Leftists are not bothered by the escalating crime.  Can we say “color revolution”?

Exactly who is behind the Seditious Six’s traitorous video?  John Brennan?  Obama?  Who knows?  But something is very, very wrong with this entire scheme.  Those six tools are doing someone else’s bidding.  Oh, they surely love being part of whatever “it” is, but they are just the tip of someone else’s spear.

One thing has become abundantly clear.  Trump-deranged leftists hate Trump so much they don’t mind destroying the republic, any semblance of the “democracy” they like to cite so often, and any remaining reverence for the Constitution they continuously pretend to respect.  They are a pernicious bunch of traitors.  They loathe Trump because he is not part of the establishment, the Deep State that fights so underhandedly against him day by day.  They can’t control him the way they have so obviously controlled just about all previous presidents except Reagan.

Leftists love, crave, and often create what they value most: leverage — leverage over anyone with a modicum of power, in the House, the Senate, the DOJ, the FBI, the IRS, etc.  Leverage is their weapon.  They don’t have any over Trump.  They thought they did, with the Epstein “files,” but it’s become clear that Epstein was a monster whose closest pals were Democrats.  Trump is the man who turned him in to the FBI decades ago and had no further relationship with him.  That is why Epstein hated him so much; he was both furious and jealous.  That the Dems even deigned to hope those files would bring Trump down was nothing but wishful thinking. 

The American left, no longer remotely related to the party of JFK, is now fully Marxist.  In some parts of the country — Michigan and Minnesota, for example — it is Marxist jihadist.  NYC just elected one of those.

The Democrat party no longer has any respect for the Constitution.  As Obama often commented, he hated it because it said what the government must not do.  Like a true Marxist, Obama believed that the government should control what people do, are allowed to say, where they can go, what they can own.

The Democrat party of today is willing and ready to turn the nation over to migrants from all over the world, who have no intention of assimilating.  The Democrat party of today values, truly values, criminals over law-abiding citizens.  When horrific events occur like the murder of Iryna Zarutska on the train in North Carolina by a man who had been arrested countless times for violent crimes but was released onto an unsuspecting public by a criminal-loving judge, they feel sorry for the mentally ill man who murdered her.

The same is true of the man who just set 26-year-old Bethany Magee on fire as she rode the Blue Line train in Chicago.  He had been arrested 72 times for violent crimes and arson!  The judge who refused to incarcerate him?  Another DIE-obsessed judge who is obviously unqualified to rule on anything.  The Chicago media?  They feel sorry for yet another mentally ill man who committed this terrible crime.  Like the countless other activist judges appointed to the Judiciary around the nation by Obama and Biden, they sympathize, empathize, with the criminals, never the innocent victims whose lives they destroy. 

Their hatred of Trump has made them enemies of us all.  They are so thoroughly ungrateful for what this great nation has provided for them.  They are indeed sick.

President Donald Trump said on Thursday he would suspend migration from what he called “third world countries,” a day after an Afghan national allegedly shot two National Guard soldiers in Washington, killing one.

His social media post, which also threatened to reverse “millions” of admissions granted under his predecessor Joe Biden, marked a new escalation in the anti-migration stance of a second term that has been marked by Trump’s large-scale deportation policies.

Trump said earlier that Sarah Beckstrom, a 20-year-old West Virginia National Guard member deployed in Washington as part of his crackdown on crime, had died from her wounds.

The FBI has launched an international terror investigation as new details emerged about the alleged gunman, a 29-year-old Afghan national who was a member of the “Zero Units” – a CIA-backed counterterrorism group, according to multiple US media reports.

The shooting on Wednesday, which officials described as an “ambush-style” attack, has brought together three politically sensitive issues: Trump’s deployment of the military at home, which has drawn criticism from some lawmakers, immigration, and the legacy of the US war in Afghanistan.

“I will permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system to fully recover,” Trump wrote on social media.

He also threatened to reverse “millions” of admissions granted under Biden, and to “remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States.”

“I want to express the anguish and the horror of our entire nation at the terrorist attack yesterday in our nation’s capital,” the Republican leader said in a Thanksgiving video call with U.S. troops.

He linked the shooting and his decision to send hundreds of National Guard troops to the city.

“If they weren’t effective, you probably wouldn’t have had this done,” Trump said. “Maybe this man was upset because he couldn’t practice crime.”

Joseph Edlow, Trump’s director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said on Thursday he had ordered a “full scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern.”

His agency later pointed to a list of 19 countries – including Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Iran, and Myanmar – facing US travel restrictions under a previous order from Trump in June.

The Trump administration had earlier ordered an immediate halt to the processing of immigration applications from Afghanistan.

The other soldier wounded in Wednesday’s attack, 24-year-old Andrew Wolfe, was “fighting for his life,” Trump said. The suspected shooter was also in a serious condition.

The U.S. attorney for Washington D.C., Jeanine Pirro, said the suspected assailant – identified as Rahmanullah Lakamal – had been living in the western state of Washington and had driven across the country to the capital.

In what she called a “brazen and targeted” attack, Pirro said the gunman opened fire with a .357 Smith and Wesson revolver on a group of guardsmen on patrol just a few blocks from the White House.

The suspect was charged with three counts of assault with intent to kill, charges that Pirro had already said would be immediately upgraded to first-degree murder should either of the wounded troops die.

Officials said they still had no clear understanding of the motive behind the shooting.

CIA director John Ratcliffe said the suspect had been part of a CIA-backed “partner force” fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, and had been brought to the United States as part of a program to evacuate Afghans who had worked with the agency.

The heads of the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security and other senior Trump appointees all insisted that Lakamal had been granted unvetted access to the United States because of lax asylum policies in the wake of the chaotic final US withdrawal from Afghanistan under former president Biden.

However, AfghanEvac, a group that helped resettle Afghans in the United States after the military withdrawal, said they had undergone “some of the most extensive security vetting” of any migrants.

The group noted Lakamal had been granted asylum in April 2025, under the Trump administration, and would be eligible to request permanent residency a year later.

