Chronological Snobbery: Media Reaction to Victory for Section 377a in Singapore

"[T]o say a law is archaic is merely chronological snobbery." -- Dr. Thio Li-Ann

The courts in the Republic of Singapore have upheld Section 377a, the statutes which criminalize homosexual offenses.

To say that the mainstream (read, liberal and pro-LGBT) media is not taking this news well would be an understatement.

Certainly, the pro-gay news sites in the world are foaming at the mouth.

Pink News reports:

Singapore doubles down on homophobia, says millions of menare breaking the law by having gay sex

Here's what they had to write:

The Singapore High Court has dismissed three separate challenges to a law that criminalises sex acts between men.

Gay and bisexual men in Singapore will continue to live as “un-apprehended criminals” under Section 377A, an outdated law colonial-era law.

Section 377A defines sex between consenting men as “acts of gross indecency” punishable by up to two years in prison. This also extends to anyone who abets, procures or attempts to procure such acts, but does not apply to lesbians.

Last year three separate challenges against Section 377A were launched by three Singaporean activists, including an organiser of the Pink Dot rally.

Prior to this there had been two unsuccessful attempts to repeal the law in recent years, but the trio petitioned the High Court to revisit its earlier decision in light of new evidence.

There is no end to the demands. The homosexual activists won't quit until pro-family and anti-LGBT activists work hard enough to break their will. They need to know that we are not playing around, and we have no interest in seeing this perversion become widespread.

Speaking to The Gay UK, Téa Braun of the Human Dignity Trust said: “This decision will be extremely disappointing for the plaintiffs and the wider LGBT+ community in Singapore, who had great hopes that new evidence presented to the court would make it clear that these draconian laws cannot withstand proper constitutional scrutiny.

"Draconian"? Really? The law is not actively enforced! 

“The ruling will also echo harmfully around Asia, where millions of people are criminalised simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”

This statement is good new indeed. Yes, we want nations like Singapore to take the lead in announcing that homosexuality is wrong, aberrant, destructive, and therefore should not be promoted or protected in any country. Yes, more Asian countries should embrace this standard and defend or reinstate their laws criminalizing homosexual conduct.

LGBT+ rights remain a thorny issue in the socially-conservative city-state, but Singaporean activists are determined to see change.

I would like to return to the headline for this article: "Doubles down on homophobia."

Opposing homosexuality is not a mental disorder, but a sign of mental clarity and intellectual accuity. It is wisdom of a higher order to recognize that homosexual conduct should not be allowed to run rampant in any country. These behaviors should not be celebrated or permitted. Indeed, the state has a right and necessity to restrain evil, and that means denouncing and delegitimizing homosexual acts.

It's not a "phobia" by any stretch of the imagination.

Now, let's look at more mainstream news sites on this topic.

Singapore Upholds Colonial Anti-Gay Laws: Being Gay Remains Illegal For 5.7 Million People

Forbes Magazine has now shacked up with the LGBT lobby?

The reporter refers to Section 377a as "colonial". i.e. backward, not progressive.

The pro-LGBT elements in the corporate world have jumped on the same perverse bandwagon, going to every length to celebrate sexual perversion and deviance. Homosexuals and their promoters around the world actually have a considerable amount of money. Most of them are wealthy investors and benefactors, and looking through historical records, one finds that homosexuality was a particular perversion of the elite, not the working or merchant classes--those groups were too busy earning a living and living their lives.

The second part of this title is outrageous, as well: "Being gay remains illegal."

Again, there is no such thing as "being gay". There is no gay identity, because there are not gay genetics. People are not "born that way". This massive fraud must be debunked thoroughly and unequivocally. When pro-business magazines and news sites traffic in this trash, they need to be held accountable.

How about the Financial Times? Surely they would write something more fair and balanced?

Singapore high court upholds law criminalising gay sex

This is the Financial Times, and even they have fallen for many of the lies of the LGBT lobby.

First of all, there is no such thing as "gay sex" (unless one is talking about the bless of marriage between man and woman). Two men cannot have sex. They can abuse each other's bodies, and they can sodomize each other, but they cannot have sex.

Secondly, the Section 377a statute clear states "acts of gross indecency". Homosexual acts, including sodomy, rimming, fisting, and other perverse behaviors, are all forms of indecency, and they should not be promoted.

