Earlier this year ABC resurrected one of the most popular sitcoms of the 90s, Roseanne, after a decades-long hiatus. The era of Trump populism seemed like the perfect time to re-introduce the sitcom about the flawed but loving family of working-class Whites. The premiere opened with a bang, boldly addressing the ideological rift in America (and within some families). Roseanne's sister Jackie showed up at the door in an "I'm with Her" T-shirt and pussy hat, after having had a year-long rift with Roseanne over political differences. The show finessed the stresses of current American political conflicts with realism and humor. In a way, it was an affirmation to many Deplorables that our voice was heard, that we had a representation on the national entertainment stage, and that our views would be treated respectfully even if not fully embraced.

The rebooted Roseanne was not exactly a fanatical right wing polemic. Aside from the Hillary-loving Jackie character, the show introduced new Conner grandchildren including a black child and a boy who liked to wear girls' clothes. Even so, there was wailing and gnashing of teeth as the Usual Suspects complained that the show portrayed Trump supporters as something other than hateful racists. I even saw one blue check-bearing neurotic expressing horror that the show was "humanizing" Trump supporters. However, the show that dared to treat the disfavored half of the country with empathy quickly became a record-breaking ratings juggernaut. What a dilemma for our Hollywood elites!

I have mixed feelings about Rosanne, myself. She can be crass and inappropriate and she says plenty of things with which I don't agree. However, unlike most people in Hollywood, she is genuine. With her, what you see is what you get. For how many inhabitants of the Golden Swamp is that true? I don't think that she could accurately be described as conservative, but she is a vocal critic of the Clinton-Obama cabal and supporter of Donald Trump. In fact it was a supposedly racist tweet about Obama-ite Valerie Jarrett which gave rise her latest woes: her moment on the public whipping block for politically incorrect behaviour, and the substantial professional setback of being gracelessly dismissed from her own show. Roseanne's behaviour can sometimes be tasteless, but she has never been known as a racist, and I don't believe her attack on Jarrett was racially driven. No matter. Despite multiple public apologies and pleas to ABC to keep her job, she was fired from the wildly successful show she had created.

Roseanne agreed to sell her rights to the show so that a spin off featuring the remainder of the cast, The Conners, could be created. In the first episode of The Conners, it was explained that Roseanne's character, who had been taking pills for knee pain during the previous season, had died from an opioid overdose. Perhaps this choice of story line was a ham-fisted attempt to show sympathy with those suffering from the scourge of opioid abuse among middle and lower-class Whites, but knowing how Hollywood feels about normal Americans, it seems just as likely that the working class heroine's overdose death was meant as an insult to the audience. 

Shortly before the premiere of The Conners, there were some news stories saying that the network was worried they had made a mistake by firing Roseanne, and they were concerned that spinoff would lose many viewers who were loyal to her. (Everyone in America who is not a Hollywood executive replied in unison, "Well, DUH!") The premiere drew about half the viewers of the premiere of last year's reboot, and some of those people probably tuned in for the curiosity factor. It doesn't matter that the show features solid comic actors John Goodman and Laurie Metcalf playing relatable characters, or that the writing is probably just as funny. When the PC police rejected the woman who was one of the few Hollywood proxies for the Deplorables, they rejected the rest of us, and the show became just another sitcom.

This whole incident is just another indication that Hollywood continues to disdain regular Americans. Hollywood continues to churn out material that is a stick in the eye of anyone in America with traditional values. Celebrities reveal their animosity towards their audience at every opportunity. The enthusiasm for the revitalized Roseanne show should have been a lesson for the entertainment industry about who Americans are and what they want for their entertainment. Unsurprisingly, they have still not learned.

