Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

This is where you keep getting it wrong, Daudi Kabanda. If you genuinely have information regarding land matters for Gen. MK, then follow the proper channels. Intelligence gathering is not conducted through Twitter. It is done professionally collect verifiable evidence, submit your report to the appointing authority, and allow...

Mwijukyeivan's profile picture

Counsel MwijukyeIvan⚖

6,127 subscribers

27,903 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Bret Weinstein cuts straight to the chase: "We are going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say, 'Where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with this election?' And we are gonna be caught in the following predicament. No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is, can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can easily. Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means, or it was the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not an accident. And the point that I wanna make primarily is the primary evidence against elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we are actually able to see, the moment by moment vote count that does something strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's really the thing that we must focus on." Bret Weinstein
2:10

Bret Weinstein cuts straight to the chase: "We are going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say, 'Where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with this election?' And we are gonna be caught in the following predicament. No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is, can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can easily. Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means, or it was the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not an accident. And the point that I wanna make primarily is the primary evidence against elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we are actually able to see, the moment by moment vote count that does something strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's really the thing that we must focus on." Bret Weinstein

The DarkHorse Podcast

696,713 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

WOW 🚨 Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says the Democrats CHANGED THE STANDARD for impeachment right before impeaching Trump They changed it so evidence no longer had to be credible, just to get Trump Literally Treason “So in the lead up to the impeachment of President Trump, the standard was, it had to be firsthand information. And then right before he happened to go through this impeachment process, the standard changed to being able to use secondhand information, even if it were unreliable and deemed unreliable” “Inspector General did from requiring that there be either evidence or firsthand knowledge presented in order to determine whether or not a complaint is credible to merely allowing for hearsay and nothing else” “How do you find a complaint to be credible when there is zero evidence provided and there is zero firsthand knowledge provided, not only by the whistleblower, by any witness in this case and when the Inspector General himself did not even request to see the documents that these individuals are referencing in their false accusations” Democrats literally changed it so it didn’t have to be first hand knowledge, and you need no evidence to make a claim for impeachment And not a single person has been held accountable for this
1:36

WOW 🚨 Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says the Democrats CHANGED THE STANDARD for impeachment right before impeaching Trump They changed it so evidence no longer had to be credible, just to get Trump Literally Treason “So in the lead up to the impeachment of President Trump, the standard was, it had to be firsthand information. And then right before he happened to go through this impeachment process, the standard changed to being able to use secondhand information, even if it were unreliable and deemed unreliable” “Inspector General did from requiring that there be either evidence or firsthand knowledge presented in order to determine whether or not a complaint is credible to merely allowing for hearsay and nothing else” “How do you find a complaint to be credible when there is zero evidence provided and there is zero firsthand knowledge provided, not only by the whistleblower, by any witness in this case and when the Inspector General himself did not even request to see the documents that these individuals are referencing in their false accusations” Democrats literally changed it so it didn’t have to be first hand knowledge, and you need no evidence to make a claim for impeachment And not a single person has been held accountable for this

Wall Street Apes

393,103 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

“We would not have made the economic progress if we had not intervened in very personal matters. Who your neighbor is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit or where you spit, the language you use. If we had not done that and done that effectively, we would not be here today.” This man transformed Singapore to a wealthy nation in ONE generation by instilling discipline and micromanaging the personal lives of people. Ghana is the fifth world country it is simply because of disgraceful leadership. There are no leaders in Ghana, only misleaders. And we love them with all our hearts.
1:42

“We would not have made the economic progress if we had not intervened in very personal matters. Who your neighbor is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit or where you spit, the language you use. If we had not done that and done that effectively, we would not be here today.” This man transformed Singapore to a wealthy nation in ONE generation by instilling discipline and micromanaging the personal lives of people. Ghana is the fifth world country it is simply because of disgraceful leadership. There are no leaders in Ghana, only misleaders. And we love them with all our hearts.