“This individual’s isolated and violent act should not be used as an excuse to define or diminish an entire community,” its president, Shawn VanDiver, said.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth said in the wake of Wednesday’s shooting that 500 more troops would deploy to Washington, bringing the total to 2,500.

Trump has deployed troops to several cities, all run by Democrats, including Washington, Los Angeles and Memphis. The move has prompted multiple lawsuits and claims from critics that the White House exceeded its authority.

© AFP 2025

Yesterday afternoon, two members of the National Guard were shot in the head near Farragut West metro station in Washington, D.C, just a few blocks away from the White House. Both soldiers were left critically injured—they were initially reported as having died—and the attacker was subsequently shot by responding troops and law enforcement.

The suspect has been named as Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan asylum seeker. He arrived in the U.S. in 2021 under Operation Allies Welcome—an evacuation and resettlement programme for Afghans linked to the U.S. mission, following the chaotic American withdrawal that year—and overstayed his visa. He applied for asylum in 2024, and was granted refugee status this year. A relative told NBC News that Lakanwal had served in the Afghan army for 10 years alongside U.S. Special Forces. So far, he is believed to have acted alone and is not cooperating with the investigation. As such, any possible motive remains a mystery. Nonetheless, the FBI are currently treating this as an act of terrorism. 

In the words of U.S. president Donald Trump himself: “This heinous assault was an act of evil, an act of hatred and an act of terror. It was a crime against our entire nation. It was a crime against humanity.” During that same address, Trump vowed to investigate all Afghan refugees who entered the country under the Biden administration. “Nobody knew who was coming in,” he said. “We must now re-examine every single alien who has entered our country from Afghanistan under Biden, and we must take all necessary measures to ensure the removal of any alien from any country who does not belong here, or add benefit to our country. If they can’t love our country, we don’t want them.” The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency has also announced that it will immediately and indefinitely stop “the processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals.”

It is telling that this sort of response to a similar attack would be almost unthinkable in Europe. Trump’s first reaction was to assume this was a terror attack, to pause all new visa applications, and to look at any Afghans who had recently arrived. The identity of the suspect was not hidden until the last possible moment, nor were the public asked to not “look back in anger.” Trump did not immediately wring his hands with concern over how this might cause a backlash against law-abiding Afghans or Muslims—though Shawn VanDiver, president of Afghan advocacy group AfghanEvac, made the now routine request that people do not “demonise the Afghan community for the deranged choice” the suspect made. As far as the administration went, however, the first priority was safety. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters that Trump has since asked him to add 500 more troops to the nation’s capital.

This is, of course, exactly how a government should respond to a potential terror attack against two members of the country’s military. Compare this to the very wet responses of Europe’s governments when faced with similar situations. Rather than safety, the priority is maintaining community cohesion. When Axel Rudakubana, the Cardiff-born son of Rwandan migrants, slaughtered three young girls at a dance class last summer, the British state’s first reaction was to attempt to suppress his identity—an act that stoked tensions more than it calmed them, as rumours swirled online and culminated in a series of violent, nationwide riots. Similarly, in the aftermath of an attack on a Manchester synagogue last month, we saw the same tendency to mitigate fallout against Muslims. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood stressed in the House of Commons that the government’s “posture at religious sites is one of maximum vigilance. That applies to the Jewish community, and it also applies to British Muslims.” She also emphasised that “violence directed at any community—be they Jewish or Muslim, and of all faiths or none—is an attack on our entire country.” This message is fine in and of itself, but why choose this moment in particular to remind people that Muslims can also face discrimination? Why did Mahmood feel the need to draw national attention away from the Jewish community in the wake of an antisemitic attack that left two people dead? The answer is that ever-elusive community cohesion.  

In cases where the perpetrator is an immigrant, there is certainly never any reckoning with mass migration as a concept. When a failed Syrian asylum seeker knifed three people to death and wounded many more at a ‘Festival of Diversity’ in Solingen, Germany, in August 2024, Olaf Scholz’s government floated some marginal changes to weapons law and EU asylum rules. But there was no serious attempt to question the policies and logic that brought the attacker to Germany in the first place, and that failed to deport him once his asylum claim was rejected. And this year, after an Afghan national who should already have left the country stabbed a toddler and others in a park in Aschaffenburg, ministers once again talked about “zero tolerance” and speeding up removals of dangerous individuals—all while insisting that Germany would remain a “country of immigration.”

No wonder, then, that attacks like these continue to happen. Until European governments start prioritising public safety and start taking a hard look at the immigration and asylum systems themselves, nothing will change. Even when people are killed, the focus remains fixed on massaging community tensions and maintaining the myth of multiculturalism. Meanwhile, the hard questions remain unanswered. 

Trump’s response to the Washington D.C. shooting will no doubt be denounced as populist or even racist in all the expected circles. But he is right to recognise that the state’s primary responsibility lies in keeping its citizens safe, over defending open borders or slavishly protecting the feelings of various minorities. European leaders can sneer at that all they like. What they cannot do is pretend that their own approach has kept their streets safe. In the end, governments must choose whether they stand with their people or with an ideology. Washington has at least remembered which side it is supposed to be on.

Lauren Smith is a London-based columnist for europeanconservative.com

Whatever happened to Britain, or the UK, or England, or whatever they’re calling it? We can’t even agree on what it’s called. But what happened to England, the England that, if you’re over 50, you grew up learning about, the England that controlled the world, the England that ran the largest empire in human history at the end of World War One?

Britain, which is an island in a pretty inhospitable climate, controlled literally a quarter of the Earth’s surface – and not controlled in the way the United States controls the rest of the world with an implied threat or with economic ties through trade, but with administrators and people sitting at desks with eyeshades, counting things. Way more than Rome, way more than the Mongols, way more than anybody, ever, or maybe in the future, ever.

Britain was the most powerful country in the history of the world. And then 25 years later, it was this kind of sad, soggy welfare state, which is, to some extent, what it still is, except maybe even a little bit worse. What happened?

There are a couple of levels on which to think about this. First is just geopolitical, and I guess they spent a lot of money in these wars and the ruling class, half the class at Eton in 1910 was killed in the trenches. You can think of a lot of different ways to explain what happened to Britain. The fact remains, however, the British won the two biggest wars in human history. They won and yet they’re still greatly diminished and to some extent humiliated. What is that?

