The Manchester Free Press

Sunday • March 11 • 2018

Vol.X • No.X

Manchester, N.H.

Goad/Gorcenski Lawsuit Update

Christopher Cantwell - Mon, 2018-02-12 17:07 +0000

If you’ve been following my case, you’ve probably heard that I filed a lawsuit against the antifa terrorists who falsely accused me of crimes last August.

They have responded, making further bogus claims.

Please contribute to my efforts to combat this corruption, and forgive my radio silence while I sort through these matters. I hope to resume regular production of the Radical Agenda very soon.

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Goad/Gorcenski Lawsuit Update appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Radio Silence

Christopher Cantwell - Wed, 2018-02-07 19:16 +0000

As my trial approaches, preparation and decision making are occupying my attentions in a way that prevents me from performing my duties at full capacity. So I regretfully must postpone further production of the Radical Agenda until further notice.

By next week we’ll either be back to regular production of Radical Agenda, or Live From Seg.

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radio Silence appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Compulsory Restraints. Because You're Not Competent.

Adventures in the Free State - Wed, 2018-02-07 04:34 +0000
You don't even need to trouble yourself over whether it's a violation of your liberty, subject. They'll decide that for you, too. Indeed, they already have.

And they'll decide that driving on roads that you are compelled to pay for is nevertheless somehow a mere government-granted "privilege" -- despite the fact that even the Supreme Court has acknowledged that travel is a Constitutionally protected natural right, the mode of which is nowhere authorized to be constrained, any more than are the modes of, say, speech or self-defense. We've simply allowed government, relentlessly operating well above its pay grade, to decide otherwise. (Time to regain some control, mayhaps? Is there a better place to make that stand than the "Live Free or Die" state...?)

So just submit. No need to thank them, really; surrendering to them control over your choices is thanks enough. Ok, almost enough...

HB1259, "relative to passenger restraints", gets an airing out -- yet it still stinks in here -- before the NH House Transportation Committee, 2/6/2018. And how 'bout that? Your humble chronicler was called upon to deliver the "rebuttal". No time to get (more) nervous, at least...

We've been here before, of course. But mercifully not since 2009's HB383 (this really is an awesome tool). But sadly yet entirely predictably, "the usual tired parade of government authoritarians and Utopian socialists" hasn't gotten any less tired over the intervening 9 years.

Had enough? Let your representatives know. See if they actually understand that they are...

  • Buckle up for new fight in old battle over adult seat belt use in N.H.
  • NH lawmakers revisit mandatory seatbelt law | New Hampshire
  • Seat belt bill debated again in NH House
  • Seat Belt Use in 2016 -- Use Rates in the States and Territories (pdf)
  • Top 10 Most Dangerous States To Drive In | HuffPost

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Radical Agenda S03E026 – Enemies Domestic

Christopher Cantwell - Fri, 2018-02-02 19:27 +0000

A controversial memo from the House Intelligence Committee has been released. The memo details the politicization of our government’s foreign intelligence apparatus, turned to domestic purposes by the Left. If you are surprised by this, then you have not been paying attention.

The Left operates not by the rules of civil discourse, but by the rules of warfare and espionage. Moreover, the conflict they are waging is not a mere battle of ideas or policies, but rather one with a decidedly ethnic tilt. Put simply, half the country is waging race war against the other half, and that other half is just taking it on the chin.

There is literally nothing they will not do to destroy White America, or White Europe for that matter. Everything they have done, from economic policy, to immigration, from education, to media, all the way up to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Federal Reserve has been set to diminish us, and our ability to resist them.

Radical Agenda S03E026 – Enemies Domestic

And who are (((they))), you ask? It’s the Jews, stupid. You cannot meaningfully discuss the Left without addressing Jews. Blacks and Muslims could never hope to accomplish such spectacularly diabolical aims. They are merely the willing and fruitful dupes of a tiny ethnic minority, hell bent on world domination and the genocide of their only intellectual competitors.  Wherever you see a truly astounding degree of evil perpetrated by a gentile, simply pop the hood, and there you will find the Jew. Jews are the archetypal supervillains, whose plots are so fantastically devious that the mind is repelled from believing such abuses were even possible.

Yet, as this memo shows, they are not only possible, but all too common.

Now consider this. If the foreign surveillance tools of our government were turned against President Trump, what other purposes might they have been put to? For how long have they been used in this manner? It seems exceedingly unlikely, that one day some FBI agents simply woke up on the wrong side of the bed, and decided to interfere with a presidential election. How many presidential elections have they interfered with? How many House and Senate races? How many state and local elections? How many political careers never began, because rivals were crushed before they even became rivals?

Remember what Hitler said about who the Jew sees as his enemy;

It is this press, above all, which carries on a fanatical campaign of calumny, strives to tear down everything that might be considered a mainstay of national independence, cultural standing and economic self-sufficiency. It aims its attacks especially against all men of character who refuse to fall into line with the Jewish efforts to obtain control over the State, or who appear dangerous to the Jews merely because of their superior intelligence. In order to incur the enmity of the Jew it is not necessary to show any open hostility towards him; it is sufficient if a man is considered capable of opposing the Jew at some time in the future, or of using his abilities and character to enhance the power and position of a nation which the Jew considers hostile to himself.

The Jew’s instinct, which never fails where these problems have to be dealt with, readily discerns the true mentality of those whom he meets in everyday life and those who are not of a kindred spirit may be sure of being listed among his enemies. Since the Jew is not the object of aggression, but himself the aggressor, he considers as his enemies not only those who attack him, but also those who may be capable of resisting him. The means which he employs to break people of this kind who show themselves decent and upright, is no honourable conflict, but falsehood and calumny. He will stop at nothing. His utterly low-down conduct is so appalling that one really cannot be surprised if, in the imagination of our people, Satan, as the incarnation of all evil, assumes the form and features of the Jew.

This is why Donald Trump is attacked as the second coming of Adolf Hitler despite having a bunch of Jewish in-laws. Cleaning up Washington corruption and stopping the flood of dysgenic immigration, is anti-Semitic because it interferes with the Jewish PLAN to ethnically cleanse America of white people. He shows no animosity to Jews whatsoever, but they oppose him as their mortal enemy and find no act beneath their dignity to destroy him, because Making America Great Again is contrary to their designs.

What we are seeing more and more as the narrative collapse gains pace, is that Donald Trump not only won the election, but he did so despite the most staggering set of obstacles. We are told that Russia “hacked our democracy” and that Trump is a stooge of the Kremlin. Democracy dies in darkness, and criticism of the press is Holocaust 2.0. White supremacists murdered Heather Heyer for the lulz, and antifa is destroying the first amendment because free speech is racist.

