Portland Police Chief Cries After Admitting Suspects in Border Patrol Truck Attack Are Tren de Aragua Associates
Portland Police Chief Bob Day knew on the first day but withheld this information from the public as leftists urged violent revenge against federal agents

Portland Police Chief Bob Day broke down and cried at a press conference on Jan. 9 after being forced to concede that DHS was right all along: the illegal Venezuelan migrants accused of trying to run down Border Patrol agents the day before in Portland have ties to the violent Tren de Aragua gang. Day admitted he hesitated to tell the public the truth.

What’s worse is that he and the PPB were aware the day prior that DHS was correct in their statement, but refused to confirm it at the initial press conference, which preceded leftist rioting outside the Portland ICE facility. PPB had the names of the couple from their investigation into a July 11 Portland shooting, where the victim said the assailants are members of Tren de Aragua.

On Jan. 8, Border Patrol agents non-fatally shot Luis David Nico Moncada and Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras in east Portland after the suspects allegedly tried to ram them down with a red pickup truck during a targeted stop. Almost immediately, internal details falsely claiming it was an ICE shooting were leaked to the extremist group PDX ICE Watch by a Multnomah County first responder.

Image
Luis David Nico Moncada
Image
Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras

Instead of waiting for facts, Portland and Oregon leaders — all Democrats — rushed to stage an emergency press conference condemning federal agents, rejecting DHS’ statements, and publicly siding with the violent suspects, whom they repeatedly described as “victims.” Corporate media followed suit, misleading the public and inflaming tensions. The Portland Police chief refused to share the truth about the suspects’ Tren de Aragua ties.

At night on Jan. 8, an angry far-left mob descended on the Portland ICE facility, attempting to attack it and forcing police to make six arrests — all sparked by misinformation pushed by elected officials, activists and media.

When you’ve lost other moslems…..

Not Satire: UAE Cuts Funding For Students In UK Because They May Encounter Radical Islam.

Prophecy and mythology.

The word “debunked” gets thrown around an awful lot by the leftist media, and it’s amazing how often it really boils down to “we said it’s false and that’s all you need to know.”

Tilting At Windmills is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Now, if the media were trustworthy, that might be enough. If someone is worthy of trust, you can take their word at face value. The phrase “trust me, bro,” isn’t needed when someone is trusted.

But I came across a story earlier today that, frankly, highlights how the leftist media’s myths can, in fact, be prophecy.

In 2009, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin created a sensation when she claimed that government-run healthcare would inevitably lead to the creation of bureaucratic boards responsible for deciding who should and shouldn’t receive treatment.

It’s from this charge that we got the term “death panel,” which became a near constant reference during the congressional debate over the passage of the Affordable Care Act.

Palin was called a loon and a crank.

Even today, a simple search on Microsoft’s Copilot for the date when the former governor coined the term “death panel” carefully notes that her accusation quickly became a viral talking point despite “being widely debunked as a myth.”

Fifteen years after Palin’s remark, disability advocate Krista Carr testified before members of the Canadian parliament that her organization receives weekly reports of medical assistance in dying (MAID) services being suggested unprompted to disabled individuals during routine, non-terminal care visits.

Who could have predicted that government-controlled healthcare, combined with legalized euthanasia, would eventually lead to the sick and uncomfortable being told to kill themselves?

Where does Palin go for her apology?

Palin was a flawed candidate, whom I mocked at the time as well, but on this, she was right. While there may not be an express panel simply deciding who lives and who dies, the fact that Canada, with its socialized healthcare system, finds it cheaper to kill patients rather than treat them, so they suggest suicide.

How is that better than simply denying treatment so people can waste away slowly? Is it a bit more humane? That depends on your perspective, but the point is that they’re still trying to use MAID to rid their system of people who require more care and, as a result, cost more money.

This was “debunked as a myth,” but that “myth” was nothing of the sort.

It’s like how the media keeps trying to claim that gun bans aren’t on the table simply because a candidate isn’t expressly talking about them at that particular moment.

When anyone on the right makes a logical inference on the result of a given policy, even if it’s not expressly spelled out as such in the proposals being discussed, the media turns to the text and calls BS, even if anyone with half a brain can see where that’s coming from.

It’s not that different than CNN calling Minnesota day cares and reporting that the one that answered the phone said it was legit, so everything Nick Shirley uncovered was debunked.

To call it asinine is too mild a term for this level of vile.

