Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC) brainwashing elements: – blind obedience indoctrination – no independent thinking – follow prepared messaging – ask questions –> reprimand –> expulsion – reject voices outside the Church – anyone who criticizes is an enemy "WE ARE ONE" 📺 Rappler

22three7eleven's profile picture

Decoy

1,227 subscribers

40,297 views • 17 days ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Team Ask Questions People really out here thinking this is about Candace Owens when really, it's about Charlie. No amount of criticism will stop independent thinking people from trying to understand complex and layered issues, especially when the outcome of that inquisition will shape their understanding of the world, their own nation, the power structure, who to trust and so much more. They say we're "dividing the party" for trying to understand something the same we've sought answers for every historical event. Meanwhile, they will incessantly assign malign your intent, your reasoning or your intelligence altogether. They think that shouting you down will actually make a difference. They think we care what they think of us. Most of us hope we're wrong, and the official story is 100% true. But like anything, we need to prove it to ourselves. If we dare to find any information from Candace or anyone else to be interesting, strange, compelling or deserving of more investigation - we are immediately categorized. They think in the binary and the world doesn’t work that way. Keep asking questions, let them stay pressed.
2:58

Team Ask Questions People really out here thinking this is about Candace Owens when really, it's about Charlie. No amount of criticism will stop independent thinking people from trying to understand complex and layered issues, especially when the outcome of that inquisition will shape their understanding of the world, their own nation, the power structure, who to trust and so much more. They say we're "dividing the party" for trying to understand something the same we've sought answers for every historical event. Meanwhile, they will incessantly assign malign your intent, your reasoning or your intelligence altogether. They think that shouting you down will actually make a difference. They think we care what they think of us. Most of us hope we're wrong, and the official story is 100% true. But like anything, we need to prove it to ourselves. If we dare to find any information from Candace or anyone else to be interesting, strange, compelling or deserving of more investigation - we are immediately categorized. They think in the binary and the world doesn’t work that way. Keep asking questions, let them stay pressed.

Bobby Sauce

20,888 views • 7 months ago

Only 40% of American parents plan to follow the full childhood vaccine schedule. 60% are now saying NO to the pressure and questioning pediatric authority. This week, we witnessed what may be the most catastrophic blow to the credibility of the childhood vaccine program in modern history. A seismic shift has occurred, and the medical establishment is refusing to acknowledge the earthquake. The evidence? A damning new study published in JAMA Open Network, surveying vaccination intentions among parents of young children and pregnant women. The results are nothing short of a revolution in parental thinking. The graph tells the entire story. At the very top, you see the number that should send chills through every pediatrician's office and every CDC conference room: Only 40%. Let that sink in. Just 40% of American parents plan to follow the entire, recommended childhood vaccine schedule for their newborns. Now, look at the other 60%. That is the sound of a silent majority rising. SIXTY PERCENT of American parents are now planning to reject the CDC's rigid, one-size-fits-all recommendations. They are saying NO to the pressure. They are saying NO to the dogma. They are preparing to question their pediatrician's authority. This isn't a fringe minority. This is the mainstream. This is a tidal wave of parents who have done their own research, witnessed the rise of chronic childhood illness, and are choosing informed consent over blind obedience. The message is clear: The people have lost confidence. The trust is broken. The era of "just trust us" is over. To all pediatricians: Your days of unquestioned authority are numbered if you don't start listening. Parents are no longer passive recipients of advice; they are active, empowered partners in their children's health. They demand transparency, individualized care, and honest conversations about risk. This is a wake-up call. The future of pediatrics depends on adapting to this new reality of an informed and questioning public. The people have spoken. Are you listening?
1:08

Only 40% of American parents plan to follow the full childhood vaccine schedule. 60% are now saying NO to the pressure and questioning pediatric authority. This week, we witnessed what may be the most catastrophic blow to the credibility of the childhood vaccine program in modern history. A seismic shift has occurred, and the medical establishment is refusing to acknowledge the earthquake. The evidence? A damning new study published in JAMA Open Network, surveying vaccination intentions among parents of young children and pregnant women. The results are nothing short of a revolution in parental thinking. The graph tells the entire story. At the very top, you see the number that should send chills through every pediatrician's office and every CDC conference room: Only 40%. Let that sink in. Just 40% of American parents plan to follow the entire, recommended childhood vaccine schedule for their newborns. Now, look at the other 60%. That is the sound of a silent majority rising. SIXTY PERCENT of American parents are now planning to reject the CDC's rigid, one-size-fits-all recommendations. They are saying NO to the pressure. They are saying NO to the dogma. They are preparing to question their pediatrician's authority. This isn't a fringe minority. This is the mainstream. This is a tidal wave of parents who have done their own research, witnessed the rise of chronic childhood illness, and are choosing informed consent over blind obedience. The message is clear: The people have lost confidence. The trust is broken. The era of "just trust us" is over. To all pediatricians: Your days of unquestioned authority are numbered if you don't start listening. Parents are no longer passive recipients of advice; they are active, empowered partners in their children's health. They demand transparency, individualized care, and honest conversations about risk. This is a wake-up call. The future of pediatrics depends on adapting to this new reality of an informed and questioning public. The people have spoken. Are you listening?

Camus

92,760 views • 10 months ago

🤔WHO HAS HIJACKED TRUMP'S ACCOUNT? Candace Owens Exposes the Dark Reality Behind the Weekend Meltdowns 👀 If you saw the unhinged rants coming from Donald Trump’s accounts this weekend, you aren't alone in thinking something is deeply wrong. From Air Force One, Trump reportedly launched an attack on the biggest independent voices in the movement—calling Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, and Megyn Kelly "fake MAGA" and claiming they are "dying fast." But on her podcast tonight, Candace dropped a massive reality check, and it changes how we have to look at the current administration. The Bombshell: "He's definitely not writing these... this is not how he speaks." So, if the President of the United States isn't the one drafting these multi-paragraph, rage-fueled posts against his own former allies... who has access to the feed? 🕵️‍♀️ Follow the Breadcrumbs: Candace points directly to the catastrophic shift in Trump's inner circle. The sane, rational advisors are gone. In their place? People like Laura Loomer, who now openly boasts that she is his "number one advisor" and speaks to him daily. Is Looney Laura Loomer the shadow-writer behind these posts? As Candace brilliantly pointed out: You eventually become the people you spend the most time with. If Trump is acting completely off the rails, it's because the people steering the ship right now are completely derailed. We used to look across the aisle and think the corruption and gaslighting was strictly a Democrat problem. Now, we are waking up to the reality that the establishment rot comes from both sides. The "America First" movement is being hijacked from the inside by deranged grifters, and they are using Trump's own megaphone to attack anyone who tells the truth. What do you think? Is Laura Loomer pulling the strings, or has Trump just lost the plot entirely? Let us know. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL episode linked below. 👇
3:13

🤔WHO HAS HIJACKED TRUMP'S ACCOUNT? Candace Owens Exposes the Dark Reality Behind the Weekend Meltdowns 👀 If you saw the unhinged rants coming from Donald Trump’s accounts this weekend, you aren't alone in thinking something is deeply wrong. From Air Force One, Trump reportedly launched an attack on the biggest independent voices in the movement—calling Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, and Megyn Kelly "fake MAGA" and claiming they are "dying fast." But on her podcast tonight, Candace dropped a massive reality check, and it changes how we have to look at the current administration. The Bombshell: "He's definitely not writing these... this is not how he speaks." So, if the President of the United States isn't the one drafting these multi-paragraph, rage-fueled posts against his own former allies... who has access to the feed? 🕵️‍♀️ Follow the Breadcrumbs: Candace points directly to the catastrophic shift in Trump's inner circle. The sane, rational advisors are gone. In their place? People like Laura Loomer, who now openly boasts that she is his "number one advisor" and speaks to him daily. Is Looney Laura Loomer the shadow-writer behind these posts? As Candace brilliantly pointed out: You eventually become the people you spend the most time with. If Trump is acting completely off the rails, it's because the people steering the ship right now are completely derailed. We used to look across the aisle and think the corruption and gaslighting was strictly a Democrat problem. Now, we are waking up to the reality that the establishment rot comes from both sides. The "America First" movement is being hijacked from the inside by deranged grifters, and they are using Trump's own megaphone to attack anyone who tells the truth. What do you think? Is Laura Loomer pulling the strings, or has Trump just lost the plot entirely? Let us know. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL episode linked below. 👇

