My Local Domestic Violence Shelter, Quanada, Has Blocked Me on Facebook


I’m not sure exactly what I did to warrant it, though I’m certain I’ve never ‘harassed’ anyone on their site. My local Domestic Violence shelter is pretty selective about which women’s opinions it wants on its site.  The most I’ve ever done was constructively criticize their position on how they portray Domestic Violence. Often it’s females as victims and males as perpetrators. I’ve been vocal of the way they’ve stereotype and attached gender to Domestic Violence roles. So I do like to occasionally go to their Facebook page and read some of their content to comment. However, the other day was different.

I noticed, initially when I had attempted to comment on one of their articles, and I had no option to reply. It had been months since I had even visited the site. So why had I even been blocked? I haven’t done anything to them, anything that is, except being an open critic of the facility. Even then, it had been over five months since I had even engaged or mentioned their name. So they either targeted me and did it without me knowing, or I’ve been blocked for awhile.

Quanada 2

When I checked to see if I sent them any emails, I found that my outbox was completely empty. I had not sent them anything directly to warrant a block. A matter of fact, I hadn’t sent them anything on their inbox an ALL.




I wanted to make certain that I was blocked. So I looked through my boyfriend’s account, he was allowed to reply and comment. It seemed that I really was put in a situation where I was targeted and silenced.

The point is, this facility receives public funding and is a non-profit, taxpayer funded organization. Is it even allowed to block one of its critics if they’re not harassing them? If they did not block me for criticizing them, are they allowed to block me for no reason at all? I would say NOT. I know for a fact that part of my own taxes go to this group and I should not be silenced for doing NOTHING wrong.

Whatever I allegedly did, I didn’t even receive a Facebook ban for, that’s how pitiful it probably was.


Why This Impeachment is A Waste of Time and Money


There are so many out there that are happy that the Democrats are finally going through with impeachment. Yet, many of these people don’t even know the process behind impeachment to realize, it’s pointless. Yes, the House scraped by with enough votes to pass for the impeachment process yesterday. However, just barely, the vote was so partisan that all Republicans and even two Democrats voted against the impeachment standards presented Thursday. This isn’t the point though, the real point is, the Democrats will succeed in the House, only to have it die in the Republican controlled Senate.

Most Americans today don’t understand how presidential impeachment works, particularly the younger ones. The Democrats are building up people’s hopes only to have their ambitions killed in the Senate. In a Presidential Impeachment, the House is responsible for investigating charges and presenting a case, while the Senate is in charge in the actual impeachment. If the case is never even allowed to be brought to the floor, even after a long trial in the House, what’s the point of holding this investigation?

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, stated that this impeachment trial was the perfect opportunity for the President to prove his innocence. That if he did nothing wrong, that this was the best time to prove it and he should have nothing to fear if that’s the case.

“The facts are what they are. They can try to misrepresent them, but the fact is, this is a process that is expanded opportunity for them to show anything that is exculpatory to prove the innocence of the president,” Pelosi said.

Yet that’s not the way our Justice System is supposed to work. It works in innocent unless proven guilty and it is that way for this very reason, malicious incrimination. Where a power or a collective power, maliciously sets out to incriminate you and you must prove your innocence. This was one thing the old courts of England did very well and our forefathers hated it.

Let’s bring it closer with today’s problems. A police officer pulls you over and asks to search your car. You are negligent, yet he tells you that if you’ve done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. You allow the search and end up getting busted with 10grams of meth that the officer planted. How can you prove your innocence here? It’s not right and it’s impossible against a power that is greater than your own. Especially if that power makes you out to look like the bad guy. Even if you’re the innocent party and they’re really the malicious one, the title that person holds is too persuasive. Thankfully this is why body cameras exist and due process is here. It seems unlikely, but this scenario really happens, and if regular police officers are capable of doing it to random people, what makes the world think politicians wouldn’t do it to an opponent they hate?

Impeachment may seem like an exciting idea to many Democrats across the country, but think about this, it’s destined for failure. The time they’ve spent on impeachment, they could be spending it on better things. Each Representative makes, on average, $174,000 a year in taxpayer dollars. Multiply that by 435, it’s only fair that we take that product and multiply it by two as well because they’ve been after impeachment for two full years, not just one. That comes out to be, $151,380,000 blown in their salaries on average and that’s only their tax collected salaries. This, in the pursuit of an impeachment, that is simply going to die in a Republican controlled Senate.


Americans are Slowly Losing Their Freedom of Speech


The constitution lists out the Rights that every American citizen has. Citizen is a key word in this language of law, because persons do not inherit these rights. This is one of the key arguments for the legality of abortion, since the unborn do not have social security numbers they are considered ‘persons’ and do not have any rights. However, even citizens are losing these supposed ‘rights’ little by little. Many don’t even realize they’re pushing Legislation that may seem like ‘good intent’. Yet, is really a step forward when it comes infringing on their own rights.

One of the most ‘sacred’ of our Amendments, it is pushed back every single day. Free speech is ‘free’ so long as no one is injured physically as a result of it. On our college campuses, a place where free speech is supposed to reign supreme, is being silenced. Obama policies such as the 2011, 2010 Dear Colleague Letters and everything dealing with Title IX has largely had a negative effect. A specific line in the 2010 Dear Colleague letter states

Harassment does not have to include intent to harm, be directed at a specific target, or involve repeated incidents

So basically, any speech that is interpreted as offensive can be classified as ‘hate speech’. All it has to do is be within earshot of a person who found it offensive. Also, unlike legal harassment, which is a repeated unwanted act; a person does not have to inform the individual that they find something offensive and request they stop beforehand. This creates the perfect environment to violate both the second Amendment and due process. A person not having to prove they were offended by something, puts the accused in a position of guilty unless proven innocent. Clearly NOT what the creators of this country wanted.

It’s not just on college campuses, it’s in State Legislation now too. Massachusetts is attempting to pass legislation that fines you if you use the word ‘Bitch’ in a “derogatory manner”.

This reduces the status on whether you’re guilty or not to your accuser’s opinion. It’s the perfect opportunity for false accusers to create allegations on people they don’t like. The law violates the first amendment and should be knocked down. It’s still only in its ‘hearing’ phase but the fact it’s even gotten this far shows how much feminism has become a tool to oppress others. Its intent is to discourage the use of a name commonly given to women, and in this push is shutting down people’s freedom to express themselves. Yet, why not ‘dick’, ‘asshole’, or ‘douche-bag’, because this law was designed to push an ideological agenda to benefit women.

Large media platforms are flagging more and more content as being ‘hateful’. It has been shown that even if content did NOT violate Facebook’s community standards, some were censored anyways. Many have used the excuse that since they are a private publishing company they have the right to censor whomever they want. However, this is no better than what the Nazis did. Now getting a 30 day ban on Facebook is considered a ‘badge of honor’.

On one positive note, Facebook cannot insist they are a publishing company, which allows them to censor whoever they wish, but keep the protection of not being regulated. This is a privilege reserved for a public platform. So either they give up their right to censor and dodge regulation; or they face being regulated, but gain the power to censor. This applies to every form of social media.

A study found that some are calling to reform the First Amendment to ‘reflect cultural norms’. If this were to have been petitioned and enforced earlier in Americas history, there wouldn’t have been a civil rights movement at all. The reality is, when free speech is gone, a culture doesn’t evolve at all. There would be no such thing as a new ‘cultural norm’ because as a person you’d have no right to speak out against current norms. It would create a rise in mob mentality, as it would allow the majority to control whatever happened to the minority. Being that hate speech is based on perception, the ones who define what speech is hateful are the ones to silence the rest.

This is precisely why the Second Amendment was put in place, to protect the first Amendment. A nation is as good as dead when their citizens are no longer truly free to speak.

Why Transitioning a 7 Year old Should be EVERYONE’S Problem!


A father in Texas recently lost his fight to stop his ex-wife from turning his 7 year-old son into a girl. The child will now be on his way towards transitioning into a girl and eventually chemical castration. The father was court ordered to switch pronouns from male to female, and custody is attempted to be stripped from the father. In a world, where fathers already have very little rights, the fight was already practically non-existent for him.

This is a SEVEN YEAR OLD! How is the mother assessing his sexual orientation based on outward observations? I played with legos, I loved getting messy, I built things, and I dressed in ‘boy’ clothes. This doesn’t mean I want to miss out on the rest of my life because someone assumed this meant something it didn’t. I’ve kissed other women, but this doesn’t mean I’m sexually attracted to them, I was simply curious. We are human beings and we LIKE to try new things.