Now, let's look at the first paragraph of the report:

Singapore’s high court has upheld a colonial-era law that criminalises sex between men, putting the international financial centre at odds with the liberal trend to embrace same-sex relationships.

Once again, the writer mentions "Colonial," i.e. backward, wrong-headed, stuck in the past, etc.

Notice also that the writer appeals to this fallacy that there is this Zeitgeist around the world that homosexuality is being embraced, and that Singapore is the last hold-out against the inevitable triumph of gay marriage and the so-called normalization of homosexual relationships.

This falsehood has become quite prevalent in First World countries. Many Western powers, or at least their globalist-leaning leaders, are convinced that part of economic progress means sexual liberation and laxity. Nothing could be further from the truth. Undermining moral relations between men and women has a host of damaging consequences on societies and peoples. Chinese cultures were getting stuck because of the rampant disregard for natural relations between men and women. Ancient Greek city-states also collapsed with the decline and fall of the family, and the rise of rampant, militant homosexuality.

Singapore is indeed a strong, vibrant, enviable financial sector. That status is not in conflict with the nation's wise decision to criminalize acts of gross indecency between men.

Final Reflection

"Colonial"

"Archaic"

"Backward"

These are the arrogant sentiments of the liberal media and LGBT activists when it comes to normalizing homosexual behaviors and transgender ideologies. They cast anyone who opposes the rank promotion of perversion as "backward", "not with it", or worse yet "bigoted".

It's stunning and sad to see how biased, how bereft of integrity the media have become around the world. They need to be held accountable for this deriliction of duty, and pro-family activists must stick to their convictions and confront such chronological snobbery categorically.

Why Angry About Tax Cuts, and Why Democrats Are Wrong to Foment This Anger

The New York Post invited columnist John Crudele to share his reasons why the tax reforms package, just passed and signed into law by the President, is so unpopular.

Santa Trump gave American taxpayers a gift that they should have been thrilled and thankful to receive. Yet polls — starting from before the plan was actually passed — show that Americans hated the idea of a tax cut.

Quinnipiac’s poll, for instance, showed that just 25 percent of voters approved the plan. Other surveys — by ABC News and the Washington Post, CNN, Morning Consult and YouGov — put approval only slightly higher. But those were still nowhere near the support that past tax cuts received.

He then references the widespread popularity for previous tax cuts by Reagan, Bush, and their extensions under Barack Obama.

Crudele then explains his opposition to the tax cuts:

With the US already $20 trillion in debt, I think it was unconscionable for Washington to change the tax laws in a way that will increase that debt by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years.

And that increase is on top of how much the debt is going to increase anyway. There were better ways to help the economy.

Larry Kudlow has concluded that the cuts will spur economic growth and tax revenue, which will more than cover for the initial deficit.

But I’d be shocked if enough Americans took the long view like I did to bring the approval rating down to an average of just 32 percent.

There are, of course, several explanations for the poll results. The most basic one is that the polls could have been wrong. Pollsters got the results of the last presidential election awfully wrong, so why trust what they say now?

Polling has been off lately. It's becoming more difficult for the polling forms to command respect from average readers. Should we really care what a sampling of people think about the tax cuts. Did the polling take place in a specific state, or were the respondents spread throughout the country?

Another reason might be that Americans bought into the idea that this tax cut was disproportionately going to benefit the rich. And it probably will.

The cuts will benefit a wide swath of men and women in the country. 80% of Americans will see a cut in their taxes. Yes, a large number of wealthy people will see a cut, too, but that's because "The rich" are paying most of the taxes to begin with. Congress needs to move toward a flat tax at some point so that this "eat the rich" or "soak the rich" insanity gets put to rest once and for all.

That anti-rich argument was mostly a story planted by Democrats and other Trump haters. The people reached by the pollsters could have simply been repeating what they were hearing on news shows and reading in the newspapers.

This reason is the more likely one, since the media corruption has become endemic and fanatical with the Trump administration. The media had a quiet disdain for Reagan, and then the press would mock George W. Bush's speaking skills. But the anti-Presidential animus eating away at the press corps is unprecedented under Trump.

Now that a number of corporations have been giving out $1,000 bonuses and crediting the tax reform for their largesse, that opinion could change quickly.