Project Constitution

37,836 views • 2 months ago

No religious organisation, political party, or powerful institution—regardless of its influence or following— has the right to dictate how the Republic administers justice. The rule of law belongs to the Filipino people, not to any organisation that believes its political weight entitles it to special treatment. By publicly rallying behind Senator Rodante Marcoleta while the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice move towards filing plunder and indirect bribery charges, the Iglesia ni Cristo has chosen institutional loyalty over accountability. Instead of affirming that the law should take its course, it has created the unmistakable impression that one of its own should be shielded from the full force of the justice system. This is not an isolated matter. Senator Marcoleta has repeatedly attracted controversy—from his conduct during the Senate’s flood control inquiry, where he was accused of diverting scrutiny from key personalities and relying on discredited testimony, to serious questions surrounding undeclared campaign funds and other matters now under official investigation and an impending indictment for plunder and bribery. These allegations deserve to be tested in court, free from political or religious pressure. That is why the INC’s intervention is so troubling. A religious institution that deploys its influence to defend a politician facing grave criminal allegations, rather than insisting that justice be allowed to run its course, abandons the moral ground from which it claims to speak. It ceases to be merely a religious body and becomes a political actor seeking to influence the administration of justice. Where was this moral outrage when thousands of Filipinos died during the previous administration’s bloody drug war? Where was the INC when the Vice President was accused, replete with evidences, of corruption in office and threatened the life of a sitting President and his family? Where was this uncompromising defence of righteousness when corruption, abuse of power, and the erosion of democratic institutions demanded moral courage? Silence then, followed by political mobilisation now, is not righteousness. It is selective morality. If the INC truly believes in justice, it should welcome an independent investigation, not to resist it. Senator Marcoleta deserves due process—not immunity. He deserves a fair trial— not institutional protection. No one is above the law. Not a senator. Not a religious organisation. Not anyone who believes influence is a substitute for accountability. The rule of law must prevail over political pressure, religious influence, and institutional loyalty—every single time. Should the INC be allowed to dictate upon the government under threat of weaponising its people if their capricious objectives are not met? The INC was gifted with free expression and was put under no obligations to pay taxes for the exercise of its purpose. But the same INC is now threatening to rupture the nation into another decade of chaos and destruction. Let the INC and its leaders be warned— you have the right to choose what you want to do, but you have no right to choose the consequences of those actions.
3:14

No religious organisation, political party, or powerful institution—regardless of its influence or following— has the right to dictate how the Republic administers justice. The rule of law belongs to the Filipino people, not to any organisation that believes its political weight entitles it to special treatment. By publicly rallying behind Senator Rodante Marcoleta while the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice move towards filing plunder and indirect bribery charges, the Iglesia ni Cristo has chosen institutional loyalty over accountability. Instead of affirming that the law should take its course, it has created the unmistakable impression that one of its own should be shielded from the full force of the justice system. This is not an isolated matter. Senator Marcoleta has repeatedly attracted controversy—from his conduct during the Senate’s flood control inquiry, where he was accused of diverting scrutiny from key personalities and relying on discredited testimony, to serious questions surrounding undeclared campaign funds and other matters now under official investigation and an impending indictment for plunder and bribery. These allegations deserve to be tested in court, free from political or religious pressure. That is why the INC’s intervention is so troubling. A religious institution that deploys its influence to defend a politician facing grave criminal allegations, rather than insisting that justice be allowed to run its course, abandons the moral ground from which it claims to speak. It ceases to be merely a religious body and becomes a political actor seeking to influence the administration of justice. Where was this moral outrage when thousands of Filipinos died during the previous administration’s bloody drug war? Where was the INC when the Vice President was accused, replete with evidences, of corruption in office and threatened the life of a sitting President and his family? Where was this uncompromising defence of righteousness when corruption, abuse of power, and the erosion of democratic institutions demanded moral courage? Silence then, followed by political mobilisation now, is not righteousness. It is selective morality. If the INC truly believes in justice, it should welcome an independent investigation, not to resist it. Senator Marcoleta deserves due process—not immunity. He deserves a fair trial— not institutional protection. No one is above the law. Not a senator. Not a religious organisation. Not anyone who believes influence is a substitute for accountability. The rule of law must prevail over political pressure, religious influence, and institutional loyalty—every single time. Should the INC be allowed to dictate upon the government under threat of weaponising its people if their capricious objectives are not met? The INC was gifted with free expression and was put under no obligations to pay taxes for the exercise of its purpose. But the same INC is now threatening to rupture the nation into another decade of chaos and destruction. Let the INC and its leaders be warned— you have the right to choose what you want to do, but you have no right to choose the consequences of those actions.

The King

10,640 views • 18 days ago

Elon Musk reduced the oldest question in human history to basic math. No one has found a flaw in it. Musk: “What are the odds that we are in base reality? And that this has not happened before.” You don’t need a physics degree to follow it. You need a timeline. Musk: “If you look at the advancement of video games, it’s gone from Pong, two rectangles and a square batting it back and forth, to photorealistic, real-time games with millions of people playing simultaneously.” Fifty years. That is all it took to close the gap between two rectangles on a screen and a world you cannot tell apart from the one outside your window. Musk: “If that trend continues, video games will be indistinguishable from reality.” The visuals are not what seals it. The intelligence is. Musk: “Think of how sophisticated the conversations are you can have with an AI today, and that’s only going to get more sophisticated.” We are not scripting characters anymore. We are building minds that reason, adapt, and surprise the people who made them. We are nowhere near finished. Musk: “The future, if civilization continues, will be millions, maybe billions of photorealistic, indistinguishable from reality, video games. And with characters in those video games that are very deep, and where the dialogue is not pre-programmed.” One base reality. Billions of perfect copies. Each one running minds that feel exactly as conscious as you do right now. Each one certain it is the original. Musk: “So then what are the odds that we are in base reality?” If even one civilization crosses that threshold, simulated minds outnumber real ones by billions. The probability you are sitting in the real one is not low. It is nearly zero. Not as philosophy. As mathematics. We are not watching this happen. We are building it. Right now. Every AI that reasons without a script. Every world rendered one frame closer to indistinguishable. We are constructing the exact technology that makes our own existence statistically implausible. And we will never stop. Because the curiosity that questions reality is the same force that builds it. If the math holds, something built us. Something conscious enough to create consciousness. They stood where we are standing. Same question. Same inability to stop. And whatever built them never answered it either. There is no top floor. There is no original. None of that changes what you feel right now. Consciousness was never about what you are made of. It was about what you experience. Musk did not float a theory. He held up a mirror with no back wall. And the math does not need you to believe it. It only needs time.
1:55

Elon Musk reduced the oldest question in human history to basic math. No one has found a flaw in it. Musk: “What are the odds that we are in base reality? And that this has not happened before.” You don’t need a physics degree to follow it. You need a timeline. Musk: “If you look at the advancement of video games, it’s gone from Pong, two rectangles and a square batting it back and forth, to photorealistic, real-time games with millions of people playing simultaneously.” Fifty years. That is all it took to close the gap between two rectangles on a screen and a world you cannot tell apart from the one outside your window. Musk: “If that trend continues, video games will be indistinguishable from reality.” The visuals are not what seals it. The intelligence is. Musk: “Think of how sophisticated the conversations are you can have with an AI today, and that’s only going to get more sophisticated.” We are not scripting characters anymore. We are building minds that reason, adapt, and surprise the people who made them. We are nowhere near finished. Musk: “The future, if civilization continues, will be millions, maybe billions of photorealistic, indistinguishable from reality, video games. And with characters in those video games that are very deep, and where the dialogue is not pre-programmed.” One base reality. Billions of perfect copies. Each one running minds that feel exactly as conscious as you do right now. Each one certain it is the original. Musk: “So then what are the odds that we are in base reality?” If even one civilization crosses that threshold, simulated minds outnumber real ones by billions. The probability you are sitting in the real one is not low. It is nearly zero. Not as philosophy. As mathematics. We are not watching this happen. We are building it. Right now. Every AI that reasons without a script. Every world rendered one frame closer to indistinguishable. We are constructing the exact technology that makes our own existence statistically implausible. And we will never stop. Because the curiosity that questions reality is the same force that builds it. If the math holds, something built us. Something conscious enough to create consciousness. They stood where we are standing. Same question. Same inability to stop. And whatever built them never answered it either. There is no top floor. There is no original. None of that changes what you feel right now. Consciousness was never about what you are made of. It was about what you experience. Musk did not float a theory. He held up a mirror with no back wall. And the math does not need you to believe it. It only needs time.

Dustin

188,816 views • 5 days ago

I love and support Ukraine not only because it is my country and my people. Not because we are so perfect and good. Ukraine has as many internal problems as other countries, and in some areas, perhaps even more. And yes, we have all kinds of people, there are good and bad, there are those who do good, but, unfortunately, there are also those who do evil and commit crimes. Just like in your country, there are such people too. I support Ukraine because the right to life and to one's own path is not the privilege of "perfect" nations, but a fundamental human right. No one is less worthy of protection simply because their country has flaws, mistakes, or a difficult history. If that were true, no country in the world would have the right to exist. Because no one is perfect or free from imperfections. Supporting Ukraine means refusing to accept violence and aggression as the norm. This is a rejection of the logic that someone has the right to destroy others simply because they feel like it. Today, it's Ukraine. Tomorrow, with this approach, it could be anyone. And that's the point. Not idealization. Not slogans. But a simple moral choice: side with those defending their home, or turn a blind eye to evil until it knocks on your door. Truth requires no justification. You don't need to be an expert to see the difference between those who defend themselves and those who come to kill, destroy, and erase the identity of others. When cities, hospitals, schools, and homes are bombed, it's no longer a "complex conflict" but an obvious crime. Supporting Ukraine is about memory. About respect for the lessons of history, which have cost humanity too dearly. Every time aggression was called "liberation," "historical justice," or "not everything is so clear-cut," these words were followed by mass tragedies. To ignore this is to knowingly follow the same path.
2:16

