ATF Removes Anti-Gun Propaganda Display in DC Headquarters, Leftists Say Removal “Retraumatizes” Dead Victims

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has removed a controversial anti-gun exhibit from its national headquarters.

The memorial display, called the ‘Faces of Gun Violence,’ consisted of 120 portraits of individuals killed in gun-related incidents and was installed under the Biden administration and was taken down earlier this year by Trump-appointed officials.

The decision, confirmed by the Department of Justice, marks yet another reversal of subversive gun control messaging embedded into federal agencies during Biden’s term.

The ATF has still kept the anti-gun propaganda video on its YouTube page.

DOJ spokesperson Chad Gilmartin stated that the removal was not a political act but part of broader efforts to “balance agency messaging” with the Second Amendment values affirmed by recent Supreme Court rulings.

The display included images of high-profile victims such as Robert Godwin Sr., who was murdered in Cleveland in 2017, and portraits of children killed in school shootings, alongside slain law enforcement officers. While originally presented as a neutral tribute, critics long argued that the exhibit was a thinly veiled anti-gun propaganda, intentionally placed in a federal law enforcement building to reinforce a narrative in favor of further firearm restrictions.

Gun control activists and Biden-aligned interest groups reacted with outrage. Kris Brown, president of Brady United Against Gun Violence, accused the ATF of being “politicized” and called the removal “a gut punch to every American family affected by gun violence.” Brenda Haymon Joiner, mother of one of the victims featured in the exhibit, also issued a statement calling the action “cruel and deeply disrespectful.”

Elderly left-wing Star Trek actor George Takei, on Facebook, denounced the change and claimed it re-traumatized the victims’ families.

Keep reading

Meet the Latest Vaccine Propagandist

On January 05, 2024, this Pharma Propaganda outlet published a video interview with Dr. Paul Offit, professional academic pediatrician and vaccine shill, in which he states a series of falsehoods in continuation of the gaslighting and falsehoods which both he and Dr. Peter Marks (FDA/CBER) are becoming known for.

Lets take a look at the transcript of this series of falsehoods.

First off, starting with the title, is Paul Offit actually a vaccine expert? What have his contributions actually been? Well, he self-identifies as the co-inventor of a licensed rotavirus vaccine (one of many, and not the first), and has received significant royalties from that. I should say currently licensed rotavirus vaccine, because there was a prior rotavirus vaccine (RotaShield – Wyeth) which was associated with an intolerable level of a clinical syndrome called “intussusception.”

If you know horses, you can think of intussusception as sort of like colic, but most often happening in children. More precisely, intussusception is a condition in which one segment of intestine “telescopes” inside of another, causing an intestinal obstruction (blockage). For some reason, rotavirus vaccines are associated with intussusception. It can be life threatening. The previously licensed rotavirus vaccine had a slightly higher rate of intussusception than the current one associated with Dr. Paul Offit (and Dr. H. Fred Clark, the senior of the two researchers).

This essay details the events surrounding the RotaShield withdrawal, including the role of Offit when participating in the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices at the CDC. Basically, all US children are required to take either Offit’s vaccine or a competing similar live attenuated virus product. According to the CDC:

There is also a small risk of intussusception from rotavirus vaccination, usually within a week after the first or second dose. This additional risk is estimated to range from about 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 100,000 US infants who get rotavirus vaccine.

There are about 3.66 million births per year in the US, so that means between 36 to 180 cases of life-threatening intussusception in the US per year due to mandated administration of this product.

Keep reading

It Was Never About Hostages. It Was Never About Hamas.

Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday that freeing the Israeli hostages in Gaza was not his top priority, suggesting instead that defeating Hamas should take precedence over a hostage deal.

“We have many objectives, many goals in this war,” Netanyahu said. “We want to bring back all of our hostages. That is a very important goal. In war, there is a supreme objective. And that supreme objective is victory over our enemies. And that is what we will achieve.”

Nothing the prime minister said here is true or valid — unless by “enemies” he means “all Palestinians in the Gaza Strip”.

Netanyahu has been fairly transparent about the fact that Israel’s ultimate goal in Gaza is neither freeing the hostages nor defeating Hamas, but seizing Palestinian territory and removing its Palestinian inhabitants. He has openly said that Israel will occupy Gaza via military force, completely ruling out the possibility of any form of Palestinian government for the enclave. He has openly said he wants to enact President Donald Trump’s ethnic cleansing plan for Gaza, which explicitly entails removing “all” Palestinians and never allowing them to return.

So they’ve made this perfectly clear. This isn’t about Hamas, except insofar as an armed resistance group will make it difficult to forcibly remove all Palestinians from Gaza. And it certainly isn’t about hostages.

And yet, bizarrely, this is how the western political-media class continues to frame this onslaught. They call it Israel’s “war with Hamas”, when it’s nothing other than an undisguised ethnic cleansing operation. They prattle on about October 7, hostages, and terrorism, even though it has already been made abundantly clear that this has nothing to do with any of those things. They act as though the admission was simply never made.

There is absolutely no excuse for continuing to babble about hostages and Hamas after the US and Israel said the goal is the complete ethnic cleansing of Gaza. They told you what this is really about. They said it. With their face holes. They said it right to you. End of debate.

Israel has been seeking ways to purge Gaza of Palestinians for generations. That’s all this has ever been about. Not October 7. Not hostages. Not Hamas. Not terrorism. Everything about Israel’s operations in Gaza have indicated that their real goal is to remove Palestinians from a Palestinian territory and not to free hostages or defeat Hamas. And then when Trump took office, they started openly admitting it.

Keep reading

The Enemy of My Enemy

One of the most effective thought-terminating clichés is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

It is particularly effective because it works on both people who are, let’s say, not extraordinarily intelligent, and on more intelligent people, people who you wouldn’t expect to fall for such simplistic tricks.

It is especially effective in hyper-polarized sociocultural environments, like the one we’re in currently, where people feel like they need to be on one or the other side of whatever.

If you’re unfamiliar with thought-terminating clichés, the term was popularized by Robert Jay Lifton in his seminal book about “thought reform,” i.e., brainwashing.

“The language of the totalist environment is characterized by the thought-terminating cliché. The most far-reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed. These become the start and finish of any ideological analysis.”Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: a Study of Brainwashing in China

Thought-terminating clichés you might be familiar with include, but are not limited to, “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists,” “trust the science,” “trust the plan,” “it’s not perfect, but it’s better than the alternative,” “it’s just common sense,” “freedom isn’t free,” “that’s just the way it is,” and the list goes on.

Thought-terminating clichés are designed to do exactly what it sounds like they are designed to do…terminate thought, particularly critical thought.

They are typically deployed against you when you are challenging some item of official propaganda, or dogma, or reprehensible action, associated with or perpetrated by whatever “party,” “side,” “team,” or “cult” people think you’re a member of, or are trying to get you to shut the fuck up about.

Keep reading

The Perfidy of 60 Minutes

It is a truism, a trope, a meme, common knowledge, a cliché, as obvious as a nose on a face, an actual fact and something so apparent that it is impossible in any way, shape, or form to deny unless utterly delusional.

But, somehow, time and time again, the major media players defy actual reality and try and try to substitute their own absurd version and – even more incredibly, like a lunatic accusing the clouds in the sky of conspiring against him – demand everyone within earshot to believe that it is true.

Typically, pointing out media propaganda is the same as pointing out that air exists – it is an atmosphere that we all must breathe and is typically specifically unremarkable due to its omnipresence.

But sometimes, when it is so egregious, so absurd, so literally dangerous, it must be challenged.

Which brings us to Sunday’s episode of the once-vaunted, now vile 60 Minutes.

The show that once intentionally made bad actors deeply uncomfortable by asking difficult questions is a shadow of its former self, with its story on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) a perfect example of the depths to which it has fallen.

The NIH has a new director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Even before he officially took over a few weeks ago, the Trump administration had already announced a few changes: dropping 1,200 probationary employees, putting new purchasing standards in place, and cutting the amount of “overhead” its research and academic “partners” can charge to conduct studies.

This, of course, led to much wailing and gnashing of teeth – not of course from the public, but from the staff, current, past, and future. 

Breaking down the segment into its constituent parts, one finds three main points.

First, a grad student is worried she may not get a job because of the looming budget cuts.

Second, a woman in an Alzheimer’s research study worries she will be negatively impacted by the cuts.

These two bits are rather silly but very heartstring tuggy. In the case of the grad student, she’s complaining about what may or may not be, as if she were entitled to a position somewhere.