Sammy

11,495 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

And this is where Candace loses: If the defense could adduce evidence of fabricated documents, conspiracy, fake messages… they would not do it at the preliminary hearing for probable cause, but would wait until the trial? That the defense was precluded from adducing such evidence at the preliminary hearing? Absolute nonsense. True, it is not the trial. But there is no realm of the universe in which the defense would not attempt to adduce evidence - to the extent that you could, either through cross or direct - of fabricated / falsified text messages, manufactured documents and/or conspiracy to frame. They were not prevented from doing so at the preliminary hearing. They simply did not present anything to suggest the messages were fabricated, that a bullet did not kill Charlie, and other elements that, if remotely demonstratable, would easily be an obstacle for even the lower threshold of probable cause. And that is exactly why they could not deny them in their latest filing.
1:59

And this is where Candace loses: If the defense could adduce evidence of fabricated documents, conspiracy, fake messages… they would not do it at the preliminary hearing for probable cause, but would wait until the trial? That the defense was precluded from adducing such evidence at the preliminary hearing? Absolute nonsense. True, it is not the trial. But there is no realm of the universe in which the defense would not attempt to adduce evidence - to the extent that you could, either through cross or direct - of fabricated / falsified text messages, manufactured documents and/or conspiracy to frame. They were not prevented from doing so at the preliminary hearing. They simply did not present anything to suggest the messages were fabricated, that a bullet did not kill Charlie, and other elements that, if remotely demonstratable, would easily be an obstacle for even the lower threshold of probable cause. And that is exactly why they could not deny them in their latest filing.

Viva Frei

60,061 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

Michael Fanone’s Bodycam Raises Serious Questions | Full Evidence Breakdown So it’s time to slow this down and look at the evidence. What you are watching here is body worn camera video attributed to Michael Fanone. This frame matters. Because it directly contradicts public claims that he was unconscious at this moment. If someone is fully out, they are not adjusting equipment. That is not an opinion. That is a physical reality. This is why I’m releasing this in parts. Because the full picture requires multiple angles. Bodycam footage. CCTV footage. Open-source crowd video. And court transcripts. I’m not asking you to believe me. I’m asking you to watch the footage and compare it to sworn testimony. If the story is accurate, it should match the video. If it does not match the video, people have the right to ask questions. This is not about attacking law enforcement. I genuinely want to believe not every officer acted improperly that day. But accountability requires honesty. And silence from those who know better only deepens mistrust. I’ve already lost enough. My reputation matters. I would not put this out if the evidence didn’t support scrutiny. This is not about violence. It’s about truth. It’s about transparency. And it’s about due process. More footage and full context will follow. 🫡🇺🇸 Watch closely. Decide for yourself.
2:55

Michael Fanone’s Bodycam Raises Serious Questions | Full Evidence Breakdown So it’s time to slow this down and look at the evidence. What you are watching here is body worn camera video attributed to Michael Fanone. This frame matters. Because it directly contradicts public claims that he was unconscious at this moment. If someone is fully out, they are not adjusting equipment. That is not an opinion. That is a physical reality. This is why I’m releasing this in parts. Because the full picture requires multiple angles. Bodycam footage. CCTV footage. Open-source crowd video. And court transcripts. I’m not asking you to believe me. I’m asking you to watch the footage and compare it to sworn testimony. If the story is accurate, it should match the video. If it does not match the video, people have the right to ask questions. This is not about attacking law enforcement. I genuinely want to believe not every officer acted improperly that day. But accountability requires honesty. And silence from those who know better only deepens mistrust. I’ve already lost enough. My reputation matters. I would not put this out if the evidence didn’t support scrutiny. This is not about violence. It’s about truth. It’s about transparency. And it’s about due process. More footage and full context will follow. 🫡🇺🇸 Watch closely. Decide for yourself.

Ryan Nichols Sr.

88,936 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Propaganda can shape perceptions—but it cannot rewrite history. For years, a relentless political campaign has sought to portray the Gandhi family as the embodiment of corruption and anti-nationalism. Repetition of allegations, however, is not the same as proof. In this clip, Priyanka Gandhi does not respond with personal attacks. She asks a simple democratic question: Where is the evidence? She urges Parliament to debate unemployment, inflation, paper leaks, and the everyday struggles of ordinary Indians instead of recycling political propaganda. Every political family in India has faced criticism, and the Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi remains a serious and legitimate subject of historical debate. But beyond that chapter, the contributions of the Nehru-Gandhi family to India's freedom movement and nation-building are substantial and well documented. Jawaharlal Nehru spent years in British prisons during the freedom struggle, and under his leadership institutions such as the IITs, AIIMS, DRDO, and major public sector enterprises were established—institutions that continue to serve the nation today. Democracy demands that citizens distinguish between verified facts and sustained political messaging. Patriotism is not determined by slogans or propaganda; it is measured by sacrifice, public service, and commitment to the Republic. A mature democracy deserves debates based on evidence—not narratives repeated until they are mistaken for truth.
5:33