So again, the first explanation can be described in economic terms. The United States took over. The British Empire just moved west to its child, the US. They just transferred the power and a lot of the gold to this new country, which had its systems and some of its customs. But there’s something deeper. If that were the whole story, then Britain would still be recognizably Britain.

The English people would still be recognizably English. They would just be not in charge anymore. They would have less money and less power. But the country would be, by any conventional measurement, thriving, just not running the Bahamas and Hong Kong and Pakistan.

But that’s not what’s happened. After winning the two biggest wars in human history, Britain has shrunken not just physically, but in some way that’s hard to describe. Its culture has changed, some might say has been destroyed, and it’s become something completely different. And what is that? And why does it matter what it is?

Well, it matters because what’s happened to Britain, to England, is also happening to many countries in the West, certainly its heirs, the Anglosphere: Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, Ireland. It’s happening to those countries. It’s also happening to the rest of western Europe all at the same time.

A bunch of different profound, never seen before phenomena are happening to all of those countries, and again, including ours here in the United States. So it’s worth understanding what has happened to Britain. So maybe the best image that describes it is the one that we’re about to show you.

In case there’s no context in the tape, what you’re watching is a woman being arrested outside an abortion clinic. And keep in mind, as you watch this, she’s not being arrested for throwing a firebomb, a petrol bomb, through the window of this abortion clinic in the UK, or even for obstructing access to this abortion clinic. No – she is being arrested and taken to jail for praying outside the abortion clinic.

So what is that? It’s hard to argue that if your government is arresting people for praying that you’re watching a political phenomenon. Because, of course, praying is not simply a non-violent act. It’s not even a physical act. It can’t possibly, at least in secular terms, affect outcomes or harm anyone. Praying for people can never be a crime. But it is a crime in Great Britain, literally a crime. And the woman you saw is not the only person who’s been arrested for doing it. So clearly we’re watching a spiritual phenomenon here. There’s sort of no arguing it once you see things like that.

But what is that spiritual phenomenon and what are its effects on the people of this country? Before we go further, we should just say that if you visit the “Yookay” as it’s now called, or London, its capital and completely dominant city, the first thing you’ll notice is it’s actually pretty nice. The nice parts of London are as nice or maybe even nicer than any city in the United States. Certainly nicer than any city in Canada or Australia. It’s a great city, filled with lots of happy people.

But broadly speaking, this country has changed dramatically, and it’s changed in ways that are recognizable. Here’s what you recognize. The people of Great Britain are going through a series of crises, and they’re all internal. Drug use, alcohol use. Their appearance has changed. People are no longer as well kept, the streets, the landscape is not tidy anymore. It’s got lots of litter and graffiti in some places. To technocrats, these are not meaningful measures of anything. Who cares if you’ve got graffiti? Does that affect GDP? Well, maybe. Maybe not, but it’s definitely a reflection of how people feel about themselves.

People with self-respect do not tolerate public displays of disorder or filth or graffiti or litter because they care about themselves and their family and they understand intuitively, as every human being does, that once you allow chaos and filth in your immediate environment, you are diminished. So you just don’t allow that. No healthy society does.

But all through the West, these are not just features, they’re defining features. All western cities are filled with litter and graffiti, and people who look like they didn’t bother to get dressed this morning, but are instead wearing their pajamas in Walmart. It’s not just in your town, it’s everywhere in what we refer to as the West.

The point that underlies all of this is a really obvious one, that too few people say. This is the behavior of a defeated people. This is what it looks like when you lose. This is what it looks like when you’re on your way out to be replaced by somebody else. This is what it looks like to be an American Indian.

Now, one thing nobody in the United States ever says about the American Indians, except in a kind of pro-forma white guilt way, is these weren’t just impressive people – and no, they didn’t write the Constitution before we did – these were some of the most impressive people, most self-reliant, most dignified. Read any account of early American settlers, people who were pushing west, who came into contact with Indians and yes, were often scalped and forced to eat their own genitals and roasted over open fires. I mean, these were cruel people. But even the people who were in danger of being murdered by them respected them. Because the Indigenous Americans had a great deal of self-respect. They had what we call dignity. And now, hundreds of years later, the opposite is true.

The poorest people in the United States are American Indians. Why? Because the federal government hasn’t given them enough. The federal government is completely in charge of the indigenous economy in the United States, and has been for over a hundred years, and it hasn’t worked. American Indians are still the poorest.

Why? Because the Iroquois and the Navajo weren’t impressive? No, they were the most impressive. Again, read the account of anyone who dealt with them. Even people who were dodging their arrows thought they were amazing people, because they were. And now they are by many measures, the saddest people in the United States. Why is that? Some inherent genetic predisposition to patheticness? They couldn’t deal with modernity? Well, they probably could. They were defeated. They were defeated. And in some deep, the deepest way, they wound up destroying themselves, and it’s not unique to them. That’s the point.

And just to be completely clear, all of this is observed with a great deal of sympathy, not scorn. No one’s mocking the American Indians. Everyone should feel bad about it. For real. Again, not in a silly white girl guilty way, but in a real way. These are amazing people. Greatly diminished. And the reason it’s worth remembering is the same thing is happening to the West.

And it makes you realize, especially if you travel a lot, that the problem is not necessarily the immigrants. The problem is what mass migration does to the people who already live there. They’re the victims of it in a way that, again, is hard to measure and sometimes hard to notice, but totally 

So you walk through this city, London, and it’s been completely transformed by immigration. Completely. And the numbers are really, really clear. One hundred years ago it was 100 percent European white. Now it’s less than 40 percent. OK, that’s massive, unprecedented demographic change. The immigrant areas are absolutely poorer than the traditionally white English areas. There’s just no question about it. But wealth as measured by the government is not the only measurement.

Actually, and this is true in the United States, too, lots of immigrants who have a lot less money than the native population seem a lot more balanced and happy, both because this is a huge upgrade for them just in terms of annual income and standard of living. But it’s more than that. They’re not defeated. They don’t hate themselves.

