Over the weekend, Squawker Media attended a “Unity March,” which was organized in support of the immigrant community in Baltimore, Maryland. In a Facebook group titled “Patterson Park Neighbors,” City Councilman Zeke Berzoff-Cohen of District 1 said in a post,“The march was organized by local Baltimore young people as part of the Free Minds Free People Conference. This will be a family march and I invite everyone to come out and show love and support.”
What we’re about to show you is the true nature of the groups actively working to ensure that America remains divided. The above Facebook post by Councilman Berzoff-Cohen deceptively telling the citizens of Baltimore that the march was organized by Baltimore’s youth demonstrates a harrowing reality: operatives are trying to undermine the system. Such operatives receive hundreds of thousands of dollars from organizations dedicated to undermining the social cohesion of the United States and have infiltrated even local city politics. From this report, and the exclusive video captured on-site at the protest, you will see firsthand just how deeply George Soros’ Open Society Foundation is entrenched in our political system, even at the municipal and local levels.
The video below shows throngs of anti-Trump, pro-immigration protestors bused into a protest on Eastern Avenue. Footage depicts protestors stepping off of unmarked buses and entering the site of the protest.
In the next video, after all the protestors are brought in, a female keynote speaker rails against President Trump, calling him “a monster.” While much of what she said about disappearing jobs and crumbling infrastructure as the result of globalization rings true, she fails to place the blame where it rightfully belongs: at the feet of the globalist svengalis. When she gave a resounding call to arms at the end of her speech, a chilling reminder of “America divided” rang through her radical insistence for protesters to grab pitchforks, shovels, and bats.
“If we don’t stand together, and you and I unite like we’ve never been before, if we don’t pool our resources together, and our spirits together, and our souls together, and everything we can think of together… revolutions were fought with pitchforks and shovels, and bats, and cans, and anything and everything we can get our hands on.”
In the second half of the video, Casa De Maryland Inc., an entity funded directly by George Soros, then leads a march down the streets of Baltimore, actively disrespecting traffic ordinances and shutting down streets. For the record, there were no traffic marshals in this march, as evidenced by the content provided above.
Soros’s Open Society Foundation has its tentacles in the funding of urban protests, disruption, and chaos. Soros has been directly linked to the Ukrainian Revolution and the ouster of Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. The Open Society Foundation has also been linked to other groups in various European countries that promote revolutionary calls to action.
Soros is notorious for funding revolutionary ideologies and has openly contributed $81.7M toward “Human Rights Movements & Institutions” in 2017, a portion of which is clearly seen in the recently disruptive Baltimore protest. Additionally, Soros’s Open Society Foundation has contributed $82.8M to matters of “Equality & Anti-Discrimination,” which is essentially euphemistic for the advocation of culturally regressive social reforms.
Despite the massive amounts of funding to Baltimore from the pocket of Soros, Baltimore’s homicide, opioid abuse, and overall crime rates are only skyrocketing.
Social division is an undeniable reality of human existence; it is also not necessarily a negative aspect of human existence. The moment a society is forced or manipulated into blindly agreeing on everything is the moment that society begins to die and the future of mankind in general becomes rather bleak. Ideas need to be tested, they need to be scrutinized and they need to be verified, perpetually. That said, there are right ways and wrong ways of doing this.
Diving into a culture of zealotry is certainly the WRONG way. Zealotry requires a religious-like idolization of a particular idea or philosophy; it requires unverified faith and an unwavering devotion. Once people become zealots, they cannot be reasoned with, they cannot be debated, they cannot be dissuaded. They are, for all intents and purposes, automatons with only one mission — to spread their beliefs by any means necessary. They do not care about being right, they only care about “winning.” Because, in their minds, their position is unassailable. They are righteous, and thus, the ends will always justify the means.
The culture of the Left in the U.S. is beginning to embrace zealotry and the path can only get more ugly from here. This is evident not only in the violent behavior of more vocal groups like Antifa, but also in the lack of self criticism by many on the left that would consider themselves more moderate. There are very few voices among liberals and “progressives” today that are openly admonishing the counterproductive and thuggish actions of their more extreme members (this includes not only Antifa, but other groups like Black Lives Matter). In many cases, “moderate” leftists even cheer such actions.