The corporations are giving money to their workers. What more do the naysayers want? They want the president removed from power, and there is nothing that he can do that would change their opinion. They are so rigidly attached to their progressive, left-wing worldview, that nothing can change their mind.

Crudele offers one more reason why the high negative opinion at this time for the tax cuts:

But I can think of another reason Americans might have been against the tax cut. And it’s the same reason that kids eventually outgrow their belief in Santa Claus.

It’s called cynicism.

Maybe we’ve gotten to the point where nothing that Washington does is right. Grown-up Americans don’t believe in Santa, and they don’t believe our politicians can solve our problems.

Let’s hope we will soon grow out of that stage.

Indeed, I hope they do, and I believe that they will when they see more money in their paycheck and less money going to the IRS.

This argument brings up why Democrats are overplaying their class warfare card on the tax reform package. David Harsanyi of The National Review reports:

According to political analysts, 2018 Democrats will use the just-passed tax reform as a way to argue that the Republican Party is the party of the plutocracy, which is another way of saying that Democrats are going to use the same argument they’ve been using for the past three decades with varying degrees of success. A number of liberals have claimed that the passage of “unpopular” tax reform is historically analogous to the passage of Obamacare, which triggered the loss of hundreds of Democrat seats and, perhaps, control of the presidency.

I am already smiling. Tax reform means that more people will keep their money. Obamacare was advertised with hollow promise, none of them came true, and people lost their health insurance and their money.

Big differences here.

Yes, the tax bill is unpopular. Then again, I’m not sure you’ve noticed that everything Washington, D.C., tries to do is unpopular. Nothing polls well. Not the president. Not Congress. Not Democrats. Not legislation. Not even erstwhile popular vote-winning candidates. 

This argument connects very well with Crudele's point about cynicism in the electorate.

However — apologies to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — they can be somewhat content knowing that voters will probably like it once they find out what’s in it.

In otherwords, they will give the bill a pass once they see what's in it.

Why do so many Americans believe that the middle class is getting a tax hike? Because outlets they trust are constantly lying to them. Both in framing and content, the coverage of the tax cuts has been impressively dishonest.

YEP! Finally, at least one reporter is calling out the militant negative bias in the press, directly targeting President Trump and everything he accomplishes.

There will always be ideological arguments regarding the efficacy of tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, but at some point people are going to find out that they’ve gotten one, too. The nonpartisan  liberals at the Tax Policy Center concede that 80 percent of Americans will see a tax cut in 2018, and that the average cut will be $2,140 — which might be something to scoff at in D.C., but I imagine a bunch of voters surprised by these savings will be less cynical. Only 4.8 percent of Americans will see a tax increase.

The elitist arrogance stands out once again. They scoff at saving $2,000, but that's big money for families ravaged by eight years of Obama-nomics.

Like Obamacare, people don’t know what’s in the bill.

This time, though, it's not the fault of the majority party, which did not hide the contents of the tax reform package. 

But unlike Obamacare, the repeal of the individual insurance mandate gives millions a choice. The passage of Obamacare, after all, upended lives. The Affordable Care Act became synonymous with “health care insurance,” and voters attributed everything that went wrong with that insurance to the bill.

Yes. There is no way that voters will attribute something bad or wrong to legislation which has allowed them to keep more money, a law which has encouraged more businesses and corporate interests to relocate and invest in the United States to create jobs.

And since Democrats offered a litany of fantastical promises about the future of health care, the disapproval was well-deserved. Millions began seeing their insurance plans discontinued as soon as Obamacare was implemented, despite assurances from the president and pliant Democrats that no such thing would happen. For many, premiums in the individual markets doubled over four years of Obamacare. Voters dealt with these tangible, real-life consequences.

In other words, the Democrats lied, health care died, and so did their House Majority. This latest litany of lying can still doom their chances of retaking the House in Election 2018, even though they claim that this is the best opportunity in nearly a decade to do so. Let's also remember that Democratic projects for House seats in 2016 underperformed, too.

Whatever valid concerns there are about debt or spending (and they are valid), it is unlikely that tax cuts will have similar long-term consequences on voting as those on health care. It is more likely that tax cuts will do little to change the dynamics of the coming years. But it is plausible that because of the overreaction from the left, millions of Americans who thought they were going pay more in taxes will find a new child credit and be thankful.