And if you have traditional nationalist opinions in the United States, I can confirm this personally, you’re never going to be stopped on the street and screamed at by some Guatemalan who’s like, you are racist for having your views on immigration. No, they’ll probably agree with you. The only people who ever get mad at you are the people who already hate themselves, and it’s always, famously, some private equity wife or somebody who should be happy about how things are going because they’re in the portion of the population that’s benefiting from it. But they’re not happy. They’re angry.

What is that? That exact same thing is going on in this country. Exact. And it’s part of a very recognizable syndrome, and it’s the most destructive of all. History is just filled with examples of people who get invaded and clubbed to death and have their women stolen from them, and they’re fine. They’re fine. It’s the people who feel defeated inside who no longer exist. And that is happening to the West. And it’s measurable.

What other society hates its own national symbols? It’s only happening in the West, only in Great Britain. This is coming to be true in the United States. It’s already true in Canada and Australia. What other country finds it embarrassing to fly their national flag? What are you saying if that embarrasses you? You don’t hate the flag. You hate yourself.

And it’s obvious because people who have dignity, self-respect, who believe in their own civilization want to continue it. How do you do that? By talking about it a lot? No. By continuing it through reproduction. No one is preventing the West from reproducing. And people who come up with these conspiracy theories, like, oh, they’re doing it. No, we’re doing it to ourselves. What else is abortion? It’s not empowering for women. Of course not. That’s absurd. Anyone who believes that is an idiot.

Abortion is the way to stop people from reproducing. So is birth control, by the way, of course. So is convincing people that their dumb job is more important than having kids. It’s not. It never will be. Any person who can get clarity for a second will recognize that. It’s only about stopping you from having more of you.

And is there anything that’s a clearer representation of how you feel about yourself than how you feel about having kids? And by the way, it’s not just because these people are selfish and they want to go on vacation and don’t want to pay for children, or they’re worried about how much it might cost. Notice that none of these impoverished immigrants living on Snap and housing subsidies, they don’t seem worried about it at all because they know it’ll be fine. Most of the time it will be fine. They’re having kids when much more affluent natives are not, because they believe in themselves and their culture, their civilization. They’d like to see it continue. It’s the most basic of all human desires.

So here in Great Britain, which has about a 40 percent abortion rate, 40 percent of all conceived children are killed. Who’s doing that? It’s not the immigrants because they don’t hate themselves. They’re not defeated. They’re ascendant. And so they can see the future. They know that they may not live to experience it, but they’re still fully human. And they know you plant the tree not because you can bask in its shade, but because your grandchildren will. This is the most obvious of all human instincts and the most basic.

But the native population in Britain is not debating abortion because it’s not even a debate here. Everyone agrees it’s just an affirmative good, of course, to eliminate your own people. Absolutely. But again, no one’s making them do this. They’ve decided to do it themselves. But now their most enthusiastic campaign is for state sponsored suicide. They’ve already done this in Canada. It’ll come to the United States. What is that? That’s an entire people saying we should exit the stage. Our time is done. It’s over. Let’s go. Someone else will take our place. Not the first time that’s ever happened. This is what defeated people do. This is what happens when you break people inside. And maybe it’ll just reach its terminus. Maybe there’s no way to stop it.

So in Great Britain, if you were to say, wait, what the hell is this? This looks nothing like the country I grew up in – guess who’s going to arrest you? Your fellow Britons. The ones whose great-grandparents lived here. The whites. They’re the ones enforcing this. They’re the ones determined to eliminate themselves.

Tucker Carlson

Beloved, Greetings in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ! Who is the TRUE source for ALL Heavenly blessings here on earth and in Heaven above (Eph. 1:3)!

As we celebrate this time of Thanksgiving we are very mindful of many things. We are thankful for our loved ones, a measure of health and a sound mind. We are thankful for the earthly blessings and liberties that we possess as Americans. We are thankful for those who have shed their blood on our nation’s behalf which have preserved our freedoms and liberties. We are thankful for the vision and labor of our Founding Fathers which steadfast sought to provide its posterity with a nation and constitution that we may enjoy our unalienable rights as human beings. We are thankful to those who labor for the Lord on our behalf, who challenge us and encourage us in the ETERNAL truths and promises of Almighty God.

In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you! (1 Thess. 5:18).

But most of all we are thankful for Almighty God our Father for so loving us that He sent His only begotten Son on our behalf (John 3:16-17), that we may be redeemed, forgiven, received, adopted and made righteous in the Person and work of Jesus Christ (Rom. 10:4, 1 Cor. 1:30).

We are truly thankful that we are still able to worship Almighty God in spirit and truth here in America and that we still have a measure of time left to get out His saving message to a dying and condemned world. We rejoice that Christ is coming again very soon and that this fallen world is NOT our home. We have a glorious future forevermore with our Savior and Lord in perfect RIGHTEOUSNESS in Almighty God’s ETERNAL day (1 Cor. 2:9, Rev. 22:5).

May this Thanksgiving be a great blessing to you all! We indeed have much to be thankful for (Phil. 4:4)!

Beloved, Maranatha! The Kingdom of Heaven is truly at hand!

The Ignorant Fishermen

A generation sidelined by debt, ideology, and stalled adulthood is drifting—but it won’t stay lost if society restores real opportunity, accountability,

The current generation “Z”—those now roughly between 13 and 28 years old—is becoming our 21st-century version of the “Lost Generation.” Members of Gen Z are often nicknamed “Zoomers,” a term used to describe young adults who came of age in the era of smartphones, social media, and rapid cultural upheaval.

Males in their teens and twenties are prolonging their adolescence—rarely marrying, not buying a home, not having children, and often not working full-time.

The negative stereotype of a Zoomer is a shiftless man who plays too many video games. He is too coddled by parents and too afraid to strike out on his own.

Zoomers rarely date, supposedly out of fear that they would have to grow up, take charge, and head a household.

Yet the opposite, sympathetic generalization of Gen Z seems more accurate.

All through K-12, young men, particularly white males, have been demonized for their “toxic masculinity” that draws accusations of sexism, racism, and homophobia.

