Bill O’Reilly, love him or hate him – brought the Foxnews Network to its standing as the most popular cable network in America for the last 20 years.

His ‘O’Reilly Factor’ has been the number one news show in the history of cable television. Obama hated Fox and never kept that a secret; snide remarks about Fox were a regular occurrence in his interviews during the 8 year reign.

Although most of the mainline media worshiped BHO, a narcissist cannot abide any criticism.  The irony here is incredible:  Fox News was the only cable network proclaiming truth about the monstrous reign of BHO and his Marxist/Socialist agenda.

So how did this happen? From where did this Left Wing wrecking ball come so suddenly? It usually all comes down to money; but in this case it was EVIL vs GOOD.  The Left have no morals. They support the likes of rapist Bill Clinton, but will team together against a man who speaks out against their Marxist agenda. How dare O’Reilly have convictions and opinions which do not line up with theirs!

You will read in the canadafreepress.com article that the same woman who attempted to bring Donald Trump down with sexual harassment charges – failed miserably when President Trump dismissed this woman as having no credibility. Do you remember how quickly the tabloids ceased their stories and accusations?

Bill O’Reilly was a prime target for law suits

Bill O’Reilly had multi-year, multi-million dollar contracts with Fox News. Deep pockets are what these snakes always seek out, and in this case, their goal was to bring down the most popular news show, The O’Reilly Factor – a Conservative program.

For the Left, speaking out against liberal causes is not included in the First Amendment of our Constitution. The thought of silencing us is what keeps these people alive.

It is a sickness.

A story about Perquita Burgess – the black woman who sealed the deal to bring O’Reilly down:

From healthyblackwoman.com    (with my commentary)

Black Woman Who Took Bill O’Reilly Down Speaks Out

A black woman who is the most recent accuser to come forward against former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly has broken her silence.

Perquita Burgess appeared on The View last Thursday (April 20th) to talk about her unpleasant experience as a temporary worker at the offices of The O’Reilly Factor show at Fox News. Burgess worked there as a clerk in 2008.

She claims that she was a victim of constant Sexual harassment, which was allegedly committed by O’Reilly.

Burgess appeared on The View accompanied by her attorney Lisa Bloom. Burgess said she endured her first uncomfortable contact with O’Reilly during her earliest days on the job. “Within the first week and a half of me working there, he walked past my desk and he made a grunt noise,” Burgess told The View’spanel of hosts.

“When he made the noise, I thought maybe it was a muscle spasm,” she continued. However, after numerous other instances, Burgess observed that this wasn’t the case.

“I noticed every time he walked past my desk, if no one was around, he would make that noise. He wasn’t speaking to me…It was embarrassing. So I got to the point where I didn’t look at him,” Burgess also said. The former O’Reilly Factor office clerk went on to describe a more lascivious act allegedly committed by O’Reilly.

“[He would] leer at me, look me up and down, I would feel like he was looking at my cleavage. He was making me uncomfortable. He had no reason to be at my desk at all. I just stopped looking at him or paying him any attention, because he was making me uncomfortable,” Burgess continued.  (emphasis mine)

Let’s go back to the “I would feel like he was looking at my cleavage” comment, shall we?  I worked for most of my life in marketing positions.  I dressed very professionally and NEVER exposed cleavage in the work place. That was reserved for my husband.  When a woman does expose her cleavage, she is SCREAMING for men to lust after her.  Sorry if you disagree, but this is truth.

Men are wired differently than women, and are very visually oriented. I am not excusing men from staring, but I am saying that if women are going to dress improperly at work, then a “grunt” or a “stare” is tame compared to what some men might do.

I worked with a lady when I was in my 20’s. She was very attractive. One day she came in to get her paycheck and she was wearing “hot pants” (remember those?)  She proceeded to complain about construction workers who were making rude comments and would not stop whistling at her.  REALLY?

Rest of story from healthyblackwoman,com

Burgess also claimed O’Reilly would call her names like “Hot Chocolate” and would perform other blatant acts of $exual harassment. This past Monday (April  17th), Burgess called the 21^st Century Fox Sexual harassment hotline to report O’Reilly’s constant acts of misconduct.