Propaganda can shape perceptions—but it cannot rewrite history. For years, a relentless political campaign has sought to portray the Gandhi family as the embodiment of corruption and anti-nationalism. Repetition of allegations, however, is not the same as proof. In this clip, Priyanka Gandhi does not respond with personal attacks. She asks a simple democratic question: Where is the evidence? She urges Parliament to debate unemployment, inflation, paper leaks, and the everyday struggles of ordinary Indians instead of recycling political propaganda. Every political family in India has faced criticism, and the Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi remains a serious and legitimate subject of historical debate. But beyond that chapter, the contributions of the Nehru-Gandhi family to India's freedom movement and nation-building are substantial and well documented. Jawaharlal Nehru spent years in British prisons during the freedom struggle, and under his leadership institutions such as the IITs, AIIMS, DRDO, and major public sector enterprises were established—institutions that continue to serve the nation today. Democracy demands that citizens distinguish between verified facts and sustained political messaging. Patriotism is not determined by slogans or propaganda; it is measured by sacrifice, public service, and commitment to the Republic. A mature democracy deserves debates based on evidence—not narratives repeated until they are mistaken for truth.

Ashok Dadhwal

53,494 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Girlfriend is spiraling and making a fool of herself. Nothing she’s saying here is factual. This isn’t the trial. It’s a probable cause hearing. She hasn’t “examined the evidence” more than anyone else because the vast majority of the evidence has never been released to the public. The defense has it. The public doesn’t. Erika is the victim’s representative because the victim is dead. Victims have rights, including the right to proceedings without unreasonable delay, but those rights do not override the defendant’s constitutional rights. In this case, the defendant has waived his right to a speedy trial. Candace, we are not privy to every detail or every piece of evidence in an active criminal case. The defense will have the opportunity to challenge every piece of evidence and every witness through the legal process. Unlike the actual investigators, you don’t present authenticated evidence or an unbroken chain of custody. You present speculation, insinuations, and question marks. Face it Candace Owens. You’ve painted yourself into a corner. The grift is coming to an end.
8:06

Girlfriend is spiraling and making a fool of herself. Nothing she’s saying here is factual. This isn’t the trial. It’s a probable cause hearing. She hasn’t “examined the evidence” more than anyone else because the vast majority of the evidence has never been released to the public. The defense has it. The public doesn’t. Erika is the victim’s representative because the victim is dead. Victims have rights, including the right to proceedings without unreasonable delay, but those rights do not override the defendant’s constitutional rights. In this case, the defendant has waived his right to a speedy trial. Candace, we are not privy to every detail or every piece of evidence in an active criminal case. The defense will have the opportunity to challenge every piece of evidence and every witness through the legal process. Unlike the actual investigators, you don’t present authenticated evidence or an unbroken chain of custody. You present speculation, insinuations, and question marks. Face it Candace Owens. You’ve painted yourself into a corner. The grift is coming to an end.

LittleHouseBlues

23,479 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

There is now damning evidence available that proves the British Government via Operation Talla were running a genocidal operation called “covid19” against the British people produced by ETHICAL APPROACH UK and M.Sexton. This is now out there and is not going away. To help save lives and bring the criminals to justice you must look at the information and share it everywhere you can. It’s up to us. Those that wilfully do not do this are either cowards or part of the operation. It’s that simple.
8:10

There is now damning evidence available that proves the British Government via Operation Talla were running a genocidal operation called “covid19” against the British people produced by ETHICAL APPROACH UK and M.Sexton. This is now out there and is not going away. To help save lives and bring the criminals to justice you must look at the information and share it everywhere you can. It’s up to us. Those that wilfully do not do this are either cowards or part of the operation. It’s that simple.