In college, the majority of students are female. In contrast, white males—9-10 percent of admittees in recent years at elite schools like Stanford and the Ivy League—are of no interest to college admission officers.

So they are tagged not as unique individuals but as superfluous losers of the “wrong” race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Gen Z men saw themselves scapegoated by professors and society for the sins of past generations—and on the wrong side of the preposterous reductionist binary of oppressors and the oppressed.

Traditional pathways to adulthood—affordable homes, upwardly mobile and secure jobs, and safe and secure city and suburban living—had mostly vanished amid overregulation, overtaxation, and underpolicing.

Orthodox and loud student advocacies on campus—climate change, DEI, the Palestinians—had little to do with getting a job, raising a family, or buying a house.

During the Biden years, white males mostly stopped enlisting in the military in their accustomed overrepresented numbers.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, they had died in frontline combat units at twice their percentages for the demographic. No matter—prior Pentagon DEI commissars still slandered them as suspects likely to form racist cabals.

Gen Z males seemed bewildered by women and sex—and often withdrew from dating.

Never has popular culture so promoted sexually provocative fashions, semi-nudity, and freewheeling lifestyles, and careers of supposedly empowered single women.

And never had the rules of dating and sexuality become more retrograde Victorian.

Casual consensual sex was flashed as cool everywhere on social media. And when it naturally proved in the real world to be selfish, callous, and empty, males were almost always exclusively blamed as if they were not proper Edwardian gentlemen.

Soon, young men feared sexual hookups and promiscuity as avenues to post facto and one-sided charges of harassment—or worse.

For the half of Generation Z who went to college, tuition had soared, rising faster than the rate of inflation. Administrators were often more numerous than faculty. Obsessive fixations with race determined everything from dorm selections to graduation ceremonies.

Zoomers were mired in enormous student debt.

Unemployed or half-employed Zoomers then ended up with unsustainable five-figure student loans and the insidious interest on them. Their affluent, left-wing, tenured profs, who had once demonized them as oppressors, could have cared less about their dismal fates.

Add it all up, and Zoomers puzzled their parents. And they found scant guidance from the campus.

Instead, they sought needed spiritual inspiration from a Jordan Peterson, entertainment and pragmatic advice from a Joe Rogan—but sometimes toxic venting from a demagogic, anti-Semitic Nick Fuentes.

What would shock the lost generation back into the mainstream, barring a war, depression, or natural catastrophe?

Instead, they sought needed spiritual inspiration from a Jordan Peterson, entertainment and pragmatic advice from a Joe Rogan—but sometimes toxic venting from a demagogic, anti-Semitic Nick Fuentes.

What would shock the lost generation back into the mainstream, barring a war, depression, or natural catastrophe?

One, an end to DEI hectoring and blame-gaming, and a return to class rather than race determining “privilege.”

Two, some sanity in the war between the sexes. When women represent nearly 60 percent of undergraduates, why does gender still assure an advantage in admissions and hiring?

Three, the federal government needs to stop funding $1.7 trillion in student debt, often for worthless degrees, and wasting away one’s prime twenties and thirties.

Let universities pledge their endowments to guarantee their own loans. They should graduate students in four years. And they must slash the parasitical class of toxic administrative busybodies who cannot teach but can hector and bully.

Four, society needs to stop granting status on the basis of increasingly meaningless letters and titles after a name.

Skilled tradesmen like electricians and mechanics are noble professionals. And their status and compensation should reflect their value to society—far more so than a bachelor’s degree in a studies major or years vaporized in off-and-on college.

Finally, incentivize building homes, rather than overregulating and zoning them into unaffordability.

If the lost Gen Z is not found soon, the result for everyone will not be pretty.

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He is an American military historian, columnist, a former classics professor, and scholar of ancient warfare. He has been a visiting professor at Hillsdale College since 2004, and is the 2023 Giles O’Malley Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Public Policy, Pepperdine University. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2007 by President George W. Bush, and the Bradley Prize in 2008. Hanson is also a farmer (growing almonds on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author of the just released New York Times best seller, The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation, published by Basic Books on May 7, 2024, as well as the recent  The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won, The Case for Trump, and The Dying Citizen.

The methods of modern censors have barely changed since the first rebellious citizen scrawled an obscenity on an ancient wall: those who question the ruling narrative are not refuted by argument but isolated — socially, economically, morally.

The analog world still relies on well-worn tools: public shaming, professional reprisals, and a reliably mobilized cadre of Antifa thugs and NGO operatives whose business model is built on performative moral outrage and steady state financing.

Every protest, every aggressive convention stunt — most recently the Book Fair scandal in Halle during the “Seitenwechsel” event — draws from the same ideological reservoirs, public funding channels, transnational “democracy foundations,” and discreet pots of money linked to long-familiar actors like the Soros network.

Digital Control: Invisible Interventions in the Platform Engine Room

Online, the system is more subtle but no less effective. With the DSA, Brussels has forged an instrument that no longer needs to announce censorship, because it is automated through technical-administrative mechanisms.

“Trusted flaggers” — mainly NGOs and semi-public institutions — receive quasi-state authority. Their reports trigger instant algorithmic downranking, visibility throttling, or full deamplification of posts and accounts. Mass-reporting campaigns, often reinforced by bot-like accounts, generate the risk signals that platforms, terrified of billion-euro EU fines, react to immediately.

The result is a state-steered information environment where politically inconvenient views are not banned — they are simply rendered invisible, disappearing into a censorship fog without ever being formally deleted. Publisher Markus Schall has described these tactics in meticulous detail.

Germany at the Center of the Censorship Regime

EU governments — and Brussels, Europe’s supreme censor — spend staggering sums on surveillance and opinion control. Across the EU, the financial architecture supporting this system likely reaches over €17 billion annually. Tellingly, Germany once again stands out as the most zealous censor, allocating nearly €1.5 billion per year to its NGO censorship complex.

Lowenthal sees Germany as the central enforcement hub for Brussels’ digital governance regime. Its influence on the international NGO infrastructure is enormous — and much of the system rises or falls with German taxpayer money.

