From Vegas to Jerusalem: Global Violence Continues with Silence


When a person is physically distanced from a terror attack it is easy to mentally disconnect and think, “That could never happen to me.”

Over the past year, global terror has intensified.

Israel has witnessed it all year, not just on October 7 when Hamas terrorists breached the border between Israel and Gaza to commit heinous acts of terror against innocent civilians including murder, rape, and kidnapping. On January 27, a Jerusalem synagogue was attacked. On April 7, three British nationals visiting Israel to celebrate Passover were murdered. Time and time again, Israel has faced terrorist attacks and much of the world has turned a blind eye, chalking it up to a geopolitical issue from which they can detach.

But terror attacks can happen anywhere.

I have lived in Las Vegas for eight years, and I decided to spend a year in Israel before enrolling in university. Until the Hamas attack on October 7, I had never felt physical danger.

On December 6 my home city’s college, University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV), faced a shooting. While I was not physically present, my father and many of my close friends were. Fortunately, no one I knew was injured or physically harmed by the perpetrator, but the mental toll is evident.

The threat of violence exists everywhere and complacency ensures that it will never end.

When the Israel-Hamas war began, many of my fellow program participants left the country as fast as they could, and I initially did as well. I stayed in England with my grandmother for more than a month.

While there, my friends and I were forced to hide our Judaism for fear of violence. This has been a common experience for my Jewish friends across the world.

On college campuses, including UNLV, there have been antisemitic graffiti, threats of another intifada (wave of violence), and extreme anti-Israel rhetoric. There have been incidents of violence committed against Jews globally.

Despite this, many people who had previously advocated against violence remained silent. This includes the Black Lives Matter movement, which garnered heavy progressive support due to its positions on police brutality and racism against black people. However, after the October 7 attack, a Chicago chapter of BLM veered away from the organization’s purported mission by posting a picture of a Hamas paraglider, appearing to celebrate the October 7 atrocity.

Additionally, top-ranked colleges Harvard, MIT, and UPenn failed Jewish students when they did not condemn calls for Jewish genocide. There is a double standard regarding violence as it pertains to Jewish people. The silence and support in response lead to a global society where the murder of innocent people is perceived as justice.

When I decided to return to Israel in late November, many people cited the inherent risks due to the ongoing war. People asked me to come home to Las Vegas to ensure my safety. Now many of those people were caught on campus during the recent shooting incident.

Shootings on college campuses have been prevalent throughout the past year, including at many institutions that my friends attend. UNC, Michigan State, and Georgia State to name a few. While they may pale in comparison to the October 7 massacre, there is a pattern to much of this violence that shows parallels to the Hamas attacks: the perpetrators have sought to cause maximum damage.

If this isn’t recognized, the cycle will continue.

The lesson must be: Stand up to hatred and violence even when it doesn’t directly affect you. Because it soon might.

Amber Lovat, who resides in Las Vegas, is currently interning at HonestReporting during her Masa-run Aardvark gap year in Israel program.

Liked this article? Follow HonestReporting on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok to see even more posts and videos debunking news bias and smears, as well as other content explaining what’s really going on in Israel and the region.

Featured image: randy andy via Shutterstock

Honest Reporting is a website that seeks to bring balance to the left slant in the major news media.

Read More

It’s Inevitable: American Patriots Need Guns Because a War Is Coming

Reprinted from NOQ report.

Should the actions of a handful of criminals be used as an excuse to take away the rights of millions of innocent people? Any reasonable person would say no, but when it comes to gun related violence the standards of logic tend to go out the window. There are many government officials that view each major shooting as a gift – They believe that tragedies are political capital, a tool for leveraging away our freedoms.

In many cases of mass murder in the US the first inclination of the corporate media and the political left has been to rush to conclusions. They immediately blame conservative political motivations for the attacks, while also blaming our 2nd Amendment rights in general. If the shooter turns out to be anti-conservative or doesn’t fit the racial mold, they simply stop reporting the story. The agenda is obvious – To paint conservative men as a dangerous monolith plaguing the rest of society.

Why do they pursue this particular narrative, though?

Perhaps because, statistically speaking, conservative (and libertarian) men are the predominant group keeping authoritarians at bay. The government attacks us because they are afraid of us, and they are afraid of us for a reason.  It’s not about what we are doing, it’s about what we could do if they cross the line into accelerated tyranny, and this is on the verge of happening.