BAM! Even Trump's daughter Ivanka worked hard to get this tax credit going. She has made the concerns for single mothers a center-piece of the GOP economic agenda for once, as did US Senator Tim Scott when he celebrated the tax reform package's passage in Congress.

As an ideological matter, every time a Democrat claims that keeping more of your own money is tantamount to “stealing” — which happens often — voters should remember this is fundamentally a debate between people who believe the state should have first dibs on your property and people who don’t. The only way to frame the bill as a tax hike is by using the 2025 expiration of individual rate cuts. And the only way they won’t be extended is if Democrats decide to raise taxes again. These are debates Republicans should embrace.

YES! 

That’s not to say tax reform is a panacea for Republicans. It’s far from it. Historically speaking, the party in power will likely lose a bunch of seats in the 2018 midterms. But the claim, as Democrats are sure to make, that those losses are unique or tied to the toxicity of an agenda item — particularly a tax cut, which is generally popular among Americans (when they know it exists) — is far-fetched.

Yes it is.

I do acknowledge that the Republican Congress will likely lose seats. They lost seats last year, and there is enough hustle in D+ leaning House seats with Republicans representing them in swing states with a larger, more diverse voting population. Carlos Curbelo is one example whose tenure in Congress remains tenuous. A Florida Republican in swing district on the Southern tip of South Florida, he has cut a centrist fold in his re-election bid, and only Wikileaks exposés helped him defeat his last opponent, along with Trump's strength at the top of the ticket.

Final Reflection

The relentlessly negative press has had to admit that the tax reform will benefit all Americans, not just "the rich". The income tax rates have been lowered significantly, for example, which all but proves that even high tax cuts which depended on SALT deductions will not see the bump or massive increase in taxes despite the lowered tax deduction credit.

Many blue state Republican lawmakers voted for the Tax Reform package, even with the SALT deduction significantly lowered, counting on massive support from President Trump and the GOP majorities to stand by them faithfully for casting the votes to get tax reform across the finish line.

McConnell and Co.'s decision to add repeal of Obamacare's individual mandate very likely sweetened the deal for many wayward Republicans facing tough headwinds going into Election 2018.

Media Fail: LA Times Report Branson Dishonest About Huntington Park Lawsuit

The Los Angeles Times has printed the article about my arrest--and now my lawsuit--against the city of Huntington Park for false arrest and violation of my civil rights.

I had contacted Hailey Branson to report on this, but then I realized "Should I give her a second chance when she tried to smear me the last time."

Here's the report, and he are the facts:

Conservative activist arrested at City Council meeting sues Huntington Park, accusing city of trolling him

Arthur Christopher Schaper sat in the back of the Huntington Park City Council chambers, wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap and a Donald Trump flag around his shoulders like a cape.

The council warned him he was disrupting the June meeting. Police officers asked him to leave. He refused, likening himself to Rosa Parks.

No they didn't. It was Cosme Lozano who had suggested that I be ruled out of order following Joseph Settles' statement to me not to disrupt the meeting.

But I was not disrupting the meeting at all. What's going on here? Why didn't the Los Angeles Times include the videos I had uploaded? Strange.

Schaper was arrested on suspicion of two misdemeanor counts of disturbing a public meeting and disobeying a police officer, according to the Huntington Park Police Department.

Further down in the article, you will find that one of the Lieutenants refuses to release the information to the reporter. Another lieutenant ended up releasing this information.

Now, more than five months later, Schaper has sued the city of Huntington Park, claiming he was wrongfully arrested and that the city trolled him with "false notices" to appear in court when the case had not yet been presented by police to the Los Angeles County district attorney's office.

"Troll"? I didn't use that word. What is she talking about?

Here's an urban dictionary definition:

In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community 

The Police Department is not trolling me, since their decision not to file a case with the district attorney's office is not a mater of exchange on the Internet.

Schaper, who was profiled by The Times three days before his arrest, is a familiar, confrontational — and, some say, racist — presence at Huntington Park council meetings, where he rails against "illegal aliens," and heckles for his Facebook Live audience. Police officers who attend the meetings are so familiar with him that they call him by his first name.