Germany provides far more resources for content control than any other EU country. And as seen with groups like the German Environmental Aid or the increasingly bizarre stunts by Fridays for Future — blocking highways or even airports — NGOs in Germany are extremely active and generously funded. Germany is the feeding ground, the playground, and the sanctuary for the NGO mob, enabled by a politically compliant establishment.

Despite growing public criticism, the German government under Friedrich Merz and Antifa-sympathizer Lars Klingbeil has allocated millions more — even NGOs feel the inflationary squeeze and rising wage costs.

A Glimmer of Hope

The increasingly aggressive posture of Antifa and the grotesque media reactions — like the coverage in state broadcasters following the assassination of American free-speech activist Charlie Kirk — indicate two underlying developments.

First, the rise of conservative forces across Europe is putting tremendous pressure on the censorship complex. Second, the U.S. government’s final dismantling of USAID — the funding artery behind countless left-wing media and NGO initiatives — acts like a stimulant on activist networks suddenly aware that their financial oxygen is running out.

They know that as long as platforms like X offer refuge for free speech, public scrutiny of their activities will only intensify, and citizen willingness to bankroll this system will continue to erode.

And they sense that every new revelation of their authoritarian impulses — escalated with growing aggression and intolerance — translates fear and uncertainty into civic resistance.

The internet has become the primary battleground for free expression. With ever-expanding funding streams, the German government is building an NGO-driven censorship apparatus that quietly injects the poison of the totalitarian impulse into public discourse. Now, a group called “Liber-Net” has succeeded in illuminating this sprawling, kraken-like suppression network.

If you are an active participant in online debates — especially if you occasionally express views critical of the government — you’ve likely already encountered one of the countless “fact foxes.” Point to independent research on CO2’s impact on global climate that undermines the logic of the green transition, and suddenly the likelihood rises that a state-funded NGO will sic one of these “fact-checkers” on you, flag your content, accuse you of hate speech, and launch a bot-driven harassment cascade designed to dehumanize and trivialize your replies.

If this has happened to you — congratulations. You are now part of the resistance against the state’s expanding censorship kraken.

Liber-Net and the Kraken

Just how deep the state’s covert censorship apparatus now reaches has long been difficult to assess. Censors love darkness, hidden channels, and opaque financing. But a spectacular investigative effort by “Liber-Net” — a civil society group advocating for digital rights — has, for the first time, shone a bright light into that darkness.

In an interview with Berliner Zeitung, Liber-Net director Andrew Lowenthal describes in detail how this multi-layered NGO ecosystem operates and the extent to which it is intertwined with state authorities.

Liber-Net identified more than 330 actors — directly or indirectly funded with taxpayer money — who participate in online content moderation. Their mandate: mark politically inconvenient posts, flag them as “harmful,” or suppress them entirely. They provide the operational foundation that gives life to the Digital Services Act (DSA), the EU’s largest regulatory project aimed at disciplining the digital public sphere.

Lowenthal outlines a system in which government agencies, quasi-public institutes, and ideologically aligned NGOs coordinate in lockstep. It is a network that does not operate openly, is not democratically legitimized, and certainly not transparent — yet it has unleashed an intimidation machine that only runs into resistance from a handful of American platforms, most notably Elon Musk’s X.

This is the new engine room of European information control: decentralized, specialized, lavishly funded — and invisible to the average citizen, until now.

The methods of modern censors have barely changed since the first rebellious citizen scrawled an obscenity on an ancient wall: those who question the ruling narrative are not refuted by argument but isolated — socially, economically, morally.

The analog world still relies on well-worn tools: public shaming, professional reprisals, and a reliably mobilized cadre of Antifa thugs and NGO operatives whose business model is built on performative moral outrage and steady state financing.

Every protest, every aggressive convention stunt — most recently the Book Fair scandal in Halle during the “Seitenwechsel” event — draws from the same ideological reservoirs, public funding channels, transnational “democracy foundations,” and discreet pots of money linked to long-familiar actors like the Soros network.

Digital Control: Invisible Interventions in the Platform Engine Room

Online, the system is more subtle but no less effective. With the DSA, Brussels has forged an instrument that no longer needs to announce censorship, because it is automated through technical-administrative mechanisms.

“Trusted flaggers” — mainly NGOs and semi-public institutions — receive quasi-state authority. Their reports trigger instant algorithmic downranking, visibility throttling, or full deamplification of posts and accounts. Mass-reporting campaigns, often reinforced by bot-like accounts, generate the risk signals that platforms, terrified of billion-euro EU fines, react to immediately.

The result is a state-steered information environment where politically inconvenient views are not banned — they are simply rendered invisible, disappearing into a censorship fog without ever being formally deleted. Publisher Markus Schall has described these tactics in meticulous detail.

Germany at the Center of the Censorship Regime

EU governments — and Brussels, Europe’s supreme censor — spend staggering sums on surveillance and opinion control. Across the EU, the financial architecture supporting this system likely reaches over €17 billion annually. Tellingly, Germany once again stands out as the most zealous censor, allocating nearly €1.5 billion per year to its NGO censorship complex.

Lowenthal sees Germany as the central enforcement hub for Brussels’ digital governance regime. Its influence on the international NGO infrastructure is enormous — and much of the system rises or falls with German taxpayer money.

Germany provides far more resources for content control than any other EU country. And as seen with groups like the German Environmental Aid or the increasingly bizarre stunts by Fridays for Future — blocking highways or even airports — NGOs in Germany are extremely active and generously funded. Germany is the feeding ground, the playground, and the sanctuary for the NGO mob, enabled by a politically compliant establishment.

Despite growing public criticism, the German government under Friedrich Merz and Antifa-sympathizer Lars Klingbeil has allocated millions more — even NGOs feel the inflationary squeeze and rising wage costs.

A Glimmer of Hope

The increasingly aggressive posture of Antifa and the grotesque media reactions — like the coverage in state broadcasters following the assassination of American free-speech activist Charlie Kirk — indicate two underlying developments.

First, the rise of conservative forces across Europe is putting tremendous pressure on the censorship complex. Second, the U.S. government’s final dismantling of USAID — the funding artery behind countless left-wing media and NGO initiatives — acts like a stimulant on activist networks suddenly aware that their financial oxygen is running out.