Jewish lies from start to finish, and we are prevailing regardless.

424-3-GO-NAZI or Radical Agenda on Skype if you would like to be on the pogrom.

Join us, this and every Friday from 5-7pm Eastern and Thursdays from 7-9am Eastern for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about common sense extremism where we talk about radical, crazy, off the wall things like FISA abuse.

Catch the live video stream and chat on GabTV or PewTube, or listen live on the Radical Radio Network.

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S03E026 – Enemies Domestic appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Radical Agenda S03E025 – Stormer The Union

Christopher Cantwell - Thu, 2018-02-01 10:51 +0000

I know you guys have probably heard about all you need to about Trump’s first State of the Union address, I know I have. The speech was rather unremarkable by design, if you ask me. I only titled the show Stormer The Union today because I thought it sounded catchy and I am, as is the case every Thursday from 7-9am Eastern, happy to be joined by Andrew Anglin of

Radical Agenda S03E025 – Stormer The Union

Dot Top you say? What happened to Dot Red? Best as we can figure, it’s the Jews. More on that later.

I had court yesterday, and shockingly enough, the justice system in Charlottesville seems less than interested in justice. Of my three motions, only one was granted. I am now allowed to travel within the city I presently reside in, which is nice because previously I couldn’t even take the garbage out or check the mail. Since I can’t carry a gun and episode 24 of stage three was just a small sample of the death threats I’ve been receiving, this is of little other significance.

We had a motion in for a special prosecutor and a change of venue, both of which were denied.

The change of venue should be obvious. Charlottesville is a communist hellhole where authorities gave antifa license to riot because they don’t like our political opinions. Countless crimes were committed by leftists that day, and the few that have been prosecuted have been handled with kid gloves. DeAndre Harris smashed a man in the head with a flashlight in the middle of the afternoon during a robbery, for no good reason whatsoever. Then he raised $166,000 for his “medical bills” which he spent on a Mercedes and production of a rap music video. His felony was dropped to a misdemeanor. Meanwhile, I pepper sprayed a guy in self defense, then two people I didn’t pepper spray lied under oath, falsely accusing me a of a crime for the second time and third in a day, were proven to have lied, and I’m facing 40 years in prison. The media has spent the last six months telling everyone who will listen that I am a Nazi terrorist who used chemical weapons against a transgender person for the sheer joy of it.

The idea that I can get a fair trial in this place is patently absurd, and no reasonable, objective observer can deny this. Luckily, the only thing more ridiculous than the legal proceedings against me is the evidence they rely on. So if there is a shred of justice remaining, even a highly prejudiced jury should find it impossible to convict me of anything other than saying mean things on the internet.

The special prosecutor motion might be less obvious to the outside observer, but should have been a no brainer for the court. The prosecutor in my case is about to be a witness in a lawsuit I just filed in federal court, because his witnesses changed their stories after meeting with him, when video evidence emerged proving that they were lying. The content of those meetings is relevant in both the civil and criminal cases, and it may well come to pass that he gets called as a witness during my criminal trial. The whole thing gives the appearance of his knowing and active participation in an effort to frame me for crimes I did not commit.

The good news is, if they manage to so prejudice the jury as to ignore the evidence and convict me of these lies, I will have grounds for appeal. If they do not convict me (or I win on appeal), I suspect I will have grounds for a malicious prosecution lawsuit against Albemarle county and all participants in this conspiracy.

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 424-3-GO-NAZI or Radical Agenda on Skype.

Join us, this and every Thursday from 7-9am Eastern, and Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays from 5-7pm Eastern, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about common sense extremism where we talk about radical, crazy, off the wall things like fighting corruption.

Catch the live video stream and chat on GabTV or PewTube, or listen live on the Radical Radio Network.

Video of SPLC discussed on the show

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S03E025 – Stormer The Union appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

The Democrats Respond To Trump's SOTU

Libertarian Leanings - Wed, 2018-01-31 21:22 +0000

How fitting that it was a Kennedy who delivered the Democrats' response to President Trump's State of the Union address.  Real Clear Politics billed it this way:

"Representative Joseph P. Kennedy III, scion of one of America’s top political dynasties, is speaking after President Trump’s State of the Union address."

Last night the latest Kennedy aristocrat to burst onto the national scene launched into a diatribe remarkable for being so transparently dishonest, vicious, spiteful, and hypocritical. One straw man after another bit the dust as the photogenic Kennedy sought to establish himself as the new face of the same old Democratic party.  Good luck with that. 

Democrats may be looking to Joe Kennedy III to follow in the footsteps of Barack Obama whose breakout speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention inspired the nation and led to his election to the presidency only four years later.  Yet their speeches were not that alike.  Obama's held out the promise of unity, false promise that it was.  Funny that he noted there were those who would divide Americans, and then later we find that he, Obama, would be the divider.

"Yet even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, there's not a liberal America and a conservative America - there's the United States of America. There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America."

Kennedy on the other hand takes division as the given.  The good, represented by himself and like minded aristocrats, must defeat the Trump-inspired racist rabble.

"This administration isn’t just targeting the laws that protect us – they are targeting the very idea that we are all worthy of protection.
For them, dignity isn’t something you’re born with but something you measure.

By your net worth, your celebrity, your headlines, your crowd size.

Not to mention, the gender of your spouse. The country of your birth. The color of your skin. The God of your prayers.

Their record is a rebuke of our highest American ideal: the belief that we are all worthy, we are all equal and we all count. In the eyes of our law and our leaders, our God and our government.

That is the American promise."

According the Joe Kennedy III, we are all worthy, equal, and we all count in the eyes of our law, our leaders, our God, and government.  Except somehow I don't think Hillary, or James Comey, or Loretta Lynch, or even Kennedy himself believe any of it.  In light of the sham investigation that held Hillary blameless for ignoring laws that sent others to jail, how could they believe it?  The law was certainly not intended to apply to Joe's great uncle Ted.  Ted Kennedy, you may recall, drove his car off a bridge and into a Chappaquiddick Island tidal channel with Mary Jo Kopechne in it.  He saved his own skin, but then didn't bother to report the accident for nine hours.  And he didn't bother to save Mary Joe.  She drowned, trapped in his car underwater.

Yes, Joe's speech was dishonest, vicious, and spiteful, but Joe Kennedy III was also being really dumb.  Really dumb.  Dumb like Hillary with her deplorables comment.  Kennedy had this to say about our year of strong economic growth and optimism:

"We see an economy that makes stocks soar, investor portfolios bulge and corporate profits climb but fails to give workers their fair share of the reward.
A government that struggles to keep itself open.

