Many had been hoping that the spell of political correctness would be broken by the election of Donald Trump, but that obviously has not happened. The forces of political correctness still have a stranglehold on our education system, on all forms of entertainment, on our legal system, and on most of the politicians in both political parties.

The unwritten rules of political correctness are shifting and changing all the time, and if you don’t keep up with them the penalties can be extremely severe. If you do or say the wrong thing at the wrong time, you could lose your friends, you could lose your job, and you could potentially even lose your reputation. In fact, there have been numerous people over the past year that have been publicly crucified in the court of public opinion for doing or saying something that was not politically-correct. And with each passing day, the forces of political correctness take a little bit more ground.

Ultimately, political correctness is a tool that progressives use to silence the opposition. They want to make it a crime to think or say anything that they might find offensive, and to a substantial degree it is working. Our founders intended for us to permanently have a right to free speech, but now we have moved into a time when saying the wrong thing can get you brutally persecuted.

I would like to be optimistic that we can start to roll back the forces of political correctness, but as I noted at the beginning of this article, they have control of our schools, our courts, our entertainment and most of our political leaders. But of course we can never give up the fight, because if they win life in America will ultimately become a complete and total nightmare.

Two months after the inauguration of President Trump, indications are mounting that the United States military is deepening its involvement in a string of complex wars in the Middle East that lack clear endgames.

Rather than representing any formal new Trump doctrine on military action, however, American officials say that what is happening is a shift in military decision-making that began under President Barack Obama. On display are some of the first indications of how complicated military operations are continuing under a president who has vowed to make the military “fight to win.”

Hiroshi Imazu, chair of the Research Commission on Security for the LDP, and former Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera, submitted the proposal on missile defense to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Anxiety in Japan follows a recent string of North Korean missile tests. Earlier this month, Pyongyang fired four intermediate-range ballistic missiles, three of which landed less than 200 nautical miles off the Japanese coast.

Abe said that his government would seriously consider the proposal. "We assess that the threat (from North Korea) has advanced to a new stage, we take it seriously. This assessment is shared by the United States," he said Thursday. "We intend to grasp today's proposal firmly."

Jeff Kingston, director of Asian studies at Temple University in Tokyo, told CNN Abe is in a "pretty good position" to push the changes through the Diet, Japan's parliament. "In many different ways Abe is pushing the envelope against postwar norms and values," Kingston said. However, "recent (North Korean) tests put wind in his sails and given that he controls both houses of the Diet he's in a pretty good position."

A resolution on the status of Jerusalem to be proposed by Arab states at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on May 1 will not specifically address the Temple Mount nor the Western Wall, according to a draft of the text received by Israeli officials. Israel’s Ambassador to UNESCO, Carmel Shama Hacohen, expressed a sense of determination to fight against any resolution in the UN body that would undermine Jewish ties to other historic sites throughout Israel.

“It is preferable to accept a draft resolution that does not harm and directly stab at the Temple Mount and the Western Wall, which are the heart of the Jewish people, but we have no intention of staying silent when they stab us in other places, even if they are less sensitive,” said Hacohen. “We will work in the coming month around the world and around the clock in order to continue to explain our truth, both contemporary and historical, and we’re expecting, but not counting on, sanity and fairness from our neighbors,” he added.

Glick described the experience as a deeply religious one in an interview at his home in the West Bank settlement of Otniel, which overlooks the lush green hills surrounding the biblical town of Hebron.

“The whole time I was praying,” Glick said. “Here we have the potential for something great to happen, but at the same time, it’s like holding a diamond in your hands that can fall and get lost. It was a very strong feeling of being part of a very historical event on the one hand and not knowing where it could lead. I’m still praying.”

President Barack Obama’s administration wouldn’t have been caught dead associating with Israelis such as Glick. Yet in a sign of the many global shifts that have taken place since Trump’s election, the new administration is treating Glick and those like him quite differently.

Glick was among five Israeli lawmakers and settler leaders invited to attend Trump’s inauguration. During his visit to Washington, he spent Shabbat with Jason Greenblatt, Trump’s lead envoy for Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, and Greenblatt’s family.

For many settlers, “the election of President Trump was a kind of miracle,” said retired Israeli Brigadier General Shlomo Brom, a former peace negotiator who now works at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies. “Everyone predicted that Clinton would be elected, so for them this is something that was done by God, which means that God supports them.”

Glick himself has compared Trump to Cyrus the Great, the biblical king who issued an edict for the building of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. “I believe we’re living in a biblical era,” Glick said at his home in Otniel.

Doctors have already harvested organs from dozens of Canadians who underwent medically assisted death, a practice supporters say expands the pool of desperately needed organs, but ethicists worry could make it harder for euthanasia patients to voice a last-minute change of heart.

"In Ontario, 26 people who died by lethal injection have donated tissue or organs since the federal law decriminalizing medical assistance in dying, or MAID, came into effect last June, according to information obtained by the Post. A total of 338 have died by medical assistance in the province. Most of the 26 were tissue donors, which usually involves eyes, skin, heart valves, bones and tendons."

Allowing a person to consent to homicide — which is what we are talking about here — with the intention of organ donation, puts great pressure on despairing people who can come to think that their deaths are more valuable than their lives. Even worse, society can come to see such people as so many organ farms too.