Mark Attwood

23,451 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

THIS INCIDENT SHOULD CONCERN EVERY ALBERTAN, WHETHER YOU SUPPORT THE PETITION OR NOT A canvasser was in public, lawfully collecting signatures, when a man approached as if he wanted to sign, then allegedly grabbed the petition papers and ran. She reported it to police. What matters here is not just the theft. It is what this kind of act says. When people stop trusting themselves to win through debate, some try to interfere with the process instead. That is when disagreement turns into contempt for democratic participation. THIS WAS AN ACT OF COWARDICE! If you oppose a petition, THEN OPENLY OPPOSE IT WITH YOUR WORDS. Make your case. Debate it. But do not interfere with other people’s lawful right to participate. THE ANSWER TO SPEECH YOU DISLIKE IS MORE SPEECH, NOT THEFT AND INTIMIDATION! Please share the video. But don't accuse random people online without evidence. Innocent people should not have their reputations damaged by reckless speculation. If you truly have useful information, report it directly to police.
10:11

THIS INCIDENT SHOULD CONCERN EVERY ALBERTAN, WHETHER YOU SUPPORT THE PETITION OR NOT A canvasser was in public, lawfully collecting signatures, when a man approached as if he wanted to sign, then allegedly grabbed the petition papers and ran. She reported it to police. What matters here is not just the theft. It is what this kind of act says. When people stop trusting themselves to win through debate, some try to interfere with the process instead. That is when disagreement turns into contempt for democratic participation. THIS WAS AN ACT OF COWARDICE! If you oppose a petition, THEN OPENLY OPPOSE IT WITH YOUR WORDS. Make your case. Debate it. But do not interfere with other people’s lawful right to participate. THE ANSWER TO SPEECH YOU DISLIKE IS MORE SPEECH, NOT THEFT AND INTIMIDATION! Please share the video. But don't accuse random people online without evidence. Innocent people should not have their reputations damaged by reckless speculation. If you truly have useful information, report it directly to police.

Jon Alberta Patriot

76,291 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

A forensic audit of your mortgage will show WHERE the debt is located. If it is lawful, it will be WITH your contract. If it was sold, it is NOT with it, and it was sold and securities fraud occurred. This happens all day every day with every mortgage. So if you want to be a baller and take down this demonic industry that preys on the elderly by stealing their homes, then you may want to take our class and do this. This is not for the weak or weak. It requires education and stones. Learn how to exercise your rights. Follow me to freedom! Link in profile. Pulte we have tons of evidence of mortgage fraud.
7:25

A forensic audit of your mortgage will show WHERE the debt is located. If it is lawful, it will be WITH your contract. If it was sold, it is NOT with it, and it was sold and securities fraud occurred. This happens all day every day with every mortgage. So if you want to be a baller and take down this demonic industry that preys on the elderly by stealing their homes, then you may want to take our class and do this. This is not for the weak or weak. It requires education and stones. Learn how to exercise your rights. Follow me to freedom! Link in profile. Pulte we have tons of evidence of mortgage fraud.

Gianna Miceli🇺🇸

30,721 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The speaker argues that the current student protests over exam paper leaks should not be limited to demanding the resignation of the Education Minister. Instead, he claims the root cause lies with the central government, alleging that institutions such as the Election Commission and the electoral system have been compromised. Key themes include: Criticism of the Prime Minister, the BJP, RSS, and the Union government. Allegations that repeated exam paper leaks reflect systemic governance failures. Calls for a broader political movement rather than a single-issue protest. Strong criticism of EVMs and advocacy for a return to paper ballots. Claims that democratic institutions have been weakened. Criticism of India's foreign policy, particularly regarding the US, Israel, Iran, China, and oil imports. Appeals for youth and citizens to participate in peaceful, sustained democratic movements. The video primarily expresses political opinions and allegations, many of which are disputed or not established as fact. For example: Claims that elections cannot be won unless permitted by the Prime Minister are political assertions, not proven facts. Statements about the Election Commission being completely controlled or elections being predetermined remain matters of political debate rather than judicially established conclusions. References to exam paper leaks are grounded in real incidents, but the attribution of responsibility to specific political actors is the speaker's interpretation. This video is less a news report and more a political speech. It mixes genuine public concerns—such as exam paper leaks, unemployment, and institutional accountability—with strong political accusations and personal opinions. Some criticisms are based on real events, while many broader conclusions are contested and should not be accepted as established facts without independent evidence. A healthy democracy allows criticism of governments, but it also requires citizens to distinguish between verified facts, political opinion, and rhetorical claims.
14:02