The embattled political pundit has been embroiled in controversy ever since a vast number of women recently came forward to claim he paid them off to keep quiet about his lewd workplace antics. Eventually, Fox News caved to public pressure and removed O’Reilly from his position as a top-rated news show host. –source

Brethren – I am NOT excusing bad behavior from men.  What I am doing is hopefully showing you that Bill O’Reilly was set up by attorney Lisa Bloom, who I am sure was paid dearly by the likes of George Soros and his ilk.

From canadafreepress.com

THE LYNCHING OF BILL O’REILLY

Antisemitism is out of control in France.

The elections being held right now in France is a lose lose for all French Jews. Both Le Pen and Macron are anti Semites, and my people who reside in France are placing themselves in harms way if they do not leave this country and make Aliyah.

Le Pen, who is a the daughter of a Holocaust Denier, insists that the Jewish people of France should not be able to have an Israeli passport. She also has vowed to ban kippahs being worn by French Jews.

Macron, another Jew hater, is a globalist who is insisting that Jewish schools cease training Jewish children in the Torah!

From jewishjournal.com

French Jewish leader: Our country’s democracy is in ‘real danger’

There is a “real danger” that France’s democracy will be destroyed by its next president, the leader of the country’s federation of Jewish communities warned ahead of the elections.

Francis Kalifat, the president of the CRIF Jewish umbrella group, sounded the alarm during an interview Friday with the RJC Jewish radio station ahead of the first round of the presidential elections on Sunday.

Polls show Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Front party, in a tight race for the top with the centrist independent candidate, Emmanuel Macron. Each candidate had 23.5 percent of the vote in an Ifop poll released Wednesday. The same poll had Francois Fillon, who heads The Republicans party, with 19.5 percent followed by the communist candidate, Jean-Luc Melenchon. CRIF has flagged both Melenchon and Le Pen as “candidates of hatred.”

“We are in a real danger of seeing the arrival to power of someone who will only use democracy to destroy it,” Kalifat said. “We are in a state of total chaos. There is a real sense of urgency that all should be aware of, and we should all assume our responsibility to go and vote to exclude these candidates, these parties of hate from reaching power.”

Le Pen recently said France “was not responsible” for the murder of Jews whom French police helped round up for the Nazis. She has also vowed to ban kippahs and the right of French citizens to have an Israeli passport – prohibitions she said were necessary to enforce similar limitations on Muslims.

She has, however, softened the National Front’s image since taking over its leadership in 2011 from her father, party founder Jean-Marie Le Pen, who is a Holocaust denier and inciter of racial hate against Jews.

Jewish support for National Front rose from negligible levels under Jean Marie Le Pen to 13.5 percent in 2012, according to a poll.

Kalifat in the interview flagged the rise in support for National Front by Jews who fear Islamists as particularly worrisome.

“I am deeply concerned. I see the polls, but I also hear the discussions of people around me who say, ‘why not give him – or her – a chance, perhaps she has the solution,” Kalifat said. “But the enemies of our enemies are not our friends, not this time.”

But Kalifat did not single out Le Pen outright, referring to “dangerous candidates” in a reference to Melenchon.

During a speech about Israel and French Jews in 2014, Melenchon said: “We do not believe that any people is superior to another,” adding that “France is the opposite of aggressive communities that lecture to the rest of country.”

A supporter of a blanket boycott of the Jewish state, in 2014 he praised participants of violent protests against Israel, calling their behavior exemplary even though some of them tried to burn down several synagogues. Melenchon condemned French Jews who demonstrated peacefully in support of Israel, suggesting their actions were tantamount to taking up arms “for a foreign country.” – source

From israelinationalnews.com

French presidential candidate blasts Torah study

French Jews incensed by centrist candidate’s claim Jewish schools must de-emphasize Torah studies.

French presidential hopeful and former Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron sparked an uproar in the French Jewish community, following the publication of an interview earlier this month of an interview touching upon religious schools in France.

A former member of the Socialist Party now running as an independent, centrist candidate, Macron served in the French cabinet under incumbent Francois Hollande from 2014 until the end of August of this year.

Speaking with Marianne earlier this month, Macron warned of the influence of religion in French schools generally and decrying Jewish schools for emphasizing the Torah.