​You may have missed the testimony of Twitter's CEO Jack Dorsey last week in Washington, as it was overshadowed by the Brett Kavanaugh appointment hearings and its accompanying parade of deranged protesters. Though it got less attention, there was a bit of commotion surrounding the tech CEO hearings, too. My personal favorite part was watching Marco Rubio attempt to look tough while being browbeaten by Alex Jones. While at the capital, Jones also confronted CNN reporter Oliver Darcy, who had lobbied successfully to get Jones removed from several major social media platforms. During their exchange, Jones called Darcy, correctly in my opinion, "anti-American" and a "coward." In less than a day, Twitter, which has given itself the right to consider real-world behaviour when evaluating who may use their platform, announced that Jones was to be permanently banned from using their service, and also that all other accounts associated with InfoWars would be reviewed for possible terms of service violations. Shortly thereafter, the InfoWars smart phone app was removed from the iTunes app store. In all probability, Jones' enemies, intoxicated with the taste of blood, will continue their campaign to destroy his media empire by putting pressure on the domain registrars for InfoWars' website and the financial service providers which process money from their merchandise sales and donations. 

I am not particularly a fan of Jones, but what is happening to him is alarming to me and should be to anyone who is paying attention. "De-platforming" has been a problem for individuals and small outlets for several years. But Jones reigns over a media empire, with millions of viewers and substantial merchandise sales, and even he has not been able to stop the virtual assasination. A small group of global Tech Titans have been able to cut him off from almost every possible avenue available to participate in public life, and, in a sense, make him a non-entity in the public realm, with no way to appeal the death sentence. It is terrifying to contemplate the extent of potential damage the Silicon Valley elites could do to other conservatives. What's to prevent Breitbart, Drudge, or Fox News being silenced in the same manner?

The problem is not limited to social networking sites. Payment providers like PayPal and fundraising sites like GoFundMe and Patreon have a history of removing promoters of conservative causes from their services. Just this week, Amazon removed nine books by "pick-up artist" Roosh from their online store. Livelihoods can be destroyed arbitrarily and without warning when pages are banned from Facebook, YouTube, or Google search. Often, these life-changing decisions are made with no meaningful explanation or means of appeal. The problem is common and growing.

A few people are standing up to the giants and fighting back. One of the pioneers of an alt-tech social network is Andrew Torba, CEO and founder of Gab, which was introduced as a free-speech alternative to Twitter. Since its inception, Gab has been in a continuous struggle against the Tech Titans. Just last month, Gab was forced to find a new hosting service when it was dropped by Microsoft Azure because of a complaint about "hate speech." The company has also developed smart phone apps, but neither the iOS App Store nor Google Play Store, who hold a virtual duopoly, will carry them. (Last week, Gab submitted an app for Google Play which attempted to adhere to their "hate speech" policy by blocking posts with objectionable speech with a message stating that the post did not meet Google standards. The app was seemingly accepted by Google play, but removed again within hours.) 

Big Tech defends their de-platforming decisions with mealy-mouthed excuses about "hate speech" and "healthy public conversations." This is false claim is absolutely staggering in its brazenness. Check the archive at VerifiedHate.com to view a massive collection of threats and hatred directed at Whites, Christians, and Trump supporters that is spouted on Twitter, much of it by *verified* users who are affiliated with corporate media outlets. Twitter not only fails to restrict this kind of "hate speech" in any way, but grants it a modicum of legitimacy by giving "verified" status to the tweeters. Inarguably, the Tech Titans do not object to "hate speech" as long as it is directed towards the right people or ideas.

Predictably, Gab was (and still is) smeared as a site for "white supremacists." It is true that Gab built some of its early popularity by providing a haven for popular alt-right personalities that were among the first banned from Twitter. While early Twitter refugees did include some unsavory characters, many others were guilty only of using facts, humor, or charisma to effectively smack down leftist talking points, or of "getting the goat" of a random squeaky-wheel leftist user. But Gab is not an "alt-right" site. In fact, in the past few months, Gab has had thousands of new accounts created by people in Brazil and Kenya after political dissidents in those countries were de-platformed or found their communications stifled by Big Tech. 