Which leads me to my next point, the LGBTQ community always states that you cannot assume someones gender, isn’t that PRECISELY what this woman is doing to her son? This boy, unless proven otherwise, is merely just curious to find out what he likes. Isn’t she applying gender stereotypes of a female onto the male and assuming that he then wants to BE a girl? If the only person who knows what gender they wish to be is the individual at question then isn’t it a legitimate and responsible judgement to allow that individual to make that choice when their brain fully matures?

Another point, biology itself conflicts with the notion that a 7-year-old can even make the choice of what gender they are since the brain doesn’t fully develop until twenty-five. Also, to have another person make this decision for you, a decision that could ruin your life sexually, productively, and psychologically is simply wrong! There-in falling back on my last argument, the only person who can make this acknowledgement is the individual in question.

Why does this matter? The last thing we need are spiteful parents getting back at their ex-partners by permanently scaring their children. Might I add, using legal and court ordered means to perpetrate their abuse. There are going to be a lot of mentally derailed children all in the name of getting back at your ex.

You know who it’s going to target the most? Boys. Be aware this is only a prediction, but this is based off of the way things are now. Since women are more likely to get custody and men are more likely to favor the same sex child. Toxic parents who are looking for some form of revenge will use their children as pawns. Most likely it’ll be his favorite to make it more painful. Does this sound to disgusting to be true? Well take a look around you, many already beat or kill their children to get back at the former partner. However, this comes with consequences. Transitioning a child is perfectly legal, insane as that may sound, and it’s court enforced so that the other parent looks like the enemy. On top of that, the child lives, and the parent in turn suffers.

There are dark people out there and this is an abusive DISGUSTING thing we are FORCING upon CHILDREN. This is WORSE than child marriage, at least they can get out of it and live semi-normal lives. These individuals will have no way to reproduce, EVER! And IF they change their minds, which studies are SHOWING that many ARE, there is little support to help them de-transition.

If he DOES change his mind, it will only serve the father, because all this documentation shows, the father did his best to save his son. While there is plenty of documentation, that the mother did everything in her power to crush his freedom to choose and stop his potential future.

The Far Left Is Creeping Up Even On Some of the Most Conservative Campuses


I was picking up my school books for this fall at the local University known as Quincy University. It is a Catholic Private School, meaning it is probably going to be as conservative and as open-minded as I’m going to find within fifty miles. They are pretty even keeled and very pro-free speech, which some find hard to believe when I tell them this, because they’ve never seen anything beyond their own town. The amount of support it had for Trump was through the roof.

However, even on a campus that’s insulted with a conservative town, the left is working its way into targeting its next generation. Probably right under this towns nose, these books are signs that the left making its way towards mass indoctrinations:


This would make sense if these were in the school library, but these are books that are in the book store. They were books specifically there to be picked up because they were requested to be used by professors in their classes. I realize today it’s considered a “feminist’s” world, which I don’t agree with, but to have an entire class on it? However, it is a private campus. Yet the second picture is where I get concerned. The fact that this was even on anyones list says that there is a problem, yes there can be a conversation, but to have an entire book for the class? That’s an over reach.

Hate speech is free speech, if you don’t like that speech, then speak your mind. The only way to fight hate speech is with more speech. The moment you start to even think the answer is to close your mouth, our country is dead.

If this is a Catholic Campus, think of how bad a non-religious campus that runs on public funding is. Think of how tied down those students voices are, if this is just a sample of what I’m expecting here.


Judge Denies Motion to Detain New Mexico Compound Criminals: After Starving 11 Children, Killing 1 & Training Them For Terror


Contact the New Mexico Eighth Judicial District Circuit Court and Nag the Hell out of them!

The media was not straight forward leading up to this story, yet now that many see the big picture this doesn’t make America look any better. On top of the media being dishonest, the American Justice system is seriously lacking in morals. Many judges simply need to lose their positions, I wonder how many got to their positions to begin with, and this is one of those times.

Everyone by now has heard of the New Mexico bunker, but if you haven’t read about it, it’ll send a chill up your spine. After several hours in a hearing the judge, Sarah C. Backus, denied the prosecutors’ requests to hold the five adults until trial. Even with evidence of the intent to commit acts of violence in the future, apparently that wasn’t enough to convince this judge that these people were a danger to the community.

You’re telling me, that even though these people have a history of disappearing on others without consulting them, that you’re going to allow them the privilege of their freedom up until their trial dates? That even though they are undeniably guilty of child abuse, you’re going to risk them having the ability to flee to a different state and disappear again?


Like last time the media is covering it up:

Washington Post Headline:

“Judge denies request from prosecutors to hold five adults without bond in New Mexico child abuse case”

Although the article is detailed the title is, Very bland, without any detail. Almost as though it was… just another child abuse case not linked in any way to the bunker in the middle of the desert.

This is what you get when you put an activist judge in the court house. It doesn’t matter if the crime was horrendous, the criminals aren’t treated as criminals. They are empathized with through the judge’s ideological lens. This is true whether a judge leans left or right. Of course this is only my opinion, however, actions speak louder than words.

What is even MORE insulting, is what the original article revealed about the defense presented in court and how they pandered to race and religion as a defense. As though those two things inherently made them less violent:

The defense spent their time at the podium hammering home that there is a double standard at play, alleging that if the suspects were white, Christian and had guns, “we might not be here today.”

If these criminals flee, the suffering of those children will be on her.

If you ask me and they DO flee, she should face some consequence right next to them!

Don’t like her decision! You’re not alone!

Here’s that Link AGAIN!

Social Media Has No Business Parenting US: Back OFF!


There was a point in time when you hit the age of eighteen, you were on your own. It’s funny how our lives are mere pawns to be used in war at eighteen, yet you need to use your parent’s information for financial aid all the way up until you’re twenty-five unless you divorce them. I had to wait until I was twenty five years old to go to college, I couldn’t receive the financial aid that I needed and I didn’t know that something as absurd as divorcing your parents even existed. I have been on my own since I was eighteen and I have received next to zero help from either of my parents.

People make conscious choices to do things, this isn’t just a matter of free speech, it’s also a freedom to choose what I listen to. Sorry, but the last person who tried to control everything in my life ended up not seeing me again. I firmly believe in the freedom of choice, even if it means hearing things I don’t necessarily agree with. By deeming certain content as “hateful”, they are becoming the parent I didn’t ask for. The parent that I don’t want, need, and quite frankly am insulted to be given. I am not a child to shepherded around.

Banning Alex Jones is like placing parental content filters on America’s computers as though he’s rated ‘R’. It’s insulting to think that you supposedly know what’s best for me to see. You see it as ‘hateful’, yet you don’t seem to have a problem with the Facebook page Death To America consisting of 1,347 people when I last counted it, Twitter having countless accounts registered under Death To America, they’re shaddowbanning conservative accounts.

However, this doesn’t seem to disturb these social media billionaires, they’re just practicing their right to religious practice. Thankfully, twitter hasn’t completely gone off the deep end and is one of the few social medias that hasn’t botted Alex Jones off yet.

Youtube doesn’t seem to mind not listing videos according to what’s popular now either. According to Mark Dice, new algorithms now make sure that what they think comes before what you’re looking for, even if the title is written word for word:

This one reveals YouTube puts mainstream media first instead of by who gets the most views (whom they just recently banned anyways and haven’t changed the algorithms)

This one reveals how YouTube intentionally scrambles your search results try to get you think like you do.

Here’s an example of how this works, there’s also another algorithm that’s gone up. If you search a controversial subject, it will post a link with mainstream beliefs linked to them to try to ‘unbrainwash’ you.

Social media is a platform to voice all opinions. If it were a place for kids to simply play on it, you wouldn’t have to verity you were a certain age. Since when was it legal to shut down another person’s right to publish and distribute to his/her audience? When did corporations have the right to take my chosen media source away from me as though I were some child that had to be moderated? It’s funny how you have to be 18 to hold a youtube account (13 with a parent’s permission), but can still be parented like you’re some little kid that can’t take a few shots of reality.