The truth is that while I’m a big fan of pointing out when the Law of Unintended Consequences rears its ugly head, there are many times we can see those consequences coming from a mile away.

Like “death panels” being the ultimate result of state-run healthcare. Like gun control’s failures eventually leading to a proposal for banning firearms almost entirely. Like making fraud easy results in fraud.

The difference between the mythology of Palin’s warning and what we can now see was clearly prophecy is a matter of time.

Meanwhile, there’s absolutely no mainstream coverage of the supposed prophecies of how the Bruen decision was going to lead to more homicides on our streets, which has now been debunked not by the media but by history.

Violent crime is down. Homicides are down. “Mass shootings” are down. Everything is down compared to where it was when Bruen was decided.

Nothing they said would happen actually happened, but they don’t talk about that being “debunked.” That would mean acknowledging that their buddies were wrong, that they didn’t know what they were talking about.

It’s like the prophecies of climate change. Every model is, in essence, an attempt at prophecy, though one based on supposed science rather than mysticism. Yet those models have a track record that would only be improved if they relied on pig entrails or tarot cards.

Those are never framed as “debunked,” either.

Weird, isn’t it?

The difference between mythology and prophecy, at least in this context, is nothing more than the media’s continued fixation on advancing leftist policies, downplaying anyone on the right, and otherwise being anything but the journalists they want us to believe they are.

Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please.
Thus, there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle

Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Withdraws the United States from International Organizations that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States

WITHDRAWING FROM INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the withdrawal of the United States from 66 international organizations that no longer serve American interests.

  • The Memorandum orders all Executive Departments and Agencies to cease participating in and funding 35 non-United Nations (UN) organizations and 31 UN entities that operate contrary to U.S. national interests, security, economic prosperity, or sovereignty.
  • This follows a review ordered earlier this year of all international intergovernmental organizations, conventions, and treaties that the United States is a member of or party to, or that the United States funds or supports.
  • These withdrawals will end American taxpayer funding and involvement in entities that advance globalist agendas over U.S. priorities, or that address important issues inefficiently or ineffectively such that U.S. taxpayer dollars are best allocated in other ways to support the relevant missions.

RESTORING AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY: President Trump is ending U.S. participation in international organizations that undermine America’s independence and waste taxpayer dollars on ineffective or hostile agendas.

  • Many of these bodies promote radical climate policies, global governance, and ideological programs that conflict with U.S. sovereignty and economic strength.
  • American taxpayers have spent billions on these organizations with little return, while they often criticize U.S. policies, advance agendas contrary to our values, or waste taxpayer dollars by purporting to address important issues but not achieving any real results.
  • By exiting these entities, President Trump is saving taxpayer money and refocusing resources on America First priorities.

PUTTING AMERICA FIRST ON THE GLOBAL STAGE: President Trump has consistently fought to protect U.S. sovereignty and ensure international engagements serve American interests.

  • Immediately upon returning to office, President Trump initiated the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement.
  • On Day One of his Administration, President Trump also signed a Presidential Memorandum to notify the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development that its Global Tax Deal has no force or effect in the United States, and direct an investigation into whether foreign countries have tax rules in place that are extraterritorial or disproportionately affect American companies.
  • Just weeks later, President Trump signed an Executive Order withdrawing the United States from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and prohibiting any future funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency for the Near East (UNRWA).
  • He has prioritized American interests by redirecting focus and resources toward domestic priorities such as infrastructure, military readiness, and border security, and acting swiftly to protect American companies from foreign interference.

On This Day: Washington orders Lee to defend New York

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Writing urgently from his headquarters, Gen. George Washington ordered Maj. Gen. Charles Lee to proceed to New York with “all possible speed,” warning that British ships fitting out in Boston were, in his estimation, bound for the city and aimed at seizing the Hudson River. Washington understood that New York was the strategic key to the continent: its loss would give the British command of the interior and open a direct corridor to Canada.

Though often at odds with Lee, Washington pressed him to act decisively, raising fresh volunteers, calling out New Jersey forces, securing military supplies, and disarming known loyalists.

Continue reading “”

What Separates Tim Walz From Other Democrats Is He Got Caught.

That Tim Walz is abandoning his reelection campaign for Minnesota governor amid a maddening multibillion-dollar welfare fraud scandal should serve as a big reminder: Democrats are robbing you every day and hardly even trying to hide it.