There is this notion among some in the Liberty Movement that to even point out this dynamic is irresponsible because it only reinforces the concept of the false left/right paradigm. Most of these people I find are very new (newbies) to the Liberty Movement and don’t really understand what the false left/right paradigm is. When we talk about the Left and the Right as an illusion, we are talking about the elites who sit at the TOP of the sociopolitical sphere. Meaning, the elites have no loyalties to concepts on either the left or the right in politics. In fact, they often switch back and forth like chameleons depending on what they want from the public at the time. They have their own agenda which does not include the rest of us.
To be clear, I was just as much against the fake conservatism of George W. Bush as I was against the fake liberalism of Barack Obama.
This false paradigm does not, however, apply to regular citizens. The further away you get from the top of the pyramid, the more people tend to legitimately associate closer to one philosophy or the other. In times of crisis and uncertainty, these divisions become more pronounced. This is reality. Anyone who argues that there is no left/right paradigm when it comes to the average citizen has no idea what they are talking about.
So, now that we have acknowledged that the problem exists, lets examine it more in depth...
The Problem
All one needs to do is observe the attitudes, insane demands and criminality of hardcore leftists in the past year to see that at least one side of the paradigm cannot be salvaged. They are a lost cause.
This is a prime example of how it is impossible to win an argument when your position is fundamentally illogical. In most cases, these protesters can’t even specify their reasons for protesting, and they don’t really care to examine why they do what they do. They only know that their ideology is not being represented in totality. They are unsuccessful at debating their ideas coherently and don’t have the intelligence to convince others that they are correct. They aren’t going to give up simply because they are wrong, so, their only other option is to slander the character of those who disagree, attack them physically and disrupt their ability to speak freely.
Keep in mind, there is no moral conundrum for zealots. They believe they are completely justified in what they do because the other side represents a “greater evil.” Labeling their opponents as “fascists” is a get-out-of-conscience-free card for them.
It is important to note that we are not quite at the moment of crisis yet, but I would consider 2017 a turning point. This is where our (conservatives and sovereignty champions) decisions now could affect the future for decades to come. I suspect that as we move closer to summer and warmer weather, riots designed to cancel conservative speaking events (and random riots with no specific purpose) will expand tenfold. Leftists seem to be more active in warmer weather (there is a reason most of them live near the coasts).
All American citizens, regardless of their political leanings or personal ideals, have a right to speak and the right to listen to those speaking. All American citizens also have a right to redress grievances. This includes leftists. That said, it is important to make a distinction here — NO ONE has the right to silence speech in public spaces in the name of “activism,” and this is where the Left has gone off the rails. My right to speak and be heard is protected; their “right” to silence me is not protected.
There is a line here that cannot be crossed. Conservatives must be allowed free speech in public places, and leftists must be allowed to protest in public places as long as that protest is PEACEFUL. Once an individual or group uses force to silence speech, they have given up the moral high ground.
I recognize that there are paid provocateurs operating among liberal protesters and that this likely contributes to higher chances of violence and the madness of mobs. The presence of elitist money among leftist groups has been exposed on numerous occasions in reference to George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, which admitted to injecting $33 million dollars into the Ferguson protests (riots). WashingtonCAN! (another Soros-funded group) put out a Craigslist ad in Seattle offering to pay people $15-$20 an hour to “organize” anti-Trump rallies. WashingtonCAN claims this was merely an ad to hire “phone solicitors,” but they do in fact help organize protests, and nowhere in the ad is phone solicitation mentioned. I do not think it is a stretch to suggest that these paid "organizers" are present at protests, nor do I think it is a stretch to suggest that they are contributing to the mob mentality.
This should be taken into account as well. There are moments in any high-tension protest where the mob can be swayed to remain peaceful or to break out into thuggery. Usually, if the mob sees a few people getting away with violent attacks, this gives them license to unhinge as well.
Is the proper response to crush all leftist protests simply because of the violence of a handful? No. The key is to disrupt individual provocateurs before they can entice the mob to forget themselves. Normally, this would be the job of police on the scene, but as I’m sure many of you have noticed recently (Berkeley being a prime example), the police have been reticent to intervene in a tactically intelligent manner, depending on what municipality they are operating. It seems that when it comes to state and local law enforcement there are only two modes of response, either they are mostly hands off, or, they go full crackdown.
The issue that needs to be considered is when police or the federal government do initiate a full crackdown on all protests. Will conservatives cheer the measure?