I love and support Ukraine not only because it is my country and my people. Not because we are so perfect and good. Ukraine has as many internal problems as other countries, and in some areas, perhaps even more. And yes, we have all kinds of people, there are good and bad, there are those who do good, but, unfortunately, there are also those who do evil and commit crimes. Just like in your country, there are such people too. I support Ukraine because the right to life and to one's own path is not the privilege of "perfect" nations, but a fundamental human right. No one is less worthy of protection simply because their country has flaws, mistakes, or a difficult history. If that were true, no country in the world would have the right to exist. Because no one is perfect or free from imperfections. Supporting Ukraine means refusing to accept violence and aggression as the norm. This is a rejection of the logic that someone has the right to destroy others simply because they feel like it. Today, it's Ukraine. Tomorrow, with this approach, it could be anyone. And that's the point. Not idealization. Not slogans. But a simple moral choice: side with those defending their home, or turn a blind eye to evil until it knocks on your door. Truth requires no justification. You don't need to be an expert to see the difference between those who defend themselves and those who come to kill, destroy, and erase the identity of others. When cities, hospitals, schools, and homes are bombed, it's no longer a "complex conflict" but an obvious crime. Supporting Ukraine is about memory. About respect for the lessons of history, which have cost humanity too dearly. Every time aggression was called "liberation," "historical justice," or "not everything is so clear-cut," these words were followed by mass tragedies. To ignore this is to knowingly follow the same path.

Igor Kyivskyi

19,395 views • 6 months ago

🥊GO MAX! - A GIVESENDGO Crowdfunding Campaign to defend Independent Journalists and Investigators including but not limited to WolvesAndFinance from TPUSA attacks of lawfare and intimidation. The URL is in the video and comments below. Legal Defense Fund for Independent Journalists & Investigators Being Threatened by Turning Point USA Why I'm Organizing This: Zach De Gregorio—a financial journalist who runs the YouTube channel Wolves and Finance—received a Cease and Desist letter from Turning Point USA. Not for lying. Not for fabricating evidence. For analyzing their publicly available 990 tax forms and asking questions. This is a pattern of lawfare and legal intimidation by TPUSA and there will be others who receive similar legal threats from them. Journalists shouldn't be bankrupted for good faith journalism and in direct violation of the First Amendment and everything Charlie Kirk stood for including open debate and asking questions. As soon as I learned TPUSA is systematically targeting small independent investigators with legal threats, I knew someone had to organize a defense. TPUSA is betting these journalists are too small, too scared, and too broke to fight back. One C&D letter, and most creators delete their content to avoid a $50,000-$250,000 lawsuit—even if they're 100% right. They're counting on us staying silent. I'm counting on us standing together. TPUSA isn't just going after Zach. They're targeting journalists and small creators who investigate their financial practices—people who can't afford legal defense. It's strategic intimidation. If you've received a TPUSA legal threat for your journalism, contact us today. This fund covers you too. The Hypocrisy That Should Make Your Blood Boil Turning Point USA built their brand on: Charlie Kirk's "debate me!" challenges Free speech advocacy "Ask questions" culture Fighting cancel culture But when independent journalists ask questions about THEIR publicly available tax filings? Lawyers. The organization that claims to defend free speech is now weaponizing defamation law to silence financial journalism about government-required public documents. Imagine a world where...independent journalists are afraid to investigate how powerful organizations spend money because they fear legal threats from well-funded institutions. Imagine only mainstream media with legal departments can hold nonprofits accountable. Imagine analyzing public tax documents becomes "too risky" for ordinary people. That world arrives the moment we let TPUSA succeed. How the Legal Defense Coalition Works Instead of each journalist fighting alone and going broke, we're creating a shared legal fund defending ALL journalists and independent investigators threatened by TPUSA (and their sub organizations) for investigating their organizations. Who This Covers: Zach De Gregorio and other journalists receiving TPUSA legal threats Future investigators they target Anyone doing good-faith journalism or investigation based on public documents What Funds Cover: ✓ Legal defense against C&D letters and lawsuits ✓ Discovery costs, depositions, expert witnesses ✓ Anti-SLAPP motions (Arizona law protects speech on public concern) ✓ Appeals and counter-suits if needed Legal Team: TBD Law Firm (First Amendment/media defense specialists) Our Advantages: Charlie Kirk, TPUSA, Jake Hoffman (AZ State Senator) are public figures requiring "actual malice" standard and the burden of proof for political defamation of public figures in Arizona is incredibly high 990s are PUBLIC documents—analyzing them is protected speech Proper sourcing shows good-faith journalism Arizona anti-SLAPP statute allows early dismissal + attorney fee recovery Pattern of targeting multiple journalists = evidence of abuse of legal process Protection of the United States Constitution and Arizona Constitution The Stakes If we don't stand together: TPUSA silences independent journalism through financial intimidation Analyzing public documents becomes dangerous Only the wealthy can afford to exercise First Amendment rights Every powerful organization adopts the same playbook If we fight back collectively: We prove intimidation fails when communities unite We establish legal precedent protecting financial journalism We show that ordinary people can hold power accountable We send a message: legal bullying doesn't work here Join the Defense 100% of funds go to legal defense of independent journalists and investigators and associated costs Your donation—whatever you can spare—helps ensure journalists like Zach don't face intimidation alone. It defends the principle that asking questions about public documents is still legal in America. This isn't about whether you agree with every conclusion these journalists reach. This is about whether they have the right to ask the questions. Share This Message We need as many voices as possible speaking out against the silencing of independent journalists—especially now, when access to accurate financial information about powerful organizations matters more than ever. Share this campaign. Tag journalists you follow. Spread the word. When truth-seekers are silenced by legal threats, their community rallies around them. Let's show TPUSA what that looks like.
1:31

🥊GO MAX! - A GIVESENDGO Crowdfunding Campaign to defend Independent Journalists and Investigators including but not limited to WolvesAndFinance from TPUSA attacks of lawfare and intimidation. The URL is in the video and comments below. Legal Defense Fund for Independent Journalists & Investigators Being Threatened by Turning Point USA Why I'm Organizing This: Zach De Gregorio—a financial journalist who runs the YouTube channel Wolves and Finance—received a Cease and Desist letter from Turning Point USA. Not for lying. Not for fabricating evidence. For analyzing their publicly available 990 tax forms and asking questions. This is a pattern of lawfare and legal intimidation by TPUSA and there will be others who receive similar legal threats from them. Journalists shouldn't be bankrupted for good faith journalism and in direct violation of the First Amendment and everything Charlie Kirk stood for including open debate and asking questions. As soon as I learned TPUSA is systematically targeting small independent investigators with legal threats, I knew someone had to organize a defense. TPUSA is betting these journalists are too small, too scared, and too broke to fight back. One C&D letter, and most creators delete their content to avoid a $50,000-$250,000 lawsuit—even if they're 100% right. They're counting on us staying silent. I'm counting on us standing together. TPUSA isn't just going after Zach. They're targeting journalists and small creators who investigate their financial practices—people who can't afford legal defense. It's strategic intimidation. If you've received a TPUSA legal threat for your journalism, contact us today. This fund covers you too. The Hypocrisy That Should Make Your Blood Boil Turning Point USA built their brand on: Charlie Kirk's "debate me!" challenges Free speech advocacy "Ask questions" culture Fighting cancel culture But when independent journalists ask questions about THEIR publicly available tax filings? Lawyers. The organization that claims to defend free speech is now weaponizing defamation law to silence financial journalism about government-required public documents. Imagine a world where...independent journalists are afraid to investigate how powerful organizations spend money because they fear legal threats from well-funded institutions. Imagine only mainstream media with legal departments can hold nonprofits accountable. Imagine analyzing public tax documents becomes "too risky" for ordinary people. That world arrives the moment we let TPUSA succeed. How the Legal Defense Coalition Works Instead of each journalist fighting alone and going broke, we're creating a shared legal fund defending ALL journalists and independent investigators threatened by TPUSA (and their sub organizations) for investigating their organizations. Who This Covers: Zach De Gregorio and other journalists receiving TPUSA legal threats Future investigators they target Anyone doing good-faith journalism or investigation based on public documents What Funds Cover: ✓ Legal defense against C&D letters and lawsuits ✓ Discovery costs, depositions, expert witnesses ✓ Anti-SLAPP motions (Arizona law protects speech on public concern) ✓ Appeals and counter-suits if needed Legal Team: TBD Law Firm (First Amendment/media defense specialists) Our Advantages: Charlie Kirk, TPUSA, Jake Hoffman (AZ State Senator) are public figures requiring "actual malice" standard and the burden of proof for political defamation of public figures in Arizona is incredibly high 990s are PUBLIC documents—analyzing them is protected speech Proper sourcing shows good-faith journalism Arizona anti-SLAPP statute allows early dismissal + attorney fee recovery Pattern of targeting multiple journalists = evidence of abuse of legal process Protection of the United States Constitution and Arizona Constitution The Stakes If we don't stand together: TPUSA silences independent journalism through financial intimidation Analyzing public documents becomes dangerous Only the wealthy can afford to exercise First Amendment rights Every powerful organization adopts the same playbook If we fight back collectively: We prove intimidation fails when communities unite We establish legal precedent protecting financial journalism We show that ordinary people can hold power accountable We send a message: legal bullying doesn't work here Join the Defense 100% of funds go to legal defense of independent journalists and investigators and associated costs Your donation—whatever you can spare—helps ensure journalists like Zach don't face intimidation alone. It defends the principle that asking questions about public documents is still legal in America. This isn't about whether you agree with every conclusion these journalists reach. This is about whether they have the right to ask the questions. Share This Message We need as many voices as possible speaking out against the silencing of independent journalists—especially now, when access to accurate financial information about powerful organizations matters more than ever. Share this campaign. Tag journalists you follow. Spread the word. When truth-seekers are silenced by legal threats, their community rallies around them. Let's show TPUSA what that looks like.