Russia knee-deep in our democracy.

An all-out war on environmental protection.

A Justice Department rolling back civil rights by the day.

Hatred and supremacy proudly marching in our streets."

The Democrats have painted themselves into a corner with identity politics.  Americans tend to reject policies that they see as encroachments on their freedoms, yet that's what the Democrats are constantly trying to sell to the voters.  Democrats have no issues that are not transparently about increasing their own power.  Democrats support labor unions and mandatory unionization wherever possible because union dues become party contributions.  Democrats support federal regulations on anything and everything because it provides an army of federal employees whose jobs depend on the Democrat vision of an ever expanding government, and because regulations can be used as weapons against political opponents.  Democrats support open borders and illegal immigration because Democrats depend on a stream of low income, unskilled workers who are more likely to become future Democratic voters.  Democrats oppose any form of voter ID validation because they make use of voter fraud in tight elections.

Most Americans do not belong to labor unions and many of those that do would prefer not to have mandatory dues automatically deducted from their pay.  Most Americans oppose unnecessary regulation and would prefer, if not smaller government, at least government that is efficient and cost effective.  Most Americans oppose illegal immigration.  Most Americans would like vote tallies to reflect an accurate count of legally cast ballots by eligible voters.  Democrats have decided that to win on these issues they have to convince voters that opposition is racist or cruel.

That leaves little else for Democrats to campaign on but the evil, the racism, the homophobia of whoever opposes them.  At the moment that happens to be Republicans, but the club could grow to include independents.  To use Hillary's words opponents are "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it."  And just as Hillary miscalculated, Joe Kennedy III is not likely to shame anybody into anything.  Instead he will create even greater resentment in the hearts of Americans to those moralizing, pretentious progressives who want only to dictate to the rest of us.  Good luck, Joe.

Categories: Blogs, United States

Radical Agenda S03E024 – Leftist Love Letters

Christopher Cantwell - Wed, 2018-01-31 13:04 +0000

I’ve got my hands full today.

For one, I’m in the middle of migrating the sites to a new server, which has proven more difficult than I had imagined thanks to a series of errors and crises with volunteers.

Radical Agenda S03E024 – Leftist Love Letters

Secondly, I’ve got court today. So, wish me luck with that.

Luckily, I’m not short on audio entertainment. I’ve got thousands of voicemails from the tolerant left for your listening enjoyment. In today’s episode, you’ll get a very small sample which will still manage to occupy two hours of your time, and I’ve still got more than 3800 others to go through before I even check the ones that came in while I was locked up.

From mocking my tears, to the standard issue death threat, to wishing I got raped, all the way up to open advocacy of white genocide, this episode has it all. And the SPLC thought Tanya Gersh had it bad…

I’ll be back tomorrow from 7-9am Eastern with Andrew Anglin.

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S03E024 – Leftist Love Letters appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Site Maintenance/Downtime

Christopher Cantwell - Tue, 2018-01-30 06:47 +0000

I am in the process of moving my websites to a new server, and there may be some downtime as I work on this. Please be patient, and know that I’m okay.

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Site Maintenance/Downtime appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Radical Agenda S03E023 – Compulsory Corruption

Christopher Cantwell - Mon, 2018-01-29 18:35 +0000

Previously, on the Radical Agenda, we spent a great deal of time talking about truth. Today, let us discuss something we have in far greater abundance. Lies.

I just watched a video from Campus Reform where students were asked what they thought about President Trump’s State of the Union address from the previous night. The punchline is, the SOTU address had not yet occurred, but that did not prevent these young students from proclaiming it to be the most racist, stupid, evil thing ever. These young people, who are spending many thousands of dollars to supposedly get an education, are purposely speaking from a position of total ignorance as if they were qualified to guide the ship of State, and lying about their knowledge.

Radical Agenda S03E023 – Compulsory Corruption

Worse than this, I imagine if you connected each of them to a polygraph, their answers would register as truthful. None of them showed any signs of being uncomfortable with their deception. It’s just normal. They are doing exactly what they think is expected of them.

This is not limited to our college campuses. It is pervasive throughout our society. In a near limitless range of topics, lies are compulsory. To tell the truth will result in one’s utter destruction. Truth is no defense when dealing with the thought police.

This might not be such a major concern if it were limited to politely paving over trivial matters that made people uncomfortable. Sadly, it is matters of the greatest importance which we are not allowed to discuss. Politics, economics, and race lead the way.

Think about the implications with police for example. Everyone is always accusing the police of racism. Insofar as this implies they are out hunting negroes for sport, this accusation is ridiculous. Sadly, though this is how it is often painted, what they actually mean is that law and order and justice are white concepts, and thus racist. Moreover, it would be impossible for police not notice certain patterns developing as they go about investigating crime.

If a police officer is discovered to be a racist, he will face penalties which may lead to his termination or even prosecution. Thus, in order to be a police officer, one is compelled to lie. Do you think your life is improved by having a dishonest police force?

People always complain about corrupt politicians. Where does this corruption stem from? We can come up with a limitless stream of answers, to be sure, but since race is the single most salient detail in any political calculation, and race is impossible to discuss honestly, it literally becomes impossible to elect an honest politician. Do you think your life is improved by electing liars?

Major corporations are met with accusations of racism for hiring mostly white males. They are forbidden from admitting that white men are being hired as a result of their greater fitness for the job. So, a “diversity program” is implemented, purposely hiring and promoting the incompetent over the capable, and paving over the poor performance of the diversity hire. Nobody dare point out the problem, for fear of retribution. How much of your life is trusted to Google? To Facebook? To some other corporate entity with such a program in place? Do you think your life is improved by handing your most sensitive data to a corporation whose entire business model is based on lies?

Economists are set with the task of explaining inequality in our society. Stating the obvious truth that racial economic inequality is due to racial differences is forbidden from the discourse. So economists come up with alternative answers that have no basis in reality, and this is what government economic policy is set by. Do you think your life is improved by dishonest economic policy?

Our universities are not teaching our children nonsense due to its mere profitability. They must (in theory) train the young for success in the job market. Teaching them that Jews are subversive or that blacks are less intelligent will not accomplish this goal. So the children are taught popular lies instead. Do you think your life is improved by a dishonest education system?

Don’t even get me started on the media. More and more by the day it seems the entire purpose of these institutions is to attack anyone who dares to tell the truth about anything of importance. Blacks slaughtering one another in staggering numbers? Must be the guns. Economy in the toilet? Taxes must be too low. Ethnic conflict? Blame the least ethnocentric demographic in the country. Do you think your life is improved by the nation’s information services being controlled by liars?