To give some historical perspective, the Antifa movement, for example, is nothing new. It is an odd plagiarism of the “Anti-Facist” movements in Europe during the 1920s. Antifa was essentially an offshoot of communist movements in Italy opposed to the rise of Benito Mussolini, but it then spread to other European nations. It was in fact the belligerence of communist groups that actually inspired public support for fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler. As common people grew fearful of a monstrous Bolshevik-style revolution, the only other option offered to them was fascism, which at the time appeared to many to be a saving grace.
Of course, it was not, and totalitarianism in the name of defeating the communists only led to atrocities equal to communist dictatorships. This is what I call a “morally relativistic choice;” a catch-22 that is usually engineered, forcing the populace to pick between the “lesser of two evils.”
There are those who might argue that there is little chance of a similar development in America today, but consider this — conservatives movements were prodded and harassed for eight years by a constitution-trampling president who originally claimed he was going to undo the trespasses of the constitution-trampling president before him. This took place while leftist organizations imposed thought control and political correctness on us with relative glee. Conservatives have been organizing, training and arming themselves for nearly a decade in the event that globalist and Marxist ideologies take one more inch of rope, the expectation being that Hillary Clinton would attempt to take a mile.
Now, with Trump in office, we are a hammer looking for a nail.
This is what the left simply does not grasp. We are certainly not fascists now, but with continued violence from the left something in the collective conservative mind will eventually snap. My suspicion is that this is exactly what elites like George Soros want. They are using the left as sacrificial pawns in order to goad conservatives into going nuclear.
There are millions of conservatives coming home from work right now, sitting with their families, and seeing news each day filled with leftist protesters trampling all over conservative events and in many cases getting away with it. These conservatives are becoming more and more angry; more and more willing to embrace an ends justify the means reaction. Ultimately, they may very well support a full spectrum government stranglehold on protests and the speech of those we disagree with. This will make us the villains of our little period in history, and this is something I would like to avoid.
So, the question is, how do we counter violent leftists like those in Antifa without abandoning our constitutional principles? Lets talk about solutions...
The Solution
There is a school of thought that suggests we should stand back, let the mobs tire themselves out and in this way we avoid “escalation.” I would point out that the Left has been escalating matters quite expertly without our intervention. When you have elitist funded organizations generating momentum at a constant pace, it is hard for me to back the notion of complete pacifism. On the other hand, moderation and an even hand rule the day.
Countering leftist mobs requires a scalpel, not a bulldozer, metaphorically speaking.
Conservatives are less likely to support police state intervention if they see that leftist attacks are already being countered in a rational way. I would argue that this could be done by limited groups of civilian volunteers (around 50-100 men strong), without any government involvement, acting as security for speakers and the attendees of events.
These people would have to be highly vetted — no criminal background, no background of mental instability or psychotropic usage, a professional demeanor, absolutely no ties to federal agencies, no propensity to be ruled by emotion, no stolen valor, etc. etc. They would also have to be physically capable.
Members would need previous training as well as updated training in self-defense and riot response, as well as defusing confrontation. They would have to be invited by the event organizers in question and their goal would be to defend attendees from violence in a non-lethal manner. Their purpose cannot be to stop a protest from happening, only ensuring that protesters do not overstep their bounds and harm others.
Of course, the immediate accusation that will be used is that this kind of organizing is simply the formation of “brownshirts” for Trump. This is why a security group of this caliber would have to also be willing to offer their services to ANY speaker or event, regardless of political affiliation. It cannot be exclusively about Trump. If a mob of conservatives were threatening to use violence to shut down a liberal speaker, then the group would have to be willing to protect those people as well. I don’t see any examples of this happening anywhere, but again, the group’s concerns must focus on free speech and those that are trying to squash it, regardless of who they are.
This civilian security organization would require funding at a grassroots level through donations from regular people. Large sums of cash from major political donors or non-profit foundations could not be accepted. The group would have to be beholden to no one. It would also need to be separate from any already existing organization and function as its own animal in order to prevent conflicting goals.
Donations would be needed to fund travel and food expenses for volunteers, as well as some protective gear, the cost of initial training, the expense of background checks as well as legal defense. This organization would have to be limited in size to prevent confusion and a lack of structural discipline. I suspect that such a venture would start small, and truly qualified people would be limited in the beginning anyway.