The speaker argues that the current student protests over exam paper leaks should not be limited to demanding the resignation of the Education Minister. Instead, he claims the root cause lies with the central government, alleging that institutions such as the Election Commission and the electoral system have been compromised. Key themes include: Criticism of the Prime Minister, the BJP, RSS, and the Union government. Allegations that repeated exam paper leaks reflect systemic governance failures. Calls for a broader political movement rather than a single-issue protest. Strong criticism of EVMs and advocacy for a return to paper ballots. Claims that democratic institutions have been weakened. Criticism of India's foreign policy, particularly regarding the US, Israel, Iran, China, and oil imports. Appeals for youth and citizens to participate in peaceful, sustained democratic movements. The video primarily expresses political opinions and allegations, many of which are disputed or not established as fact. For example: Claims that elections cannot be won unless permitted by the Prime Minister are political assertions, not proven facts. Statements about the Election Commission being completely controlled or elections being predetermined remain matters of political debate rather than judicially established conclusions. References to exam paper leaks are grounded in real incidents, but the attribution of responsibility to specific political actors is the speaker's interpretation. This video is less a news report and more a political speech. It mixes genuine public concerns—such as exam paper leaks, unemployment, and institutional accountability—with strong political accusations and personal opinions. Some criticisms are based on real events, while many broader conclusions are contested and should not be accepted as established facts without independent evidence. A healthy democracy allows criticism of governments, but it also requires citizens to distinguish between verified facts, political opinion, and rhetorical claims.

Ashok Dadhwal

14,868 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

This is some good information to know. The US mail system aggregates stewardship of delivery but not deadlines. The work around this is signing up for USPS digital or online account and it is free service. It sends you an image scan via email of the current postal mail to be delivered that day so the proof of what was delivered or not is given to you. You get a notification everyday whether you have mail or not. I don't know if this service varies by state so consider looking into the availability for your postal zip code covered area. . 's a state-by-state. If you can get this access depending on the state you live in. But I believe every state should have the account. You can set it up, it's easy. And then you can see your mail. That's coming. If you have packages coming, you can see your account and it gives you notifications every day regardless if you get mail or not, whether you have something coming or not. #Inspirenaire
2:23

This is some good information to know. The US mail system aggregates stewardship of delivery but not deadlines. The work around this is signing up for USPS digital or online account and it is free service. It sends you an image scan via email of the current postal mail to be delivered that day so the proof of what was delivered or not is given to you. You get a notification everyday whether you have mail or not. I don't know if this service varies by state so consider looking into the availability for your postal zip code covered area. . 's a state-by-state. If you can get this access depending on the state you live in. But I believe every state should have the account. You can set it up, it's easy. And then you can see your mail. That's coming. If you have packages coming, you can see your account and it gives you notifications every day regardless if you get mail or not, whether you have something coming or not. #Inspirenaire

Inspirenaire

18,205 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Yes, indeed, this is lawlessness by any standard. Even by banana republic standards, this is still lawlessness. Your country has a constitution, it has a government, it has a police service, and it has a ruling party. I am sure you can see that some of the people there are actually wearing ruling party T-shirts. It is lawless regardless of whoever does it. It is an embarrassment to South Africa as a country, what you are doing and what you are encouraging people to do. Your country has an immigration service. If people are in your country illegally, they should be arrested and deported through lawful processes. You do not go around destroying property, tearing down markets, and attacking people. It is illegal regardless of whoever does it. It is not illegal because I have said so. It is illegal because the laws of your country make it so. This is vigilantism, pure and simple, and it is tainting the reputation of South Africa, not only across Africa but across the world. If you have got satellite television in your home, you can see that these actions are being reported everywhere. It is not good for your country. This kind of barbarism undermines the rule of law, fuels division, and damages South Africa’s standing as a constitutional democracy. It is the actions of a few that are tainting the reputation of many. The average South African is not mindless like this. They respect the law, and they respect the fact that among them, in their communities, there are people from other countries. If those people are in the country illegally, you report them and the law takes its course through proper processes of arrest and deportation. You do not descend into mob justice, lawlessness, and destruction. That is not who South Africans are, and it must not be normalised.
2:51