“It is very important to maintain neutrality in the public sector,” Macron said. “Religion cannot be present in school. But I hear few people becoming concerned by the consequences of this phenomenon, [with] more and more children being sent to religious schools which teach them to hate the Republic and teach mainly in Arabic, or,” Macron added, “in other places [Jewish schools] teach the Torah more than general studies.”

Members of the French Jewish community pushed back against Macron’s comments.

“The Torah is the basis of Judaism,” one representative of the French Jewish community told Israeli haredi news site Kikar HaShabbat, “and to ban its instruction would mean the annihilation of the Jews.”

“Jews, a small community in France, again find themselves targeted for no good reason….the ex-minister’s anti-Semitism has come out on behalf of his [political] aspirations, at the expense of national unity.”

Surveys show Macron could be a viable candidate, with middling poll numbers for the 1st round of the election, and likely defeating two of the three most highest polling competitors in the 2nd round. – source

Brethren, you can see clearly that the Jewish people are in danger in France if either of these frontrunners win this election.

I pray that the Lord will show the Jews of France that it is indeed time to make Aliyah!

Please pray for them!

Shalom b’Yeshua

MARANATHA

On the 22nd of April, almost 1.4 million South African Christians gathered on a farm in Bloemfontein. Their purpose was to pray about the white genocide taking place in their country. All races were represented.  But our Lord had different plans for them.

The brother in Christ who has been keeping me apprised of the planning of this event, has now written to me about the gathering – and what God did there.

Here is his email to me:

 

I love frontpagemag.com.

As a strong Conservative, I know that I can go to this news source to get Truth.  They cut to the chase, call progressivism what it really is: Communism – and make no apologies for standing firm on their Conservative convictions.  They know what’s coming.  We all know what’s coming; but frontpagemag is using this window of time to expose the Left Wing loonies and to tell TRUTH.

We thought that perhaps the “window of time” would be extended for freedom of speech for Conservatives after Trump was elected. We see just the opposite happening.  Our First Amendment right of freedom of speech is on shakier ground than ever before in our history.  The Left follow Satan. Satan is angry, so therefore his followers are throwing caution to the wind, and have declared an all out war on Conservatism.

Recently, a so-called blogger posted a piece on Huffington Post, which was ultimately removed by the left wing rag. I like to refer to them as “Huffington Hot Air Post.” The blog actually revealed the progressives true beliefs and intentions, but it was so honest; and honesty is not a priority for the Left – so the piece was taken down. If you search for it now, only a remnant of the title remains.

So devilish

Let’s take a look at the devil from the Word of God:

1 Peter 5:8 – “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.”

2 Corinthians 11:14 – “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”

John 8:44 – “Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.”

John 10:10 – “The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.”

2 Corinthians 11:3 – “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”

Romans 16:20 – “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you. Amen.”

Revelation 12:9 – “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.”

Ephesians 6:11 – Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

Matthew 16:23 – But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Ephesians 6:12 – “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places].”

2 Corinthians 4:4 – “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”

Luke 10:18 – “And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.”

1 John 5:19 – “[And] we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.”

From frontpagemag.com

“THE LEFT’S ULTIMATE PLAN REVEALED

Thanks to a hoax pulled on the Huffington Post.

For a distillation of the contemporary left’s worldview, one needn’t look any further than a blog post that was recently published at the Huffington Post: “Could it Be Time to Deny White Men the Franchise?”

At least one could have turned to this post—until HuffPo took it down.  But we’ll get to that shortly.

The author, a person going by the name of “Shelley Garland,” a self-declared South African and graduate student in philosophy, argued that it is morally necessary to temporarily deny the franchise to white men.

Moreover, at least some of their resources should be repossessed and “redistributed” to others.

Garland explains her reasons.  First, white men are bad for left-wing progressivism.  “Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past year,” she writes, “have often been due to the votes of white men.”  She gives examples.  “If white men were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing four of South Africa’s biggest cities.”

“If white men no longer had the vote,” Garland summarily states, “the progressive cause would be strengthened.”  She’s quick to underscore that she is proposing nothing more than “the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation),” for this is all that it would take to “go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world.”