Sword Truth

245,829 views • 6 months ago

🔥IN GOD WE TRUST: As I Walk Through The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death, I Shall Fear No EVIL- Just Like MY Brother In Christ Charlie Kirk Did.✝️ They finally got him. The one guy who started asking the questions they told we weren't allowed to ask. A few months ago Charlie went on the biggest platform in the world and calmly suggested America might want a 5-year plan to stop sending blank checks overseas. He said it with love—for the country, for real allies, for actual peace. Two weeks later he’s bleeding out on stage in Utah. They called it “antisemitic” to even float the idea. They screamed that questioning endless wars and endless billions made you a traitor. Then, suddenly, the loudest voice asking those questions is silenced forever. Funny how that works. Funny how the same people who spent years smearing him as an “extremist” are now posting candle emojis and pretending they were best friends and now tryibng to hijack his legacy. Funny how fast the “coincidence” pile keeps growing. No one’s saying it out loud yet… but a lot of us are thinking the exact same thing. They didn’t want him canceled. They wanted him gone. Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk. The truth you died for is only getting louder. You have inspired so many to speak up about against this EVIL. 🕊️ Video By: Travis FOLLOW Him... Candace Owens Tucker Carlson
3:52

🔥IN GOD WE TRUST: As I Walk Through The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death, I Shall Fear No EVIL- Just Like MY Brother In Christ Charlie Kirk Did.✝️ They finally got him. The one guy who started asking the questions they told we weren't allowed to ask. A few months ago Charlie went on the biggest platform in the world and calmly suggested America might want a 5-year plan to stop sending blank checks overseas. He said it with love—for the country, for real allies, for actual peace. Two weeks later he’s bleeding out on stage in Utah. They called it “antisemitic” to even float the idea. They screamed that questioning endless wars and endless billions made you a traitor. Then, suddenly, the loudest voice asking those questions is silenced forever. Funny how that works. Funny how the same people who spent years smearing him as an “extremist” are now posting candle emojis and pretending they were best friends and now tryibng to hijack his legacy. Funny how fast the “coincidence” pile keeps growing. No one’s saying it out loud yet… but a lot of us are thinking the exact same thing. They didn’t want him canceled. They wanted him gone. Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk. The truth you died for is only getting louder. You have inspired so many to speak up about against this EVIL. 🕊️ Video By: Travis FOLLOW Him... Candace Owens Tucker Carlson

Project Constitution

42,122 views • 7 months ago

I was a sexual violence and human trafficking prosecutor for many years. There are really three buckets of evidence that go into a successful sexual violence or human trafficking prosecution. As an evidentiary matter, Israel checked all three buckets given the overwhelming proof from Hamas’ October 7 attacks. What are those three buckets? 1. Victims We see this in cases that come on TV or appear in the news. If there is one victim, it is hard to win a case because it becomes a “he said, she said.” Nobody was there. There were no cameras, etc. But here we don't have one victim. We have dozens and dozens of victims. People that have never met one another. People that don't know each other. They don't work together. They're not family members. What does that tell you? In the law, we always tell our jurors, when disconnected people who have no affiliation with one another tell you the same story about their interaction with a series of men, that is extremely probative as to whether they're telling you the truth. And these victims, they're not speaking anonymously. They have come forward on the record. They have done so in person at the United Nations, for example. They've done so in person to Israeli and American investigators. They've done it on camera for all the world to see. It's there for all time. One of the reasons why we think it's really important in our justice system not to rely on anonymous sources is because we want to test the reliability of the claim through cross-examination, background investigation of the person, and their history. But there's a separate reason. We believe that the mere process of declaring something publicly and on the record that's unfavorable to you evinces some degree of credibility. 2. Independent investigators We have these medical examiners who have come to the scene and investigated these victims' bodies. Some of the victims were alive, and their genitalia had to be investigated and tested. And some of them were dead. Many of the women who were abused sexually were then murdered by the Hamas terrorists. We know this. It's extremely painful to talk about, and I'd rather not talk about it, but we have to talk about it because the world doesn't understand the compare and contrast game. 3. Defendants This is the crown jewel. This is the cherry on top. You can go on YouTube right now and watch the videotaped confessions of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists to the mass sexual violence they perpetrated on October 7th. There are videotaped confessions of these men on the record for all the world to see. *********** Why is it important to compare and contrast? Because The New York Times op-ed story has none of those three buckets. First bucket, they rely on anonymous sources. They won't tell you who these people are. These people won't come on video to tell you what they suffered. It's important to ask why they won't go on the record with their allegations. Second bucket, they don't have independent medical examiners. The NYT article tries to tell you that they have these independent medical examiners and NGOs. They claim that Euromed is an independent organization, no affiliation, sometimes critical of Israel, they say. But we know that the CEO, the director of this organization, has called for a million October 7s. There were 1,200 Jews murdered on October 7th. A million October 7s, that's way more Jews than there are on the planet, if you're scoring at home. This is the kind of person that they're pitching as the independent third party. Third bucket, on the back end, there's no confession by anyone. There's no secret recording confessing to mass systemic sexual violence as a state policy against Palestinians. Of course, there have been individuals who have done wrong. That's not the question. No one denies that. In any society where there are prison guards and there are prisoners—including our own—there are prison guards who are bad and do bad things to individual prisoners. That's not the point of the Kristof piece. The point, he is clear, is that there is a systemic policy of perpetrating mass sexual violence against Palestinians in these prisons, and there is simply no evidence of that, not from the victims, not from the independent third parties, and not from the the so-called defendants themselves.
8:21

I was a sexual violence and human trafficking prosecutor for many years. There are really three buckets of evidence that go into a successful sexual violence or human trafficking prosecution. As an evidentiary matter, Israel checked all three buckets given the overwhelming proof from Hamas’ October 7 attacks. What are those three buckets? 1. Victims We see this in cases that come on TV or appear in the news. If there is one victim, it is hard to win a case because it becomes a “he said, she said.” Nobody was there. There were no cameras, etc. But here we don't have one victim. We have dozens and dozens of victims. People that have never met one another. People that don't know each other. They don't work together. They're not family members. What does that tell you? In the law, we always tell our jurors, when disconnected people who have no affiliation with one another tell you the same story about their interaction with a series of men, that is extremely probative as to whether they're telling you the truth. And these victims, they're not speaking anonymously. They have come forward on the record. They have done so in person at the United Nations, for example. They've done so in person to Israeli and American investigators. They've done it on camera for all the world to see. It's there for all time. One of the reasons why we think it's really important in our justice system not to rely on anonymous sources is because we want to test the reliability of the claim through cross-examination, background investigation of the person, and their history. But there's a separate reason. We believe that the mere process of declaring something publicly and on the record that's unfavorable to you evinces some degree of credibility. 2. Independent investigators We have these medical examiners who have come to the scene and investigated these victims' bodies. Some of the victims were alive, and their genitalia had to be investigated and tested. And some of them were dead. Many of the women who were abused sexually were then murdered by the Hamas terrorists. We know this. It's extremely painful to talk about, and I'd rather not talk about it, but we have to talk about it because the world doesn't understand the compare and contrast game. 3. Defendants This is the crown jewel. This is the cherry on top. You can go on YouTube right now and watch the videotaped confessions of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists to the mass sexual violence they perpetrated on October 7th. There are videotaped confessions of these men on the record for all the world to see. *********** Why is it important to compare and contrast? Because The New York Times op-ed story has none of those three buckets. First bucket, they rely on anonymous sources. They won't tell you who these people are. These people won't come on video to tell you what they suffered. It's important to ask why they won't go on the record with their allegations. Second bucket, they don't have independent medical examiners. The NYT article tries to tell you that they have these independent medical examiners and NGOs. They claim that Euromed is an independent organization, no affiliation, sometimes critical of Israel, they say. But we know that the CEO, the director of this organization, has called for a million October 7s. There were 1,200 Jews murdered on October 7th. A million October 7s, that's way more Jews than there are on the planet, if you're scoring at home. This is the kind of person that they're pitching as the independent third party. Third bucket, on the back end, there's no confession by anyone. There's no secret recording confessing to mass systemic sexual violence as a state policy against Palestinians. Of course, there have been individuals who have done wrong. That's not the question. No one denies that. In any society where there are prison guards and there are prisoners—including our own—there are prison guards who are bad and do bad things to individual prisoners. That's not the point of the Kristof piece. The point, he is clear, is that there is a systemic policy of perpetrating mass sexual violence against Palestinians in these prisons, and there is simply no evidence of that, not from the victims, not from the independent third parties, and not from the the so-called defendants themselves.