In the case of the Alzheimer’s patient, it is rather telling – and may even be terrifyingly true – that she is worried that the study she is part of may face an overhead cut.

As the show notes – moments after her worried statement – the NIH has cut the amount it pays for overhead – administrators, paper clips, etc. – to institutions from an overhead of about 28% to 15%.

Note – the cut is not for the research project itself, but just to the administrative overhead. Second note – the much-vaunted Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (like almost every other funder of medical research) has always capped its overhead costs at 15%.

So, ironically, what the patient is – even if she does not know it – really worried about is whether or not the folks that run the study (being done by Duke University and UNC jointly) could actually prioritize paying administrators over caring for patients.

Keep reading

Reports: Castro Regime Propagandist Living in Florida Thanks to Biden Parole Program

Narciso Amador Fernández Ramírez, a known propagandist of Cuba’s communist Castro regime, is allegedly living in the United States thanks to the Biden-era “Humanitarian Parole” program, Cuban-American journalist Mario Pentón reported on Thursday.

The outlet Cubanet described Fernández Ramírez, 65, as a former deputy director of Vanguardia, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC) in the central province of Villa Clara, who also served as columnist for the state propaganda outlet Cubahora

The communist propagandist is known in Cuba for vehemently insulting the Cuban diaspora in the United States, branding its members as “rats,” gusanos (“maggots”), and “mercenaries.”

Most notably, Fernández Ramírez appears listed as the author of two pieces published on the official website of late murderous dictator Fidel Castro. One such piece, dated 2019, in which Fernández Ramírez is listed as an author refers to the veterans of the Bay of Pigs liberation attempt as “rats.” In another piece, dated 2017, Fernández Ramírez praised late murderous communist dictator Fidel Castro and claimed that Castro is “seated, vigilant, next to [Cuban founding Father Jose] Martí, in the sacred Olympus of the heroes of the Homeland.”

Pentón reported that Fernández Ramírez has resided in Homestead, Florida, since March 2024 after he became a beneficiary of “humanitarian parole,” a now-extinct and fraud-riddled program launched in 2023 by the administration of former U.S. President Joe Biden that allowed up to 30,000 Cubans, Haitiaians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans per month to request entry to the United States by means of a “sponsor,” granting them legal stay and work permits for a period of “up to two years.”

“He is waiting for a green card to apply for benefits such as Social Security and Medicare. He, who was the most unconditional communist in Villa Clara, is now enjoying his old age in the country he despised so much,” a source told Pentón on condition of anonymity.

According to Pentón, Fernández Ramírez presently lives in Homestead with his wife Elizabeth Leal and their daughter, who already resided in the United States.

“A simple Google search was enough to know that this man was a propagandist for the Communist Party of Cuba. That makes him ineligible for immigration benefits,” Florida-based immigration attorney Ismael Labrador told Pentón.

Keep reading

Judge Orders Trump Admin To Disburse $12 Million In Funding To Radio Free Europe

A federal judge ruled on April 29 that the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) must disburse the funding appropriated by Congress to the nonprofit news organization Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth issued a temporary restraining order sought by the media group, directing USAGM to immediately disburse over $12 million in funding for the month of April to Radio Free Europe.

Lamberth said the plaintiff had shown it would suffer irreparable harm absent a restraining order, noting that USAGM’s actions to terminate the grants agreement “threaten the very existence” of the group.

The judge also stated that Radio Free Europe is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that USAGM had violated the Administrative Procedure Act by terminating the grants agreement.

Lamberth said the Trump administration must seek congressional approval to take such action, noting that it “has no residual constitutional power to refuse” to spend appropriations by Congress.

“It is, after all, Congress that makes the laws in this country. In this case, for example, it was Congress who ordained that the monies at issue should be allocated to RFE/RL,” Lamberth stated, referring to the acronym for Radio Free Europe.

The judge also determined that USAGM’s decision to change the grant agreement after the start of the fiscal year was “arbitrary and capricious.”

According to the court order, USAGM presented “a radically different grant agreement” in mid-April, leaving little time for a meaningful negotiation as Radio Free Europe was running out of funding.

If our nation is to thrive for another 250 years, each co-equal branch of government must be willing to courageously exert the authority entrusted to it by our Founders,” Lamberth stated.

USAGM moved to terminate Radio Free Europe’s grant agreement following President Donald Trump’s order directing officials to eliminate non-statutory components of the agency. USAGM has an annual budget of around $900 million and operates networks broadcasting in more than 60 languages and around 100 countries.

The cutbacks affect the organizations and agencies under its umbrella, including Voice of America (VOA); the Office of Cuba Broadcasting; Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and other organizations such as Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks.

Keep reading

Trump terminates NPR, PBS federal funding with sweeping executive order

President Trump signed an executive order late Thursday terminating federal funding for National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS).

NPR and PBS, which have long been targeted for cuts by conservatives, both receive partial funding through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which the president argued is unnecessary in the current media environment.

“Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence,” Trump wrote in the order.

“The CPB Board shall cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my Administration’s policy to ensure that Federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage,” he added. “The CPB Board shall cancel existing direct funding to the maximum extent allowed by law and shall decline to provide future funding.”

Trump further directed the CPB to end indirect funding to NPR and PBS, including by “ensuring that licensees and permittees of public radio and television stations, as well as any other recipients of CPB funds, do not use Federal funds for NPR and PBS.” 

The president gave the CPB until June 30 to effectuate his directive. 

Keep reading

China Deploys ‘Growing Army’ Of Pro-Beijing NGOs To UN To Target Critics: Report

The Chinese regime is increasingly sending groups that pose as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to the United Nations in an effort to suppress criticism of its human rights record, according to a report published by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) on April 28.

The 10-month investigation, a partnership between the ICIJ and 42 media organizations, examined China’s transnational repression under Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Part of the report focused on the communist regime’s subversion campaign against the U.N. Human Rights Council through “a growing army of Chinese NGOs.”

“Since Xi’s reelection as Communist Party general secretary in 2017 and president the following year, China has sought greater influence within the U.N. human rights system and become more aggressive in silencing dissent,” the report reads.

ICIJ found that the number of Chinese NGOs holding consultative status with the U.N. has nearly doubled since 2018.

NGOs can participate in U.N. meetings, make oral statements, and submit written statements before U.N. sessions after obtaining consultative status, which is granted by the U.N. Economic and Social Council.

An ICIJ analysis of 106 NGOs from China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan found that 59 are not independent but are “closely connected” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The ICIJ referred to these Beijing-backed NGOs as “GONGOs” or “government-organized nongovernmental organizations.”

Ten of these GONGOs receive more than 50 percent of their funding from Beijing, the ICIJ noted.

In at least 46 of these groups, directors, secretaries, vice presidents, or other high-ranking staff also hold positions in the Chinese regime’s departments or within the CCP.

Additionally, 53 of these NGOs pledge loyalty to the CCP on their websites or in other official documents. Among them, 12 agree to defer their decision-making to the Party, such as leadership appointments.

“In 2024, 33 Chinese NGOs showed up about 300 times on the lists of speakers at Human Rights Council sessions. There were only three of them in 2018. None criticized China,” the report reads.

Rana Siu Inboden, senior fellow at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas at Austin, was quoted in the report as saying that Beijing “is clearly using NGOs as a tool.”

“They are encouraging them, helping them, guiding them, coaching them through how to get this [consultative] status,” Inboden said. “And then once they’re [at the U.N.], you can see how their statements, whether it’s in the Human Rights Council or elsewhere, serve the government.”

Keep reading

US Attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin, Calls Out Wikimedia Foundation (Wikipedia) of Violating 501(c)(3) Status by Allowing Propagandists to Flood Platform – Gives Them Til May 15th to Turn Over Documents

It’s not a secret that The Gateway Pundit, the fifth-largest conservative news website in America today, has one of the most dishonest and vile entries on Wikipedia.

This works out well for the globalist left in the fact that we do not own our name on Wikipedia – the far-left editors do, we cannot comment or explain any entry under our name, we cannot edit our entry to include our award-winning journalism, we cannot rebut any of their lies about us.

It’s a great tool for the left and it has cost conservatives, including this website, millions of dollars in potential traffic and income.

The Gateway Pundit is not the only conservative website that Wikipedia smears and lies about.

In December 2019, T. D. Adler at Breitbart News reported that Wikipedia blacklists now included The Epoch Times and The Gateway Pundit for our truthful reporting on Russiagate.

Wikipedia highlighted The Gateway Pundit’s reporting that was true and factual and used it against us as an excuse to censor our website.

Keep reading