​The influx of users from other parts of the world to Gab also illustrates an important point: Tech Titan's chokehold on the of the flow of information is a global problem. A handful of people can shift power in almost any part of the world by choosing which voices to stifle or amplify, and they are working against conservative and populists movements all over he world. It is not an exaggeration to say that the fight of alt-tech against Big Tech is a fight for the future of freedom in the world, and for some peoples, a fight for survival. 

​​The odds against anyone fighting the Titans of Tech are daunting. In fact, almost impossible. But intelligent, determined and brave people have done the impossible before. With the help of God, we can do it again.

​FALSE NARRATIVE NUMBER ONE: UNITE THE RIGHT WAS A WHITE SUPREMACIST RALLY - How many times have you heard it matter-of-factly stated by authoritative-sounding talking heads that Jason Kessler, planner of the Charlottesville rally, "advocates violence," "espouses Nazi ideology," or "is a White supremacist?" I've heard these claims countless times myself. I've also listened to dozens of his videos both before and after the rally, and read numerous articles he's written, and I have seen no evidence that any of these statements are true. But we all know that if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

​Kessler vehemently rejects violence and Nazi ideology. He does not identify as alt-right or advocate White supremacy. He does advocate White civil rights, and the right for White people to form groups to advocate for their common interests, such as protesting the erasure of our history and displacement through immigration. He speaks out in favor of non-violent free speech for everyone and the preservation of the constitutional rights our forefathers fought to establish. In my opinion, he is frightening and dangerous to The Powers That Be not because he is evil, but because he unflinchingly speaks aloud what many "regular" people are quietly thinking. They mean to discredit him so that he will be dismissed by the public without a hearing.

Don't let them. You may or may not agree with Kessler, but I am asking that you not condemn him until you have heard him in his own words. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, should be condemned based solely upon the characterization of the treacherous, deceptive jackals in the mainstream media.

Another picture splashed across the headlines in wake of the event was this one, supposedly of White Supremacists ganging up to viciously attack an innocent black man. Where do I even begin with this one? The mainstream media jackals could not have been less interested in reporting the whole story, though there is ample evidence to disprove their favored interpretation. ​

Here's the rest of the story: Harris had been skulking around the entire day, he and his companions armed with blunt objects, looking for trouble. Shortly before the picture was taken, he attacked a group of rally attendees as they left the park, trying to get into their cars to leave after the order to disperse had been issued by the authorities. Harris was the aggressor in the incident, and attacked one of their party with a large mag lite. There is ample photo and video evidence to support this claim. 

As I mentioned in my companion piece, Charlottesville: My Experience, the police had been passively watching violence occur all day long, apparently having been given a stand-down order. This had created a temporary state of anarchy in the city. Nobody was coming to arrest or subdue the attacker, Harris. The rally attendees, in defense against an aggressor, subdued him themselves, as many people of good conscience would agree the situation warranted.
​
Nonetheless, the damning photo was taken and publicized in the following days, and self-proclaimed victim Harris raised $100,000 in online donations.

FALSE NARRATIVE NUMBER THREE:  JAMES FIELDS - While I appreciated that President Trump was more evenhanded than other public figures about the Charlottesville rally, I was disappointed that he condemned James Fields before all the facts were in. Obviously it is tragic that a woman was killed, and if Fields did ram the crowd with malicious intent, he should be punished accordingly. However, we don't yet know for certain that that is what happened. He deserves the presumption of innocence until he has his day in court.

​FALSE NARRATIVE NUMBER FOUR: NAZIS! NAZIS! NAZIS! – I attended the rally, and despite the fact that I was moving around the crowd for hours, I did not personally see any Nazi flags. However, this picture was splashed all over the news in the days following the Charlottesville event, alarming the public that Nazis had descended upon the city. However, is it really what it appears to be? 