They know that as long as platforms like X offer refuge for free speech, public scrutiny of their activities will only intensify, and citizen willingness to bankroll this system will continue to erode.

And they sense that every new revelation of their authoritarian impulses — escalated with growing aggression and intolerance — translates fear and uncertainty into civic resistance.

Thomas Kolbe, American Thinker

Our lives are made up of decades, years, minutes, and seconds. The numbers vary by individual, but we are all given a limited amount of time on earth to live. The average American lifespan is about 78 years, roughly 2.5 billion seconds.

In each person’s life, there comes a time when they truly comprehend good and evil, as the conscience bears witness to the law being written on our human hearts. In God’s grace and mercy, He knows when that time is for each person. As the awareness of sin marches on, the seconds of our lives tick away. Every one of those seconds is a step on the road to eternity.

Time is an immeasurably valuable commodity, a finite resource we can spend, invest, or waste just like money. There are 86,400 seconds in each day. We will obviously spend some of those seconds sleeping, so if the average person sleeps eight hours, we still have around 56,000 seconds to fill at our discretion.

We live at a point in time when there are so many things clamoring for our attention. Just a few decades ago, we could come home after work or classes and have a refuge from the outside world; now, interruption is a constant email or text alert away. Scrolling through social media, posting on our profile, and channel surfing all chip away at the remaining seconds.

“Show me, Lord, my life’s end and number of my days; let me know how fleeting my life is. You made my days a handbreadth; the span of my years is as nothing before you.” -King David

Christians have a Biblical mandate to redeem the time, and we do this by using the seconds we’ve been given to count for God’s glory. In the scope of eternity, our life on earth is a vapor and mist compared to the ages to come, James 4:14.

Jesus told several parables about using our time wisely. In Matthew 25:14-30, He instructs us to use our time and opportunities to serve God and warns those who waste time. In Matthew 25:1-13, He warns about waiting and being prepared for His return, and that time will be up for the unprepared at His coming. Jesus told us to work while it is still day, because the time is coming when we can’t work, John 9:4. We’re instructed to pray without ceasing and make the most of our time because the days are evil, Ephesians 5:15-16.

As Christians, being good stewards of our time goes far beyond a well-managed schedule because our time doesn’t belong to us; it belongs to the Lord. He gives us time to use for His kingdom and glory. Anything that takes precedence over that is wasted time. Things like playing with your kids on the floor, taking your teen on a lunch date, or spending time with your spouse at dinner or in prayer are all honoring to God. So many people gripe that they have little or no time for prayer, Bible study, or witnessing about Jesus to others, yet they will fill hours with activities that won’t matter in eternity.

Can you imagine what would happen if true Christians started to redeem the time as though Jesus might return at any moment? Our walk with the Lord would be marked by renewed boldness for Him and love for lost souls.

As we consider the people who don’t know Jesus as their Lord, the reality that they will all soon face God’s wrath should compel us to make the most of every second we have available to share the good news with them. Many of our modern churches are swanky spiritual country clubs brimming with people who have itching ears, not broken hearts for lost souls, 2 Timothy 4:3.

There are still local churches where remnant Christians gather to make much of Jesus, not themselves, Hebrews 10:25. When we realize that the road to eternity is measured in seconds, we will have a renewed sense of biblical urgency to compel lost people to come to repentance and saving faith.

“Right now people are being swept into the vortex of a sewer of gross iniquity which ultimately will suck them down into eternal hell.” -Leonard Ravenhill

Dear Friends, if we love Jesus and lost souls, we don’t have a second to waste. Don’t put off reaching people until you feel equipped. Because the Holy Spirit lives in you, consider yourself equipped. As you plan, pray for the Lord’s will to be done and to direct you. Since the road to eternity is measured in seconds, we can’t assume that we’ll have until old age to serve God. Two dear brothers were called home to be with the Lord at a very young age, but they made quite an impact for His kingdom in just a few years.

William Borden was born in 1887 into a very wealthy family. After conversion around age 16, the young millionaire was on a trip around the world, and while in London, he felt called to foreign missions. He wanted to bring the good news to the Hui Muslims in Northwestern China, but first went to Cairo to study Islam and Arabic before going on to China. While in Egypt, he spent time distributing Christian sermons on the streets of Cairo. William contracted cerebral meningitis in March 1913; he died 3 weeks later. He was only 25 years old, but he made the seconds he was given count for eternity.

Beloved singer-songwriter Keith Green was born-again at age 19. From that point on, whether he was composing soul-stirring worship songs, providing housing for marginalized people, or preaching the gospel, Keith lived a life of no compromise. At the pinnacle of his ministry, he died in a plane crash in 1982 at the age of 28. After Keith came to faith in Jesus, he lived the remaining few years of his life for God’s glory. Both William Borden’s and Keith Green’s lives were brief, but these men stand as a vivid testimony of what the Holy Spirit can accomplish in a person who understands that the road to eternity is measured in seconds.

The longest life ends abruptly, and one is suddenly ushered into eternity. Time has vanished into the past, except as choices and words and deeds have affected eternity.” -Dave Hunt

If you are reading this article and don’t know Jesus as your Savior, I have to warn you about the eternal danger you are in. No one is guaranteed tomorrow. Approximately 150,000 die and go into eternity every day; many go there unexpectedly. Jesus said that most people would take the wide road leading to destruction. God’s wrath will soon fall on all unrepentant people, and the only way to be saved is by coming to repentance and being born again.

God does love you and demonstrated it by sending Jesus. He’s the only way to eternal life. I’m pleading with you to come to saving faith in Him while you still have time. The road to eternity is measured in seconds, and each one might be a final opportunity to have your sins forgiven.

Howard Green, Rapture Ready

In a significant shift in the Middle Eastern power dynamics, Iranian officials have admitted that their once-loyal proxy force, the Houthis in Yemen, is increasingly defying Tehran’s orders.

Reports indicate that the Houthis, who have long served as Iran’s strategic arm in the ongoing conflicts against the United States and its allies, are now acting independently, much to the dismay of their former benefactors.

