Connect with us

Opinion

Farrakhan Fracas Perfectly Illuminates Twitter’s Discriminatory Practices

You would certainly expect that this sort of hate speech would quickly have you banned from platforms such as Twitter, right? Wrong.

Published

on

Louis Farrakhan

Once the dust settles tomorrow evening, and we raise a glass to a brief reprieve from the partisan bickering, one of the most lingering questions that we will face regarding the 2018 midterms will be one of informational access.

Our nation has long been touted as one of the freest in the world.  Our ethos from the onset was one of liberty and happiness, and not getting in each others’ ways when in pursuit of either.  When it comes to voting, this principle must stand, unmolested, at the very tip of the spear.  Our votes must matter, because without them, there is no such thing as freedom in America.

So we look now to the mainstream media, and the advent of internet bottlenecks such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter, whose power to re-educate or de-educate the American populace en masse is a terrifying reality of the world we live in.  At the snap of a finger, Facebook can cancel out some of the voices who are urging you to educate yourself on the issues, simply because that’s not what Facebook wants.

Google and Twitter are no saints, either, with the trio teaming up in recent months to silence some of the nation’s most polar voices…on both sides of the issues.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

In the case of Twitter, their discriminatory actions against conservatives are being highlighted by their recent inaction when it comes to the always controversial Louis Farrakhan.

A video published by Iranian state television shows Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan leading an Iranian audience in the infamous “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” chants so often heard at political rallies in the country.

“Marg bar” the footage shows Farrakhan declaring; “Israel,” the audience responds. “Marg bar,” repeats Farrakhan; “Āmrikā,” the audience chants.

The moment took place Sunday during his trip to Iran in which he declared his solidarity with the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism against America, which he condemned for sanctioning Iran and for its support for Saudi Arabia, Algemeiner reports.

“Today, I warn the American government that sanctioning Iran is a big mistake,” he said during a meeting with Iran’s Expediency Council Sec. Mohsen Rezaei, according to Iranian news agency Mehr.

You would certainly expect that this sort of hate speech would quickly have you banned from platforms such as Twitter, right?

Wrong.

As of this writing, Farrakhan and his 380,ooo followers are merrily going about their business on the internet, discussing their fondness for a man who has literally evoked the death of every single American…this week alone.

Twitter apparently has much bigger fish to fry in Alex Jones – the zany conspiracy theorist who espouses daily regarding reptilian shapeshifters and MK Ultra programming.

News

‘RUST’ SHOOTING: Alec Baldwin Not Out of The Woods Yet, Says Santa Fe District Attorney

Baldwin has suggested that he won’t be charged, but the local DA has other ideas.

Published

on

The story surrounding the shooting death of cinematographer Halya Hutchins continues to grow stranger by the day, and a district attorney in New Mexico just dropped a major bombshell in the direction of Alec Baldwin.

Baldwin was rehearsing for a scene when the firearm he was holding discharged live ammunition, killing Hutchins and injuring others.  The gun somehow had a live round in it, despite there being a number of ethical and legal reasons why this should not have been possible.

To further confuse things, Baldwin has wildly suggested that he never pulled the trigger of the gun – something that experts are going to have to find a way to prove in order to clear Baldwin’s culpability.

Now, a local litigator has suggested that Baldwin should be prepared for the worst.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

On Friday, First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies clarified that it is still very possible for Alec Baldwin to be “criminally culpable” in Hutchins’ death depending on what the investigation yields.

“Certain individuals may be criminally culpable for his/her actions and/or inactions on the set of Rust,” Carmack-Altwies told Deadline.

Carmack-Altwies asserted that she will “exercise my prosecutorial discretion to its fullest, including filing charges that are supported by probable cause.”

The possibilities are numerous.

The district attorney further clarified that “everyone” handling firearms on the set of Rust had a duty to follow safety protocols.

“Everyone involved in the handling and use of firearms on the set had a duty to behave in a manner such that the safety of others was protected, and it appears that certain actions and inactions contributed to this outcome,” Carmack-Altwies the attorney said.

During the interview in which Baldwin suggested that he never pulled the trigger, he also insinuated that he’d spoken with the local sheriff’s department, and that there was some sort of understanding between he and them regarding the lack of charges to be brought.