Alex Jones, though I don’t agree with him and do take him for a nut job at times, should have his accounts reinstated. He hasn’t hurt anyone, hasn’t incited violence of any kind, if the most he has done is presented conspiracy theories then do nothing more than voice your opinion as to why they are conspiracy theories. You do nothing more than bring validity to his claims by cutting off his voice. If  social media is not in fact social then I will treat you like any other controlling parent, divorce you. These are class action lawsuits waiting to happen, people don’t like having their voices cut off, or the content they love taken away from them by force.

Eleven Children Rescued in New Mexico Were Being Trained For School Shootings


There was a frantic search for a little boy who had allegedly been taken by his father. Siraj Wahhaj, 39, was suspected of kidnapping his three year old son who was disabled and was in the custody of his grandfather. The chase led to New Mexico, where low and behold, Police found eleven other children, in a compound in the middle of the desert. Without water, disgusting conditions, and practically starving to death.

When this was initially reported, the story was that three women and two men were arrested after finding them with eleven children. However, they only showed the mugshots of the men and the horrible living conditions. Being that we live in a rather feminist society I didn’t think much of it at first.


Then, I ran across a blog post on facebook saying that the New Mexico bunker was really a place to train future school shooters. I like looking into these things, only because I like to get my facts straight to know in the future. I found a news article that linked to an article from the UK that showed the mugshots to the three women that were apprehended. Now I see why CNN didn’t put them in their original post, when they say they “asked the captain to confirm a Muslim connection” in their second article (which was in no way in their first) this should have given it away at the very beginning.



Of course this doesn’t show the initial intent behind the abduction or that Islam played a part, but with holding information from a story is lying to the public. Nobody said that there were suspicions that Islam could be involved, no, they completely withheld the information completely. I had to find out through a blog circulating on social media, and confirm it through a source, which at the time, was only posted through a different country’s media. Even though the media DID eventually cover it, it was extremely defiant and dishonest in its initial presentation of all the facts. If an alternative news source hadn’t covered it, I doubt there would have been any mention of it at all.

In doing more research, I ran across a video that basically spells out everything in capital letters.

This explains the media’s silence and their reluctance to talk about it afterwards, it comes to show they were silent even when the curtain was pulled back. Even when we thought we knew everything, they were still ‘keeping us in the dark’. It comes to show how dishonest the media has truly become.


Riot at Portland Freedom Rally



Antifa has struck again against a peaceful display of pro-peace. The violent group, without permit, crashed the Trump supporter party. With fists and various objects, Antifa members beat Trump supporters without the supporters showing any antagonism. They were beat simply because they showed open support for the president. They did so in the name of anti-fascism, ironically using fascist tactics to silence their political opponents.

Trump supporters tried their best to defend themselves, without any weapons to counter the violent group. They were forced to use nothing but their bodies to defend against the attacks. The most antagonism that happened were the Trump supporters repeating the Pledge of Allegiance over and over.

They threw rocks and eggs at the protesters. Finally the Trump Supporters had enough, and basically stampeded them. A riot was officially called by Portland Police the Department.

I have bought the Antifa handbook just to get a glimpse into the minds of these supporters, and the results are disturbing. He admits that, “Some antifa groups are more Marxist while others are more anarchist or anti-authoritarian.” The fact that he admits the group members have supporter anarchism and Marxism is appalling. Anti-authoritarian isn’t so horrible, but to what degree do they believe is an unacceptable form of authority? Every country has to have some degree of authority or else, you don’t have a country. Sorry, but the human race is not enlightened enough to survive outside of this structure.

The hypocrisy of Antifa is using Authoritarian acts to enforce their own beliefs on others. This is a trademark of fascism, instead they could have started their own enlightened community and apply their beliefs. Yet, they’re not antifascists, they ARE the fascists and using the antifascist label to shield their fascism.

The group “Patriot Prayer” had obtained a permit for a march in the area, as confirmed by the Portland Police department:


Reports of the rally from the Police Department can be found here.

However, the left-wing mainstream media won’t tell you that it was Antifa that started this provocation. They’ve spun it to where the Patriot Prayer group was the perpetrator. Many weapons that were confiscated from the group initially were intended to be used in the name of self defense. Antifa had no permit to be in the area, and was exclusively there to shut down the Freedom Rally. Think of that for a moment, the only reason they were there was to shut down someone else’s first amendment rights, that they had a permit for.

The reason there was a dispersement order and the permit revoked, wasn’t due to the Patriot Prayer group hunting down Antifa. Reality is, the police department has kept everything 100% neutral in their reporting. It seems that both parties were at fault for the canceling of the group’s march. Yet, many mainstream media place their biased opinions in their articles, painting Trump Supporters as perpetrators, instead of just reporting the facts.

Huffington Post’s title has bias to begin with, “Right-Wing Portland Rally Declared Riot Amid Clashes With Antifa Protesters” First of all, Antifa weren’t protesters since they didn’t have a permit to confront the activists. How is saying the pledge of allegiance and supporting your president considered right-wing today?

A word of advice when reading the mainstream media:

REMEMBER, Anything to the Right of the Far-Left today is Considered “Alt-Right”

To Abolish ICE is to Forget 9/11


Where were you when the first plane slammed into the North Tower? I was only in sixth grade, an 11-year-old, who still remembers that day as though it were yesterday.  Initially in a state of panic, we watched what was happening on television. It was as though the world stood still. Nothing mattered that day except for what was happening in New York. People jumping out of the burning skyscraper, knowing that there was no other way out. I cried that night just at the realization that there were people out there that were so heartless to kill massive amounts of people for nothing. I still cry for those people, even more so knowing that much of our country has appeared to have forgotten. It seems like half of our country has amnesia, because they don’t seem to realize that there are people out there that truly hate our country and will do anything to destroy it.

Many of the younger people who are being groomed by radical left mentors don’t know what that horror feels like. Documentaries over the issue doesn’t cover it. Even worse, many suggest that it was all just a hoax, even though the hijackers made accidental transmissions that confirms the story.

After this National tragedy, it was decided that more extreme National Security was needed in order to deal with the new threats. Many Democrats are saying that ICE isn’t doing what they were originally designed to do. It doesn’t matter if the target has changed, what hasn’t changed is the attack on sovereignty. Violent illegal gang members, human traffickers, and smugglers are all attacks on the United States. ICE’s function was always about getting potential threats out of our country.

How exactly is taking illegal aliens out of our country NOT fulfilling that job? How are keeping criminals off the streets, that shouldn’t be here to begin with,  against American values? If we do not have ICE we run the risk of no longer having an America at all. If we aren’t careful, we’ll be the ones fleeing our country. Many of the people who are marching against ICE are marching against American sovereignty and are handing our country to the world on a silver platter.


The Left’s Hypocrisy on Fathers: Illegals VS Citizens


Father’s day is supposed to be a day to honor fatherhood. The left, of course has been griping about the National Policy of separating children from their parents. A policy, I might add, that has been in effect for decades and is not a Trump administration policy. On Father’s day, members of the Democratic Party were outraged that Illegal children couldn’t be with their father’s on father’s day.

They went so far as going to the Immigrant Detention Center in order to protest the poor fathers being detained on father’s day.

If I could ask all the Democrats, who were so dramatic fighting for these illegal fathers, anything it would be…

  • Where have you been this past decade?
  • Since when did you believe Fathers HAD rights?
  • Why are you fighting for Illegal fathers, but have yet to acknowledge that American Fathers are suffering?
  • Why is it immoral to take away children from Illegal fathers, but okay to take children away from fathers who are citizens?
  • How is it totally okay to have laws that discriminate against male citizens, but immoral to have a laws that take children from illegal aliens because they broke the law?

If you don’t know what I’m getting at, let me give you some perspective. For the past several years, Democrat-backed groups have called father rights groups sexist and slandered them. Women are still more likely to get custody of children than fathers, even in instances the father is a better parent. Even if a father today pays their child support, mothers are not held accountable when they alienate the child from the father. However, when a father withholds child support as leverage to gain access to their own children, they face extreme consequences:

  • loss of driver’s license
  • garnishment of wages
  • jail time
  • probation

Not to mention the stigma one has to carry around of being labeled a “deadbeat father”. This is a country where it’s become “okay” to hold a child hostage against their own fathers. Yet, when a father tries to flee with their child, that father is considered to be a kidnapper. Parental alienation is not even being acknowledged by the Democratic party. Fathers are committing suicide at an alarming rate due to alienation, being legally abused, and emotionally abused by their children’s mothers. The drug usage increases when a father is alienated from his children. Democrats seem to have just sat on their butts and watched these problems.