We came within a razor’s edge of war during the covid mandates. If Biden had got what he wanted with his vaccine passport executive order, the country would have erupted into conflict. Many Americans have no clue how close we were. Understand that no country, including the US, is immune to rebellion, and such events tend to escalate quickly.

Leftists often envision their own rebellion as a sort of modern French Revolution in which mobs march the streets and rule the day as heads roll in the town square. They believe their “righteousness” is a shield from harm. But this kind of mob intimidation only works within societies that still respect the rule of law. Leftist insurgencies use a nation’s freedoms and laws against them by saying “You can’t touch us because your principles prevent you…”

US patriots have no such delusions. We know that when it comes to corrupt governments, principles and the rule of law go out the window very quickly if their power is legitimately threatened. Leftists can exploit mob actions, invade government buildings and burn cities to the ground because the government ALLOWS them to. When we do the same thing? Well…how many years now have we heard the word “insurrection” over a single protest on January 6th 2021?

The strategies of the leftists cannot be our strategies because government protections apply to them and not to us. This double standard is leaving constitutional Americans with few options, and the hypocrisy is getting worse by the day. As I write this, Joe Biden is calling for an “assault weapons” ban over a shooting perpetrated by a transgender lunatic acting on her political motivations.  We used to call that terrorism. Instead, the White House is throwing their full support behind trans activist movements and blaming firearms for the deaths instead of the shooter’s twisted beliefs.

Numerous mass murder events have been perpetrated by people indoctrinated into the leftist fold. I would usually be the first to look at the psychological triggers for a shooter, rather than pure political motivation. But, more and more, it appears that the political left is creating the very monsters we now see targeting specific groups. And in each scenario, the media argues that these tragedies were STILL caused by conservative policies. For example:

1) On November 21st 2021, Darrell Brooks jumped into his SUV and deliberately drove it through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, killing six and injuring 60 other people, including children and the elderly. He is cited on numerous social media posts supporting BLM related arguments and anti-white arguments. Some BLM activists took to social media to defend Brooks’ actions, and suggested that his act of mass murder was the “beginning of a revolution.”

At first, the media denied any race related motives or political motives for the attack. When Brooks’ comments were made public, they went silent. Suddenly, no one in the media was talking about the Waukesha Massacre anymore, and those that did talk about it argued that it was actually the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse (a young man who acted in self defense against an attacking mob) that justified the actions of Brooks.

2) On November 19th 2022, Anderson Aldrich entered a gay club in Colorado Springs called ‘Club Q’ and opened fire, killing 5 and injuring dozens of others. The immediate response by the media and the political left was to accuse conservatives of encouraging the crime and encouraging “hatred against the LGBT community.” Yet, when details finally emerged it became clear that the shooter identified as “non-binary” and had been a regular visitor to the club.

Once again, the media went utterly silent and the deaths at Club Q disappeared from the radar. When a mass murder event is not useful for leftists to push their agenda, they no longer care.

3) Then there was the recent mass shooting in Nashville at The Covenant school, a private Christian institution. Audrey Hale, a biological female trans activist, entered the school with a Keltec rifle that fires pistol rounds and killed 6 people, including 3 children. Hale reportedly left behind a “manifesto” which authorities have yet to release (Gee, I wonder why?), but going by her social media activity it is likely that she was politically motivated by Tennessee’s legislation against gender bending surgeries for children as well as bans against sexualized drag shows for minors.

Leftists and the media have aggressively tried to spin Hale’s attack as a gun control issue rather than what it is – Political terrorism.

4) Finally, we have the attack in Louisville, Kentucky at Old National Bank by a man named Connor Sturgeon, an employee of the bank that was about to be laid off who killed five colleagues while livestreaming the incident. Sturgeon has the look that the media likes (tall, young white man) but not the proper politics. Sturgeon’s social media history including his Reddit posts indicate he was a rabid leftist.

Using the pronouns He/Him, Sturgeon posted numerous anti-Trump and anti-NRA memes and rants, as well as pro-covid lockdown comments. There has in fact been a widespread effort by many platforms to scrub his comments from their pages as quickly as possible. In one group chat message, Sturgeon reportedly sent photos that included the statement “They won’t listen to words or protests, let’s see if they hear this…”

Media discussion on the Old National Bank shooting evaporated within a couple days, the fastest I think I have ever seen a story get buried.  I could list may other ideologically inclined attacks by verified leftists, but I think you get the idea.  Are there shooters with anti-leftist views?  A few, but they don’t receive protection from the media and the government like leftist attackers do.