I am willing to coordinate this effort with others depending on the level of enthusiasm that is generated and if donations are adequate. I am ready to help provide training for those who pass the vetting process. Interested parties can contact me at: brandon@alt-market.com
I am also willing to be present and in harms way at every single event that requires a security response.
I have looked into money raising avenues like Kickstarter, but I believe strongly that these websites will not allow crowdfunding for this venture for political reasons. If there is a strong response to this idea, I will post regular updates to Alt-Market.com on money raised as well as progress made.
It is entirely possible that I will not be able to find the support needed to make this volunteer venture happen. I can only present the concept and hope that people agree with it. Make no mistake though, if I do not do it, someone else eventually will. It is vitally important that these people are found trustworthy and have a track record of supporting Constitutional principles as well as a track record of competence. Anyone that arrives on the scene from nowhere should not be trusted. Anyone looking merely for notoriety and celebrity should not be taken seriously. Anyone looking to start a confrontation rather than prevent one should be dismissed. We cannot allow ourselves to become what the left accuses us of being. This is a time for extreme caution, and quiet professionalism.
Because the rise in popularity of alternative and populist candidates in Germany and elsewhere around the world can"t possibly by a legitimate rejection of politicians who simply skewed policies too far to the left over the past decade, Germany and Facebook have announced an accelerated effort to crack down on "Fake News" (i.e. anything that is deemed critical of Angela Merkel) ahead the country"s elections in September. Just like in the U.S., Facebook"s crackdown in Germany will enlist the support of 3rd-party "fact checkers" who will flag stories as "disputed" if they"re found to include "fake" or "misleading" content. The Financial Times:
German users of the social network will now be able to report a story as fake and it will be sent to Correctiv, a third-party fact checker. If the fact checker discovers it is fake, the story will be flagged as “disputed”, with an explanation. Disputed stories will not be prioritised by the news feed algorithm and people will receive a warning if they decide to share it.
Facebook said it had been in discussions with German media and publishing groups and was working to get more partners on board. “Our focus is on Germany right now but we’re certainly thinking through what countries will unveil next,” he said.
Of course, as we pointed out a few weeks ago, similar efforts to enlist the help a third-party, "independent" fact checker in the U.S., Poynter, drew some scrutiny after a quick google search revealed that they are funded by none other than George Soros" Open Society Foundation, which can be accused of many things, but political impartiality is not one of them. From our previous post:
A quick review of Poynter"s website reveals that the organization is funded by the who"s who of leftist billionaires including George Soros" Open Society Foundations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, and Ebay founder Pierre Omidyar"s Omidyar Network. Well that seem fairly bipartisan, right?
As we pointed out a couple of weeks ago, Germany is actively considering a number of laws that could impose fines of up to €500,000 and 5 years in jail for the distribution of "fake news" with justice minister Heiko Maas saying that "social networks have a duty" to censor "lies and hate campaigns."
The German government announced last month it was planning a law that would impose fines of up to €500,000 on Facebook for distributing fake news. Angela Merkel, chancellor, has warned there are signs that online attacks and misinformation coming from Russia could “play a role in the election campaign”.
In an interview with Welt Am Sonntag on Sunday, Heiko Maas, Germany’s justice minister, warned that fake news posed a “danger to our culture of debate”, and added that, in extreme cases, those responsible could face up to five years in jail.
“But social networks also have a duty,” he said. “It can’t be in Facebook’s interest that its platform is misused in order to spread lies and hate campaigns. Criminal content should be deleted immediately once it has been reported. And it must be easier for users to report fake news.”
Germany’s Justice Ministry will draft a bill that will include a “catalog of fines” for violations, Volker Kauder, Merkel’s top lieutenant in parliament, told reporters Saturday. Thomas Oppermann, his counterpart in the Social Democratic Party, Merkel’s coalition partner, last month told Der Spiegel that the penalties could reach 500,000 euros ($532,000), and that sites like Facebook should also be required to publish corrections after removing criminal posts.
The fines “have to hurt, otherwise they won’t work,” Kauder said.
And while many would say this is yet another unprecedented attempt of the left to collude with the mainstream media in an effort to censor their political opposition, Merkel"s CDU party would like for you to rest assured that their "fake news" crusade is simply intended to "protect Germany’s democratic process against manipulation."