We are watching the most brutal and awful things transpire with barely a peep of protest. Well, I will: Suicidal people need suicide prevention, not the implied encouragement of allowing their killing to be conjoined with organ procurement.

Reading this article in The Atlantic, I couldn’t help but agree that in recent times advertisers have even more confidently stepped into areas of family’s lives where brands once never dared to tread. “What are we to make of ads that engage in the kind of discourse once reserved for pulpits and art and books and op-ed pages?” the author asks.

Once upon a time brands were carefully void of values and absolutely apolitical, yet now “marketers act as arbiters — of goodness, of rightness, of us-ness,” Megan Garber writes. She points to a number of recent ads that are not only “profoundly political” but “explicitly moral,” telling consumers not only what they should buy but “about what people should be.”

So while marketers are busy politicising and moralising and companies are much more concerned with being on the “right side of history,” it is important to consider the effects this onslaught of values messaging is having on children. So if you don’t talk to your children and help them to decode and defuse the messaging companies are now selling alongside their products, the advertisers most definitely will.

It has also been reported that there are 1.5 million victims of human trafficking in the United States, and most of those are female. In every community in the country, there are vicious predators that are always on the hunt for new victims. Of course we could just ignore reality and pretend that “most people are good people”, but being careless would only put our children at risk.

After decades of feeding our minds with sick and twisted material, our society has literally become sick and twisted, and so it is important for parents to know how to protect their children in such an environment. America in 2017 is not like America was in 1950. We live at a time when we all should be paying special attention to security.

Because even though everything might seem “normal” most of the time, it only takes a single bad encounter to suddenly change everything. As our society continues to unravel, the number of predators is only going to continue to grow, and protecting our children is of the utmost importance.

In a short video posted to Twitter on March 2, Fransen tells the unnamed convert that she’s read the hadith, the accepted collection of the prophet Muhammad’s words and deeds, which states that “Muhammad took a child bride at the age of 6.” Pointing to the scriptures that confirm this, she asks, “If these aren’t wrong teachings, how do you feel about your prophet marrying a 6-year-old and consummating the marriage at 9 years of age.”

Although the Muslim man falsely states that Aisha was 9 when she wed the 50-year-old prophet and 12 when he slept with her, he still justifies the disturbing idea of an ageing man having sex with a prepubescent child by admitting that it’s perfectly acceptable if the girl’s “mature.” “So, it’s okay to have sex with a 12-year-old?” Fransen asks. “If she’s mature,” the Muslim repeatedly replies. “If a person is mature, then, yes, you may have a relationship.”

At this, Fransen expresses her disgust, becoming more enraged with every justification uttered by the Muslim peddler. “I give you Islam, ladies and gentlemen,” Fransen says to passers-by. “You should be ashamed! All of you have no place in this country — no place in this country, standing here condoning paedophilia!” she loudly proclaims.

Moments later, the Muslims can be seen packing up their religious texts and flyers because of Fransen’s relentless scolding. “This man here has just stood and told me it’s okay to have sex with a 12-year-old if she is mature! This is Islam, ladies and gentlemen!” she continues while the Muslims hastily flee the growing number of onlookers.

Sadly, Fransen and many others like her risk being killed by offended Muslims or thrown in jail by the Sharia-compliant UK for nothing more than exposing and standing against the most sadistic evils. To Fransen and other individuals speaking out against Islam, we offer thanks for fighting for the rights of women and children more than any liberal feminist ever has.

As many as 300,000 mainly South Korean and US personnel are involved in military drills that will run until the end of April. These exercises have been a feature of life on the peninsula since the Korean War ended in 1953. In recent years, they have become larger and more realistic.

Every US president since at least Bill Clinton has confronted North Korea’s weapons program and been offered a range of potential military action to tackle them. So far, none has been willing to strike – primarily because all the options are bad, particularly given the risk of North Korean retaliation that could turn the peninsula, and perhaps the wider region, into a bloodbath. At worst, violence on the peninsula could even drag the United States into war with China, just as it did in the original Korean War.

As Pyongyang moves forward with warhead and missile testing, however, many experts believe the likelihood of Washington finally taking such steps is gradually increasing. For now, Kim appears to think he can keep ramping up his nuclear program unchallenged. Washington, though, may not be willing to watch from the sidelines.

Trump is one of the most unpredictable presidents to ever hold that office. If any US leader is going to take a risk with military options in North Korea, he very well might be the one. It’s an unenviable choice. Action could provoke disaster. But failure to do anything might be blamed for a future conflict that could be even worse.

“When I spoke with Trump, I ventured that, based on available evidence, it seemed as though conservatives probably shouldn’t hold their breath for the next four years expecting entitlement reform. Trump’s reply was immediate. “I think you’re right,” he said. In fact, Trump seemed much less animated by the subject of budget cuts than the subject of spending increases.

“We’re also going to prime the pump,” he said. “You know what I mean by ‘prime the pump’? In order to get this” — the economy — “going, and going big league, and having the jobs coming in and the taxes that will be cut very substantially and the regulations that’ll be going, we’re going to have to prime the pump to some extent.”

In other words: Spend money to make a lot more money in the future. “And that’ll happen.” A clearer elucidation of Keynesian liberalism could not have been delivered by Obama. "Priming the pump" is one of the scariest economic programs you can hear promoted by a president. It is nothing but the promotion of rotund government expansionism justified by confused Keynesian theory.