Beyond the issue of directed attacks there is also the issue of overall violence in America. The vast majority of violent crime in the US occurs in Democrat run cities. This is a fact.  Data shows that 27 of the top 30 most violent cities in America are run by Democrat governments, including the cities with the most homicides. Fourteen of those cities also have Soros-backed prosecutors. This trend has been ongoing for years.

The problem is not guns, nor is it conservatives. Conservative towns are some of the safest places in America for the exact reason that there are guns everywhere in the hands of law abiding citizens. What the stats show is a trend that directly relates to a particular ideology – The leftist ideology (and by extension Globalism). Without leftists and leftist policies crime would plummet in the US. The more leftist extremism and globalism spreads the worse things get from generation to generation.

The inevitable outcome is war.

To be sure, there are peaceful means to delay conflict, such as separation or “national divorce.” This is already happening. Millions of Americans tired of leftist policies, taxes, mandates, bureaucracy, crime and cultism have left blue cities and blue states, and many millions more who have the means will leave in the near future.

There will come a point, however, when leftists and establishment elites will try to stop this separation from continuing. If they let people leave they then have to admit their ideology is failing, and that’s not an option for them. They will extort Americans into the society THEY want.  History shows us that when a population is disarmed the worst atrocities unfold.  The Soviet purge of millions of citizens through gun confiscation and then food confiscation is just one example that people should study before joining any anti-gun bandwagon.

One can easily see where this is going. The establishment will try to use force to make us submit to their system and we will not let them. That’s when the shooting starts. If we consider the problem from this perspective it makes perfect sense that these people are rabidly chasing after gun bans today. They know a war is about to happen because they know they are about to start one. And, they know there is a chance they will lose the fight should Americans remain armed. They’re afraid for a reason; they’re afraid of losing.

Article cross-posted from Alt-Market.

The post It’s Inevitable: American Patriots Need Guns Because a War Is Coming appeared first on NOQ Report – Conservative Christian News, Opinions, and Quotes.

NOTE: The opinions expressed in the NOQ REPORT are not necessarily those of "Cogny Mann." But it is certain that we share a lot of overlap in our philosophies and worldviews.

Read More

An Open Letter To New York’s “Black Lives Matter” Leader Hawk Newsome

An Open Letter To Hawk Newsome

Dear Hawk;

My readers might not be familiar with the name “Hawk Newsome.” But many probably saw a recent viral video of you at a recent Trump rally, where you took the stage to speak for two minutes to speak to the Trumpers there about what is on your heart about your cause – the Black Lives Matter movement.

I did watch the video with great interest. If nothing else, it brought home the reality that so much of the division in the country between different racial factions might actually come closer to being bridged if we just gave each other the chance to speak and if we really listen to each other.

Actually, I don’t know that I would have thought to write this open letter to you, simply based on what I heard in that speech on the video. What has prompted me to write is that I heard an interview you did recently with Detroit’s Stephen Henderson on NPR’s local station WDET. I listened to that interview with a greater interest than I even had about the video.

And actually, it was some of the ideas that the two of you seemed to hold in common that prompted me to write .

First of all, know that I loved your speech.

What you said was right on the money. “We don’t want anything that’s yours; we don’t want handouts. We want our God-given right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” (CHEERS). “All lives matter, right? If we want to make America great, we do it together.”

You made some other great points. Like, “the great thing about America is that if you see something broken, you can do something to fix it.” Amen to that. It’s a great country, even with all its flaws.

I suppose there might have been a point or two that struck me as a little off. But to nitpick about the finer points isn’t fair to you. After all, can you really find any two people that agree on everything? If I were to challenge every detail, it would miss the point you were trying to hammer home. I heard loud and clear what I believe your heart was. I believe your point was that you don’t want conflict. You want to make things better.

Based on how you handled yourself, you strike me as a good man.

In fact, I really wish we could talk. I think I would benefit from knowing you.