Yes, indeed, this is lawlessness by any standard. Even by banana republic standards, this is still lawlessness. Your country has a constitution, it has a government, it has a police service, and it has a ruling party. I am sure you can see that some of the people there are actually wearing ruling party T-shirts. It is lawless regardless of whoever does it. It is an embarrassment to South Africa as a country, what you are doing and what you are encouraging people to do. Your country has an immigration service. If people are in your country illegally, they should be arrested and deported through lawful processes. You do not go around destroying property, tearing down markets, and attacking people. It is illegal regardless of whoever does it. It is not illegal because I have said so. It is illegal because the laws of your country make it so. This is vigilantism, pure and simple, and it is tainting the reputation of South Africa, not only across Africa but across the world. If you have got satellite television in your home, you can see that these actions are being reported everywhere. It is not good for your country. This kind of barbarism undermines the rule of law, fuels division, and damages South Africa’s standing as a constitutional democracy. It is the actions of a few that are tainting the reputation of many. The average South African is not mindless like this. They respect the law, and they respect the fact that among them, in their communities, there are people from other countries. If those people are in the country illegally, you report them and the law takes its course through proper processes of arrest and deportation. You do not descend into mob justice, lawlessness, and destruction. That is not who South Africans are, and it must not be normalised.

Hopewell Chin’ono

80,812 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

One can say “Christ is King” and the Lord may say, “I never knew you.” Christ did not come to establish political reign here on earth. He chastised the followers who asked it from Him, saying, “My Kingdom is not of this world.” It is not the Christian project to idolize social or political power, demanding special respect or position from others *because* “Christ is King.” In fact, this is the opposite. We are called to be salt and light, remembering that the Faith we possess is a gift given to us by God, one we do not deserve. We are called to love, to serve, to share the Faith in word and deed, and to pick up our cross and follow Him, until we can enter His Eternal Kingdom.
1:24

One can say “Christ is King” and the Lord may say, “I never knew you.” Christ did not come to establish political reign here on earth. He chastised the followers who asked it from Him, saying, “My Kingdom is not of this world.” It is not the Christian project to idolize social or political power, demanding special respect or position from others *because* “Christ is King.” In fact, this is the opposite. We are called to be salt and light, remembering that the Faith we possess is a gift given to us by God, one we do not deserve. We are called to love, to serve, to share the Faith in word and deed, and to pick up our cross and follow Him, until we can enter His Eternal Kingdom.

Lila Rose

509,318 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

It's Good To Be Anti-Islam... but not anti-Muslim. 'Islam is an ideology—a set of ideas. It is not defined by what any individual Muslim wants it to be, but by what it inherently is. No ideology is above critique—particularly one that explicitly seeks political and social dominance over every person on the planet. Additionally, ideologies are not entitled to human rights; these rights apply to individuals. As an ideology, Islam is not necessarily entitled to equal respect and acceptance. Ideas do not carry equal moral weight. The feelings or the number of those who believe do not make an idea true or good. Bad ideas should be challenged before they lead to bad consequences. Islam is not simply a belief about God. The word 'Islam' means submission. It is a set of rules that define a social hierarchy where Muslims submit to Allah, women submit to men, and all non-Muslims submit to Islamic rule. Since we do not live in a Muslim country—where censorship, intimidation, and brute force are used to protect Islam from intellectual analysis—we are still somewhat free to openly exercise our right to debate the merits of the Islamic value system against Western Liberalism. Consider the following questions: Are men really superior to women as the Quran says? Are women intellectually inferior as Muhammad taught? Does propagating material that curses people of other religions amidst random calls to violence create a better social environment? Is it right to keep women as sex slaves merely because the Quran permits this practice in numerous places? Should atheists and homosexuals have to choose between the noose or an outward profession of faith in Allah? Is conformity superior to freedom? Yes, there are Muslims who take issue with these aspects of Islamic theology, but that doesn't change what Islam is. Do not confuse the ideology with the individual. Do not draw conclusions about Islam based on the Muslims that you know, whether they are terrorists or humanitarians. Islam must be understood based on what it is, as presented objectively in the Quran, Hadith, and Sira (biography of Muhammad)." Thank you to the amazing Pat Condell, who released this video ten years ago. #Respect
6:19