Father’s advocates and rights groups have been trying to bring these problems to light for years. Though, feminist agencies have used a large amount of their energy towards shutting down their voices. Instead of creating new laws to fix these problems, all they done is drowned out the activist’s voices. Paint them as though they are a danger to gender equality, when the true gender inequality is being perpetrated before everyone’s eyes.

Democrats are now dramatically acting as though fathers matter. Which is why I asked: where have you been? What they won’t say are only ILLEGAL fathers matter, because they are potential future voters. They want to look as though they care. They don’t.

Are you understanding it yet? The hypocrisy behind these actions?

Democrats have lazily sat by for years while children have been ripped away from their loving fathers. Fathers, many whom get the blame for being absent in the end, that love their children. This is done through an abusive, biased, and broken court system that has heavily favored women. Even in the instance where children have verbally requested to live with their fathers, they are denied. Though the psychological consequences of alienating a child, through data, is shown to be catastrophic there’s no punishment for it.

Some will say that my argument isn’t legit simply because children are being torn from their parents at the border. To that I say, bull. Parents come to this country with full knowledge that they will be separated from their children. They also, as a family, decide to illegally cross the border knowing that being broken up will be a consequence. This is a moral crime committed by the child’s own parents, NOT by the legal system. The other moral crime are Democrats screaming about it and doing nothing to fix it. It’s like taking video of themselves yelling that child labor is wrong in front of a child labor camp, and then not using their power to shut it down.

My point in the end? Illegal immigrant fathers are being treated with more respect and dignity than the American citizens our country is supposed to be protecting.

So DEAR DEMOCRATS: if ANYONE are using children as pawns… it’s YOU.

America FIRST

Why I Cancelled Netflix, and why you should too!



Some people are boycotting Netflix, now represented by a hashtag of #LEFTFLIX people don’t seem to understand WHY anyone should cancel Netflix. Is it convenient, yes. However, when you actually look at some of the documentaries being broad-casted, you’ll understand. Netflix is supposed to be about entertainment and the expansion of knowledge in the comfort of your own home.

The corporation has been going down hill ever since Donald Trump was elected president. There are at least three documentaries to date, that specifically target Donald Trump and his family. Expressing all the negatives associated with his life- why do I care about an affair he had? He’s human, it’s his relationship, and there are reasons billionaires cheat versus regular people. Not to mention it’s in the past! There are at least two others that target Conservatives. Interestingly enough, there has also been an increase in Nazi documentaries since the election. Why so many Nazi documentaries you think? I know why, because all Trump supporters are Nazis and somehow these documentaries of  Nazis will convert people over to the “good side”. How do I say it? This doesn’t work when the people who ‘need educating’ see the ‘educators’ as the Nazis.

A matter of fact, propaganda in the education system was one of the biggest ways of converting much of Germany to the Nazi party. It was a false history being taught to children, slanting many major details. Details that run parallel to today’s lies of Stalin being a good leader, never speaking of any slave trades except the American one, or the origins of planned parenthood as a “Women’s Health Facility”. Small manipulations of the truth that gather people behind a completely different set of values had they heard it untainted. There are documentaries on Netflix that tell history in a certain context, and context is everything.

Even the fiction in Netflix slants to the left and it’s ruined many of the Marvel Comics shows. This year, the new Jessica Jones series was released on International Women’s Day. It’s basically about a drunken woman with super human strength; and although I loved the first season, I can’t stand the politics that has been inserted into the second season. The illegal immigrant was definitely one of the biggest blows to the show. NOT because I dislike illegal immigrants, but because how they made them look. He doesn’t want to be found out, but if he has all these talents shouldn’t he become legal? I don’t know of any Trump supporter that would endorse this character. Jones endorsing his illegal status and encouraging his fraud business makes her more of a dirty vigil anti and hurts the show. The other big thing, is her values are seen as strong; but drinking to dull pain, acting as though you don’t care, constantly being in and out of sexual relationships, and using physical violence to scare people into submission are classic signs of psychological weakness and long-term depression. There are women out there that actually view these characteristics as admirable, it’s not a place you want to be. Her classic “I don’t give a fuck” attitude is nothing more than code word for “I give too many fucks”. It seems that Netflix is so focused on politics now, that it won’t finish many of the good Marvel series that it originally started. Even in the comedy of Santa Clarita Diet, there are Nazis. Maybe I’m just a little sick of seeing Nazis and would settle for some good old-fashioned heroes?

And just for people who are not in my country: now that the Obamas have signed a contract in creating content for the media outlet expect MORE propaganda. Expect people to use terms outside of their original meaning, expect definitions to be altered, stories to be bent to fit certain narratives. If political correctness gives you a headache, cancel now and save yourselves the pain! The same woman who thinks that there’s something wrong with women if they didn’t vote a certain way is here to slip into your entertainment to FURTHER tell you what’s wrong with your voice. The same man who defined harassment as not needing a target or repeated act, but merely had to offend someone once and screwed up our schools’ handling of harassment is here to educate you more. I am SICK of the Obama’s version of virtues. Many in other countries don’t know that this man comes from Chicago. The Last five governors in Illinois went to federal prison because of their crimes. Chicago is known for its twisted dirty two-faced politicians. In an environment like that, what makes you think that Obama is NOT dirty? To think that I voted for him once! NEVER AGAIN!

I’m getting sick of politics inserted into everything! The thing that will really bring people together? Let go of Netflix even if just for a little while. Get rid of some of the politics in life. Live life outside for a little while. It’s not going to be a new show that brings people together, it’s going to be getting rid of shows for a while that does the trick. Think of this way… you’re not walking out on Netflix, they’re walking out on you!




What Parents Can Do To Win their War on Parental Alienation


NOTICE: I am NOT a lawyer and  NOT certified to give any legal advice on this subject matter. If you want any guidance or are curious about one of my suggestions please seek the proper legal council.

I call it a war, because when one parent makes the decision to play dirty it is nothing less than that. However, just because it is a war doesn’t mean you have to sink so low as to fight with the same cruel tactics. No, there are ways of fighting this that won’t put your child in the middle of it, and will win the war in the end.

Only Communicate Through Ways That Can Be Documented

Don’t talk on the phone with your partner unless you absolutely have to. Text messages, emails, voice-mails, and even faxes are some of the best ways. Communicating through verbal conversation can make both of you tense if you’re not already. Be up front about where your partner can find the best way to communicate.

ALWAYS Document Things

It doesn’t matter if your text messages were never answered, if you have continuous documentation that you made the attempts it will look good on you. Remember to TIME STAMP EVERYTHING accurately! If you’re in a state where it is legal to video tape someone without their knowledge, do so. If you must make the person aware, document every pick up and drop off. This is more for the time to line up with any text messages you may get. This will show how late a person is, prove that you were on time, or show that you were stood up. These will solidify your time-line more. If you send things in the mail that NEEDS to be sent (like Holiday Cards with money), take video of the contents, use certified mail with return receipt, and video tape the package being dropped in a mailbox. This way the other parent can’t tell your child that they didn’t receive anything from you or that there was ‘only a card with no money in it’. I suggest not showing this information until they’re older as to not put them in the middle of the situation. But MOST OF ALL, keep these documents ORGANIZED. Last thing you need is to have the documentation, then lose it because it’s too messy!

Always Be Respectful

It’s going to hurt, but it looks better to the court if you are completely respectful through text messages and emails. Especially when your ex is deliberately being cruel.


Keep Buying Gifts

Even if your child is NOT with you, keep buying Birthday Cards, Christmas Cards and other gifts just like you naturally would. When your child comes around, you’ll have something to show.

Make A Video Journal

The best thing you can do is preserve the present in the future. This includes showing the things you buy on the videos. Your child may not understand things now, they may even hate you now, but take it from someone who used to be that child… we always come looking for answers. If you believe your partner is horrible to your child there’s a great probability that they will come seeking you in the future. The best thing you can do is pour out your current emotions into a journal and when your child gets to a certain age, present it to them. Instead of talking badly about the other parent in these videos, talk about how much you miss them, how much you wish you could have been with them, and how much you care. It feels better to a child when they know you’ve dedicated time to them and keeping a video log (TIMESTAMPED) will definitely help!