Having said that, and In the spirit of trying to create effective dialog, I want to say a couple things that I wish you and others in the BLM movement could understand. It doesn’t seem that the majority of your followers typically do. But then, I may be wrong. I don’t know any of them personally, so how would I know? I only get what I get from the news, and we all know how distorted and selective those messages can be, no matter who does the reporting, right?

So you can get a radar fix on where I am coming from, I will say, in the interest of you hearing my take on this, that I am what I would call a “reluctant Trumper.”

Now, I don’t propose to speak for all Donald Trump supporters. After all, as you know, there are among them some KKK members, some skinheads and some other people who just hate black people because they are black.

That is not me. Those people make me ill. They really do. And the fact that they are happy that Donald Trump got into office is annoying. Those types don’t get at all why Trump would get my vote.

I believe I am more the norm for a “Trumper” as opposed to them. You see, in my travels and in my interaction with others, the bulk of the Trump supporters I meet are kind of like me: we dislike the hate groups as much as you do. We hate what the KKK stands for; we loved Martin Luther King and embraced his ideas many years ago when they were fresh. We, too (whether or not you know it) have a dream that somehow we could all somehow become “color-blind.”

Anyway, the reason I am writing is this:

I  found it curious how you and Stephen agreed on a particular point that seemed a little strange to me.

If I understood the conversation, you both seemed to have the idea that perhaps these Trump fans, when presented with the ideas you put forward at that rally, might have somehow, in that moment, all sort of come to the conclusion that some of the points you were making just started to make sense in context; as if somehow, when confronted with your thoughts, they might have suddenly realized for the first time that your interests as BLM aren’t all that unreasonable. I believe you both wondered if you might have somehow penetrated the “Trump rhetoric” on the right that had been clouding their thinking all along until that very moment you spoke.

But with all due respect, Mr. Newsome, I don’t think you get it.

I wondered if  you might have gotten it the day of your speech, based on the remarks you made at the end of the video. But in this interview it seems you may have reprocessed the experience to the point of missing the golden nugget that was there for you.

May I suggest there might have been something else happening at that rally that led to all the unexpected applause?

If (as is likely) the people at that rally are anything like me, the reason they were cheering when you brought those ideas forth was not because, in a moment of sudden inspiration, the scales fell off their eyes and your ideas made sense for the first time, as if they had never thought that way before.

No, Mr Newsome. If that is what you think, then I believe that you are out of touch with where the average Trump supporter is, and where much of where conservative America is.

Those people cheered because for a long time now, they already embraced the ideas you were presenting in that speech; and in that instant, they cheered robustly to try to communicate that fact.

They cheered when you spoke about police brutality against blacks because they already hate it when it happens; they cheered when you said, “all lives matter, right?” because they already do believe all lives matter, including black lives. And even though they recognize that many in the BLM movement find the phrase “all lives matter” to be belittling to the cause of BLM, they were cheering because you were acknowledging to them (in that moment, anyway) that you might be hearing them a little bit, too. They want peace, justice and equality as much as you do.

But if I can speak as one Trump fan who hates racism, and who freely admits that there are still many areas where there is racial injustice in the USA –  there is something that bothers me.

It bothers me when much of what we see from BLM is so much of the stuff that you didn’t say in that speech.

Don’t get me wrong. I thought you did a commendable job in the moment. I think you might well have felt you were walking into the gates of racist hell. No one, off the cuff, confronted by a swarm of people he perceives to be his enemies, will always do a perfect job of delivering the exact message he wants to get across. Considering the time frame and the feelings I’m sure you had, you did a bang-up job. It was commendable.

But what you didn’t say in that speech, what you didn’t address and what was likely on the hearts and minds of many in that crowd were the many questions, problems and complaints that people on my side of this issue are constantly grappling with.

You didn’t speak to the violence that comes from the BLM side of the movement. You didn’t address the rhetoric like “what do we want? Dead cops. When do we want ‘em? Now!” You said nothing to acknowledge that any of the violence perpetrated by the BLM movement is a little over the top, or that assassinating white police officers in ambush style is also a terrible waste of lives in the “ALL Lives Matter” movement.

But you only had two minutes.

You were putting your best foot forward to show us that you are not an unreasonable man, and your movement isn’t asking for unreasonable changes. I get that.

I also recognize that there is the leadership in a movement and then there is the membership which may or may not embrace or even understand the views of the leadership. So often there seems to be much more heat than light in the lower ranks of any organization.