It's Good To Be Anti-Islam... but not anti-Muslim. 'Islam is an ideology—a set of ideas. It is not defined by what any individual Muslim wants it to be, but by what it inherently is. No ideology is above critique—particularly one that explicitly seeks political and social dominance over every person on the planet. Additionally, ideologies are not entitled to human rights; these rights apply to individuals. As an ideology, Islam is not necessarily entitled to equal respect and acceptance. Ideas do not carry equal moral weight. The feelings or the number of those who believe do not make an idea true or good. Bad ideas should be challenged before they lead to bad consequences. Islam is not simply a belief about God. The word 'Islam' means submission. It is a set of rules that define a social hierarchy where Muslims submit to Allah, women submit to men, and all non-Muslims submit to Islamic rule. Since we do not live in a Muslim country—where censorship, intimidation, and brute force are used to protect Islam from intellectual analysis—we are still somewhat free to openly exercise our right to debate the merits of the Islamic value system against Western Liberalism. Consider the following questions: Are men really superior to women as the Quran says? Are women intellectually inferior as Muhammad taught? Does propagating material that curses people of other religions amidst random calls to violence create a better social environment? Is it right to keep women as sex slaves merely because the Quran permits this practice in numerous places? Should atheists and homosexuals have to choose between the noose or an outward profession of faith in Allah? Is conformity superior to freedom? Yes, there are Muslims who take issue with these aspects of Islamic theology, but that doesn't change what Islam is. Do not confuse the ideology with the individual. Do not draw conclusions about Islam based on the Muslims that you know, whether they are terrorists or humanitarians. Islam must be understood based on what it is, as presented objectively in the Quran, Hadith, and Sira (biography of Muhammad)." Thank you to the amazing Pat Condell, who released this video ten years ago. #Respect

Amy Mek

108,407 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

MUST WATCH 🚨: NBC News’ Kristen Welker: “How do you prove intent, Mr. Blanche, when Mr. Comey himself said he didn't understand that some people would look at that and think about violence?” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: “You prove intent like you always prove intent. You prove intent with witnesses, you prove intent with documents, with materials. So again, this is not just about a single Instagram post. This is about a body of evidence that the grand jury collected over the series of about 11 months. That evidence was presented to the grand jury. And it's not the government. It's not the Department of Justice. It's not Todd Blanche that returned an indictment against James Comey. It's the grand jury, part of the judicial process, and that this process has to be allowed to play out in the courts. It's not fair to Mr. Comey, it's certainly not fair to the prosecutors for us to be airing your view or my view of this indictment. It's something that will be presented in court at the time set by the judge.”
1:09

MUST WATCH 🚨: NBC News’ Kristen Welker: “How do you prove intent, Mr. Blanche, when Mr. Comey himself said he didn't understand that some people would look at that and think about violence?” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: “You prove intent like you always prove intent. You prove intent with witnesses, you prove intent with documents, with materials. So again, this is not just about a single Instagram post. This is about a body of evidence that the grand jury collected over the series of about 11 months. That evidence was presented to the grand jury. And it's not the government. It's not the Department of Justice. It's not Todd Blanche that returned an indictment against James Comey. It's the grand jury, part of the judicial process, and that this process has to be allowed to play out in the courts. It's not fair to Mr. Comey, it's certainly not fair to the prosecutors for us to be airing your view or my view of this indictment. It's something that will be presented in court at the time set by the judge.”