Roy K. Altman

13,125 views • 1 month ago

Jensen Huang just made the case that the smartest person in the room is now the most replaceable person on earth. Huang: “The definition of smart is somebody who’s intelligent, solve problems, technical. But I find that that’s a commodity. And we’re about to prove that artificial intelligence is able to handle that part easiest.” The skill you built your entire identity around was the first thing the machine replicated. Not the hardest part. The easiest. Huang: “People who are able to see around corners are truly, truly smart. And their value is incredible. To be able to preempt problems before they show up, just because you feel the vibe.” Huang: “That vibe came from a combination of data, analysis, first principle, life experience, wisdom, sensing other people.” The vibe is not intuition. It is decades of failed bets, human friction, and first-principles thinking compressed into a single read no model can replicate. You cannot prompt your way to it. You earn it by surviving things that had no instructions. Huang: “I think long term the definition of smart is someone who sits at that intersection of being technically astute, but human empathy and having the ability to infer the unspoken, around the corners, the unknowables.” Every institution you ever passed through graded you on the one thing the machine now does for free. The thing they never tested you on is the only thing that still matters. Huang: “And that person might actually score horribly on the SAT.” The SAT did not measure intelligence. It measured obedience to structure. The future does not reward what you can solve inside a framework someone handed you. It rewards what you can see when no framework exists. The machine did not replace human intelligence. It revealed that what we spent a century calling intelligence was never intelligence at all. The people who memorized the answers are about to work for the people who sensed the questions before anyone thought to ask.
2:01

Jensen Huang just made the case that the smartest person in the room is now the most replaceable person on earth. Huang: “The definition of smart is somebody who’s intelligent, solve problems, technical. But I find that that’s a commodity. And we’re about to prove that artificial intelligence is able to handle that part easiest.” The skill you built your entire identity around was the first thing the machine replicated. Not the hardest part. The easiest. Huang: “People who are able to see around corners are truly, truly smart. And their value is incredible. To be able to preempt problems before they show up, just because you feel the vibe.” Huang: “That vibe came from a combination of data, analysis, first principle, life experience, wisdom, sensing other people.” The vibe is not intuition. It is decades of failed bets, human friction, and first-principles thinking compressed into a single read no model can replicate. You cannot prompt your way to it. You earn it by surviving things that had no instructions. Huang: “I think long term the definition of smart is someone who sits at that intersection of being technically astute, but human empathy and having the ability to infer the unspoken, around the corners, the unknowables.” Every institution you ever passed through graded you on the one thing the machine now does for free. The thing they never tested you on is the only thing that still matters. Huang: “And that person might actually score horribly on the SAT.” The SAT did not measure intelligence. It measured obedience to structure. The future does not reward what you can solve inside a framework someone handed you. It rewards what you can see when no framework exists. The machine did not replace human intelligence. It revealed that what we spent a century calling intelligence was never intelligence at all. The people who memorized the answers are about to work for the people who sensed the questions before anyone thought to ask.

Dustin

122,376 views • 8 days ago

WATCH: Mark Carney kicks out independent journalists again, with police enforcement Despite Mark Carney expressing openness to independent journalists during the media scrum following the French-language debate, police were called to forcibly remove Rebel News from his event. Rebel News travelled to Laval, just outside Montreal, to cover a rally hosted by Liberal leadership candidate Mark Carney. Despite Carney’s public invitation to independent journalists during the debate scrum — telling Keean Bexte, a journalist with Juno News and The Counter Signal, “When I make an announcement, I don't think I've seen you at any of them, but next time you come” — Rebel News' request for media accreditation was ignored. Shortly after arriving to report, our team was promptly asked to leave by security and police, who told us we were “not welcome.” Nevertheless, we stayed just long enough to speak with several Carney supporters and get a sense of voter sentiment. “He’s the best candidate to face Trump,” one supporter said confidently. Another added, “We need an economist, not just a politician.” One man admitted he hadn’t originally planned to vote Liberal: “I hadn’t even planned to… I thought, let’s give the runner a chance to run.” Carney’s ambitious new spending announcement of $130 billion for new measures over the next four years, with no timeline to balance the federal budget — raised eyebrows, but many attendees seemed unfazed. “He said he’ll balance the budget in three years,” one attendee insisted, despite no official timeline being provided. Another voter justified the explosion in national debt double over the last decade with: “We had COVID. We had to keep Canadians afloat. That spending was necessary.” When police and private security approached to remove us from the event, we repeatedly asked, “Who gave the order?” Officers refused to answer, simply stating: “This is a private event. You’re not welcome.” We complied and left peacefully. No disruptions — just questions. But even those, it seems, are unwelcome in Carney’s carefully controlled campaign.
15:18

WATCH: Mark Carney kicks out independent journalists again, with police enforcement Despite Mark Carney expressing openness to independent journalists during the media scrum following the French-language debate, police were called to forcibly remove Rebel News from his event. Rebel News travelled to Laval, just outside Montreal, to cover a rally hosted by Liberal leadership candidate Mark Carney. Despite Carney’s public invitation to independent journalists during the debate scrum — telling Keean Bexte, a journalist with Juno News and The Counter Signal, “When I make an announcement, I don't think I've seen you at any of them, but next time you come” — Rebel News' request for media accreditation was ignored. Shortly after arriving to report, our team was promptly asked to leave by security and police, who told us we were “not welcome.” Nevertheless, we stayed just long enough to speak with several Carney supporters and get a sense of voter sentiment. “He’s the best candidate to face Trump,” one supporter said confidently. Another added, “We need an economist, not just a politician.” One man admitted he hadn’t originally planned to vote Liberal: “I hadn’t even planned to… I thought, let’s give the runner a chance to run.” Carney’s ambitious new spending announcement of $130 billion for new measures over the next four years, with no timeline to balance the federal budget — raised eyebrows, but many attendees seemed unfazed. “He said he’ll balance the budget in three years,” one attendee insisted, despite no official timeline being provided. Another voter justified the explosion in national debt double over the last decade with: “We had COVID. We had to keep Canadians afloat. That spending was necessary.” When police and private security approached to remove us from the event, we repeatedly asked, “Who gave the order?” Officers refused to answer, simply stating: “This is a private event. You’re not welcome.” We complied and left peacefully. No disruptions — just questions. But even those, it seems, are unwelcome in Carney’s carefully controlled campaign.

Alexandra Lavoie

31,615 views • 1 year ago

🚨BREAKING: WolvesAndFinance Zach De Gregorio responds to TPUSA lawfare Cease and Desist and intimidation tactics with a Video Smackdown. 🔥GIVESENDGO Legal Defense Fund Launched for Independent Journalists and Investigators against the TPUSA Threats which Betray Charlie Kirk and the Free Debate and Asking Questions He Stood For 🐺Independent small financial investigator and journalist Wolves and Finance (Zach) fired back at TPUSA after they sent him cease and desist letter. Amazingly, their lawyer doesn't even know what he is doing and referenced paraphrasing out of context instead of direct quotes. The Turning Point Lawyers say people aren't allowed to ask questions, exposing the hypocrisy of TPUSA, Erika Kirk, Tyler Bowyer, and their leadership betraying Charlie Kirk over his stance on open dialogue and debate and asking question. The letter confirms the Kirk DOGE letter, admits 990 fraud (I mean "inadvertent errors" how convenient), admits TPUSA media team used drones at the site of Charlie Kirks assassination, admits Americas Turning Point is intentionally listing Tyler Bowyer their COO as an Independent Contractor and not withdrawing payroll taxes to send to the IRS. They again claim with no evidence that Tyler Bowyer is a victim and has had threats to his safety. TPUSA is on very shaky ground as the burden of proof for political defamation against public political figures like Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman is very very high. The Arizona Constitution provides even higher protection for Journalists and Free Speech than the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Join the Defense A GiveSendGo campaign has been launched and 100% of funds go to legal defense of independent journalists and investigators and associated costs. Your donation—whatever you can spare—helps ensure journalists like Zach don't face intimidation alone. It defends the principle that asking questions about public documents is still legal in America. This isn't about whether you agree with every conclusion these journalists reach. This is about whether they have the right to ask the questions. Share This Message We need as many voices as possible speaking out against the silencing of independent journalists—especially now, when access to accurate financial information about powerful organizations matters more than ever. Share this campaign. Tag journalists you follow. Spread the word. Candace Owens Project Constitution DDGotAPodcast When truth-seekers are silenced by legal threats, their community rallies around them. Let's show TPUSA what that looks like.
21:34