Look at the photo closely. The fact that the flag appears to be newly unpackaged is a bit suspicious. More importantly, the man is holding a Nazi flag and wearing a shirt with a Confederate flag. Does this make sense? Southern Nationalists, Southern history preservationists, and the like, are mostly libertarian-leaning, Constitution-loving, American traditionalists. Nazis are authoritarian socialists - in many ways the polar opposite. To those of us on the right end of the spectrum, this juxtaposition makes no sense. It may, however, make sense to leftists, who view the Nazi and Confederate flags only as "things racist people like."

​The most compelling reason to me for believing that this "Nazi" is a leftist poser is simply that YOU DON'T KNOW WHO HE IS. In the days following the Charlottesville rally, leftist message boards were swarming with people examining crowd photos and targeting anyone they could identify with unwanted publicity and threats to their employment. But somehow, the fellow pictured on every news site in America for weeks escaped identification! How can this be? Why haven't Antifa surrounded his house and place of employment, demanding his head on a platter? Why haven't the Usual Suspects in the media interviewed his neighbors and cousins and third grade teacher? These are the people who did a week of in-depth reporting on Ken Bone, the red sweater-vest wearing man who asked Hillary Clinton an impudent question during a town hall appearance. Why do you suppose they have not said a word about the most brazen "Nazi" at the Charlottesville rally? My guess as to the reason for the lack of interest in exposing him? He's one of them.

​FALSE NARRATIVE NUMBER FIVE:  THOSE PROTESTING AGAINST THE RALLY WERE THE GOOD GUYS - Soon after the Charlottesville rally, President Trump made the statements that "there were good and bad people on both sides," and that some of the rally attendees were "fine people." Those suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome became apoplectic, quickly twisting his comments into "Trump thinks some Nazis are fine people!"  Many wondered how anyone protesting Nazis could be possibly considered bad.

The rally protesters I observed included young adults holding colorful signs about love and tolerance, a group of clergy persons singing songs, and an assortment of local people who were observing or protesting peacefully.

​There were also Antifa. I have never in my life experienced anything like what they wrought that day.

​Consider for a moment if you will, the mental and moral characteristics of someone who would take the time and effort to collect excrement, mix it together with paint and other chemicals, put it in a vehicle and transport it to a public place with the intention of flinging it at one's ideological opponents.

There were more than a few people like this at the rally - busloads of them, in fact. Many black-clad, masked protesters were wielding pipes, bats, and a variety of other makeshift weapons. People like these are among the group that the media wants you to believe are righteous anti-racists and above reproach.
​
Thank the Lord in Heaven that we have the White House a President that tells the truth when it matters. Undoubtedly, there were good and bad people on both sides.

The curtain is coming down for Alex Jones of Infowars on most of the major social media outlets. As of this writing, pages have been removed from Facebook, Spotify, and YouTube.

In addition to the routine claims of "hate speech," one of the criticisms often cited about Jones is that his speculation about the Sandy Hook massacre being a staged, false-flag event, caused anguish to the families of the victims. One family in particular claims to have had their lives turned upside down due to harassment and threats by Jones' followers.

"Get this charlatan off the internet!" his detractors cry. "Facebook and YouTube have a responsibility to protect the public from being misled by harmful fake news!"

It's a farce. Even if all the bad things people say about Alex Jones are true, and I believe some of them are, HE IS STILL NO WORSE THAN THE REST OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

Look at the events that occurred in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014. "Real" news stations repeated incessantly the uncorroborated claim of a felon who witnessed the shooting that Michael Brown had his hands up and was begging "Don't shoot!" as Officer Darren Wilson gunned him down. The phrase "Hands Up, Don't Shoot!" became a rallying cry for black people across the nation who felt that they were potential targets of murderous police officers. 

Who is crazier? The survivalist who perceives oppressive plots in everything done by the government, or the Oberlin professor who sees oppressive microagressions in everything done by cis-het white males?

Who is crazier? Someone who thinks alien visitations are real, or someone who thinks identifying as an alien is a valid lifestyle choice?