Dr Charlie Ward

162,094 Aufrufe • vor 12 Tagen

My Final Word on the Matter A sister recently made a false allegation against me. It has been addressed. This is my final word. "Produce your proof, if you are truthful." —Surah Al-Baqarah (2:111) “The burden of proof is upon the claimant.” —Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Three days have now passed since Dunya Shuaib’s ex-husband gave a platform to the Stalker, who loudly proclaimed she possessed “damning evidence.” And yet—there is nothing. No documents. No photographs. No voice notes. No witnesses. Only silence. And this silence is not just disappointing—it is shocking, given the severity and scope of the claims that were made. For accusations so sweeping and specific, the total absence of even the most basic forms of proof speaks louder than any allegation. One cannot shout fire in a theatre, then flee when asked to show smoke. Even more disturbing is the glaring inconsistency of the Ex, who in the very video below insists that evidence must be presented when he is accused—citing the seriousness of a claim like zina. Yet when it comes to the Stalker, suddenly “her testimony is evidence.” This is not justice. This is partisanship masquerading as principle. Those who claim to possess the truth know how to bring it forward—if they have it. And should anyone dare submit falsehood, let it be known: others will respond on my behalf. Truth does not stand alone. It is defended. And not all of its defenders speak softly. And while we are speaking of truth, will the Ex condemn what was aired under his watch? Will the Ex disavow the open shirk—where I was called “God”—and the vile supplication asking Allah to curse my children with cancer? Or does his hatred excuse anything, so long as it is aimed at me? His silence here is not a shield. It is a signature. It speaks not of caution—but of cowardice. Not of neutrality—but of malice. There is nothing further to add. I will continue the work that my team and I are committed to, without distraction. I advise us all: do not give yourselves to suspicion and spectacle. Do not become tools for those—on and offline—who seek to harm Islam and Muslims. Preserve your dignity. And if you claim to stand for truth—then stand for it, even when it is inconvenient.
0:21

My Final Word on the Matter A sister recently made a false allegation against me. It has been addressed. This is my final word. "Produce your proof, if you are truthful." —Surah Al-Baqarah (2:111) “The burden of proof is upon the claimant.” —Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Three days have now passed since Dunya Shuaib’s ex-husband gave a platform to the Stalker, who loudly proclaimed she possessed “damning evidence.” And yet—there is nothing. No documents. No photographs. No voice notes. No witnesses. Only silence. And this silence is not just disappointing—it is shocking, given the severity and scope of the claims that were made. For accusations so sweeping and specific, the total absence of even the most basic forms of proof speaks louder than any allegation. One cannot shout fire in a theatre, then flee when asked to show smoke. Even more disturbing is the glaring inconsistency of the Ex, who in the very video below insists that evidence must be presented when he is accused—citing the seriousness of a claim like zina. Yet when it comes to the Stalker, suddenly “her testimony is evidence.” This is not justice. This is partisanship masquerading as principle. Those who claim to possess the truth know how to bring it forward—if they have it. And should anyone dare submit falsehood, let it be known: others will respond on my behalf. Truth does not stand alone. It is defended. And not all of its defenders speak softly. And while we are speaking of truth, will the Ex condemn what was aired under his watch? Will the Ex disavow the open shirk—where I was called “God”—and the vile supplication asking Allah to curse my children with cancer? Or does his hatred excuse anything, so long as it is aimed at me? His silence here is not a shield. It is a signature. It speaks not of caution—but of cowardice. Not of neutrality—but of malice. There is nothing further to add. I will continue the work that my team and I are committed to, without distraction. I advise us all: do not give yourselves to suspicion and spectacle. Do not become tools for those—on and offline—who seek to harm Islam and Muslims. Preserve your dignity. And if you claim to stand for truth—then stand for it, even when it is inconvenient.

Mohammed Hijab

411,331 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🛑WARNING SENSITIVE CONVERSATION During a live broadcast on @TrueStrategicEyes, an active detective made a shocking statement publicly about a photo of #EmmanuelHaro (posted) is not alive, or post mortem. It was a very strong statement to make, without further proof, which would be the metadata of the date and time that this photo was taken, something that is done during an investigation. A photo alone is not going to prove. I felt this was very unprofessional of him to say, and rather aggressively. Maybe you are desensitized, but the 2k during your life are not. We must stick to FACTS of ALL evidence reporting. #Shameonyou
2:18

🛑WARNING SENSITIVE CONVERSATION During a live broadcast on @TrueStrategicEyes, an active detective made a shocking statement publicly about a photo of #EmmanuelHaro (posted) is not alive, or post mortem. It was a very strong statement to make, without further proof, which would be the metadata of the date and time that this photo was taken, something that is done during an investigation. A photo alone is not going to prove. I felt this was very unprofessional of him to say, and rather aggressively. Maybe you are desensitized, but the 2k during your life are not. We must stick to FACTS of ALL evidence reporting. #Shameonyou

Ms_Harmony ツ

38,608 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr