Connect with us

Politics

Meet the Violent Communist Insurgent Group That Wants to “Annihilate” Conservatives

Published

on

No, this is not about a group of communist rebels in a banana republic and you have not in fact somehow stumbled upon a news story from 1976.

This is happening now, in our country, and you should be very, very concerned.

While many of the most far-left voices in the nation right now are openly plotting ways to limit the Second Amendment rights of millions of law-abiding citizens, right under everyone’s noses, violent anti-Trump insurgents are arming themselves and openly avowing to use violence to stop “fascists”.

Trending: Black Man Brutally Attacks Mexican Woman He Thinks is Asian

One might argue using violence to voice opposition to your ideological enemies is far more fascist than standing up for the right of every citizen to arm themselves against the threats of tyranny and crazy neo-communist leftists, of course, and that would be perfectly valid.

take our poll - story continues below

Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?

  • Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?  

  • 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.

Never have I heard a better reason to arm oneself in 2018 than what you’re about to hear.

Big League Politics explains:

Red Guards Austin, a self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist-Maoist violent antifa group, has called for the formation of a “Red Army.” The group itself is based out of Austin, Texas, but works in tandem with Red Guards Kansas City, Red Guards Pittsburgh, Red Guards Los-Angeles, and Red Guards Charlotte to “annihilate” those they believe are “collaborators” or “fascist.”

Here are some of the group’s stated goals, from their website:

“…we encourage the formation of paramilitary organizations on two levels. The first being those who are mainly unarmed but are prepared and trained to carry out fist fighting or using blunt weapons like axe handles or flagpoles as well as shields and basic armoring. The second level is the more advanced embryo of a Red Army, which is trained militarily and operates as soldiers all the time, engaging in production and mass work among the proletariat and the oppressed nation’s people.”

“It is time for Austin to stand up, to shake off bad leadership trying to impose itself on antifascism and come together under a better model of actual resistance and not token performance. When we organize and lead actions the fascists do not march every step they take is met with physical confrontation and they are bombarded from all sides.”

“On the basis of our principled united front work, fascists and their collaborators can be drowned out, run out, routed, beaten bloody, and even annihilated. These are our principles and we aim to hold them to the very finish.”

Um…isn’t this highly illegal? Or at the absolute very least, shouldn’t this group be kicked off social media?

No, of course not. We are unaware if they’re under investigation by the FBI as they absolutely ought to be (can you think of a better example of a “hate group”? Somehow, I doubt they’re on the SPLC’s list), but they’re definitely not only active on Facebook, they’re recruiting on Facebook.

Big League Politics explains:

Social media is essential to the Red Guards Austin’s ability to not only recruit, but also radicalize and mobilize other far-left extremists. With almost 8,000 followers on the Austin cell’s Facebook group page, and constant posts calling for other angry and violent masked individuals to join, why is a group such as this able to continue using the platform to recruit and insight violence?

…they’re openly calling to form violent militias, trained and ready to physically attack others based on what their idea of fascism is, while conservative accounts are being censored and shadowbanned for posting things these social media platforms don’t want to gain any traction that have no mention of violence or hatred. How can any of these social media platforms claim there’s no bias with a straight face??

Absolutely insanity.

Opinion

DC Statehood Incoming: House Set to Vote Within Days

Biden and his team are wasting no time setting up ways to stack the electoral deck in their favor.

Published

on

Joe Biden and his cohorts in the Democratic Party are doing everything in their power to never lose another election again, and they are doing so with all the subtlety and grace of a three-legged hyena that stepped into a yellow-jacket nest. First and foremost, there are their recently-revealed plans to pack the Supreme Court with several new justices during Joe Biden’s first term. Now they’re looking to make good on their long-held pipe dream of making Washington DC its own state…and they are wasting no time. The House of Representatives will vote Tuesday on whether to make Washington, D.C., a State. The House Oversight Committee, chaired by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), voted the bill, H.R. 51, out of committee by a vote of 25-19 to create D.C. statehood Wednesday. But there are likely constitutional issues at play here. The ultimate argument seems to be whether the 23rd Amendment guarantees the federal Capitol at least three electors in presidential elections, Rep. Any Biggs (R-AZ) suggested Wednesday. Biggs’ view is supported by legal scholars, who opposed D.C. statehood’s feasibility without a Constitutional amendment to the 23rd Amendment. The Office of Legal Counsel in 2007 believed it was unconstitutional, the Justice Department under former President Reagan and former President Carter stated the transformation was unconstitutional, and so did Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, when he sat on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The move is highly controversial, and twenty-two state attorney generals have already sent a stern letter warning President Joe Biden about the danger of moving forward.

Continue Reading

News

Dems Begin Assault on 2A with Bill to Confiscate Suppressors

Here comes the heat from the left.

Published

on

When it comes to the right to bear arms, there truly is no foreseeable future in which the Constitutional guarantee will disappear entirely.  It’s a logical fallacy to suggest otherwise…just look at how well outlawing guns went in Chicago starting back in 1982. There will likely never be a full repeal of the right, either, as the idea of disarming the American people, particularly as Russia and China grow ever bolder in their international devilishness, leaves the world’s greatest nation feeling like sitting ducks. So, instead of working toward a total nullification of the inalienable right, the Democrats simply work to make if more difficult, more annoying, and more expensive to own the sort of firearms equipment that they want. This year will be no exception. Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) introduced legislation on Wednesday to ban the sale and possession of firearm suppressors. His legislation, the Help Empower Americans to Respond (HEAR) Act, is co-sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), among others. It would ban the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, and possession of firearm suppressors. Menendez commented on the legislation, saying: Gun silencers are dangerous devices with one purpose and one purpose only – to muffle the sound of gunfire from unsuspecting victims. The sound of gunshots is what signals you to run, hide, take cover, call the police and help others save themselves; however, this is nearly impossible when a gun silencer is used. That is why we must pass the HEAR Act, commonsense legislation that will prevent armed assailants from using these deadly devices to make it easier to shoot and kill another person. Of course, there was no definitive plan as to how confiscation would work, or what the left believes an acceptable amount of casualties would be for…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week