"Racist". Who are the people who say this? Did the LA Times even bother to follow up on these remarks? She had profiled me in May, and she noticed that with one of the groups I interact with, there are men and women of different ethnic backgrounds. I still don't understand why she can print something like that without any proof of it. 

"Illegal aliens" are indeed sitting on two city commissions. They are in the country illegally, and they have no legal right to reside in the country. They are aliens, as that term is appropriate.

On June 6, Schaper and a cadre of anti-illegal immigration activists loudly laughed through the public comments of a man who told the council that Schaper was a white supremacist.

Huh?

Members of the City Council warned Schaper twice that he was disrupting the meeting before asking police to escort him out.

No they didn't. That is a total lie. The videos I have submitted and uploaded all detail this information.

"You have to leave or we're going to take you to jail," a Huntington Park police officer told him. "I don't want to do that if we don't have to. This isn't worth going to jail for."

"They said the same thing to Rosa Parks," Schaper said, just before he was arrested.

He or she was arrested? I am confused.

I don't see why there is a problem here, mentioning a civil rights activist who refused to give up her seat on a bus. I refused to leave the city council chambers because they had no right to arrest me. I was not disrupting the meeting.

Schaper, the president of the Beach Cities Republicans club, wrote on his blog that he sat in jail for two hours and was released with a citation and notice to appear at a Downey courthouse three months later.

I am no longer the President of the Beach Cities Republicans. How could she not get that right?

On Sept. 6, he wrote, he showed up, but his name was not listed on a court calendar. A proof of appearance document from the court, which he posted, said no case had yet been filed.

"I was astounded that the Huntington Park police department couldn't bother to file anything with the District Attorney's office in the last three months. Would it really have taken them that long?" he wrote.

He was rescheduled to appear Oct. 23. The same thing happened. His court date has since been rescheduled two more times.

Misdemeanor charges must be filed within one year of an arrest, said Ricardo Santiago, a spokesman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office. As of Thursday, no charges had been filed.

Santiago said police presented a case to the district attorney's office, which will decide whether to pursue charges, on Nov. 22.

Really?! That's news to me!

That was the same day Schaper sued the city for $10,000 in small claims court, records show. He claimed a "gross violation of civil rights" and said "city police harass plaintiff with false notices to appear in court."

Schaper reached out separately to two Times reporters about the case this week. Before a reporter could discuss it with him, he declined further comment, citing his displeasure with The Times' profile of him.

I declined further comment to Hailey, since she had tried to do a smear piece against me in the June article. I see no reason to give bad reporters a second chance. It just rewards bad behavior.

I have further reason not to communicate with her, since she thinks of the deceased reporter Helen Thomas as a mentor, when she was a rabid anti-Semite who thinks that the Jews "should get the hell out of Palestine" and called the state of Israel an "occupation".

Huntington Park Police Lt. Patrick Kraut, who is handling the case, refused to discuss the arrest or name the suspected charges on which Schaper was arrested. Local law enforcement agencies are required by the California Public Records Act to provide the charges on which a person is held and factual circumstances surrounding an arrest.

Kraut told a Times reporter that Schaper "has a copy of the citation" and that she should get it from him.

At this point, if this record is true, I have a lot of respect for Kraut. He is handling the case, is he not? Of course he is not allowed to discuss the case! I even saw him at the Huntington Park police department three days ago when I provided evidence in a case against John Turano, aka Gay Cuck Spartan, who had hit me on the hand and has twice threatened me with violence.

Lt. Al Martinez, a spokesman for the department, later provided the two misdemeanor charges on which Schaper was held.

"Full capacity" Alfred Martinez told Hailey whats going on, the same Lieutenant who lied to an entire group of people about

Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who now is a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said it's hard to say if the police would keep refusing to present a case out of spite or if the "inefficiency" of an overburdened court system was to blame.

How could she not know? I mean, the "evidence" was already presented within two hours. I have a clear record of 

"If there's bad blood between them, you would hope [police] would pay attention so they don't make mistakes," she said. "If they are just hassling him, that would be totally inappropriate."

They are hassling me, and it is inappropriate.

Still, with the "enormous volume of misdemeanor and infraction cases" that regularly cause delays in local courts, Schaper's alleged crime, Levenson said, "is not one that would be the highest priority, even though you think he's constantly on their minds."