In every major field of influence, lies are not only acceptable, but compulsory. Truth is punished by social ostracism, economic sanction, legal penalties, and violence. Lies are rewarded with money, status, and sex. We are not just chasing honesty out of our society, we are breeding it out as well.

On the previous episode we talked about honest communication being the core doctrine of Christianity. On what seems like every other episode, we talk about Jewish lies.

This is the catastrophe of Jewish influence, and multiculturalism more broadly. All of our institutions have been turned away from rewarding the honest behavior of our Christian majority, and heaping the greatest rewards to Jewish lies. We aren’t just becoming corrupted, we’re creating Jews.

424-3-GO-NAZI or Radical Agenda on Skype.

Join us, this and every Monday, as well as Wednesdays and Fridays from 5-7pm Eastern, and Thursdays from 7-9am Eastern for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about common sense extremism where we talk about radical, crazy, off the wall things like compulsory corruption.

Intro Song – Follow Me – Morrakiu

Catch the live video stream and chat on GabTV or PewTube, or listen live on the Radical Radio Network.

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S03E023 – Compulsory Corruption appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

I Need Expert cPanel/WHM/WordPress Help

Christopher Cantwell - Sat, 2018-01-27 02:34 +0000

Right now, you’re seeing this web page served to you by a dedicated server which is running out of disk space and meeting other limitations. Two weeks ago I spun up a cloud server, and had a guy I have worked with before start migrating the websites over.

I Need Expert cPanel/WHM/WordPress Help

Long story short, it’s still on the dedicated server.

cPanel/WHM has a migration feature that makes this pretty simple. I could do this myself with that feature, but I have changed hosting accounts a few times, allowed some domains to expire, started a bunch of projects I have no intention of finishing, and just don’t want to drag over all this mess to the new system.

I also have some changes I want to make going forward, which I don’t want to announce here right now.

I’m looking for the assistance of someone who can handle this entirely without my intervention. I want to be able to give you the necessary login credentials, and hear back from you when my sites are up and running on the new server. If you need to read the manual to do this, I don’t want to hear from you. This will require you to prove your real identity, and loyalty, to me and sign a legally binding non-disclosure agreement.

I can pay a small fee, if you accept crypto. If you prove useful, I will come back to you when I have better paying jobs, which should come in short order once my trial is over.

Comments or questions are welcome.

* indicates required field Name:* Email:* Subject:* Message:* CAPTCHA Code:*


 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post I Need Expert cPanel/WHM/WordPress Help appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Radical Agenda S03E022 – Strong Words

Christopher Cantwell - Fri, 2018-01-26 09:41 +0000

If you’ve been listening to the Radical Agenda awhile, you’ve probably heard the name Jordan Peterson a few times. In case you’re new to the pogrom, he’s a professor at the University of Toronto who made a name for himself by taking a really bold stance on the most important subject of our day. That’s right, non standard gender pronouns. He went on to make other outrageous statements, like suggesting that men and women might have actual biological differences between them which impact their inclinations and aptitudes.

The overton window has shifted so much, that this extremist managed to get on Fox News the other day with Tucker Carlson.

Radical Agenda S03E022 – Strong Words

When asked to give the audience a piece of life advice, Peterson said “Stop saying things that make you weak.”

When asked to elaborate, Peterson said “If you pay attention to what you say, you’ll know that sometimes you feel like you’re standing on a rock, that you’re in a solid place and I suppose that you’re speaking from your heart. And other times you’re saying things just to look good, and to buttress your particular status at the time, and that makes you feel weak. You sell yourself out. And if you pay attention to what you say, you can tell when you’re making yourself stronger and you can tell when you’re making yourself weaker. Unless you want to be weaker, then I would say it’s best to say those things that make you strong.

That’s some solid advice. I don’t want to advise the audience to go out and get themselves fired from their jobs or ruin their relationships, but I can tell you folks, I feel powerful when I tell the truth in the face of adversity. Be it with a face full of pepper spray or behind the concrete and steel of communist cages, I’m hooked on the feeling of speaking truth to power. I hate it that so many of you are denied this feeling out of necessity, and my highest goal is to correct this state of affairs.

I’ve felt this way to some degree for a long time, but it has most certainly undergone some refinement over the last couple of years.

In the early stages of my shift rightward I became heavily influenced by Jordan Peterson. He damn near made a Christian out of me after I listened to an interview with him titled “Religion, Myth, Science & Truth.” I’ve got come clips that I’m going to play from that today, but for now I’ll summarize by saying that though there was no effort to convince the listener of the supernatural, he described the essence of Christianity essentially as living a truthful life with the expectation that reward will follow, though suffering may well come first. The truth buttresses you best against the vicissitudes of being.

It was the survival strategy of Western Civilization, aka the White Race. Countless men sacrificed their individual interests and died for their societies, confident they would be rewarded in the next life. Even if a supernatural afterlife for the individual is not a factual accuracy, it is still true in the sense that one’s legacy carries on with the continuity of his tribe in a way that it would most certainly not if men did not risk their lives to protect the women and children.

At the time I came across this video, some of you will recall, I was in a bit of a life crisis which involved the death of a child. Though the circumstances of this death were ultimately not within my control, I had a great deal of sorrow about this and in some ways it manifested itself as guilt.

“What did I do wrong to be punished in this way? I must be a better person, or this will happen again.”

And so, when I was facing seemingly insurmountable odds, I moved forward as though I had faith that God would protect me. Not because I actually believed this to be the case, but because I had internalized it as a strategy to avoid feelings of guilt.

This was one of a million things going through my head in the now infamous crying Nazi video. I had done everything right. I had been honest. Cautious. Brave. Sober. Even downright merciful to my enemies given the circumstances, and yet I was being punished again.

But after I regained my composure, I pushed forward still.

A lot of people were confused about the timeline of all this. They thought I had the follow up interview with Vice News where I showed them all my guns, before hearing about this warrant. In fact, that video came between the mayhem at Lee Park and the interview in the hotel room. I pulled it together, talked to Vice, and several other media outlets. Hired an attorney, and turned myself in.

From jail, much to the chagrin of my attorney, I continued to speak, knowing it had the potential to harm my case. Though I am far from out of danger, and my suffering is far from over, things are starting to look up, and I may yet see a great reward for all of my trouble.

Thank you very much Jordan Peterson, for your inspiration.

Imagine my shock then, when I saw someone ask Jordan Peterson about Jews and the Holodomor.

Andrew Anglin at the Daily Stormer describes what happened as follows.

On Tuesday, the 23rd of January, Jordan Peterson was confronted in New York City with a copy of the newly translated “200 Years Together” by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a Russian author who wrote about the Jewish role in the Bolshevik revolution and the overwhelming Jewish hatred for white Christian Russians.