🚨BREAKING: WolvesAndFinance Zach De Gregorio responds to TPUSA lawfare Cease and Desist and intimidation tactics with a Video Smackdown. 🔥GIVESENDGO Legal Defense Fund Launched for Independent Journalists and Investigators against the TPUSA Threats which Betray Charlie Kirk and the Free Debate and Asking Questions He Stood For 🐺Independent small financial investigator and journalist Wolves and Finance (Zach) fired back at TPUSA after they sent him cease and desist letter. Amazingly, their lawyer doesn't even know what he is doing and referenced paraphrasing out of context instead of direct quotes. The Turning Point Lawyers say people aren't allowed to ask questions, exposing the hypocrisy of TPUSA, Erika Kirk, Tyler Bowyer, and their leadership betraying Charlie Kirk over his stance on open dialogue and debate and asking question. The letter confirms the Kirk DOGE letter, admits 990 fraud (I mean "inadvertent errors" how convenient), admits TPUSA media team used drones at the site of Charlie Kirks assassination, admits Americas Turning Point is intentionally listing Tyler Bowyer their COO as an Independent Contractor and not withdrawing payroll taxes to send to the IRS. They again claim with no evidence that Tyler Bowyer is a victim and has had threats to his safety. TPUSA is on very shaky ground as the burden of proof for political defamation against public political figures like Arizona State Senator Jake Hoffman is very very high. The Arizona Constitution provides even higher protection for Journalists and Free Speech than the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Join the Defense A GiveSendGo campaign has been launched and 100% of funds go to legal defense of independent journalists and investigators and associated costs. Your donation—whatever you can spare—helps ensure journalists like Zach don't face intimidation alone. It defends the principle that asking questions about public documents is still legal in America. This isn't about whether you agree with every conclusion these journalists reach. This is about whether they have the right to ask the questions. Share This Message We need as many voices as possible speaking out against the silencing of independent journalists—especially now, when access to accurate financial information about powerful organizations matters more than ever. Share this campaign. Tag journalists you follow. Spread the word. Candace Owens Project Constitution DDGotAPodcast When truth-seekers are silenced by legal threats, their community rallies around them. Let's show TPUSA what that looks like.

Sword Truth

271,771 views • 6 months ago

🔥WELCOME TO RWANDA, THE BANANA REPUBLIC 😂 I keep seeing people in my comments asking why many #Rwandans can’t tolerate criticism of Rwanda. Instead of demanding accountability from those in power, they attack, intimidate, and threaten anyone who dares point out the problems. Take Senator Evode Uwizeyimana as a perfect example.😁 Before he chose to store his brain and conscience in his stomach when he was a refugee in #Canada, He openly admitted that in Rwanda there are only two options: 👉worship Kagame’s regime or 👉be branded an enemy of the nation. There is no middle ground, no room for thought, no space for independent opinion. And let’s talk about their favorite weapon: 👉labeling anyone who refuses to clap for Paul Kagame’s dictatorship a “genocide denier.” That’s not justice ,that’s censorship. That’s how they choke freedom of expression and silence criticism. he said the same things they now criminalize as “#GenocideDenial.” Back then, no charges, no outrage. Why? 👉Because at that time, he wasn’t useful to the regime. Now he’s suddenly innocent ,not because the narrative changed, but because he serves the dictator’s interests. The moment he steps out of line, that old case will magically reappear. That’s how Kagame operates. That’s how he wages wars in #Congo without Rwanda Parliament daring to ask a single question. He only recruits people he already has leverage over , dirt, accusations, or fabricated crimes, so the second you start thinking for yourself, the leash gets pulled. This is not governance. This is control through fear. #MillenZMovementRw ✊🏽#
8:35

🔥WELCOME TO RWANDA, THE BANANA REPUBLIC 😂 I keep seeing people in my comments asking why many #Rwandans can’t tolerate criticism of Rwanda. Instead of demanding accountability from those in power, they attack, intimidate, and threaten anyone who dares point out the problems. Take Senator Evode Uwizeyimana as a perfect example.😁 Before he chose to store his brain and conscience in his stomach when he was a refugee in #Canada, He openly admitted that in Rwanda there are only two options: 👉worship Kagame’s regime or 👉be branded an enemy of the nation. There is no middle ground, no room for thought, no space for independent opinion. And let’s talk about their favorite weapon: 👉labeling anyone who refuses to clap for Paul Kagame’s dictatorship a “genocide denier.” That’s not justice ,that’s censorship. That’s how they choke freedom of expression and silence criticism. he said the same things they now criminalize as “#GenocideDenial.” Back then, no charges, no outrage. Why? 👉Because at that time, he wasn’t useful to the regime. Now he’s suddenly innocent ,not because the narrative changed, but because he serves the dictator’s interests. The moment he steps out of line, that old case will magically reappear. That’s how Kagame operates. That’s how he wages wars in #Congo without Rwanda Parliament daring to ask a single question. He only recruits people he already has leverage over , dirt, accusations, or fabricated crimes, so the second you start thinking for yourself, the leash gets pulled. This is not governance. This is control through fear. #MillenZMovementRw ✊🏽#

U.Sheila C kamuzinzi 🇷🇼🇸🇬

29,662 views • 6 months ago

🚨Let's Talk About REAL Biblical Discernment vs. Emotional Manipulation Laurie Cardoza-Moore wants to lecture us about "biblical foundations" while conveniently ignoring some very basic biblical principles. So let me break this down the way apparently NO ONE else will: FIRST - Let's address the elephant in the room: This is the same woman who sent threatening texts to Charlie Kirk before his tragic death. And now she's positioning herself as the arbiter of Christian faithfulness? The audacity is truly breathtaking. SECOND - On "Biblical Foundations": You know what the Bible ACTUALLY says? "Thou shalt not bear false witness." Yet she accuses anyone who questions Israeli government policy of being "demonic" and full of "jew-hatred." Criticizing a GOVERNMENT is not the same as hating a PEOPLE. Israel is a nation-state with a government that makes policy decisions. The Jewish people are God's chosen people. These are two different things. And if you can't distinguish between them, YOU are the one with the identity crisis—not the Church. THIRD - The Covenant Confusion: Yes, God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But let's read what Jesus said in Matthew 23:37-38: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her... See! Your house is left to you desolate." The New Covenant established through Christ extends God's promise to ALL who believe—Jew AND Gentile (Galatians 3:28-29). To suggest that modern political support for every action of the Israeli government is a prerequisite for Christian faithfulness is theological malpractice. FOURTH - "Anti-Semitism" As A Weapon: Notice the pattern: Anyone who asks questions = "anti-Semite." Anyone who wants accountability = "demonic." Anyone who reads the FULL counsel of Scripture = "heresy." This isn't about protecting Jewish people. This is about silencing dissent and critical thinking. And weaponizing the charge of anti-Semitism to shut down legitimate discourse is disgusting and diminishes ACTUAL anti-Semitism. FIFTH - The Missing Context: She wants you to share her videos and "defeat these anti-Semites" but won't address: 🔘Why she threatened Charlie Kirk? 🔘Why Tucker Carlson's journalism is "heresy"? 🔘Why asking questions about foreign policy is "jew-hatred"? 🔘Why Christians can't think critically about Middle East conflicts? FINALLY - What The Bible ACTUALLY Says: "Test all things; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21) "The simple believes every word, but the prudent considers well his steps" (Proverbs 14:15) Real biblical faith doesn't require blind allegiance to any government—Israeli or American. It requires discernment, wisdom, and the courage to stand for truth even when it's uncomfortable. You want to talk about the "last days," Laurie? In the last days, Jesus warned about FALSE PROPHETS who would deceive many (Matthew 24:11). He warned about wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew 7:15). And He commanded us to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves (Matthew 10:16). So here's MY call to the watchmen: WATCH. But watch with discernment. Watch with wisdom. And watch out for those who use fear, intimidation, and manipulation to control your theology. Charlie Kirk deserved better than threats. Christians deserve better than emotional manipulation disguised as biblical teaching. And the truth deserves better than to be buried under accusations of "anti-Semitism" every time someone asks a question. I stand with Candace Owens. I stand with facts over manipulation. I stand with the truth. And I will NOT be bullied into abandoning either. Share this if you believe Christians are called to think critically, love genuinely, and refuse to be manipulated by fear.
2:51