Always Make Yourself Easy to Find

Sometimes when a child is alienated from the other parent for long periods of time, it is extremely hard to find them. They wouldn’t know where to look. It’s like trying to find a needle in a haystack. However, once they get to around 17 and a half. You should start doing the following things:

  1. Create a Facebook page- Younger people love social media and it is probably one of the first places they will go in order to dig you up.
  2. Make sure they can realize that you and them are related, but ONLY speak in the third person! (Some judges see speaking on social media in the first person to the covered person as a violation OF the order of protection)

FIRST PERSON: “If you’re reading this and your name is Sean Tyler Heeger born on October 25, 2012, and your mother’s name is ******. Then I am your father”

THIRD PERSON: “My Son, Sean Tyler Heeger, is going to turn 18 on October 25, 2030, his mother’s name was ******, and he was born in 2012.”

I would also suggest placing your number in the phone book within whatever area your child lives in or in a general area.

Tips for Blogs

  • Always write disclaimers on your blogs stating that a person is voluntarily coming
  • If a person claims harassment, USV-Cassidy case-law states that any person visiting a site is doing so voluntarily thus cannot claim harassment and in doing so is harassing themselves.
  • Always state FACTS, allow others to see the same negative opinion that you have made based on those facts. Opinions can get you in deeper trouble and could be used by your ex to validate their claims (even if they’re not true).
  • Always write in third person, this will look like you’re not ‘targeting’ your ex specifically
  • Make accusations in the form of questions: “Did she do this JUST to spite me?”
  • Always keep in mind that your child may see this, this is why basing your blog on facts instead of emotions and having a private video journal for emotion is one of the best ways to go.

This is the best advice that I can come up with based on my personal experiences with this situation. I wish the best in hopes that laws will change so that we have less broken hearts in this world. In the end… we need to think about our children.

However, please seek proper legal council with any of these suggestions.

Myths About Female Anti-Feminists


I have supported #womenagainstfeminism since it started, I consider myself an MRA, but more specifically I’m an anti-feminist. There are a whole lot of names I’ve been called just for holding these beliefs. There are several myths about us that are spread around by Feminists and Mainstream media.

  1. We have internalized misogyny- This term basically means that we are self-loathing and deep down we have a secret hate for the female sex. This is simply NOT the case. Most of us simply see the unrealistic standards Feminists hold for men. We see the seething hatred in their rhetoric and call it out for what it is… hateful. Many women don’t like the misrepresentation of todays feminism.
  2. We are against our own voices- Reality is, just because you claim to be a voice for someone doesn’t mean you realistically represent what they believe in. In just the same way, just because you think you know what is best for someone, doesn’t mean you actually do. Feminism is guilty of believing in both things, WomenAgainstFeminism are speaking out about how Feminism mis-represents us. To say that you represent someone without listening to them is false leadership and flat out arrogant.
  3. We are under the control of our men- This statement is laughable, many of us simply care for our men and to assume women are this weak for merely having an opinion is in itself sexist. The more you demonize WomenAgainstFeminism the MORE we will believe our cause is just.
  4. We don’t have minds of our own- Quite the opposite, it is BECAUSE we have minds of our own that we are not complying with Feminism’s bigotry. To believe that Feminism is the ONLY path to equality is naive and, if anything, is a sign of a power-hungry movement.
  5. We Demonize Feminism instead of Talking about Men’s Issues- Actually many of us DO talk about men’s issues, however, feminism is deeply intertwined within men’s issues. Many of their policies have affected men and their relationships to people, negatively. Even when talking about these issues, it is Feminists and Women’s Rights Groups that shut down talking points of very REAL men’s issues. You can’t talk about men’s issues and NOT talk about feminism, when it is BECAUSE of Feminism that many men’s issues exist AND Feminists who prevent people from speaking about them.
  6. We are betraying women that fought for our rights- Not really, the fact is, I’m sure those women wouldn’t have wanted us to use our rights to oppress the other sex. They also wouldn’t have wanted us to keep gender roles (which many women STILL have) to keep children away from their fathers out of spite.

When you sum it up, we are tired of Feminism’s horrible ‘leadership’ then telling us “our leadership is your only choice”. We refuse to accept Feminism’s voluntary blindness to their unequal treatment of men versus women. They’re making our boyfriends/husband’s lives hell, our lives hell, and will probably make our son’s lives hell if we don’t stop it.

A Higher Form of Consent


Many feminists will say that men have a responsibility to pay for a child if they have sex. They claim that consent starts when they slip into bed with a partner. Yet, I feel there is a higher level to consent and men should not be forced to pay any child support, whether they consensually had intercourse or they were tricked.

If a woman doesn’t necessarily consent to having a child by simply having sex or being a ‘baby factory’. Then doesn’t this mean that the acts of reproduction and pleasure are two completely different actions? According to Feminism, when it applies to women this is how it is. Simply having sex doesn’t mean you consent to reproduction right?

If this is the case with women, why are we applying an old fashioned standard to men? Women have access to multiple forms of birth control, including plan B, and abortions as last resorts. When we say that a man consented to having a child when he had sex, is that not saying that men are nothing more than ‘baby factories’?

My point, there is a difference between consenting to sexual activity and consenting to reproduction. If the slogan “my body, my choice” rings true, then she holds the power to reproduction, not the man. They are separate actions and to meld them together for one sex, but not the other is a form of mistreatment and inequality.

Now some will say that if she engages in sexual activity and she happens to get pregnant then she doesn’t have a choice. Actually, this day and age she does, if her partner wants to have an abortion and she doesn’t, she is essentially consenting to having the child against his will.

But what about the women who claim their religion prevents them from getting an abortion?  To this I answer, if she wasn’t for her religion when engaging in intercourse why the change in heart? Why does she believe in the rules now? Because she’s in trouble and is drowning? You either believe in ‘my body, my choice’ or you believe in not having sex until marriage, there is practically no real in between. I’m not saying don’t engage in sex, go ahead and engage, but know that the possibility of ruining your own life is there, and morally someone else should not be responsible for your decision when you are well aware of the potential it holds.

To any woman that uses religion as an excuse to not have an abortion to an unwanted child, where was your faith before that? Sorry, but last time I checked, God didn’t believe in sex before marriage anyways. If you believe in ‘my body, my choice’ and don’t take the measures in order to prevent conceiving a child or have the child against the father’s will. I will hold you to your word, but I’ll add a few more “My body, my choice, my responsibility”. Either be the baby factory with men… or refuse the sex roles of both sexes and take care of your own choice.

Forced Sterilization Bill Pops up in Alabama

A proposed Alabama law will require men to have a vasectomy either within one month of the age of fifty or after their third child. Using the reasoning that “Under existing law, there are no restrictions on the reproductive rights of men.” I thought it was a hoax at first, but then we confirmed the proposed Bill. Of course, the party who is sponsoring it? A Democrat.

Just because a there is no existing legislation against it doesn’t mean it is NOT a violation of the fourteenth amendment. The prohibition of this kind of action is decades old.

Only the sc of the earth starilized people. It was usually forced upon a part of the population they hated or didn’t care for. In 1924, Virginia passed The Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924, which allowed for the sterilization of people within Asylums. In a disgusting and shameful act, in Buck V. Bell, the Taft Court ruled it constitutional. However, the means by which it was deemed constitutional are disturbing. With the judge stating “being swamped with incompetence . . . Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Another means for which it was deemed constitutional were time and a hearing guardians could go to. Yet, it was like saying since they had a right to hear their decision it wasn’t a violation. The state of Virginia did not apologize for these atrocious actions until 2001 and in 2013 paid each victim $25,000.

Black, Native American, and poor whites were all singled out in the past for sterilization. All of it was based on Eugenics, weeding out the garden so it could “prosper” so to speak. It was the same theory that inspired the Nazis to sterilize millions of people. The Nazis had a formal hearing for sterilization as well, yet it was nothing more than a show. Ninety percent of the petitions that made it to the Nazis courts in 1934 ended up with the result of sterilization. The Nazis and America were on the same page at this point in time. The only difference, forced sterilization is still considered legal in America due to shady judges of the past willing to uphold it.

What lawmakers don’t seem to understand is intent should not matter. Sterilization without ones consent, if one was considered psychologically sound, was considered an “abuse” even back then. Some states are calling for reparations for people sterilized under the Eugenics laws, considering them damages. Virginia considered them victims through compensation and fault on behalf of the government.