The audience member questioning Peterson brings up the Holodomor, a genocide of Ukrainians, and says that this was driven by Jewish hatred for white Christians.

He says that the same Jews who acted out of genocidal mania against Russians during the communist era are now running the Western media and are spewing the same type of vile hatred for the Russian people.

He then asks Peterson: “Could Jewish individuals use their positions of power to seek out revenge against placed like Europe and Russia that have a history of expelling Jews?

Peterson wavers and walks back and forth across the stage, talking about how he’ll read the book before eventually saying: “I can’t do it.”

This was the day before he went on Tucker Carlson with his advice that you “Stop saying things that make you weak.

I’ve got a lot to say about this, and I’m interested to hear your thoughts at 424-3-GO-NAZI or Radical Agenda on Skype.

Join us, this and every Friday, as well as Mondays and Wednesdays from 5-7pm Eastern, and Thursdays from 7-9am Eastern, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about common sense extremism where we talk about radical, crazy, off the wall things like strong words.

Hopefully GabTV is working, PewTube has been solid, and of course you can listen live on the Radical Radio Network.

Intro Song: Mr. Bond – I Mean It

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S03E022 – Strong Words appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Radical Agenda S03E021 – Morning Stormer

Christopher Cantwell - Thu, 2018-01-25 11:30 +0000

It’s morning in the People’s Democratic Republic of Virginia, and degeneracy abounds.

There’s a manhunt on for a black cop killer in Colorado. No need to worry though, goyim. This is just your long overdue cultural enrichment, helping you to repent for the sins of your slaveholding ancestors.

Radical Agenda S03E021 – Morning Stormer

What do you get when you mix a Jewish faggot, a Paki faggot, and a mad scientist? Twin children with different fathers and a lawsuit against the US State department.

Also, find out the Alt Right’s inside strategy for global domination.

Finally, how to turn your boomer parents in raging anti-Semites without ruining dinner.

All that and more on this exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

424-3-GO-NAZI or Radical Agenda on Skype

Show airs live from 7-9am Eastern on PewTube and the Radical Radio Network.


 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S03E021 – Morning Stormer appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

"Family Leave Bill is Tax on Income"

Adventures in the Free State - Thu, 2018-01-18 06:34 +0000
That's the assessment of the Coalition of NH Taxpayers. But let's start here, though, 'cuz since financials bore me to tears, I rarely have a natural opportunity to focus on this shit.

Theft (noun): taking without the owner's consent.

Is that, by itself, a fair, unbiased, unprovocative, nonpartisan definition? I believe it is. It doesn't matter a lick what the thief intends to do with his newly acquired property. If the owner didn't consent, then it's theft. And in my definition of a free society, theft is unlawful. Rude. Frowned upon, even. Property rights are respected and upheld, regardless of the identity of the thief. Yes, even regardless of whether or not the thief has been "democratically elected." That is, in fact, what we believe is, self-evidently, the purpose for instituting a government.

Taxation is theft perpetrated by government, as your representative, in your name. And just as capos worked for, and were accountable to, Al Capone, your respective government representatives work for you. You are the "top capo" in this legal mafia. And thus you are responsible for the crime -- like theft -- that they commit which you condone (if, of course, you do so) simply because you happen to like what they propose to do with the stolen property -- your neighbors' property, that they quite possibly don't consent to surrender (which is why the IRS has so many guns). Either you (perhaps grudgingly) recognize this basic truism, or cognitive dissonance is about to make your head explode.

HB628, heard here before the NH House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee, 1/16/2018, would set up yet another force-funded government entitlement that's nevertheless already available in the competitive (to the extent government "allows" it to be, of course) private sector.

(I want to note somewhere here, and this seems as good a place as any, that the Chair initially admonished the assembled, as is typical in such circumstances, that this Committee, the bill's 2nd, will be considering only the economic aspects of this proposed legislation, and so to kindly restrict testimony, in what already promised to be a very long day regardless, to that element. Did pretty well through all the government actors testifying in the first half, too. But after the lunch break, he failed to reiterate [not that it would have made much practical difference, no doubt], and the "public" testimony -- hey, the People don't have busy days like government employees...! -- tended to go rather far afield -- in the predictable direction, needless to say. Indeed, by the end, well over 4 clock hours in, physical props were even tolerated -- in this case, pictures. Photographs. On photo paper. For the committee to pass around. 'Of the children!', of course...)

For the moment, at least, a convoluted so-called "opt-out" provision is beneficently included, but privacy professional Rep Jess Edwards, starting at about 1:14:00, asserts that the Federal Trade Commission would characterize it as "unethical" and "an unfair and deceptive trade practice" -- were government to be actually held accountable to the rules it imperiously imposes on its employers, of course (hey, how terribly convenient that government doesn't hold itself to, well, even the standard standards, eh...?).

Except, even with the uniquely arduous, and shady (and precariously tenuous, to be sure) opt-out provision, the scheme won't generate enough theft to cover this bill's centrally-planned "utopia" -- per government's own testimony. Here's the "money shot," immediately following Rep Edwards, from Richard Lavers, Deputy Commissioner of the NH Department of Employment Security, responding to a question near the end of his testimony, at about 1:30:00.
"The work that Employment Security has done, in a mathematical analysis of various levels of participation, is that at an 8-week average duration, at a half-percent premium contribution, the only way this program is solvent is at 100% participation. At 90% participation, it's no longer solvent."
Dire words, indeed, from someone who does dearly love a good wealth-transferring government entitlement -- at least when the coerced books balance, anyway, so at least there's that...  He does figure that if the premium contribution were increased by fiat to .67%, and the duration decreased to just 6 weeks, it just might fly.

So. Oopsie-you-weren't-supposed-to-notice, but a proposed government program that's written to be insolvent, to fail ('course, we all know that won't happen: as Reagan said, "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!"). And even the skeptical DC Lavel, as we later hear, wants it to be "successful", "to be around for a long time". But it won't be with voluntary contributions. Whatever shall we do...?

Where, then, will the money come from to make it solvent? Charging ridiculous sums -- sums necessary to sustain inevitably inefficient non-competitive government bureaucracies, sums that the innovative competitive private sector seems able to avoid without (ok, much, comparatively) subsidies -- surely won't fly with government's happily captured market -- the market that's been testifying all day that they'd like more free and subsidized stuff. Because they'd neglected to buy insurance for themselves (well, government takes care of those things, doesn't it...?).