Recall Walz as the stereotypical self-abasing Democrat white male, presumably heterosexual, who was inexplicably chosen to be Kamala Harris’ running mate in the 2024 election. His stint in that role was the equivalent of a 300-pound belly flop into a pool full of sand, with memorable moments like when he said he rode his bicycle as a child and was “proud of that service” or otherwise was proven to have lied when he referred to “the weapons of war that I carried in war.” (He never saw combat.)

Now, however, Walz is most known as the Minnesota governor who oversaw and enabled a years-long scam in which Somalis occupying large swaths of his state were pocketing hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars with fake child care and health care operations that provided no services to anyone at all. The scheme was uncovered mostly through federal prosecutions, which were then covered by our dying national news media. But most devastating for Walz and the state’s whole government was a 45-minute video produced by a 23-year-old YouTuber who demonstrated just how brazen the fraud was by simply knocking on “child care center” doors — only to be greeted by savage Somalis who spoke next to no English and had no kids inside.

The mass fraud was made possible by obscene welfare programs that Democrats like Walz — especially Walz — champion in order to lock in votes from impoverished foreigners and otherwise ne’er-do-wells who have no interest in working. “We have to make it easier for folks to be able to get into that business and then to make sure that folks are able to pay for that,” Walz said at the vice presidential debate last year. “We were able to do it in Minnesota.”

When he announced his withdrawal from reelection this week, he did so with typical Democrat energy, which is to say he claimed to be the victim honorably stepping aside, selflessly putting the well-being of others first. “Every minute I spend defending my own political interests would be a minute I can’t spend defending the people of Minnesota against the criminals who prey on our generosity and the cynics who prey on our differences,” he said.

They play in your face and then call you the problem for noticing. Walz’s Minnesota welfare scheme was every bit a fraud as his and Kamala’s 2024 campaign was. That pathetic 100-day operation likewise saw more than a billion dollars shoved into the pockets of consultants and production companies based on the media-perpetuated lie that Kamala Harris was a legitimate contender for the presidency and that Walz, a fraudster, was capable of serving in the White House, too.

Remember how Democrats recoiled in absolute horror when Elon Musk’s DOGE effort attempted to clip a few million from the federal budget, including the unending flood of money that we send overseas called “foreign aid”? That’s all your money, and they claw for each and every dollar in order to send it all to people just like those Somali scammers.

Democrats lie and steal. Then they resent you for finding out.

A humanist system rests on humans and you can’t have humanity be dependent on “because mommy wants me.” That is what we have now and it’s ontologically indefensible and philosophically infantile. Sorry. Truth must be told. – Sarah Hoyt

 

Are the Unborn People?  
The pivotal point the abortion debate turns is not whether abortion itself is right or wrong, but whether the unborn are “persons.”

( “point upon which the abortion debate turns is not whether abortion itself is right or wrong…”  I disagree, and say it does matter, but read the article)

In general, it seems that people are quick to proclaim that “words matter” and that logic and science are key, except when it comes to certain issues. On the topic of abortion, many have attempted to argue, despite clear science and logic, that because the subject is not specifically addressed within our founding documents, the right to life for those who are unborn is not an absolute certainty (i.e., in some cases a babies “right to life” appears to currently depend, inconsistently, on whether the child is “wanted” or “unwanted”).

Similarly, there are Christians who argue that because the term “abortion” is not found in the Bible, God’s intent on this matter is somehow neutral or unclear—thus conveniently leaving us to decide this matter of profound importance for ourselves as to what is right versus what is wrong. Such an approach is disingenuous, intellectually dishonest, and illogical, for subjects that might appear to be unaddressed in the first instance can easily be illuminated by other issues and with reference to other information.

Are the Unborn People?

The choice of words that were purposely selected for use in the Bible are important. And in a world full of shifting truths and changing definitions, the words and pages of the Bible have remained—and will remain—unchanged (Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). But not every practice/topic is addressed, and the Bible does not claim to answer all of our questions.
There are many mysteries that surround us which will unfortunately remain unanswered until the end of time. The topic of abortion, however, is not one of them. That is because the answer to a much bigger primary and fundamental question, whether the unborn are “persons” or “people,” has been shared with mankind. Although some Christians claim the status of personhood for the unborn to be unclear, the Bible makes an important—but not very well known—Old Testament reference at the end of Psalm 22 (in verse 32):

“The generations to come will be told of the Lord, that they may proclaim to a people yet unborn the deliverance you have brought (emphasis added).”

Even though this passage does not, as some would prefer, specifically declare verbatim that “the unborn are people,” it leaves little room for doubt. Although the wording could easily have referenced “future generations” instead of “a people yet unborn” (as most of us probably would have written it), an intentional choice was made in this passage to highlight the unborn as “people,” thereby making its meaning sufficiently clear.

It is also important to note other terms that the Bible does not use in reference to the unborn. For example, this specific passage does not refer to:

  • entities;
  • spirits;
  • organisms (or future organisms);
  • “products of conception, a medical term that is currently in use (or future “products of conception”);
  • clumps or groups of cells (or future clumps or future groups of cells);
  • almost people (or future people);
  • non-persons;
  • the non-living or the non-existent;
  • soon-to-be-people, or anything else that would leave doubt as to their status as persons.

(note that the issue goes even deeper, for while we as human beings think of the unborn as beginning to exist at conception, because God is not bound by space and time, it is likely that our Creator thinks of us as people even prior to our conception (see for example Jeremiah 1:5: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (emphasis added), meaning that all past, present, and future generations are considered as “people” to God).

Continue reading “”

AWFL- Affluent White Female Liberal

 

It’s Already Happening: AWFLs Who Converted to Islam Are Going Full-Blown Karen on It
God works in mysterious ways, my friends.

He sent a raven, an animal considered unclean to the Jewish people, to feed Elijah when he was in hiding from King Ahab.

He gave the Israelis in exile a bronze serpent to look upon to cure their snakebites in the desert, in spite of serpents being considered evil.

And now, God is sending the world’s greatest predator, the first-world leftist white woman, upon the Islamic world.

Last week, I wrote about how the new leftist trend for 2026 surfaced early in the form of leftist white women converting to Islam for the Gram. Gone are the days of declaring your bisexuality or your gender being “non-binary.” Now it’s all about putting on a hijab and giving praise to Allah.

But if you thought these women were converting to Islam to obey the faith and keep to its very misogynistic and homophobic tenets, then I regret to inform you that these are AWFLs, and the only religion they adhere to is the one where they are god.

As I predicted, these leftist white women are now discovering that their “religion of peace” is actually very intolerant of all the things their ideology told them to hold dear, such as gays, transgender people, and even the victimhood of women. As it turns out, Islam doesn’t just reject these things; they actively toss members of the LGBTQ+ community off the top of buildings and consider women to be second-class citizens who have no rights.

But never fear, these converts who still adhere to the religion of “ME” are here to peck-hand and finger wag Muslim men into having the correct beliefs and the acceptable behaviors that will take all the problematic issues out of the faith that has plagued it for the thousands of years it’s been around.

Let’s start with white savior A, who has a message to Muslims who are being homophobic and transphobic. She says they need to be more accepting, not just to stop the genocide of LGBTQ+ people, but because it fuels the genocide of Muslims, because being homophobic and transphobic gives people the excuse to be cool with Muslim genocide.

She ends by stating that being so phobic is pushing away people who are gay and trans from Islam and that they need to humble themselves before Allah because he knows best. Apparently, she knows Allah better than the Imams, and why not? She’s a white leftist woman.

While that was hilarious, I think this next one is even funnier.

Here we have another AWFL complaining about Muslim men who need to “leave hijabi women alone” and stop “haram-policing” women like her. She says she wants a gender separation in women’s online spaces, just like she has at the mosque she attends.

I’m no expert, but I’m pretty sure this woman is doing many things considered “haram” (forbidden) by Islamic standards, and she doesn’t know that because she converted yesterday and already thinks she’s an expert.

In both videos, we see the hubris of the AWFL. So confident in their ignorance that you could shove facts and established rules in their faces and they would brush it off angrily and tell you to stop being problematic while they live out “their truth.”

They clearly haven’t been a part of the religion for long because if they were truly experienced with it, or even looked into it deeper than the likes and views they get for cosplaying as a faithful Muslim, they’d learn that expulsion of gays and transgender people is the point. If given a free hand, these people would be decorating the pavement with “queer” blood like they were painting a Jackson Pollock.

Moreover, they would know that a woman disobeying the rules comes with real punishments that don’t involve a strict talking to. More like a whip to the back or even a stoning.

And if they really adhere to the way, then they’ll get that wakeup call, but in the meantime, I can’t help but laugh as I watch the very thing that plagued Western culture now begin to infect Middle-Eastern culture.

The question is, how long before these women appear in videos, tearfully talking about how they had to walk away from Islam because it was just too problematic?

And another question to ask: How many will be allowed to?