Why does this matter? Precedence, all of this compensation sets a precedence that it’s wrong, it’s considered a damage and is entitled to compensation if done. Around 39% of those who were sterilized in the 1920s were male. However, even if a single male wasn’t compensated, females were for the exact same reason, and under the 14th amendment, males are entitled to equal protection under the law. Another statute that would kill this legislation is the Equal Rights Act, ironically being pushed by feminists.

Sex of the victim shouldn’t matter, and quite frankly it’s sexist for someone to believe it makes any difference that the sex of an individual matters when forcibly sterilizing them. Hopefully, there’s been enough outrage for them to think twice, but let’s err on the side of caution.

False Accusations aren’t Seen as Illegal, It’s Considered an act of ‘Activism’

More and more men are being falsely accused of sexual allegations and misconduct. However, what happens when the women bringing these allegations out in the open don’t see themselves perpetrating a crime, but empowering women? What happens when this is not only ‘okay’, but a responsibility when a man of power is seen as a threat?

There has been this notion that all women who come forward are entitled to be believed. It’s also been pushed, that anyone who questions their sinscerety, should be labeled a ‘victim blamer’ and shamed. This combination makes for the perfect opportunity to maliciously target someone. Without anyone questioning your intent, the circumstances surrounding the allegation, or even the story itself, innocent people can be put behind bars.

When powerful men are seen as a danger, even if they may not be, some women take it upon themselves to ruin that person’s life. To them it is a ‘matter of duty’ to what they see as taking power away from a dangerous man. Worse still, when one person makes an allegation, it places incentive for others to join. As though it were some ’cause’ to be fighting for. A runaway mob effect soon follows.

It’s been a few years since Bill Cosby was convicted on rape charges. Since then, at least one accuser admitted they lied. Can we really say, with false accusation activism, that he received a fair trial? Kavanaugh nearly had his career ruined by three accusers, and two of the threehave already admitted to false statements.

These women’s strategy has been for people to doubt them through the massive amount coming forward. Their thought? With so many accusing, how could he NOT have done it?

This is the REASON for due process, because innocent people don’t deserve to have their lives destroyed. Falsely accusing someone is not justice it’s revenge, based on the assumption you’re right.

In the name of truth and justice, accusers should NOT be believed without question.

The Left Keeps their Audience Context Ignorant

I was enduring “The View”, they referred to an unknown comment made by the president. They didn’t show the comment all they showed was the reaction to the alleged “racist comment”.

These are the alleged “racist” tweets (that I had to look up). I’m using CNN simply to be authentic to them. But I replied to the video:

And the response?

Really? This is the propaganda being comprehended from the above tweets? So the comprehension they’re being told is:

” I am presuming you are NOT a citizen already based on your skin color, go back to where you came from we don’t want you here!”

HOWEVER, what was actually said is VERY different when put in CONTEXT!

“If you don’t like our country, then you’re free to make the choice to leave any time. The fact one of you is an immigrant and is praising one of our enemies is disgraceful. Why stay or come to a country you hate?”

I again replied in a way a person the left could comprehend:

My question is if the left hates corporations…why in the HELL would they want Sharia law?! 🤪

Why the Left Will Lose in 2020

Lately we’ve heard the left yell insult after insult. Attempting to attach every negative label under the sun to Trump and his supporters. The irony in this madness is if you have the balls to simply scroll through the comments section of their videos on YouTube. You’ll find how disgraceful they really are.

Walter here, and apparently two others, thinks it makes them less racist as long as they refer to both people as subhuman.

It’s wrong for the right to look like they may be inciting violence. But hey, when the Left calls for it on the YouTube thread (with six people agreeing) let’s just shrug our shoulders.

President Trump said in an interview that Democrats were “moving so far left they’re going to fall off a cliff”. Here is undeniable proof of that statement. When you’re labelling Nancy Pelosi as a Republican because she’s not far left enough and you have people liking your comment instead of criticizing it? You’ve gone off the deep end my friend.

Until Democrats can stop making these moron, because that’s what they are, their main runners. Until this type of thinking is not their mainstream thinking. Their party will eventually collapse either through no one voting for them, or through civil war. I’m a realist, that’s what’s being projected. Many of those who don’t know it are living in a false reality. They’ll say, “But everyone I know…”. That’s right, everyone you know, that doesn’t mean the majority, you must stop thinking like that.

So before anyone on the left starts calling you racist, dehumanizing, or accuses you of inciting violence remind them of having clean hands before they start pointing their dirty fingers.

So for 2020… Democrats are screwed.


The Left is Creeping Up on Even the Most Conservative Campuses

I go to a University called Quincy University. It is a small private Franciscan University that has Franciscan Friars living on campus, a church in the main building, and religious credits required to graduate. There is an entire floor dedicated to the history of faiths such as Muslim, Christianity, and a variety of others. However, I have noticed a disturbing large amount of leftist propaganda posted all around the school.

Most of them held by the campus’ multicultural group. In October, the placed fliers up advising people to not wear costumes that would offend a person’s culture.

None of them had the “white inbred racist” up there only the other identities.

North Korean Nuclear Problem: A History


Some may think that the North Korean Nuclear incident is a recent problem, but this international issue is as old as the nuclear devices themselves. Although recent progress has pointed towards a hopeful deconstruction of North Korea’s nuclear arms, past behavior has made this an unlikely outcome. There have even been reports of nuclear expansion despite goals of denuclearization. How it has come to this point, the accomplishments overlooked, and where the future goes lies in the hands of politician’s negotiation skills.

Many people believe that North Korea didn’t get a-hold of Nuclear technology until the deal with Bill Clinton in 1994. However, the Hermit Kingdom actually started its program along with every other country in the early 1950s with the creation of the Atomic Energy Research Institute  (James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies , 2018). Scientists were sent from North Korea to the USSR to collect research on the topic. The nuclear deal propositioned by Bill Clinton in 1994 was not a gift of free technology that North Korea didn’t already have, but a response to North Korea’s pre-existing nuclear program (Blakemore, 2018).

Under the guise of “Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy” the USSR signed an agreement with North Korea to assist them in building research complexes in 1959 (James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies , 2018). Later on, in the 1960s, Russia also provided them with a small nuclear reactor to help train their own personnel with (James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies , 2018). Knowing that Russia played a large part in North Korea’s nuclear program creation

In 1968 the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was open for signatures. This treaty was a mutual world-wide agreement to disarm nuclear weapons. More countries signed the NPT than any other arms agreement (UNITED NATIONS, 2011). The treaty stressed that countries that weren’t already nuclear powers, wouldn’t seek to create a nuclear arsenal (UNITED NATIONS, 1968, p. Article II). It made note the importance of nuclear powers to not assist non-nuclear nation states in the development in nuclear weapons (UNITED NATIONS, 1968, p. Article III). North Korea did not sign this for another seventeen years as they dove into nuclear research with the assistance of the USSR.

Since it was not against the contract to explore nuclear energy in general and the only crime was specifically the manufacturing of nuclear weapons, North Korea eventually signed the treaty in 1985 (Council on Foreign Relations, 2018). This was the source of nearly every American President’s headache in office after that. Signing the document, North Korea had agreed to disarm any nuclear weapons it may have created, destroy any research facilities used to develop them, and actively work toward becoming nuclear free.

Keep in mind that the Korean peninsula had ally arms left over from the Korean war. The United States had a compliment of 100 nuclear weapons in the South and the Russians had some to the North. On September 27, 1991, allied forces removed their devices in good faith that the two countries would follow suite (Sanders-Zakre, 2018). The two Koreas made an agreement and signed off to completely denuclearize the peninsula jointly (Center for Nonproliferation Studies , 2018). South Korea, extended an olive branch and gave up its weapons, North Korea insisted it did as well. It was revealed on January 10, 2003 when North Korea pulled out of the NTP, that it had actually retained nuclear weapons for the entirety of the time (Kirgis, 2003). North Korea had been so convincingly cooperative, that it was actually surprising that there were still weapons on the peninsula.