That leaves, seems to me, 1) removing the (already intentionally onerous) "opt-out" provision altogether to ensure the elusive-yet-necessary 100% mandatory market "satisfaction", or 2) implementing a broad-based income tax to shore the whole collectivist mess up (and gosh, then what other new programs could we fund by raising the rate just a little bit more...?). Aw hell. Why not both...?!

As always, however, as Meldrim Thompson explained, "Low taxes are the result of low spending," not t'other way 'round. Especially as government crowds the private sector out of the market even further, costs will go up. Because there's simply no (market) pressure not to. And seriously, when was the last time a politician lost his job for spending too much of other people's money?

But more fundamentally, if this scheme -- even as presumably eventually modified -- is self-sustaining, if this is a profitable model, why does government need to be involved at all? If you want FMLI, go voluntarily contract directly with a competitive private-sector provider. It's available now. One doctor testifying in great support of this bill curiously told the committee how he's set up a private-sector foundation to voluntarily help people get this insurance! Problem solved.

So why don't all these people who've suffered such hardships because they didn't have insurance, instead of trecking to the legislature to beg for contract intervention, just go get insurance? What's the advantage of injecting unnecessary and expensive government / employer middlemen if the customer will be paying for it either way (right?), other than being able to legally steal subsidies from their neighbors' dinner tables?

And here's a shocker: businesses love to get their operating costs subsidized by taxpayers, too. Corporate welfare. Just ask the private-sector airline industry, with their public-sector "security" costs -- subsidized by you, whether you choose to fly, whether you choose to suffer their "security theater" at all, or not. Your protestations are irrelevant. As Al Haig put it, "Let them march all they want, as long as they continue to pay their taxes." It applies to the Warfare State, too, in case you haven't noticed. Does that seem right to you...?

Further, if offering such insurance as an employment benefit is, in fact, a competitive advantage for the business (as also noted by supporters, curiously), they will happily offer it sans government coercion, because it's in their economic self-interest. Because it attracts the best employees, thus increasing the business' productivity. Because it's profitable. Again, problem solved.

So why are they lobbying government to provide -- hell, to mandate -- their competitors with equivalent bennies? Why are they advocating to undermine their own perceived competitive advantage in a cutthroat market for labor? Seems counterintuitive -- even foolish -- doesn't it? Could it be that they just want a subsidy? And the public perception of being charitable with other people's money, of course -- but ya simply don't get moral credit for that.

But if they nevertheless don't believe it makes economic sense, what can we surmise about no-skin-in-the-game ('cuz it's not its money, it's yoursgovernment's rosy "utopian" economic predictions?

Indeed, if it's inherently not profitable, what can we anticipate regarding where the funds will eventually have to come from for this force-based government entitlement that, once implemented, will... never... go... away?

If you're "allowed" (nevermind an actual competitive free market) even just a nominal "choice" -- that the FTC, according to someone who should know, would likely call "an unfair and deceptive trade practice," remember -- this bill as written will not work. According to a state economist. Even if you simply don't like competitive free markets and voluntary contracts. Won't work.

You can do better on your own. Right now. And you can control it. You should do that.

But then, in a free society, one that respects the rule of law -- hell, even in this one -- insurance contracts aren't supposed to be a government function in the first place. You have an unalienable right -- and a concomitant responsibility, notably -- to control your own contracts (including, potentially, a voluntary contract -- get this -- to manage your contracts). And to control your own property. Even if your addle-pated neighbor "neglected" to anticipate certain contingencies, you are under no lawful obligation whatsoever to bail them out. 'Course, you can always still choose to help them voluntarily. Used to be that way back in the day, in point of fact...

What if servant government simply gave up the repeatedly empirically failed notion that it perfectly and uniquely groks economics, the incomprehensible economy -- for everyone -- and knows better than you how to run your life -- at your neighbors' expense?

What if servant government was compelled to simply acknowledge and humbly accepted that it was never expressly delegated the lawful authority in the first place...?

  • Stop the secret income tax | New Hampshire
  • NH HB 628: One Step Closer to the Perpetual Drain of an Income Tax - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • Letters: Income tax bill disguised as insurance bill is bad for NH | Manchester Ink Link
  • Reminder: These New Hampshire House Republicans Voted for An Income Tax - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • Is New Hampshire Ready For Another Unsustainable Social Experiment? - GraniteGrok — GraniteGrok
  • House committee votes against New Hampshire family leave bill
  • Family leave bill set back by committee vote | New Hampshire

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

NH "Preemption" Accountability Bill Divides 2A Community

Adventures in the Free State - Thu, 2018-01-11 04:12 +0000
"Preemption" -- the notion that the 2nd Amendment and NH's own Article 2-a actually mean what they say, and that, NH not being, for good or ill, what's called a "home rule" state, local communities (and other subdivisions) can only do what Concord has authorized them to do -- was nevertheless officially codified back in 2003 as RSA 159:26.

Sadly, the rule of that law has subsequently chafed certain recalcitrant local officials, who have continued, on occasion, to unilaterally overrule it (such as some police chiefs who feel entitled to modify the one-and-only-authorized/accept-no-substitutes Dept of Safety Pistol/Revolver License application by requiring additional information). HB1749, "relative to the state's authority to prohibit or regulate firearms and relative to the selectmen's authority to manage town property," heard here, 1/10/2018, before the NH House Municipal and County Government Committee, not to put too fine a point on it, is an effort to say, "no, we really meant it, and you will be held accountable." Well, ok then...

Curiously, while we are presented with always-expected objections from self-interested government(-affiliated) actors -- advocacy groups the NH Municipal Association (their testimony, essentially, including the exclamation points, can be found here) and the NH Chiefs of Police Association (hey, now there's a surprise...), and from representatives of a couple of town select boards -- and the always amusing (and usually bemusing) Rep Tim Horrigan, no one actually from the private-sector hoplophobe community even showed up.

Pure bizarre internecine struggle, otherwise, with state gun activists staking out opposing positions. However, there does appear to be some building consensus surrounding a proffered amendment initially presented to the Committee in testimony by Gun Owners of NH, starting at about the 1:04:00 mark. At this juncture, however, it must be officially introduced by a Committee member during their Executive Session (which didn't happen this day) to be considered. So if you have a Representative sitting on the Municipal and County Government Committee, you might want to put a bug in their ear about making sure it's allowed to at least see the light of day and be discussed.

James Gaffney at about 1:36:30 pretty much nails the objective, regardless of the execution: shouldn't government officials be held accountable when they -- perhaps even intentionally -- break the law? Aren't you? Even when maybe it's not intentional? Shouldn't there be some substantive incentive not to break the law? Or does election -- or mere appointment -- make men angels...?