“Social networks take too long to remove insults before they spiral out of control,” said Stephan Harbarth, a senior lawmaker of Merkel’s CDU party. “There are clear limits to freedom of speech in the real world that aren’t yet applied online and that needs to change. This is about hate posts as well as fake news.”
Harbarth said he would like to see the law enacted before this year’s national election, expected to be held in September. He insists it’s not intended to boost the CDU’s chances in the ballot, but rather to protect Germany’s democratic process against manipulation.
But, if the last year has taught us anything, it"s that Putin and his army of hackers will not be stopped. If they can single-handedly topple the Clinton dynasty then Merkel doesn"t stand a chance.
And it has outgoing-president Obama all worked up.
So does this mean war?
Underlying the post-election hysteria surrounding “Russian hacking” and “fake news” is the basic issue of trust – the U.S. Government, the Congress, the media and most leaders in Washington just don’t have it. So that have to make up reasons.
Anyway you slice it, the complete lack of trust was a major reason for the defeat of Hillary Clinton – widely perceived as corrupt and untrustworthy.
In his most recent statement, an exiting Obama expressed his concerns that Russia’s alleged-meddling in the election went so far as to win over the hearts and minds of the American people – in what would supposedly amount to the ultimate blowback of disinfo and propaganda after decades of pure B.S….
At heart, it is one of his most ridiculous assertions yet.
Outgoing US President Barack Obama has warned Americans and his successor Donald Trump that Vladimir Putin is an “adversary” who should never be trusted over the US intelligence community.
[…]
“I think that what is true is that the Russians intended to meddle and they meddled. And it could be another country in the future,” President Obama told the host of ABC’ ‘This Week’…
The outgoing president spoke of a need to unite the country amidst the cyber hysteria that has split the country over the extent of Moscow’s influence in the US presidential race.
[…]
“One of the things that I’ve urged the president-elect to do is to develop a strong working relationship with the intelligence community,” Obama said. “We have to remind ourselves we’re on the same team. Vladimir Putin’s not on our team,” Obama added.
“If we get to a point where people in this country feel more affinity with a leader who is an adversary and view the United States and our way of life as a threat to him, then we’re gonna have bigger problems than just cyber hacking.”
It appears to him that some politicians and reporters “seem to have more confidence in Vladimir Putin than fellow Americans because those fellow Americans are Democrats… That cannot be,” Obama stressed.
“[I]n this new information age, it is possible for misinformation, for cyber hacking and so forth to have an impact on our open societies, our open systems, to insinuate themselves into our democratic practices in ways that I think are accelerating,” he said.
In this last sentence, President Obama makes a clear reference to George Soros’ Open Society Foundation and his general hacking of U.S. foreign policy – and his extensive influence over the Democratic party, numerous protest movements (including Black Lives Matter) and color revolutions aimed at toppling regimes in the soft-coup style that Hungarian-born billionaire seems to prefer.
That’s ultimately whose agenda you’re supposed to believe.
More broadly, Obama has felt the need to justify Putin’s influence because the administration sees a clear threat to the narrative – as the credibility of the intelligence community, mainstream media and ruling establishment drops to zero.
Despite the fact that they continually pump out fairy tales – about 9/11, WMDs, Benghazi, death of bin Laden, ISIS, Syria, and most recently the claim that Russia hacked U.S. elections – this group of sacred cow spy agencies insist that they must be believed above all?
Here is President Obama’s full statement:
With the CIA openly attempting to pick a fight with Putin, and basically the entire Middle East region, who would even pretend to take what they have to say seriously? It is all propaganda.
President Obama depicts the tyranny of a cold and calculating Putin who dares to pick off the shattered pieces of the faith and credibility of U.S. leadership and media reporting... and that just should not be.
Lies they may be, but lies that must come from Americans’ own government – through the official channels for lying.
It is the lying and misrepresentations of Vladimir Putin and Russia that must be rejected, because those our dangerous lies. Domestic lies are caring, nurturing, patriotic – and for the good of the many.
Losing Hillary’s assumed and ‘deserved’ term at the Oval Office is just the beginning of the injustice. Soon, other Soros puppets won’t be believed either, and what about the plans for war?
It is as if the hot air and noxious gases of the last eight years of foreign policy were supposed to intoxicate everyone into pretending that they don’t see all the naked corruption, overreach and abuses.
That this is normal, and that lies are our staple diet, our chief export and our greatest achievement. But from our enemies – unacceptable.