North Korea threatened to leave the NTP once before, using it as leverage to obtain what they wanted. Hindsight is always twenty-twenty. In 1993 threats were made to leave unless specific conditions were met. In response, a six-party talk was held which included North Korea, South Korea, Russia, China, Japan and the United States (Cooper, 2007). North Korea came to the table with four conditions. One, the United States would build two light-water nuclear reactors by 2003 to compensate for energy set-backs (Davenport, 2018). Until the two plants were built, the United States would ship 500,000 tons of heavy fuel to North Korea per year (Davenport, 2018). The United States would lift sanctions, remove them from the list of state sponsors of terror, and normalize political relationships (Davenport, 2018). These weren’t unreasonable requests, however, the United States failed to live up to these expectations. Not only did the United States fail to build the two nuclear reactors, but they were also late with shipments of fuel for several consecutive years (Ryan, 2017). Even though being late with fuel shipments was not uncommon, it bred distrust with the North Koreans.

In 2002, George W. Bush referred to North Korea in a speech, placing them on an “axis of evil” next to Iran and Iraq (Council on Foreign Relations, 2018). Directly after making this speech fuel shipments were shut down under the accusations of enriching Uranium (Boghani, 2018). United states intelligence allegedly found evidence of HEU technology that was came from Pakistan (James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies , 2018). However, I don’t have much faith in the Bush administration’s intelligence after its claims of nuclear weapons in Iraq. If it wasn’t bad enough for the President of the United States insulting the country they were attempting to disarm, after not living up to their half of an agreement; the United States applied sanctions to an already frustrated country (Council on Foreign Relations, 2018). The North Koreans didn’t get their request to be taken off the terrorist watchlist until 2008 (Ryan, 2017). They got taken off, even after they made the claim that they successfully tested a nuclear weapon in 2006 (Hamblin, 2017).

North Korea’s request to be taken off the terrorist watch list fell upon deaf ears for twelve years. When George W. Bush did act it seemed more like an act of desperation to save his own legacy than good will. It took Bush four years into his Presidency even after the North had been qualified to be taken off. At the last second, North Korea was taken off the terrorist watch list on October 11, 2008 (Ryan, 2017). To give some objective insight, Obama became president elect on November 4, 2008, just twenty-four days after the call was made (A&E Television Networks, LLC, 2018). Less than a full month away from new leadership and Bush made a large political choice that could have altered the incoming administration’s dialogue. On his way out the door, George W. Bush wrote a personal letter to then leader Kim Jong IL, requesting that he keep ‘his end of the bargain’ to denuclearize (Cooper, 2007). He also wrote the other four leaders who were in the six-member talks to reassure them on the United States’ commitment to staying at the negotiating table (Cooper, 2007).

In April of 2009, North Korea launched what many critics called a test of a long-range ballistic missile and pointed out that the Six-party talks were “useless” (Moore, 2009). The Obama administration reacted hastily. Three North Korean companies were blacklisted by the United Nations under expanded sanctions (The Associated Press, 2009), a decision the Obama administration claimed was a “clear and united message” that would send a message of real consequences (Moore, 2009). It had been thirteen years since their initial agreements to denuclearize in 1994. The results from a North Korean point of view, had been nothing but increased sanctions, unkept promises, and the United States tightening their grip on their only lifeline.

The world was then confronted with North Korea’s second nuclear test on May 25, 2009 (Jie-ae, Florcruz, Chance , & Neill , 2009). Whether this was previously planned or out of reaction to increased sanctions is debatable. The blast was large enough to have even its allies concerned, China was not defending North Korea as it had a month previously. North Korea had allegedly attempted place a satellite in space, but failed. The Obama administration considered this a violation of U.N. resolutions and sanctions were tightened (Boghani, 2018). Just a few days later, North Korea was kicking the IAEA inspectors out of the country (Boghani, 2018).

Another test was conducted in May of 2009, with claims that all the flaws had been ironed out. Sanctions were automatically tightened in reaction to the test (Boghani, 2018). Then, just a year later in November of 2010, it was revealed that even under tight sanctions the regime had managed to construct a Uranium enrichment plant (Council on Foreign Relations, 2018). Not only had they built the plant swiftly, but they managed to keep it a secret until publicly revealed. If that’s not bad enough, in the same year South Korea stops negotiations with North Korea over the singing of a Navy vessel (The BBC, 2010).

In December of 2011, it was publicly announced that the ‘Great Leader’ Kim Jong IL had passed away (Boghani, 2018). Walking next to the former leader’s son, Kim Jong Un and one of his closest advisors and brother-in-law, Jang Song-thaek. The world had hope that maybe this individual, no more than twenty-five years old, was the key to major reform in the region (World Affairs Institute, 2012). Their answer came when he publicly announced to world leaders, including to the “puppet group in South Korea”, to not expect any change from the North (AFP, 2011). Some still wondered if the young man wasn’t going to be a puppet for bureaucratic officials in the background. His uncle, Jang Song-Thaek had been pulling the strings ever since his father started deteriorating. The Chinese trusted the man, which was likely his biggest downfall. In December 12, 2013, Jang Song-Thaek was executed, with accusations of conspiring against the ‘Republic’ (Morse, 2014). There were even rumors that this young man, who looked harmless, fed his own uncle to actual dogs that he starved for three days (Morse, 2014). The purge of possible instability left the dictator stronger, he would be pushing forward with no one questioning him and a full army at his back. The world had a new leader to deal with, unpredictable, inexperienced, who seemed more unstable than his predecessor’s, and had his hands on a nuclear arsenal.

On February 6, 2015, a little over a year after the strategically planned execution of Song-thaek was carried out, Obama declared his national security strategy for strategic patience (Korte, 2015). The thought behind the alleged strategy was that the United States would allow activities in other countries to resolve as they would have had they not been there at all and ultimately, allow the country’s own actions be their downfall. The thought that, perhaps, maybe China would realize that it was not our interference that made North Korea a headache to work with and would eventually cut them off. That inaction was sometimes better than acting. A philosophy that works better on an individual level, rather than a national level. With this, the United States increased its defenses and practically left North Korea to themselves.

The tides turned on North Korea when they had been dealt a new hand in 2016. An unpredictable person had been elected into the Presidency, it wasn’t just a new set of cards being dealt, it was an entirely new game being played. President Trump was an experienced, unpredictable, negotiator that had something in his personality that said, “I don’t care about the consequences of my words and I don’t care if you judge me for them,”. There was a positive to his tweeting, it made him extremely unpredictable to the North Koreans. Every previous president had a known pattern, was calm and conservative compared to the way Donald J. Trump harnessed his social media platform. Calling his political opponents names, making plans, then cancelling those plans, and spouting his opinion for everyone to see. Presidents of the past would excessively plan before meeting initiating conversation with North Korea, could this be the approach to take the bull by the horns?

Many in the media saw the language as fanning the flames of an already heated topic. Trump used colorful language, in August of 2017 he stated any threats made to the United States would be met with “fire and fury” (Paolo, 2017). A few hours Trump made this threat, North Korea made threatened to target the U.S. Territory of Guam (Paolo, 2017). Many saw Trump as dumping gasoline on a forest fire by using such language, but expert and writer on North Korea, Michael Malice, says Trump was speaking to North Korea “on their level” (Malice, 2017). A month later, the country launched another rocket that successfully flew over the Japanese Islands (Griffiths, Cohen, & Berlinger, 2017). This earned him the nickname “Rocket Man” by Trump that accompanied the statement that he may be forced to “totally destroy” North Korea (Vitali, 2017). This was followed with a new launch at the highest ballistic missile height North Korea had ever reached (BBC, 2017), one of the key components necessary to hit the United States.

A meeting was finally established between the two, and would be hosted by China. There were those who believed that if Trump met with the young dictator that it would be nothing more than free political propaganda for him, with zero results for the United States. Trump reassured everyone watching that he was more than willing to walk away if things weren’t going his way, which again Michael Malice acknowledged as a smart move since North Korea used this tactic all the time at negotiations (Malice, 2017). Publicly announcing the willingness to leave would keep North Korea on their toes instead of the other way around.

On June 12, 2018, Donald Trump met with Kim Jong-Un even against the wishes of some people in the country (BBC, 2018). A movie clip was shown to Kim Jong-Un that showed him two outcomes, one with prosperity through cooperation and the other through war and annihilation should they not (Friedman, 2018). Trump’s political opponents criticized that he wasn’t more confrontational, instead the President seemed to be respectful and complimenting the Chairman. However, this detail was part of the plan, this is a common sales-pitch tactic known as love bombing the target (M.D., 2017). Before meeting him, he made the chairman uneasy by thinking he may walk away. After Trump meets him, he psychologically narrows the target’s options down to two through visual stimulation. He then showers a neglected confidence with affection to draw him closer to the more attractive option. Love bombing is a manipulation tactic that showers someone with compliments or general affection so they are more open to trusting you (M.D., 2017). Of course, this isn’t the same type of love-bombing as the manipulative romantic relationship type, it’s more of a sales-pitch lure. This is the only reason Trump was hailing Kim Jong Un at the Trump-Kim Summit.