But yeah, it's a concept that really should be applied to government violations of all rights, not just gun rights. I do feel compelled to note here that there are 10 co-/sponsors on this bill, and their average NH Liberty Alliance legislative grade is an A+...


  • NH legislators debate more changes to gun laws; Sununu voices support for status quo | New Hampshire

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Are We Looking at a Standoff?

Libertarian Leanings - Sun, 2017-12-03 03:19 +0000

Yesterday Michael Flynn entered a guilty plea to the charge of lying to the FBI about two meetings he had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in December of 2016.  According to reports Flynn is now cooperating in the investigation of alleged Trump campaign collusion with Russia as it allegedly attempted to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.  The stock market took a dive when Brian Ross of ABC News reported that candidate Donald Trump had instructed Flynn to reach out to Russian officials.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average which was hitting record highs suddenly dropped 350 points. 

Meanwhile euphoria gripped the fever swamps of the left.  Mueller had his "smoking gun."  With Flynn apparently poised to testify that Trump ordered him to make contact with the Russians when he was a candidate, Mueller had proof that Trump colluded with Russians to rig the U.S. presidential election.  Then came ABC's correction.

Ross issued a “clarification” to his report on ABC “World Tonight,” hours after the initial bombshell allegation about pre-election Russia contacts was made on air.

“A clarification tonight on something one of Flynn’s confidants told us and we reported earlier today,” Ross told ABC “World Tonight” host David Muir.

“He said the president had asked Flynn to contact Russia during the campaign. He’s now clarifying that, saying, according to Flynn, candidate Trump asked him during the campaign to find ways to repair relations with Russia and other world hot spots. And then after the election, the president-elect asked him to contact Russia on issues including working together to fight ISIS.”

The stock market began to rebound even before Ross's correction was announced, probably buoyed by the anticipated Senate tax reform vote.  By market close the Dow had recovered to where it was only 40 points down from its previous close, still well above the 24,000 barrier it had broken through on the day before.  Lefty dreams of impeachment began to fade.  There's still nothing about contacts between Trump's transition team and foreign leaders that was anything but the normal practice for an incoming administration.

But with Flynn's guilty plea we finally have a crime related to the 2016 elections.  Up to now the only known illegality is the leaking of unmasked names of Trump campaign personnel who were under surveillance by the Obama administration.  There may be other illegalities and in my opinion there probably are, like the surveillance itself, but the leaking of unmasked names are the only actions we know of with a certainty that are against the law.

Also since Flynn entered his plea, there's been a lot of talk about all the leverage Special Counsel Robert Mueller might now have for getting Flynn to incriminate President Trump.  With Mueller breathing down his neck, you get the sense that all the pressure is on Trump, but that may not be quite true.  The saying goes, if you take a shot at the king, you better kill him, so what might Mueller have to worry about if he takes his shot? 

Answer:  Uranium One.  

An FBI investigation that began prior to 2010 had accumulated substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in a scheme of bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering that was intended to expand Russia's atomic energy business inside the United States.  Documentary evidence showed that President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation received millions of dollars during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.

Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions.

The first decision occurred in October 2010, when the State Department and government agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States unanimously approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom, giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply.

When this sale was used by Trump on the campaign trail last year, Hillary Clinton’s spokesman said she was not involved in the committee review and noted the State Department official who handled it said she “never intervened ... on any [Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States] matter.”

In 2011, the administration gave approval for Rosatom’s Tenex subsidiary to sell commercial uranium to U.S. nuclear power plants in a partnership with the United States Enrichment Corp. Before then, Tenex had been limited to selling U.S. nuclear power plants reprocessed uranium recovered from dismantled Soviet nuclear weapons under the 1990s Megatons to Megawatts peace program.

“The Russians were compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry with kickbacks and extortion threats, all of which raised legitimate national security concerns. And none of that evidence got aired before the Obama administration made those decisions,” a person who worked on the case told The Hill, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution by U.S. or Russian officials.

So how would all of this be a problem for Mueller?  Answer:  Robert Mueller was head of the FBI when the investigation began in 2009.  And, oddly enough, James Comey was FBI director when it ended in 2015.  

The investigation was ultimately supervised by then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein, an Obama appointee who now serves as President Trump’s deputy attorney general, and then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe, now the deputy FBI director under Trump, Justice Department documents show.

When Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from investigations of all things related to Russia, his deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel.  It was Andrew McCabe's wife, you may recall, who received more than a half million dollar campaign contribution from now Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe for her Virginia state Senate campaign.  Thicker than thieves.

To sum up the Uranium One scandal, a lot of money changed hands, Russia got uranium, the Clintons got millions, the Clinton Foundation got hundreds of millions, and the investigating team, that included Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Andrew McCabe, and James Comey, were apparently looking the other way while it all went down.  Inquiring minds are beginning to ask questions.

So, what will Robert Mueller do?  Can he keep himself out of the crosshairs when Congress begins to demand to know how the Uranium One deal really went down?  What does Robert Mueller know about Uranium One?  Will he help himself by going hard after President Trump, or somebody in his family like Jared Kushner?  

Or would he be better off looking into the origins and financing of the Steele Dossier?  That would turn his focus on the Democrats and Hillary Clinton, since it's been reported that Hillary and the DNC paid for the dossier, transactions that sent Clinton campaign and DNC money through Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele to "Russian sources."  And once his attention turns to Hillary's indirect collusion with the Russians, would his investigation then be expanded to include the Clinton Foundation.

Trump and Mueller may be at something of a standoff.  Trump can't fire Mueller, and Mueller doesn't seem to have anything on Trump.  So far Mueller's investigation looks like a rerun of the Scooter Libby persecution.  Is Michael Flynn playing the Scooter Libby role in Robert Mueller's shot at bringing Trump down?  And what happens if his shot doesn't kill the king?

Categories: Blogs, United States

The One Where the Commission Announces Its Findings Before the Hearing

Adventures in the Free State - Tue, 2017-11-28 14:55 +0000
For the predetermined deliberations of this lopsided simpatico NH Commission to Study the Legalization, Regulation, and Taxation of Marijuana (and here's the Senate hearing on the House bill to establish it) is what the NH House Criminal Justice Committee insists it must wait. But rest assured, citizen, your unauthorized overlords are unbiased. Uh-huh. They "represent" you, too...

Can this really be surprising, though, when the hand-picked membership is overwhelmingly comprised of unrepentant on-the-record -- even vestedly self-interested -- drug warriors? Oh, the prohibitionist/authoritarian echo chamber. Thank you, late-commission-addition attorney Paul "How the hell did he get in here?!?" Twomey, for injecting a shudder of jarring objectivity and honesty into the juggernaut.