This is a nonsense argument. It does not take long for a police officer to submit a criminal package to the DA's office.

Reflection

I would like to know why the Los Angeles Times refused to include the videos I had taken for the Huntington Park Chief of Police refusing to answer my questions about not filing the paperwork with the DA's office.

I would also like to know why the LA Times reporter Hailey Branson looks up to an anti-Semite like Helen Thomas--who is now deceased--as a welcome figure of support and comfort.

The race card has become so overplayed, and yet who are the racists by and large? We find so much of it on the Left.

NewsWEAK Fail: "Ivanka Plagiarizes Her Own Speech"

I cannot believe that the press has sunk to such a low level.

Do they even take themselves seriously anymore? Do they have any self-respect or regard for their craft anymore? No. Instead, they have turned into a 24-7 Anti-Trump Derangement Machine, dedicated to doing whatever they can to smear, shame, and stop the President and his pro-American agenda.

They are still rabid that they could not prevent the President from becoming ... the President. They have all lined up behind Crooked Hillary from the outset, and they were determined to make sure that she was the next Chief Executive. She would complete the circle for the globalist, corporatist international shills who want to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. She was an elitist's elite.

Ivanka Trump plagiarizes one of her own speeches in India https://t.co/nqrPl8R6cX pic.twitter.com/C5Ivw2fEbb

— Newsweek (@Newsweek) November 30, 2017

Plagiarism means stealing someone else's ideas and using them as if they were your own. No one can plagiarize themselves!

Someone at Newsweek needs a dictionary.

Of course, this gaffe merely reveals how deep the anti-Trump, anti-White House animus has clouded the judgment and integrity of the mainstream media.

They tried to cover their tracks once someone clicks on the link, but it's too little, too late!

Even with this correction, though, another question comes forward:

"Why is this even news?" I mean, who cares of Ivanka used statements from another speech to address entrepreneurship in India?

Keep in mind, I am not a big fan of Ivanka of Jared. They both need to go, in my view, but that's no excuse for the corrupt media to go out of their way to shame her for speaking her own mind a second time!

More Media Fails from the LA Titanic: Reportedly vs. Actually

This one tweet encapsulates why the liberal mainstream media is in total freefall.

Hailey Branson-Potts (or is just Branson? Has she been divorced yet?), sent out the following tweet after the attacks and assaults I had endured in Berkeley this past weekend:

Vocal SoCal Trump supporter Arthur Schaper, known for disrupting public meetings, reportedly had MAGA gear taken & was cornered in Berkeley. https://t.co/Zh7iVXjzQP

— Hailey Branson-Potts (@haileybranson) August 28, 2017

She writes "reportedly".

As if it weren't true or something?

The proper term is "actually", or how about not writing a qualifying adverb in the first place?

What does "reportedly" actually mean?

"According to what some say (used to express the speaker's belief that the information given is not necessarily true)."

Wow!

Did Hailey even graduate from high school? What kind of grades did she earn in English Composition?

Reportedly, she's educated, but not from the poor journalism and word choice evident in her media.

I think the pictures speak for themselves:

Then after the Antifa mobs showed up:

Corrupt LA Times Media Runs from Me

This was a lot of fun.

I love going after the corrupt media.

This photographer works for the Los Angeles Times.

The same Los Angeles Times whose main editors have been fired and replaced.

Watch him run!

The same Los Angeles Times which is carrying water for Maxine Waters while trying to smear and malign Trump supporters.

Check out my confrontation with this photographer:

Tolerance: Liberal Democrats Refuse to Ralk to Trump Supporters

Yes, this happened to me at the Brad Sherman Town Hall.

I wanted to talk to a two Brad Sherman protesters.

But they were protesting Sherman ... from the Left.

They faulted him for serving on no major committees, and for not achieving ranking status on any committees, either.

Check out the signs below:

The guy explicitly stated to me: "We will not talk to Trump supporters. Only to Democrats."

Now that was really funny, because one older man came up to me very uielty, then adcknowledged: "I am a Democrat and I voted for Trump!"

HA!

What is it about these "liberals"? They are not very inclusive or tolerant at all, are they?!

How does anyone expect to accomplish anything if there is no dialogue?

These two were easily triggered, too, when I was trying to get some answers out of them.

Oh well ...

