Says YOU Are the Problem

Op-Ed — Mainstream headlines constantly decry Bernie Sanders supporters for disrupting events in outrage, as if their protests and demonstrations somehow illustrate the devolution of the elections. But that focus by the corporate media utterly negates the consistent and continual reports of fraud and disenfranchisement fueling their ire.

And it’s getting ridiculous.

Newsweek, though far from alone, offered a prime example of the obfuscation of the election fraud and questionable campaign tactics by Hillary Clinton in its skewering of Sanders’ supporters.

Get Control, Senator Sanders, or Get Out,” Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald titled his op-ed — which thoroughly blasts the Vermont senator — as if he were somehow responsible for both the electoral chaos and the actions of an irate voting public.

“So, Senator Sanders,” Eichenwald writes [with emphasis added], “either get control of what is becoming your increasingly unhinged cult, or get out of the race. Whatever respect sane liberals had for you is rapidly dwindling, and the damage being inflicted on your reputation may be unfixable. If you can’t even manage the vicious thugs who act in your name, you can’t be trusted to run a convenience store, much less the country.”

Yeah! And that goes for you too…Donald Trump!

Really?

Because what Eichenwald obviates most readily in his attack is the inability to understand why those protests might be occurring in the first place. Judging by the timing of his article, it’s likely Eichenwald wrote it after chaos broke out at the Nevada Democratic Convention on Saturday — chaos that transpired after the party took it upon itself to ignore thousands who rightly believed Sanders delegates had been excluded unfairly from the caucus proceedings.

Despite the call for a recount, party officials refused to follow necessary procedure and abruptly adjourned the convention, leaving thousands of voters in the lurch — and hotel security and local law enforcement to deal with the aftermath. When things seem suspicious, apparently Eichenwald feels voters should not only have no recourse, they should be happy about it.

“Sanders has increasingly signaled that he is in this race for Sanders,” he continues, “and day after day shows himself to be a whining crybaby with little interest in a broader movement.”

It would be nice if Eichenwald’s hit piece were as much a joke as it comes across, but clearly he’s missed the point — and the vast movement supporting not only Sanders, but electoral justice. Worse, he didn’t stop there:

“Signs are emerging that the Sanders campaign is transmogrifying into the type of movement through which tyrants are born.

“The ugly was on display” at the aforementioned Nevada convention, Eichenwald adds, “where Hillary Clinton won more delegates than Sanders.”

No kidding. That would be precisely the issue that “cult” expressed fury about — Clinton managed to put yet another state under her belt under highly questionable circumstances. In fact, suspect happenings at nearly every primary and caucus so far oddly favor the former secretary of state — and Nevada stood as further testament to why voters are practically up in arms over what appears to be electoral favoritism.

But Eichenwald wasn’t alone in overlooking those concerns — or in blatantly mischaracterizing both that bias and its consequential thwarting of the wishes of a hefty segment of the voting public.

In the New York Times, Alan Rappeport also took the chance to strike at Sanders’ followers by citing Roberta Lange, Nevada State Democratic Party Chairwoman, who adjourned the convention early — earning the wrath of Nevada’s voters.

“‘It’s been vile,’ said Ms. Lange, who riled Sanders supporters by refusing their requests for rule changes at the event in Las Vegas,” Rappeport notes, adding, “The vicious response comes as millions of new voters, many of whom felt excluded by establishment politicians, have flocked to the insurgent campaigns of Mr. Sanders and Mr. Trump.”

Though he at least presented that aspect of the elections fairly, his description of what Lange actually did in Nevada misses the mark — that rules change had originally occurred prior to the convention, and Lange’s hasty and subjective decision on a contentious voice vote to permanently install the change arguably created the eruption of anger. But a number of Times staff have contributed sizeable amounts to Hillary’s campaign — and a Clinton family organization also donated $100,000 to the Times’ charitable organization the same year it endorsed her. Funny how bias thus peppers its reporting.