The titular revelation barely 4 minutes into this "impartial" commission's only second non-"organizational" meeting, 11/27/2017 -- the announcement that the Chair is already intending to speak in House session against this year's "marijuana legalization" bill, HB656 (the Criminal Justice Committee's equally tediously predictable Executive Session for which can be seen here), and his request for the commission's consent for him to speak on behalf of the whole group at that time -- and then Mr. Twomey's desperately needed subsequent objection to said presumptuous, disingenuous, "really, who needs a horse anyway when we got this here dandy pre-ordained cart?" Committee Chair's request round out the first 6 minutes.

If you'd just prefer to skip over all the essentially "the feds might get mad!" and "we have to protect voluntary commercial partners from themselves!" -- and, of course, the ever-popular catch-all, "REGULATE ALL THE THINGS!" -- bullshit that comes next, Marijuana Policy Project's New England Political Director Matt Simon -- who isn't on this commission, bringing some deficient balance, right next to the devoutly prohibitionist private-sector advocacy group New Futures, because...? -- starts at about 59:00, providing some rational facts regarding the recent history and current regional state of "The War on People Who Use (Some) Drugs"™.

(Some unfortunate audio difficulties in the middle as my mic battery slowly expired without notice, somewhat ameliorated in post, but it clears up with a mic swap just after 1:24:00.)

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Uranium One

Libertarian Leanings - Wed, 2017-11-22 14:29 +0000

The Uranium One scandal is back in the news, not that it was ever really gone.  According to The Hill, an undercover FBI informant who has gathered extensive evidence of corruption surrounding Russia's purchase of Uranium One and its U.S. assets, will soon testify before Congress.  The Hill has reviewed the documents.

An FBI informant gathered extensive evidence during his six years undercover about a Russian plot to corner the American uranium market, ranging from corruption inside a U.S. nuclear transport company to Obama administration approvals that let Moscow buy and sell more atomic fuels, according to more than 5,000 pages of documents from the counterintelligence investigation.

The memos, reviewed by The Hill, conflict with statements made by Justice Department officials in recent days that informant William Campbell’s prior work won’t shed much light on the U.S. government’s controversial decision in 2010 to approve Russia’s purchase of the Uranium One mining company and its substantial U.S. assets.

Campbell documented for his FBI handlers the first illegal activity by Russians nuclear industry officials in fall 2009, nearly an entire year before the Russian state-owned Rosatom nuclear firm won Obama administration approval for the Uranium One deal, the memos show.

The FBI and the DOJ have been less than cooperative with congressional investigations, seeking to prevent Congress from hearing testimony from its informant.  One gets the picture that there was a coordinated effort by Deep State officials and Clinton friendly media to kill the story and block the evidence from coming out.

Uranium One was a large enough concern for the informant that he confronted one of his FBI handlers after learning the CFIUS had approved the sale and that the U.S. had given Mikerin a work visa despite the extensive evidence of his criminal activity, the source said.

The agent responded back to the informant with a comment suggesting “politics” was involved, the source familiar with Campbell’s planned testimony said.

Justice officials said federal prosecutors have no records that Campbell or his lawyer made any allegations about the Uranium One deal during his debriefings in the criminal case that started in 2013, but acknowledged he collected evidence about the mining deal during the FBI counterintelligence investigation that preceded it.

In recent days, news media including The Washington Post and Fox News anchor Shepard Smith have inaccurately reported another element of the story: that Uranium One never exported its American uranium because the Obama administration did not allow it.

However, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission authorized Uranium One to export through a third party tons of uranium to Canada for enrichment processing, and some of that product ended up in Europe, NRC documents state.

A Uranium One executive acknowledged to The Hill that 25 percent of the uranium it shipped to Canada under the third-party export license ended up with either European or Asian customers through what it known in the nuclear business as “book transfers.” 

The Uranium One scandal has been around for more than a year.  It was first revealed by Peter Schweizer in Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, which was released in July of 2016.  A few months later Andrew McCarthy reported on it in a National Review article entitled Clinton’s State Department: A RICO Enterprise.

In a nutshell, in 2005, under the guise of addressing the incidence of HIV/AIDS in Kazakhstan (where the disease is nearly nonexistent), Bill Clinton helped his Canadian billionaire pal Frank Giustra to convince the ruling despot, Nursultan Nazarbayev (an infamous torturer and human-rights violator), to grant coveted uranium-mining rights to Giustra’s company, Ur-Asia Energy (notwithstanding that it had no background in the highly competitive uranium business). Uranium is a key component of nuclear power, from which the United States derives 20 percent of its total electrical power.

In the months that followed, Giustra gave an astonishing $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation and pledged $100 million more. With the Kazakh rights secured, Ur-Asia was able to expand its holdings and attract new investors, like Ian Telfer, who also donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Ur-Asia merged with Uranium One, a South African company, in a $3.5 billion deal — with Telfer becoming Uranium One’s chairman. The new company proceeded to buy up major uranium assets in the United States.

Documentation provided by Campbell and his testimony will soon be in front of Congress.  Will the Clinton Crime Family be finally brought to justice?  Time will tell, but it's an encouraging sign to see Bill's liberal allies, who once gave him a pass for his sexual harrassment and abuse, now backing away. 

Categories: Blogs, United States

LIVE from Seg! Ep. 026 – (((Franken-Stein)))

Christopher Cantwell - Sat, 2017-11-18 16:41 +0000

LIVE from Seg! Ep. 026 – (((Franken-Stein)))

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post LIVE from Seg! Ep. 026 – (((Franken-Stein))) appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Urgent need of commissary funds

Christopher Cantwell - Fri, 2017-11-17 18:25 +0000

Chris is running very low on commissary funds. If he runs out, he won’t be able to make phone calls and he won’t be able to produce any more content. If you like listening to live from seg, please send him some money here.

Please donate here:

*Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail
160 Peregory Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Christopher Cantwell- Inmate #631424

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Urgent need of commissary funds appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

Christopher Cantwell’s call into Free Talk Live

Christopher Cantwell - Thu, 2017-11-16 23:02 +0000

His call starts at around 3 minutes 14 seconds into this.

Please donate to his goyfundme!

Please donate to his hatreon!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Christopher Cantwell’s call into Free Talk Live appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Categories: Blogs, New Hampshire

The Manchester Free Press aims to bring together in one place everything that you need to know about what’s happening in the Free State of New Hampshire.




Our friends & allies

New Hampshire

United States

We publish links to the sites listed above in the hopes that they will be useful. The appearance of any particular site in this list does not imply that we endorse everything that the particular site advocates.