Pacific Justice Institute Slams the Alt-Left Hate Group Southern Poverty Law Center

VIDEO: PJI President's Response to SPLC’s Baseless and Reckless Hate Label August 17, 2017 ***Media Contact: Brad Dacus - 916-616-4126*** Sacramento, CA—The Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), a religious liberties defense organization, is demanding apologies and retractions from television and newspaper media outlets after PJI was listed alongside extremist white supremacist groups and linked to recent violence in Charlottesville, Virginia.  No reporters reached out to PJI to verify their stories, which repeated information from the incendiary, discredited and far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). The SPLC's false accusation that PJI is a hate group is calculated to provoke contempt and potential violence against PJI.  PJI has never promoted or engaged in acts of violence against any person or group.  The work of PJI includes the defense of victims of intolerance against individuals and institutions because of their faith.  The case files of PJI's attorneys include the representation of immigrants fleeing religious persecution from Asia and the Middle East. During the last year lawyers for the organization have fought hospitals and government officials—in court—to prevent the removal of life-support from two children of African-American descent and a construction worker who is a Mexican immigrant.  SPLC's attempts to associate PJI with violent racist hate groups is incendiary and dangerous. “It is unacceptable and inexcusable to compare the First Amendment work of a legitimate religious freedom defense group to abhorrent White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis.  PJI believes in mutual respect and tolerance.  We have absolutely nothing in common with hate groups working to spread discord and violence, as has recently manifested in Charlottesville.” said Brad Dacus, president and founder of PJI.   The SPLC is an extremist organization that creates vitriol and division instead of tolerance, dialogue, and understanding by attacking non-profit organizations like PJI for helping to defend those who cannot defend themselves.  Further, in recent years, SPLC has created an enemies list which include nonviolent and law abiding individuals and organizations who, as a matter of conscience, simply promote biblical values on sexual ethics. By projecting the acts of violent racist extremists onto PJI, SPLC creates the conditions for further persecution and invites violence against PJI.  For 20 years, PJI has defended religious freedom, parental rights, and the sanctity of all human life and we will continue to do so no matter the fabrications and defamation by SPLC and their allies.

Los Angeles Eastside Sun Fail: Pity for Illegals, Nothing for Americans

Then check out the article headline in the bottom right corner:

This narrative about the poor illegal alien families "This Father's Day: Orphans A Crule Trump Legacy"

What about Angie Morfin?

What about Kate Steinle's parents?

What about Don Rosenberg?

What about them? They are parents bereaved for their children?

What about the children of Sandra Duran?

She was killed by an illegal alien in the North Hills section of Los Angeles?

Her children have no mother.

What about them?

Where is the pity for Americans?

LA Times Fail--Print Version Leaves Out Legal Action Against Huntington Park

Yesterday, I shared how I had forced the Los Angeles Times to print more accurate, updated information about in relation to the false arrest I had endured in Huntington Park in June 6th.

Here are all the captures from  the LA Times article online:

Then the changes that followed affirmed that I was pursuing legal action because the Huntington Park Mayor and police ruled me out of order wrongfully, then falsely arrested me:

And yet, what was in the paper this morning?

Looking at the bottom of the article, there is no mention whatsoever of my being arrested in Huntington Park--or that I was filing a claim against the city for false arrest and wrongful ruling of out of order.

The Los Angeles Times had plenty of time to update the article on the website.

But they couldnn't to print what I had written to them yesterday?

What is up with the editing department at this newspaper? Was Hailey Branson upset because I called her out earlier yesterday for attempting to spin a negative narrative?

After all, the idea is developing--at least among the Fake News outlets--that Trump supporters are protecting illegal immigration in the Southeastern Los Angeles region, and looking for every opportunity possible to get arrested.

The narrative is to portray the "immigrant" communities and their brown supremacist enablers as the victims, while the citizens fighting for the rule of law or the lawless aggressors.

What a crock!

And once again, the Los Angeles Times refused to cover anything about me in Huntington Park right after I had called them out on my unjust arrest in Huntington Park!

Keep in mind that the incident with Tom Green drawing out his weapon took place on Monday, June 26.

The LA Times article was online by Wednesday, June 28, including corrections about my legal claim.

Then comes the print version on June 29, with no mention of Huntington Park?

Come on, LA Times, get it together!