A senior Iranian official disclosed that the Houthis have distanced themselves from Iran. “They have gone rogue for a while and are now really rebels,” the official stated, reflecting concerns within the Iranian regime as they grapple with a deteriorating hold over their regional proxies.

This development comes on the heels of significant military and strategic collapses for Iran, particularly following the successful operations by Israel against Hezbollah and the ongoing struggles of Hamas.

In a desperate attempt to regain control, Iranian leaders dispatched high-ranking commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to Yemen, hoping to rein in the Houthis and restore a semblance of order among Tehran’s remaining regional allies.

However, analysts suggest that the Houthis have matured into a self-sufficient force, developing their own military strategies, cultivating alliances, and securing resources beyond Iranian support. Despite facing escalating military pressure, they have learned to adapt, successfully hiding their assets and leveraging Yemen’s complex terrain for tactical advantages.

The Iranian officials’ candid acknowledgment of their waning influence highlights an alarming trend for Tehran, which has built its regional policy on cultivating proxy forces for decades. The Houthis’ revolt indicates a fracture in a strategy that once appeared robust.

This internal rift has profound implications. As the Houthis continue to assert their independence, Tehran faces the stark reality of having to confront a multifaceted crisis—both from external military pressures and internal fragmentation of its proxy forces.

The shift in control also signals a potential for increased instability, not just in Yemen but across the region, as the United States and its allies monitor the evolving landscape.

With President Trump now in office, the U.S. is likely to leverage these developments to further push back against Iranian aggression and exert pressure on Tehran’s remaining interests in the Gulf and beyond.

As Iran struggles to manage its proxies, the consequences of its diminishing power will resonate throughout the Middle East, providing the U.S. and its allies with an opportunity to redefine the balance of power in a region that has long been plagued by instability.

This moment calls for a renewed commitment to U.S. interests in the region, echoing the previous successes of the Trump administration in countering Iranian influence and supporting democracy and stability among U.S. allies.

Only time will tell if the Houthis’ defiance will lead to a stronger, more autonomous Yemen or if they will ultimately be brought back under Tehran’s thumb. However, in the current landscape, Iran’s influence is clearly on the wane.

MAGA/Red State Observer

Like a master chef promising a five-course meal in fifteen minutes, Washington’s latest promise on affordability might be biting off more than it can chew. The word “affordability” has become the political equivalent of a Swiss Army knife—everyone’s wielding it, but few seem to know which tool to pull out first.

From New York City’s mayoral race to the halls of Congress, “affordability” has emerged as the buzzword du jour, a catch-all solution to Americans’ economic anxieties. President Trump has seized on this narrative with characteristic gusto, promising sweeping changes to make life cheaper for working families. His One Big Beautiful Bill Act—now rebranded as the “working families’ tax cut” because apparently everything needs a rebrand these days—represents the kind of bold economic overhaul that helped propel him back to the White House.

But behind the fanfare and executive orders, a more sobering message is emerging from Republican leadership. The revolution, it seems, will not be televised on a rapid timeline.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, in an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, offered what amounts to a reality check on the administration’s ambitious affordability agenda. While affirming the GOP’s commitment to reducing costs across the board—from healthcare to energy—Johnson’s words carried a notable note of caution that should give both supporters and skeptics pause.

From Fox News:

“We the people rightfully revolted against that, and gave us the power again in January. But the economy is a very complex thing, you don’t flip a switch and just change it all in one week. It takes a while.”

This admission from the House Speaker represents more than just expectation management—it’s an acknowledgment of the enormous gulf between campaign promises and governing realities. Johnson’s comment that changes will manifest “by the time we get into the first and second quarter of next year” pushes the timeline for economic relief well into 2026, beyond what many voters might have anticipated when they cast their ballots.

The Speaker’s candor comes at a particularly awkward moment. And let me tell you, the timing couldn’t be worse. Just as Johnson was tempering expectations, the White House quietly postponed its much-anticipated healthcare cost proposal, originally scheduled for unveiling this week. The administration offered no explanation for the delay, but sources suggest the complexity of reforming healthcare while avoiding the pitfalls of simply extending Obamacare subsidies has proven more challenging than expected.

Meanwhile, another signature Trump initiative has quietly faded into obscurity. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), once touted by Elon Musk as a revolutionary force for slashing federal spending, has been disbanded after just eight months. Former staffers have been reassigned to work on beautifying government websites. Beautifying websites? Really? That’s our radical restructuring?

Look, I’ve watched this movie before, and spoiler alert: it doesn’t end with rapid change. Every administration arrives in Washington convinced they can move faster, cut deeper, and deliver quicker than their predecessors. The Biden administration promised to “build back better” and ended up building back inflation. Now, the Trump administration promises affordability but asks for patience while the machinery of government slowly grinds forward.

Johnson correctly identifies the Biden-era policies as creating the inflation that sparked voter revolt. The Texas A&M analysis he references shows consumer prices consistently outpacing wage growth throughout Biden’s term. But diagnosing the disease and curing it are two different challenges entirely. The Speaker’s talk of unleashing “job creators, entrepreneurs, risk-takers, innovators” sounds promising, but these forces need time to work their magic—time that struggling families may not have.

But here’s what really got me: the most telling moment in this unfolding drama came last week when President Trump hosted New York City’s socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani for a friendly press conference, just weeks after calling him a dangerous communist. When pressed on this about-face, Trump simply shrugged: “We all change.” Indeed, Mr. President, but hopefully not on the promise to make life affordable for American families.

The truth is, Johnson deserves credit for his honesty. Better to level with the American people now than to perpetuate the cycle of overpromising and underdelivering that has defined Washington for decades. The economic mess inherited from the Biden administration won’t be cleaned up overnight, and pretending otherwise would be political malpractice.

Still, one can’t help but feel a sense of déjà vu. The “affordability agenda” risks becoming another entry in Washington’s long catalog of well-intentioned initiatives that take longer, cost more, and deliver less than originally advertised. For Americans struggling with grocery bills and gas prices, “full steam ahead” at government speed might feel more like a slow crawl.

Noah Stanton