So I don’t hold any of that against you in your “one crack at the bat,” two-minute speech. There were much more important points that you needed to make. And from my side, it’s alright. And from my side, I believe you needed to understand that your ideas were already embraced by many whom you thought were opposed to you.

I will also say that I would love to have a chance to get to know you, to hear your heart and your story. Because, from my side of this….

I freely admit that I probably understand little of your experience.

I will never forget the moment when I had an occasion about 15 years ago to speak with a young man who travelled down from Michigan to work in Springhill, Tennessee. He told me about an incident that occurred when he was checking into a local motel down there for the first time in town. His story was shocking to me as much as it was shocking when he first experienced it.

As he told the story, it was that he (a white man) was standing in line at the motel counter. There was a white woman working behind the desk. She was taking care of a white woman who was first in line. Behind her was a black lady, second in line. And he was standing behind her, third in line. He said the black woman in front of him had two dollar bills in her hand, and he assumed this black lady was waiting for change for the vending machine.

As the story went, the white female clerk finished with the first customer – the white woman, and (in his words) looked right through the black woman at him and said, “yes sir. Can I help you?”

He was a little surprised; but not knowing exactly what was going on, he said to the clerk, “that’s ok. You can help her first. I think she just needs change for the vending machine.”

And in an instant, the clerk’s countenance changed. She reached into her till, counted out 8 quarters and slammed them on the counter, grabbed the bills from the black woman and said to him in a quite harsh tone, “what do you want?”

He was stunned when it happened. And I was stunned later when he told me the story. And perhaps you’ll just think my whiteness is showing here.

Or perhaps you can realize that  it  just might be the way I was raised – my unique experience growing up. We all have stories as unique as fingerprints, don’t we?

You see, I was raised in a community where we had a few black people who lived in our community but whenever I was exposed to racist attitudes, my good Christian parents were quick to point out to me how wrong and backward those ideas were; that we were all God’s children and were all the same in his eyes.

And so my story is not one of not caring about the types of systemic racism that may well exist far more than I know and about which BLM protests. My story is simply one of not having heard your story and the stories of so many people of color.

But sir, if I can say this:

There is an inverse relationship between the violence from some in your movement and the ability for those of us with a different experience to hear you.

I hope you can hear that point. Many opposed Dr. Martin Luther King when he took his cause for justice on the road. But there were many people – black and white (as you know) who not only heard the message, but they heard it and embraced it to the point that some white people died for the right of people like Dr. King to be judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

But Dr. King had character. And the violence of some in the BLM movement distracts from your character if you do not acknowledge that it is not the best way forward.

But as I said, I realize you only had two minutes.

And I believe, having heard you, not merely under fire for your two-minute blurb, but in that interview with Stephen Henderson, that you are a man of character, too. I heard your heart at the end of the video, where you were speaking of what surprised you that day and what you learned from people you previously considered to be your avowed enemies. It takes character to quickly acknowledge what you learned from your experience that day. Not everyone can do that. Most people are much quicker to simply rearrange their presuppositions.

Just don’t reprocess the experience to the point of missing what I am trying to say: we want justice for all, too. But we already did before you spoke.

And as much as I do hope you can hear that, I pray that people who have grown up more sheltered, perhaps as I did, will want to hear all the individual stories that have caused so many in the black community to feel marginalized and unheard.

We all need to hear the stories.

It is all too easy to reinforce our own echo-chambers, listening only to those on our side who want to agree with us.

But if that is all we do, we will never change and grow. White people need to hear stories like yours to know how much these things might still be going on. And black people need to hear the stories like mine so you can understand we aren’t against you but rather maybe truly unaware.

I loved the magic that happened that day. I love the fact that those people generally embraced you. I pray you will see that the reason they cheered at so much you said that day was not merely because you convinced in the moment of things they hadn’t thought about before.

Hopefully, you’ll soon embrace the reality that they cheered because most of them were already there, longing for the chance for you to show up so they could embrace with you what we all want: freedom, liberty, an end to racism, an end to police violence, and end to crime, pain and suffering.

But it starts by talking to each other. Thanks for bravely taking that podium. And thanks for listening.

Perhaps we will someday meet. And perhaps, some day, we will all look back and see those were two minutes that changed the world.


Cogny Mann

(The Cognitive Man)

Related: Hear the interview between Hawk and Stephen Henderson here.

Read More