The story surrounding the shooting death of cinematographer Halya Hutchins continues to grow stranger by the day, and a district attorney in New Mexico just dropped a major bombshell in the direction of Alec Baldwin. Baldwin was rehearsing for a scene when the firearm he was holding discharged live ammunition, killing Hutchins and injuring others.  The gun somehow had a live round in it, despite there being a number of ethical and legal reasons why this should not have been possible. To further confuse things, Baldwin has wildly suggested that he never pulled the trigger of the gun – something that experts are going to have to find a way to prove in order to clear Baldwin’s culpability. Now, a local litigator has suggested that Baldwin should be prepared for the worst. On Friday, First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies clarified that it is still very possible for Alec Baldwin to be “criminally culpable” in Hutchins’ death depending on what the investigation yields. “Certain individuals may be criminally culpable for his/her actions and/or inactions on the set of Rust,” Carmack-Altwies told Deadline. Carmack-Altwies asserted that she will “exercise my prosecutorial discretion to its fullest, including filing charges that are supported by probable cause.” The possibilities are numerous. The district attorney further clarified that “everyone” handling firearms on the set of Rust had a duty to follow safety protocols. “Everyone involved in the handling and use of firearms on the set had a duty to behave in a manner such that the safety of others was protected, and it appears that certain actions and inactions contributed to this outcome,” Carmack-Altwies the attorney said. During the interview in which Baldwin suggested that he never pulled the trigger, he also insinuated that he’d spoken with the local sheriff’s department, and that there was…

Continue Reading

Opinion

US State Pushes to Make Mask Mandates Permanent

The move is sure to have freedom advocates in the Beaver State enraged. 

Published

on

The American landscape is currently littered with a hodgepodge of coronavirus precautions, as each state, country, town, and business takes the COVID-19 pandemic at their own level of seriousness.

This has, of course, made it somewhat difficult for any individual to navigate their day in compliance to the ever-changing rigidity of the pandemic’s threat.  And, furthermore, it has led to some questionable decisions by local leaders looking to simplify the issue.

The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) assembled a Rules Advisory Committee (RAC) earlier this week to address a permanent indoor mask mandate in the state. Oregon is one of a few states that still retain one nearly two years into the pandemic.

The committee included several community stakeholders, including representatives from the hospitality industry, the business sector, and faith communities, according to local ABC affiliate KATU.

take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Local leaders attempted to downplay the “permanent” status of the mandate.

Dr. Paul Cieslak, the medical director for communicable diseases and immunizations with OHA, explained to KATU that OHA’s potential “permanent” indoor mask mandate is not necessarily permanent because it can be repealed.

“Permanent means indefinite. It doesn’t necessarily mean permanent,” Cieslak said. “We can repeal it as well, but we are only allowed to have a temporary rule for 180 days, and anything that goes beyond 180 days, we cannot extend it.”

The move is sure to have freedom advocates in the Beaver State enraged.

The American landscape is currently littered with a hodgepodge of coronavirus precautions, as each state, country, town, and business takes the COVID-19 pandemic at their own level of seriousness. This has, of course, made it somewhat difficult for any individual to navigate their day in compliance to the ever-changing rigidity of the pandemic’s threat.  And, furthermore, it has led to some questionable decisions by local leaders looking to simplify the issue. The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) assembled a Rules Advisory Committee (RAC) earlier this week to address a permanent indoor mask mandate in the state. Oregon is one of a few states that still retain one nearly two years into the pandemic. The committee included several community stakeholders, including representatives from the hospitality industry, the business sector, and faith communities, according to local ABC affiliate KATU. Local leaders attempted to downplay the “permanent” status of the mandate. Dr. Paul Cieslak, the medical director for communicable diseases and immunizations with OHA, explained to KATU that OHA’s potential “permanent” indoor mask mandate is not necessarily permanent because it can be repealed. “Permanent means indefinite. It doesn’t necessarily mean permanent,” Cieslak said. “We can repeal it as well, but we are only allowed to have a temporary rule for 180 days, and anything that goes beyond 180 days, we cannot extend it.” The move is sure to have freedom advocates in the Beaver State enraged.

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week