🚨Let's Talk About REAL Biblical Discernment vs. Emotional Manipulation Laurie Cardoza-Moore wants to lecture us about "biblical foundations" while conveniently ignoring some very basic biblical principles. So let me break this down the way apparently NO ONE else will: FIRST - Let's address the elephant in the room: This is the same woman who sent threatening texts to Charlie Kirk before his tragic death. And now she's positioning herself as the arbiter of Christian faithfulness? The audacity is truly breathtaking. SECOND - On "Biblical Foundations": You know what the Bible ACTUALLY says? "Thou shalt not bear false witness." Yet she accuses anyone who questions Israeli government policy of being "demonic" and full of "jew-hatred." Criticizing a GOVERNMENT is not the same as hating a PEOPLE. Israel is a nation-state with a government that makes policy decisions. The Jewish people are God's chosen people. These are two different things. And if you can't distinguish between them, YOU are the one with the identity crisis—not the Church. THIRD - The Covenant Confusion: Yes, God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But let's read what Jesus said in Matthew 23:37-38: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her... See! Your house is left to you desolate." The New Covenant established through Christ extends God's promise to ALL who believe—Jew AND Gentile (Galatians 3:28-29). To suggest that modern political support for every action of the Israeli government is a prerequisite for Christian faithfulness is theological malpractice. FOURTH - "Anti-Semitism" As A Weapon: Notice the pattern: Anyone who asks questions = "anti-Semite." Anyone who wants accountability = "demonic." Anyone who reads the FULL counsel of Scripture = "heresy." This isn't about protecting Jewish people. This is about silencing dissent and critical thinking. And weaponizing the charge of anti-Semitism to shut down legitimate discourse is disgusting and diminishes ACTUAL anti-Semitism. FIFTH - The Missing Context: She wants you to share her videos and "defeat these anti-Semites" but won't address: 🔘Why she threatened Charlie Kirk? 🔘Why Tucker Carlson's journalism is "heresy"? 🔘Why asking questions about foreign policy is "jew-hatred"? 🔘Why Christians can't think critically about Middle East conflicts? FINALLY - What The Bible ACTUALLY Says: "Test all things; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21) "The simple believes every word, but the prudent considers well his steps" (Proverbs 14:15) Real biblical faith doesn't require blind allegiance to any government—Israeli or American. It requires discernment, wisdom, and the courage to stand for truth even when it's uncomfortable. You want to talk about the "last days," Laurie? In the last days, Jesus warned about FALSE PROPHETS who would deceive many (Matthew 24:11). He warned about wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew 7:15). And He commanded us to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves (Matthew 10:16). So here's MY call to the watchmen: WATCH. But watch with discernment. Watch with wisdom. And watch out for those who use fear, intimidation, and manipulation to control your theology. Charlie Kirk deserved better than threats. Christians deserve better than emotional manipulation disguised as biblical teaching. And the truth deserves better than to be buried under accusations of "anti-Semitism" every time someone asks a question. I stand with Candace Owens. I stand with facts over manipulation. I stand with the truth. And I will NOT be bullied into abandoning either. Share this if you believe Christians are called to think critically, love genuinely, and refuse to be manipulated by fear.

Project Constitution

45,706 views • 5 months ago

Left and Right Finally Agree on Israel Lobby Power. Why Can’t They Link Arms? The Republican Party is fracturing in ways we haven’t seen before. Lifelong Trump supporters are walking away as Trump and the GOP back new wars and keep making policy decisions with Israel’s interests at the top of the page. Dissident voices on the right have shown that they are not pledged to MAGA, Trump, or any party, and they stand for principles, not team jerseys. At the same time, some voices on the Democratic side are finally saying out loud what used to be taboo: AIPAC and Israel wield massive influence over American politics. So if both left and right are starting to question the same lobby and the same foreign entanglements, why can’t they meet in the middle on this one issue? Have Democrats and progressives become so locked into identitarian politics that they can’t link arms with anyone outside their tribe, even when they agree? Where does it leave the independent voter who rejects endless war, opposes foreign control over U.S. policy, and no longer feels at home in either party? Clint Russell (Clint Russell) joins us to dig into this realignment, the collapse of old loyalties, and what a genuine America First, anti‑war coalition could look like.
2:25

Left and Right Finally Agree on Israel Lobby Power. Why Can’t They Link Arms? The Republican Party is fracturing in ways we haven’t seen before. Lifelong Trump supporters are walking away as Trump and the GOP back new wars and keep making policy decisions with Israel’s interests at the top of the page. Dissident voices on the right have shown that they are not pledged to MAGA, Trump, or any party, and they stand for principles, not team jerseys. At the same time, some voices on the Democratic side are finally saying out loud what used to be taboo: AIPAC and Israel wield massive influence over American politics. So if both left and right are starting to question the same lobby and the same foreign entanglements, why can’t they meet in the middle on this one issue? Have Democrats and progressives become so locked into identitarian politics that they can’t link arms with anyone outside their tribe, even when they agree? Where does it leave the independent voter who rejects endless war, opposes foreign control over U.S. policy, and no longer feels at home in either party? Clint Russell (Clint Russell) joins us to dig into this realignment, the collapse of old loyalties, and what a genuine America First, anti‑war coalition could look like.

Redacted

19,262 views • 5 days ago

Erika Frantzve mastered controlling Charlie by weaponizing God and religion. Charlie was controlled by a cult. Cult leaders do not simply "brainwash" people overnight. Instead, they use a systematic process of psychological manipulation—often called "undue influence" or "thought reform"—to gradually erode a person's independent identity and replace it with a group identity entirely dependent on the leader. Cult leaders typically exhibit strong traits of pathological narcissism and, in many cases, psychopathy. They are highly charismatic, lack empathy, and demand total surrender to mask their own psychological fragility. They create closed systems with no checks and balances, allowing them to exploit followers for power, money, or sexual gratification while convincing the followers it is for the "greater good". The Mechanics of Control: The BITE Model Authoritarian leaders systematically control four overlapping domains of a person's life: 1. Behavior Control The most visible layer of manipulation is controlling what a person does with their physical body, time, and money. By regulating daily habits, the leader makes it exhausting and practically impossible to exist outside the group's structure. •Dictating routines: Strict rules regarding diet, sleep schedules, clothing, and physical appearance. •Financial exploitation: Demanding heavy tithes, mandatory donations, or forcing members to hand over their assets. •Relationship control: Dictating who members can speak to, who they can marry, and regulating their sexual behavior. 2. Information Control An informed member is a dangerous member. To maintain power, cult leaders filter and distort the reality their followers consume. •Isolation: Discouraging or outright banning contact with non-members, including family and friends. •Censorship: Banning outside media, critical literature, or internet access that contradicts the group's teachings. •Controlling the narrative: Labeling former members as "apostates," "enemies," or "suppressive persons" so current members are too afraid to speak with them. 3. Thought Control Leaders require unquestioning obedience and must eliminate a follower's ability to think critically or independently. •Black-and-white thinking: Everything is framed as an epic battle between "us" (good, chosen, saved) and "them" (evil, lost, worldly). •Thought-stopping techniques: When a follower starts to have doubts, they are trained to shut down their own critical thinking through repetitive chanting, praying, speaking in tongues, or repeating key phrases. •Loaded language: Cults often create their own jargon. This creates a false sense of insider belonging while making it difficult for members to effectively communicate with the outside world. 4. Emotional Control Cult leaders manipulate a follower's emotional range to keep them off-balance, dependent, and terrified of leaving. •Love-bombing: New recruits are overwhelmed with intense affection, flattery, and a manufactured sense of belonging. Once they are hooked, this affection becomes conditional and is routinely withdrawn to punish the follower. •Manufacturing guilt and shame: Followers are taught they are inherently flawed, sinful, or broken, and that the leader or the group is the only cure. •Phobia indoctrination: Instilling an irrational, paralyzing fear of the outside world. Members are told that if they leave, they will go insane, be struck by disease, face divine judgment, or die. Ultimately, the goal of authoritarian control isn't just to force obedience—it is to make the member incapable of imagining an existence outside the group.
5:53

Erika Frantzve mastered controlling Charlie by weaponizing God and religion. Charlie was controlled by a cult. Cult leaders do not simply "brainwash" people overnight. Instead, they use a systematic process of psychological manipulation—often called "undue influence" or "thought reform"—to gradually erode a person's independent identity and replace it with a group identity entirely dependent on the leader. Cult leaders typically exhibit strong traits of pathological narcissism and, in many cases, psychopathy. They are highly charismatic, lack empathy, and demand total surrender to mask their own psychological fragility. They create closed systems with no checks and balances, allowing them to exploit followers for power, money, or sexual gratification while convincing the followers it is for the "greater good". The Mechanics of Control: The BITE Model Authoritarian leaders systematically control four overlapping domains of a person's life: 1. Behavior Control The most visible layer of manipulation is controlling what a person does with their physical body, time, and money. By regulating daily habits, the leader makes it exhausting and practically impossible to exist outside the group's structure. •Dictating routines: Strict rules regarding diet, sleep schedules, clothing, and physical appearance. •Financial exploitation: Demanding heavy tithes, mandatory donations, or forcing members to hand over their assets. •Relationship control: Dictating who members can speak to, who they can marry, and regulating their sexual behavior. 2. Information Control An informed member is a dangerous member. To maintain power, cult leaders filter and distort the reality their followers consume. •Isolation: Discouraging or outright banning contact with non-members, including family and friends. •Censorship: Banning outside media, critical literature, or internet access that contradicts the group's teachings. •Controlling the narrative: Labeling former members as "apostates," "enemies," or "suppressive persons" so current members are too afraid to speak with them. 3. Thought Control Leaders require unquestioning obedience and must eliminate a follower's ability to think critically or independently. •Black-and-white thinking: Everything is framed as an epic battle between "us" (good, chosen, saved) and "them" (evil, lost, worldly). •Thought-stopping techniques: When a follower starts to have doubts, they are trained to shut down their own critical thinking through repetitive chanting, praying, speaking in tongues, or repeating key phrases. •Loaded language: Cults often create their own jargon. This creates a false sense of insider belonging while making it difficult for members to effectively communicate with the outside world. 4. Emotional Control Cult leaders manipulate a follower's emotional range to keep them off-balance, dependent, and terrified of leaving. •Love-bombing: New recruits are overwhelmed with intense affection, flattery, and a manufactured sense of belonging. Once they are hooked, this affection becomes conditional and is routinely withdrawn to punish the follower. •Manufacturing guilt and shame: Followers are taught they are inherently flawed, sinful, or broken, and that the leader or the group is the only cure. •Phobia indoctrination: Instilling an irrational, paralyzing fear of the outside world. Members are told that if they leave, they will go insane, be struck by disease, face divine judgment, or die. Ultimately, the goal of authoritarian control isn't just to force obedience—it is to make the member incapable of imagining an existence outside the group.