One part of the North Korean Nuclear problem that many don’t understand is the demand of denuclearization itself is a large request when the country considers it to be its only bargaining chip. Having the expectation of full denuclearization up front is a naïve approach. When looking at the scenario in full context, the United States has been just as neglectful at the negotiating table as they accuse North Korea of being. Our media outlets only exacerbate the situation by making us out to always look like the ‘good guys’. A 2009 Washington Post article read, “The 2006 explosion pushed the Bush administration to negotiate directly with North Korea, including removing it from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, to persuade it to give up its nuclear weapons.” (Harden, 2009). However, when looking at the entirety of the issue, being taken off the watch list was a promise made by the United States in its original talks in 1994. This means that the Washington Post neglected to report the full context of the issue, made North Korea completely at fault, and made the United States out to be a hero. Even though North Korea undoubtedly took up producing nuclear weapons, it was due to America’s insufficiency that cost us the opportunity to denuclearize the peninsula.

When comparing Trump’s current approach to others, North Korea has been making genuine strides towards denuclearization. Visitors to the country reported that anti-American propaganda has been replaced with more positive images (Illmer, 2018). Even their media has lightened up on its coverage, the tone in the paper has changed from ‘negative’ to ‘neutral’ (Illmer, 2018). A neutral tone is a ‘miracle’ in the eyes of some experts, “In five years working in North Korea, I’ve never seen them completely disappear before.” (Illmer, 2018). Kim Jong Un made history when he became the first North Korean dictator to cross the demilitarized zone and enter Seoul, South Korea (Coonan, 2018). On July 27, 2018 the United States received the remains of alleged soldiers from the Korean war. When the remains were analyzed they were confirmed that they were likely to be Americans (CBS Interactive Inc., 2018) (Gamel, 2018). Scientists have already successfully identified two of the remains and matched them through DNA testing with family members (Copp, 2018). The very fact that they are American human remains is significant itself. North Korea has released alleged remains in the past and they have turned out to be completely faulty. They were nothing more than a box filled with random animal bones. The North and the South have demined a large section of the demilitarized zone (CBS/AP, 2018).

The more likely answer is that these are all moves to make us think that they are genuine. Kim Jong Un will do anything to keep his hands on power. Many North Korean Defectors have warned Donald Trump that Kim Jong-Un is lying (CBC Radio, 2018). However, since Trump has yet to lighten up on the regime, it is likely that these acts of fake integrity are really a sign of desperation.

North Korea has continued with their nuclear weapons, as we all knew they would (DePetris, 2018). Sanctions are still tight on North Korea and they have expressed their unwillingness to cooperate if sanctions stay in place (Denyer, 2018). They have shown full capability of producing nuclear weapons with sanctions on them (Malice, 2017), and have shown a history of being uncooperative if sanctions are in place. Two choices lie ahead, take the risk of taking the sanctions completely off or starve the regime down till it cracks. Either way, Kim Jong Un has backed himself into a corner, his people are starving, the younger generation is not loyal to him, and people are becoming more informed. The real questions are, will the regime be forced to cooperate and will they survive should they refuse?




A&E Television Networks, LLC. (2018). Barack Obama. Retrieved from

AFP. (2011, December 30). Do ‘not expect any change from us’, warns North Korea. Retrieved from

BBC. (2017, November 27). North Korea launches ‘highest ever’ ballistic missile. Retrieved from

BBC. (2018, June 12). Trump Kim summit: US and North Korean leaders hold historic talks. Retrieved from

Blakemore, E. (2018, April 17). Bill Clinton Once Struck a Nuclear Deal With North Korea. (A&E Television Networks, LLC) Retrieved from

Boghani, P. (2018, April 18). The U.S. and North Korea On The Brink: A Timeline. (WGBH Educational Foundation) Retrieved from

CBS Interactive Inc. (2018, August 1). Korean War remains to head for Hawaii after repatriation ceremony. Retrieved from

CBS/AP. (2018, October 1). North and South Korea begin removing mines along DMZ. Retrieved from

Center for Nonproliferation Studies . (2018, September 19). JOINT DECLARATION OF SOUTH AND NORTH KOREA ON THE DENUCLEARIZATION OF THE KOREAN PENINSULA . Retrieved from

Coonan, C. (2018, 12 5). Kim Jong-un’s first visit to South Korea linked to denuclearisation. (The Irish Times) Retrieved from

Cooper, H. (2007, December 6). Bush Writes to North Korean Leader. (The New York Times Company) Retrieved from

Copp, T. (2018, September 10). 2 more service members ID’d from North Korea remains. (Sightline Media Group) Retrieved from

Council on Foreign Relations. (2018). North Korean Nuclear Negotiations. Retrieved from

Davenport, K. (2018, July 19). The U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework at a Glance . Retrieved from

Denyer, S. (2018, November 3). North Korea threatens to restart nuclear program unless U.S. lifts sanctions. Retrieved from

DePetris, D. R. (2018, December 7). North Korea Is Building More Nuclear Weapons and Missiles (Don’t Be Shocked). Retrieved from

Friedman, U. (2018, June 14). About That Movie Trailer Donald Trump Gave Kim Jong Un. Retrieved from

Gamel, K. (2018, July 31). War dead remains from N. Korea ‘likely to be American,’ DPAA official says. (Stars and Stripes) Retrieved from

Griffiths, J., Cohen, Z., & Berlinger, J. (2017, September 15). North Korea launches missile over Japan. Retrieved from

Hamblin, A. (2017, August 10). North Korea: How Obama, Bush, Clinton dealt with the rogue nation. (The San Diego Union-Tribune) Retrieved from

Harden, B. (2009, May 25). N. Korea Conducts ‘Successful’ Underground Nuclear Test. (The Washington Post) Retrieved from

Illmer, A. (2018, June 23). North Korean propaganda changes its tune. (BBC) Retrieved from

James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies . (2018, October). North Korea Nuclear. Retrieved from

Jie-ae, S., Florcruz, J., Chance , M., & Neill , M. (2009, May 25). World outraged by North Korea’s latest nuke test. (Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc) Retrieved from CNN.Com:


Korte, G. (2015, February 6). Obama embraces doctrine of ‘strategic patience’. (USA TODAY) Retrieved from

M.D., D. A. (2017, March 6). The Danger of Manipulative Love-Bombing in a Relationship. Retrieved from

Malice, M. (2017, October 5). North Korea: What You Need to Know (Michael Malice Pt. 2). (D. Rubin, Interviewer) The Rubin Report. Retrieved from

Moore, M. (2009, April 14). North Korea quits six-party talks and threatens to restart nuclear programme. Retrieved from

Morse, F. (2014, January 3). Kim Jong-un’s executed uncle Jang Song Thaek ‘stripped naked, fed to 120 dogs as officials watched’. Retrieved from

Obama, B. (2015, February 6). NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY. Retrieved from

Paolo, J. d. (2017, August 8). North Korea threatens to strike US territory of Guam after Trump ‘fire and fury’ warning. Retrieved from

Ryan, M. (2017, July 19). Why the US’s 1994 deal with North Korea failed – and what Trump can learn from it . Retrieved from

Sanders-Zakre, A. (2018, November 16). Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy . Retrieved from

The Associated Press. (2009, April 24). UN panel agrees to blacklist 3 North Korean firms. (Fox News Network, LLC) Retrieved from,4670,UNUNNorthKorea,00.html

The BBC. (2010, May 20). ‘North Korean torpedo’ sank South’s navy ship – report. (BBC) Retrieved from

UNITED NATIONS. (1968, July 1). Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Retrieved from

UNITED NATIONS. (2011). Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Retrieved from

Vitali, A. (2017, September 17). Trump Threatens to ‘Totally Destroy’ North Korea in First U.N. Speech. Retrieved from

World Affairs Institute. (2012, April). Korea’s Third Kim: Will Anything Change? Retrieved from