Garland explains that “liberalism—and its ideological offshoots of conservatism and libertarianism—are the most popular ideologies among white males” because, “with their focus on individuals and individual responsibility, rather than group affiliation,” they “allow white men to ignore the debt that they owe society, and from acknowledging that most of their assets, wealth, and privilege are the result of theft and violence.”

Denying white men the vote, even if temporarily, would “strike a blow against toxic white masculinity, one that is long needed.”

Another reason why white men need to be constrained is compensatory in nature.  The disenfranchisement of white men, Garland eagerly wishes, “could see a redistribution of global assets to their rightful owners.  After all, white men have used the imposition of Western legal systems around the world to reinforce modern capitalism.  A period of twenty years without white men in the world’s parliaments and voting booths will allow legislation to be passed which could see the world’s wealth far more equitably shared.  The violence of white male wealth and income inequality will be a thing of the past.”

While admitting that it may indeed be “unfair” to adopt the measures that she urges, Garland insists that “this violent status quo will not change without a struggle, and the only way to do so will be through the expropriation of these various assets and equitably distribute them to those who need them.”  Going this route “will not only make the world a more equitable place, but will also go some way to paying the debt that white males owe the world.”  For “500 years,” such evils as “colonialism, slavery, and various aggressive wars and genocides, have been due to the actions of white men.”

Thus: “Redistributing some of their assets will go some way to paying the historical debt that they owe society.”

The unfairness to white males “is a small price to pay for the pain inflicted by white males on others, particularly those with black and female-identifying bodies.”

Garland reiterates her call: “It is time to wrestle control of the world back from white males[.]”

The backlash on social media was immediate and relentless.  Initially, the editor-in-chief of HuffPo SA, Verashni Pillay, stridently defended the post.  Garland’s “underlying analysis about the uneven distribution of wealth and power in the world,” Pillay remarked, “is pretty standard for feminist theory.”

Moreover, it has “been espoused in many different ways by feminist writers and theorists for decades now.  In that sense, there was nothing in the article that should have shocked or surprised anyone (or so we thought).”

Pillay accuses critics of refusing to engage Garland’s blog post and informs them that there is no way to avoid her conclusion given her premises, premises that she and her ilk at the Huffington Post share with Garland.  “Dismantling the patriarchal systems that have brought us to where we are today, a world where power is wielded to dangerous and destructive ends by men, and in particular white men, necessarily means a loss of power to those who hold it.”

Pillay doesn’t mince words: “Those who have held undue power granted to them by the patriarchy must lose it for us to be truly equal.  This seems blindingly obvious to us all.”

Then, however, something happened.

Huffington Post SA removed the post, supposedly because “the blog submission from an individual who called herself Shelley Garland, who claimed to be an MA student at UCT, cannot be traced and appears not to exist.” It then reaffirmed “the Constitutional values of South Africa,” especially “universal enfranchisement.”

The “Shelley Garland” post was a hoax.

A person, a female, claiming to be the author of the piece referred to it as “total garbage” that she packed with clichés—“black and female-identifying bodies,” “patriarchy,” etc.—that are common currency among the “less sensible left.”

“Shelley Garland” supplied to the nation an invaluable service.  In one little article, she revealed for all with eyes to see the gist to which the agenda of today’s left ultimately boils down:

It is resolutely, vehemently anti-white, specifically anti-white men.  (emphasis added)

Leftists almost always hide behind abstractions and generalities.  They know that if they are too overt in expressing their plans for the rest of us, the latter would stall.  A real leftist wouldn’t want to state things as baldly as “Garland” did.  But as Pillay made abundantly clear before she and her employer had to go into damage control, “Garland’s” is the position of the hard left, and has been “for decades now.”

Thank you, “Shelley Garland,” for unveiling the truth.” – source

YES – thank you so much, “Shelley Garland” for coming out of the shadows and shooting from the progressive hip. Thank you for not using double speak and clearly articulating the heart and desires of the Left Wing Liberals (Communists).

Oh, it’s incredibly evil, but at least those who lack discernment can understand what Satan is doing and planning to do.

There is no gray area, and it is clear that the “White man” has been identified as Enemy #1 to the forces of evil.

Come Lord Jesus!

MARANATHA