But the media roasting of Sanders and his supporters also appeared in the Sacramento Bee — where the editorial board also called the senator to task for the Nevada incident in lieu of calling out the controversial elections. According to the Bee,

“The episode had the reek of Trump rallies, where threats, insults, and sucker punches to defend the presumptive Republican nominee have been common. Yet looking back at the hundreds of Sanders supporters who descended on a Clinton rally in East Los Angeles earlier this month to intimidate her supporters, making one little girl cry, it now seems inevitable that the same kind of violent eruption would afflict those ‘feeling the Bern.’”

Seriously?

While the protest in L.A. certainly rattled Clinton supporters, violence didn’t pepper the event. One Sanders supporter — sporting a Free Hugs tee-shirt, no less — even assisted Clinton-supporting families with teary-eyed children in tow navigate through the crowd. While reports that someone ripped apart a young girl’s pro-Hillary sign might be valid, it would stand as the exception to what amounted to a boisterous demonstration over justifiable grievances. And, again, this obfuscation forgets entirely the need for demonstrations, which Hillary Clinton — in repeated lies, controversial policy proposals, and a campaign replete with fraud complaints — has clearly helped create.

Perhaps corporate, mainstream media — instead of targeting the symptom — should attempt to report its root cause.

No I don’t think corporate mainstream media should do that either. Reporting the “root cause” isn’t profitable and marketable. And if anyone (including you) really knew the root cause, you wouldn’t care what the media reports because you wouldn’t be watching it. And politics wouldn’t get under your skin, let along have anything to do with you and your life.

Perhaps enormous swaths of voters being dropped from the rolls in New York; Clinton’s inexplicably astronomical luck in coin tosses in Iowa; inexcusably untrained elections volunteers and their equally inexcusable tendency allowing Clinton supporters to participate in caucuses without first being registered; or any number of other examples from the mountain of ever-growing evidence the elections are, indeed, rigged, are infinitely more deserving of headlines than hit pieces against those protesting such affronts to the American electoral process.

See? If you knew the root cause, you wouldn’t care what headlines is more “deserving”.

Or perhaps we should all just do as Eichenwald suggests — swallow our pride and our desire for a less corrupt and fairer system — and turn tail.

Well I’m not in Eichenwald’s head but—I actually agree with him from my own perception.

Or not. Because this system is rigged — and the corporate media helps pull the strings. But as long as independent media reports what the mainstream refuses, and as long as fraud inundates the 2016 election, there will be protests — regardless of whether or not Newsweek and the Times and the rest of their ilk ever grasp accuracy in reporting.

So the system is “rigged”. Why?

What’s “rigged”, what does that mean?

Everyone who keep repeating “the system’s rigged” will give you more rigging. It’s the basic laws of attraction. And the government (and media) keeps on giving you what you keep saying they are…just keep on.

What’s rigged is using a wire hanger and aluminum to catch the right reception for your TV…that’s for those who remember the rabbit ears.

The mainstream media reports DRAMA, because drama sells. The thing is, drama is sold to a masses who’s addicted to–well, drama. So this article encourage “independent media” to report drama, then you’d be alright regarding coverage from a masses who wants more drama.

There will be protests. Really? How profitable. Protesting is such a masterful tool that get a bunch of angry people angry about something they know nothing about, for if they knew, they wouldn’t be protesting.

You see, the media is right. You might be the problem. It takes a viewer to turn the television on to watch what MSM got for them on today’s headlines to be angry about and share it among their angry friends and family. Same thing with social media, where everyone can click on their emoticons so Facebook, Twitter and other corporations can market to you based on your anger–voluntarily of course.

Mainstream media is a business, and they only sell what the viewers want. However, you’re not the problem if you like drama. What’s problematic is being in denial about it.

Bernie, Clinton, Trump, Johnson, Stein–it doesn’t matter who your cult of personality is. It’s all a game. And if anyone get so emotional over a story they heard (or watched) from someone else, and believe it without verifying the source. Well, maybe that’s a problem.

Then I’d encourage protesting.

Source courtesy of: theantimedia.org

This article (Mad About Rigged Elections? Mainstream Media Says YOU Are the Problem) is an opinion editorial (OP-ED). The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the views of Anti-Media. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.