Honest Ash

19,136 views • 20 days ago

BREAKING: PLAIN CLOTHES GARDA OUTSIDE MY HOME & MY PARTNER IrishInquiry STEPHEN KERR ARRESTED FOR A ONE-LINE JOKE TWEET Violent crime is rampant across the land, and Garda resources are inadequate. But never mind all that important stuff! Arresting dissenting voices like Stephen Kerr of The Irish Inquiry takes priority. Lawfare and anarcho-tyranny reign supreme while predators walk free from court daily. This is why THREE Gardaí made the trip from Dublin all the way to Co. Mayo (a three-hour journey) to arrest Stephen, nearly TWO YEARS after the tweet was posted. The following day, my neighbour (who had NO IDEA Stephen was arrested the night before) came to my home to inform me he noted what he described as "two detectives in an unmarked car" watching my home (who he says then followed the vehicle Stephen and I were in). In April 2024, Stephen wrote a one-line joke tweet under an article by an Irish Independent journalist. She alleges this tweet put her in fear of her life... yet strangely, she didn't report it straight away. In fact, the timing of her reporting is highly suspect. Was the journalist REALLY in fear for her life? Or was she just seeking revenge on behalf of a disgruntled colleague whom I challenged in person on the VERY SAME DAY as the journalist made her complaint? The Irish Independent then wrote to me the following day, complaining about a video we had done that exposed the Irish Independent for not reporting on migrant children being housed in windowless rooms (and also being trafficked), despite the inage they have of portraying that they care about migrants (while framing us as racist and far-right). Did the Irish Independent conspire to target The Irish Inquiry, wasting precious Garda time in the process? Furthermore, if the tweet was so threatening, why did it take THIRTY THREE DAYS for the journalist to make the complaint, and why did it take the Gardaí TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY THREE DAYS to arrest Stephen? (are those numbers a coincidence?). Watch the video and decide for yourself. This is not the only case we are currently dealing with. We were in court last Thurs for a separate case that has not concluded. Yet another bogus accusation. It seems that there are those determined to silence us, but they will find that won't be as easy as they think.
6:22

BREAKING: PLAIN CLOTHES GARDA OUTSIDE MY HOME & MY PARTNER IrishInquiry STEPHEN KERR ARRESTED FOR A ONE-LINE JOKE TWEET Violent crime is rampant across the land, and Garda resources are inadequate. But never mind all that important stuff! Arresting dissenting voices like Stephen Kerr of The Irish Inquiry takes priority. Lawfare and anarcho-tyranny reign supreme while predators walk free from court daily. This is why THREE Gardaí made the trip from Dublin all the way to Co. Mayo (a three-hour journey) to arrest Stephen, nearly TWO YEARS after the tweet was posted. The following day, my neighbour (who had NO IDEA Stephen was arrested the night before) came to my home to inform me he noted what he described as "two detectives in an unmarked car" watching my home (who he says then followed the vehicle Stephen and I were in). In April 2024, Stephen wrote a one-line joke tweet under an article by an Irish Independent journalist. She alleges this tweet put her in fear of her life... yet strangely, she didn't report it straight away. In fact, the timing of her reporting is highly suspect. Was the journalist REALLY in fear for her life? Or was she just seeking revenge on behalf of a disgruntled colleague whom I challenged in person on the VERY SAME DAY as the journalist made her complaint? The Irish Independent then wrote to me the following day, complaining about a video we had done that exposed the Irish Independent for not reporting on migrant children being housed in windowless rooms (and also being trafficked), despite the inage they have of portraying that they care about migrants (while framing us as racist and far-right). Did the Irish Independent conspire to target The Irish Inquiry, wasting precious Garda time in the process? Furthermore, if the tweet was so threatening, why did it take THIRTY THREE DAYS for the journalist to make the complaint, and why did it take the Gardaí TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY THREE DAYS to arrest Stephen? (are those numbers a coincidence?). Watch the video and decide for yourself. This is not the only case we are currently dealing with. We were in court last Thurs for a separate case that has not concluded. Yet another bogus accusation. It seems that there are those determined to silence us, but they will find that won't be as easy as they think.

Susanne Delaney

46,863 views • 4 months ago

Texas, We Sounded the Alarm - Chip Roy Took the Fight I have given my absolute all to wake America up to the threat of Islam and the Red/Green Alliance. No one will ever understand what it means to my team and me to have Chip Roy hear us, care, and do everything in his power to move to action. 15 years of my life, one man on my team has given 25 years of his life. All day, every day, trying to make Americans hear us. Report after report, we have produced interviews, translations, videos, and more. My team has taken so many hits, both personally and professionally, in fighting this battle. It is actually heartbreaking for me to even talk about… I now know the hits Chip and his family are taking fighting these powers. Pro Tip America: ANYONE who is an enemy of CAIR should be someone you should be fighting to protect. There is a reason CAIR stands outside his office and tries to intimidate him and his staff. You want someone who is going to fight? Then fight for Chip Roy. If you care about the Islamization of your state, fight for Chip. If you care about protecting your borders, Fight for Chip!
1:54

Texas, We Sounded the Alarm - Chip Roy Took the Fight I have given my absolute all to wake America up to the threat of Islam and the Red/Green Alliance. No one will ever understand what it means to my team and me to have Chip Roy hear us, care, and do everything in his power to move to action. 15 years of my life, one man on my team has given 25 years of his life. All day, every day, trying to make Americans hear us. Report after report, we have produced interviews, translations, videos, and more. My team has taken so many hits, both personally and professionally, in fighting this battle. It is actually heartbreaking for me to even talk about… I now know the hits Chip and his family are taking fighting these powers. Pro Tip America: ANYONE who is an enemy of CAIR should be someone you should be fighting to protect. There is a reason CAIR stands outside his office and tries to intimidate him and his staff. You want someone who is going to fight? Then fight for Chip Roy. If you care about the Islamization of your state, fight for Chip. If you care about protecting your borders, Fight for Chip!

Amy Mek

187,385 views • 4 months ago

Over the past few days, Ukraine has been facing one of the most significant political crises since the beginning of the full-scale war. Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov was dismissed. According to Fedorov himself, he had serious disagreements with the military leadership over reforming the Ministry of Defense, defense procurement, and the future development of the Armed Forces. His dismissal has sparked widespread public outrage, protests, and intense debate across Ukraine. But the biggest problem is not only the personnel decision itself. The biggest problem is the complete lack of open dialogue with society. There has been no proper conversation with the public, no clear answers to the questions that concern hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, and no understandable explanation of why this decision was made or what the plan is going forward. And we still have none. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians publicly support Mykhailo Fedorov. Tens of thousands are taking part in peaceful demonstrations, while millions are expressing their position online. We want the international community to see the scale of this public reaction. We are not asking foreign governments to interfere in Ukraine’s internal affairs or make personnel decisions for us. We are appealing to international journalists, newsrooms, analysts, experts, human rights advocates, and everyone who cares: please help bring attention to this situation. Tell your audience about it, request comments from Ukrainian officials, and ask questions about the reasons behind these decisions, the future of defense reforms, and the absence of open dialogue with society. Please help ensure that this issue does not disappear from the public agenda without answers. We do not need foreign interference. We need attention, transparency, accountability, and an honest conversation between the Ukrainian government and Ukrainian society. Please share this post. Tag journalists and international media, translate it into other languages, and tell your audience what is happening. Every repost, every mention, and every question asked helps make the voices of Ukrainians more visible. Ukrainians deserve answers.
0:06

Over the past few days, Ukraine has been facing one of the most significant political crises since the beginning of the full-scale war. Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov was dismissed. According to Fedorov himself, he had serious disagreements with the military leadership over reforming the Ministry of Defense, defense procurement, and the future development of the Armed Forces. His dismissal has sparked widespread public outrage, protests, and intense debate across Ukraine. But the biggest problem is not only the personnel decision itself. The biggest problem is the complete lack of open dialogue with society. There has been no proper conversation with the public, no clear answers to the questions that concern hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, and no understandable explanation of why this decision was made or what the plan is going forward. And we still have none. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians publicly support Mykhailo Fedorov. Tens of thousands are taking part in peaceful demonstrations, while millions are expressing their position online. We want the international community to see the scale of this public reaction. We are not asking foreign governments to interfere in Ukraine’s internal affairs or make personnel decisions for us. We are appealing to international journalists, newsrooms, analysts, experts, human rights advocates, and everyone who cares: please help bring attention to this situation. Tell your audience about it, request comments from Ukrainian officials, and ask questions about the reasons behind these decisions, the future of defense reforms, and the absence of open dialogue with society. Please help ensure that this issue does not disappear from the public agenda without answers. We do not need foreign interference. We need attention, transparency, accountability, and an honest conversation between the Ukrainian government and Ukrainian society. Please share this post. Tag journalists and international media, translate it into other languages, and tell your audience what is happening. Every repost, every mention, and every question asked helps make the voices of Ukrainians more visible. Ukrainians deserve answers.

DroneBomber

28,746 views • 2 days ago