Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Yesterday was Veteran’s Day and I’m mad as hell



It’s difficult to type, my vision blurred by welled up tears. I am internally grappling with an unanticipated soup of emotions, boiling and bubbling, bubbling and boiling: I am infuriated, I am flabbergasted, I am frustrated, embittered, and bereaved.

I loathe.

I weep.

I type.

Flashback to 1972

TiltonHe had been sitting alone, fingers trembling as he reached forward to press record, a deep ache in his throat. What do you say to you wife… to your two little daughters… The chaplain had just left the room. You need to record a final message to your family.

The memory of that conversation with the chaplain, still so fresh, flashed through his mind as he wiped the saliva from his cheek and his eyes. “Baby killer!” she screamed at him, her face contorted in hate and revilement. “Baby killer!” she hollered in disgust just before spitting in his face once more. In uniform, he had been spotted by a radical leftist, roughly 15 years of age, while he was walking through the Los Angeles airport on his way home, returning to his family after years of service in the Vietnam War. “Baby Killer!” she hissed, spitting in his face in a state of agitation like that of a rabid beast, eyes filled with madness.

What was it that had elicited such hatred from an American teenager? What had fueled a rage so powerful that it had driven this young woman to accost a uniformed member of the US Air Force, to accost my dad? The simple answer: lies, treasonous lies.

The liars of yesterday: the AmeriCong

Sadly, many Vietnam veterans experienced this type of vile assault. Other experienced much worse: including mob attacks right here on American soil. The viciousness of those belonging to the anti-America cult during the Vietnam War was born out of lies and propaganda, orchestrated by leaders in Hanoi and put into action right here in the American homeland.

“Hey, Hey, LBJ. How many kids did you kill today?”

  • Antiwar slogan/chant

The treasonous liars, like pied pipers of the ignorant masses, hollered such untruths as, America is imperialist and fascist! America’s troops are drug addicts and murderers; baby killers, every one of them! America isn’t fighting for the freedom of the South Vietnamese: America’s corporate, capitalist system and its interests are an evil, occupying force, bent on the oppression of the marginalized Vietnamese people! The National Liberation Front forces are merely freedom fighters working to secure liberty from the evil, imperialist Americans; they fight for democracy! Persistently they rallied, and they hollered, and they lied through their teeth, and, sometimes, they threw bombs.

“The spontaneous antiwar movements in the US have received assistance and guidance from the friendly [Viet Cong/North Vietnam] delegations at the Paris Peace Talks…. The PCPJ [People’s Committee [sic] for Peace and Justice]…maintains relations with us…”

-from the Viet Cong’s Circular No. 33/VP/TD.

Busy RebelThese AmeriCong (now assisted by sympathetic “historians”) routinely denied their frequent dealings with the top brass of North Vietnam (Zaroulis, Who Spoke Up, xii; Tom Wells, The War Within, 211).  Yet, during the war, the “peace” lovers were often seen publically wearing rings, necklaces, and medals given as gifts from a grateful North Vietnamese government, often made from US airplanes shot down in the war. The infamous Bill Ayers has fondly recalled being given a ring at a Toronto conference sponsored by Women’s Strike for Peace (WSP). On the inside of the ring was inscribed, “500,” to commemorate the 500th US plane shot down (Bill Ayers, Fugitive Days, Penguin Books, 2001, 74).  Featured on the cover of Life Magazine (April 23, 1971) was Jane Fonda (“Hanoi Jane”) wearing her own necklace made from America’s downed aircrafts (Canfield, Comrades in Arms). As the daughter of a USAF pilot of the Vietnam War, I am disgusted, sickened, horrified.

In a speech given at a Congressional seminar in 1985, former leftist radical (aka communist), David Horowitz, stated, “Let me make this perfectly clear. Those of us who inspired the antiwar movement did not want just to stop the killing, as so many veterans of those battles now claim. We wanted the Communists to win. It is true that some of may have said we only wanted the United States to get out of Vietnam, but we understood that meant the Communists would win. ‘Bring the troops home’ was out slogan; the fall of Saigon was the result.”

The liars of today: Kaepernick and the NFL

In the same speech, Horowitz described the hypocrisy which characterized the minds of the Vietnam era communist activists in America, explaining that “…activists had a double standard when it came to making moral and political judgements. We judged other countries and political movements – meaning socialist and revolutionary movements – by the futures we imagined they could have if only the United States and its allies would get out of their way. We judged America, on the other hand, by its actual performance, which we held up to a standard of high and even impossible ideals. Of course, if we had been able to look at the facts we would have seen that America was more tolerant, more democratic, and more open to change than the countries and the movements to whom we gave support. But we were unable to do that. We were, in the then-fashionable tern, ‘alienated’ from what was near to us, unable to judge it objectively.”

Horowitz then went on to describe his personal awakening, his sudden awareness that America was not the oppressive monster which he had long envisioned. “As our opposition to the war grew more violent and our prophesies of impending fascism grew more intense, I took note of how we were actually being treated by the system we condemned. By the decade’s end we had deliberately crossed the line of legitimate dissent and abused every First Amendment privilege and right reserved to us as Americans. While American boys were dying overseas, we spat on the flag, broke the law, denigrated and disrupted institutions of government and education, gave comfort and aid, even revealing classified secrets, to the enemy. Some of us, like Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda, provided a protective propaganda shield for Hanoi’s Communist regime while it tortured American war-prisoners; others engaged in violent sabotage against the war effort. All the time I thought to myself: If we did this in any other country, the very least of our punishments would be long prison terms and the pariah status of traitors. In any of the socialist countries we supported – from Cuba to North Vietnam – we would spend most of our lives in jail and, more probably, be shot.” Instead, the capitalist, repressive, evil, imperialist America only handed out slaps on the wrists, here and there. Some activists did do some time in jail, “but basically the country tolerated” them.

So, is it just me or does old propaganda die hard?

Today, with the help of educational indoctrination, we have historical imbeciles like Colin Kaepernick moaning on and on about America’s “oppression” of “marginalized” people, wearing t-shirts emblazoned with the faces of dead socialist murderers such as Che Guevara and Fidel Castro – a flabbergasting act of moral and political hypocrisy – and blurting out lie after lie about “systemic racism” and “bodies in the streets.” With a straight face, Kaepernick blabbers away about America’s repressive “system,” simultaneously exulting Cuba’s equality, or claiming Ghana, a known abuser of human rights, to be his true “home.”

“How can we truly celebrate independence on a day that intentionally robbed our ancestors of theirs? To find my independence I went home.”

-Colin Kaepernick calling Ghana his home on America’s Independence Day, 2017

It has become ever apparent that far too many childish ninnies play professional football. Evidently, the are equally as skilled at playing “Follow the Leader” as they are on the football field. The kneeling trend had become a ritualistic alternative to chanting for the anti-America cult. Although the kneelers themselves are swimming in money and fame, the thirst of their egos remains unquenched. These kneeling players have chosen a collective lie: This isn’t about the flag. This isn’t about the anthem. This isn’t about Veterans. We are kneeling for social justice. We are kneeling against inequality.

Oh, please! Give me a break!

The fact of the matter is that this herd of man-children – radical shepherds in cleats and their foolishly egotistical sheep, I mean, teammates – have shown zero concern for the ways in which their actions affect others, hurts others. Yes – kneeling hurts others, especially veterans and families of veterans, and it hurts America as a whole. When it comes to the matter of kneeling, “because they can” does not mean that “they should.”

Yes, I am mad as hell!

Yes! I am mad as hell, because the real tragedy is that, just like the Hollywood radicals of the “antiwar” movement, NFL players have tremendous influence over society. The attitudes and actions of players like Kaepernick who are so woefully unable to appreciate the bounty of this great country, have spread into a vast swath of the citizenry, too ignorant to know better. The virulent resentment, hate and victimhood has now become enmeshed in the minds of Americans from coast to coast. The socialist ideals that Kaepernick so foolishly espouses, ideals that have caused millions upon millions of deaths worldwide, has reached endemic proportions among significant segments of America. When a society has lost its gratitude, it has lost its empathy and its ability to reason as well.

“On this Veterans Day, the mistreatment of American troops remains a red line that few dare to cross. But with every new protest, it seems that line gets a little less clear.”

-US Army Officer Jeremy C. Hunt, November 10, 2017

Yes! I am mad as hell, because I am spending my first Veteran’s Day without my father, without my veteran, while watching padded chumps denigrate the country that my dad was willing to die for. Through my sadness in missing my dad, I am watching an influential group of millionaire meatheads peddle Marxian lies and push the same socialist ideals my father was willing to give his life to defeat. I am watching levels of ingratitude that I never imagined possible.

Yes! I am mad as hell, because – worst of all – I am watching today’s enlisted veterans begin to worry that, soon, the vicious treatment toward the veterans of the Vietnam War will become their own reality. I am watching veterans wonder whether it will soon become too dangerousfor them to wear their uniforms in public. This is a problem, folks.

So, yes, I am mad as hell.

Paige Rogers is a Christian artist and author, and a former professional practitioner in the field of Early Childhood Development. She is the creator of, a blog offering Christian reflection, exhortation and discernment alongside various artistic techniques visually documented through Paige's unique artistic endeavors. A lover of learning, Paige is an avid enthusiast of history, civics, political geography and human nature, physical geography and the sciences. She is an incurably inquisitive and chronically creative “egghead.” Paige is a strong supporter of America's service members and veterans.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

When have the Enemies of Liberty on the Left ever compromised on the 2nd amendment?




The history of freedom always has been one of it’s enemies slowly ratcheting it down with restraints in the name of equality or security.

Everyone knows the drill by now, a ‘Serious Crisis’ takes place, the Left immediately demands the surrender of more human rights forcing the innocent to pay for the sins of the guilty. Meanwhile, those who dare defend those rights are pilloried with almost every pejorative in the book.

The history of Liberty Control has always been one of unending incremental infringements on our rights. The enemies of Liberty on the Left always follow the same progression. They begin with spurious claims over the ‘easy access to guns’, getting whatever they can, after which they reset the sequence for the next go around.

The Left’s idea of ‘progress’ is always one direction, with demands that the pro-liberty side give up as yet more of their freedom. Each time around it’s the same story, with only ever worsening regularity. But why is this the case? When have the Liberty controllers on the left ever compromised on the common sense human right of self-defence, or any other liberties for that matter?

Liberty Control down through the ages.

The dirty little secret of Liberty control is that it has it’s roots in racism, epitomised in the infamous United States Supreme Court case DRED SCOTT v. SANDFORD, (1856):

It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.

Please note that it specifically mentions “the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”, as the partial rationale for the decision.

Further on, the past century has saw an inexorable sequence of infringements with the examples ranging from the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968 to the Brady act of 1993.

In some rare cases, the Republican party spearheaded some partial relief of earlier infringements, but these were always accompanied with other restrictions. The overall trend has always been ever intensifying restrictions on the rights that are supposed to be free from infringement.

The Left’s idea of ‘compromise.’

It should be obvious by now that the enemies of Liberty on the Left do not want anyone to have the basic human right of self-preservation. They have made that clear in many articles, editorials and videos on the subject of repealing the 2nd amendment or outright gun confiscation.  Consequently, it can be presumed that anything short of that immediate goal is a ‘compromise’ to them.
The win-win eventuality for them is that their ‘compromise’ positions sets up for their ultimate goal none the less. Asserting government control over everyone’s private property with ‘Intergalactic’ Background Checks followed on with the governmental permission requirements in gun registration that will eventually lead to gun confiscation. They would also like to control free-speech with the expedient of ‘Political correctness’ or entirely undefined ‘Hate speech’. But for now they merely want to get people used to these restrictions on Liberty.

The Takeaway

The Left’s increasing stridency towards Liberty has intensified as of late, which is quite odd given that they supposedly support the concept with the self-labeling as “Liberals”. The Left has become single-minded in their pursuit of gun confiscation(and it’s precursors), to the point of rejecting measures that would actually serve to protect the children. As is typical of the nation’s Left, they self-label their obsession with taking guns away from the innocent as being ‘reasonable’. Meanwhile, they vehemently oppose workable solutions to the problems they caused in the first place.

Their latest tactic is to exploit the victims of mass murder in a bid to shut down debate and impose their unworkable ‘solutions’ to the exclusion of anything else. Do they even sound ‘reasonable’ or ‘Liberal’ for that matter? They incessantly complain that the proponents of Liberty won’t surrender their principles and once again yield to their demands, but when will they ever compromise and defend liberty?



Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

An open letter to Sen. Lamar Alexander, US Senate on the nomination of Chai Feldblum



The Honorable Lamar Alexander

Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions committee

United States Senate

CC United States Senators

March 17, 2018


Dear Senator Alexander,

It has come to my attention that President Trump has re-nominated Chai Feldblum to her position as commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). This news has brought me grave concern.

On behalf of the American people, it is up to you and the rest of the Senate to remedy this unfortunate situation.

As you are aware, the EEOC deals with cases of workplace discrimination; having the power to enforce federal laws, investigate discrimination complaints, regulate and pursue legal charges against private businesses, and influence public opinion. It is imperative that any federal agency entrusted with such powers be steered by the conscientious counsel of unbiased leadership.

A former college basketball coach once said, “Offense is not equal opportunity.” However, since her appointment by former President Obama in 2010, Ms. Feldblum has exploited her position at the EEOC to offensively further her own fanatical advocacy goals at the expense of religiously-oriented American citizens, the Bill of Rights be damned.

Religious liberty, inviolable and protected from governmental infringement by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, is richly ingrained in our country’s values, having been secured by the blood of our ancestors. In fact, religious liberty, often referred to by the Founders as freedom of conscience, was considered by early Americans to be so precious that, even in the midst of America’s fight for independence, conscience objections were considered sacrosanct.

Consider the words of America’s first President, George Washington, in a letter to Benedict Arnold during America’s Revolutionary War:

“While we are contending for our own liberty, we should be very cautious not to violate the conscience of others, ever considering that God alone is the judge of the hearts of men, and to Him only in this case are they answerable.”

For Chai Feldblum, however, religious freedom must be subjugated with the full force of the government’s ugly fist.

She is, in a word, tyrannical.

Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary defines tyranny as “a rigorous [strict] condition imposed by some outside agency or force,” as imposed by a tyrant.

A tyrant is defined as “one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power.”

Ms. Feldblum has made several deeply troubling statements that betray her tyrannical intentions, wholly at odds with America’s founding principles:

  • “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win… Sexual liberty should win in most cases. There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win because that’s the only way that the dignity of gay people can be affirmed in any realistic manner (emphasis mine).”
  • “I believe granting liberty to gay people advances a compelling government interest, that such an interest cannot be adequately advanced if ‘pockets of resistance’ to a societal statement of equality are permitted to flourish, and hence that a law that permits no individual exceptions based on religious beliefs will be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of liberty for gay people (emphasis mine).”

Ms. Feldblum’s seditious statements are in dramatic contrast to what Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1774, in Emblematic Representations:

“The ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken policy. An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages, is what every part is entitled to, and ought to enjoy (emphasis mine)”

In addition, Ms. Feldblum’s thesis on the proper role of government is unequivocally incompatible with the words spoken by President Thomas Jefferson during his first inaugural address, 1801:

“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.”

Chai Feldblum’s offensive advocacy through the EEOC is so extreme and outside of Constitutional bounds that, in 2012, the usually divided Supreme Court of the United States ruled unanimously against Feldblum’s EEOC attempt to void the “Ministerial Exemption,” which allows leeway for religious organizations to carry out routine, religiously-related matters of hiring and terminating employees.

While Ms. Feldblum claims to represent the LGBTQ+ community, she speaks only for a small, yet loud portion of the demographic; one comprised almost entirely of radical LGBTQ+ activists.

In truth, Ms. Feldblum’s fanatical, extremist, ideologically-driven agenda only serves to marginalize a significant portion of sexual minorities, in addition to women and countless Americans of religious orthodoxy.

Ignoring the conservative, sexual minorities who disapprove of the forced subjugation of religious Americans, Ms. Feldblum propagates stereotypes of the various people she claims to represent, and actively encourages neighbors to go to war with neighbors.

Feldblum insists on a “zero-sum” game, where religious Americans and members of the LGBTQ+ community are incapable of living peaceably side-by-side. As the architect of former President Obama’s Transgender executive order, Feldblum further victimizes traumatized women and children, insisting they must tolerate an unsafe existence, as grown men are ushered into their locker rooms and bathrooms in the name of “progress.” Feldblum insists on subjugating religious, yet same-sex attracted business owners in the private market, drastically hindering their pursuit of happiness through economic independence. Feldblum insists that all LGBTQ+ Americans think as she does.

Ms. Feldblum is a tyrant; wholly unworthy of another five years at the helm of the EEOC.

Speaking on the sacredness of religious liberty in America, Samuel Adams stated, August 1, 1776:

“Driven from every other corner of the earth freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum.”

The responsibility, Senator Alexander, now rests with you and the Senate to protect religious liberty as vigorously and as confidently as our Founding Fathers.

If you fail to perform this duty, this great test of your legacy as one of the leaders of the free world, may the words of Samuel Adams haunt you for the remainder of your days:

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”


Most sincerely,


Paige Rogers, Tennessee

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video: The Racist roots of Liberty control – Who doesn’t like certain people getting rights?




In honour of #NationalWalkoutDay let’s look at those who really don’t like certain people getting rights – specifically the common sense human right of self-preservation.

This is NationalWalkoutDay [Who would have thought that kids would want to skip school?] With one of the most important human rights in the spotlight, it would be a good idea to examine the reasons why this has been suppressed in the past. To begin, consider Hillary Clinton’s statement smearing most of the country:

So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign, Make America Great Again, was looking backwards. “You don’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian-American succeeding more than you are, whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.”

So who really is opposed to the certain people getting their common sense human rights? The following video from Colion Noir details that Liberty (gun) control has it’s roots in racism:

Gun Control’s Racist History

Interestingly enough, the same people who claim to care about ‘the children’ but whole heartily support Planned Parenthood are the same folks who want to deprive the people of their basic human rights. Who would have thought that was the case?


Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily






Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.