The answer to all of these question will vary widely depending on who you ask. "Crazy" is subjective, and honest observers will admit that there are crazy people all along the political spectrum.

So, Jones isn't unique in positing theories that may cause harm to the innocent. He isn't unique in hosting people with, shall we say, unconventional ideas. What, then, is the issue?

An article for Wired about the free speech implications of Jones' case discusses a precedent from a somewhat similar case in 1964, but then states that today's case is different because the law was written before the advent of social media. They explain that the "context of the internet starts to matter" because the law does not assume "a world where a YouTube channel's following can rival a media company's..." 

Well, now we may be onto something. Why might it be a problem for a YouTube channel to rival a media company? If millions of people find an information source valuable, what difference does the format make?

Jones does indeed interview some unconventional guests and posit some eccentric theories. But that is only a portion of what he does. He also provides the opportunity to speak to a very large audience to many people the Old Guard media would rather ignore. He shares his platform of new right reporter Paul Joseph Watson, who reports extensively about the problems with mass Muslim immigration in the UK. He gave airtime to the Bernie Sanders supporters who filed the lawsuit claiming the DNC rigged the election against him, in which they stated they feared for their lives because of the lawsuit. Jones has given long-form interviews to many former associates of the Clintons who have unflattering things to say about them. How often have you seen a "respectable" media company do that? 

The internet has provided a way for alternatives to the Old Guard Media to speak directly to the public. Some view the rise of non-corporate-approved news as a danger that must be stopped. Others view it as way to get to truths that the self-appointed gatekeepers find inconvenient. But for the fear-mongering spin-meisters of corporate news to point fingers at anyone else for being dangerously deceitful and irresponsible is laughable. These disingenuous claims about "fake news" are to meant to obscure this fact: The problem isn't that Jones provides a lesser form of journalism than they do, it's that HE DOES THE EXACT SAME THING, BUT FOR PEOPLE THEY DON'T LIKE.

So who is more fake, Alex Jones or the MSM? Let us have complete free speech, and let us decide for ourselves.

​​Nobody knows that I went to the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville in August 2017. Well, my immediate family knows, and one or two close friends, but nobody else. Most of the country thinks that the rally was a gathering of belligerent male White supremacists, a modern-day Nazi uprising. I am a quiet middle aged woman, mother of small children, church-goer, and I don't know whether or not you would consider me a "fine person," but I am most definitely not a Nazi. I am here to share my story. It does not conform to what most of the media wants you to believe.   
​
I made the drive from SC to VA the Friday before the Charlottesville rally. While taking in the rural mountain scenery, I was feeling incredibly thankful to have been born in such a beautiful and blessed part of the world. Looking at the old buildings along the way, I contemplated the hardships the settlers in the area had faced, including those of my own ancestors who had been in the Southeastern US since before the American Revolution. Considering what those who came before me had been willing to do to secure their freedoms and protect their way of life, wasn't it the very least I could do to attend a rally in support of a statue to one of the greatest men our country has ever produced?

There had been many, many stories in the previous months of statues and other symbols of the founding population being torn down or slated for removal - many, but not all, Confederate. The fights to secure these symbols had been defensive, apologetic, and largely ineffectual. When I heard Jason Kessler speak about defending the statue of General Lee in Charlottesville, he had been bold and unapologetic, fiercely defending our rights to honor our heritage while standing up to the authorities in one of the most far-left cities in the South. FINALLY, I thought, someone is REALLY fighting.

I was also interested in hearing the speakers. There were some with whom I was unfamiliar, and others with whom I expected to disagree. However, I am a firm believer in free speech. I am not afraid of ideas, and I think that if you believe someone's viewpoint to be erroneous, you should prove them wrong with debate, not suppression. And how can you do that if you don't even know or understand what they believe?

I was planning to meet a friend for the event, an attorney turned stay-at-home mother. We had bonded online over our grief at the loss of the America we had grown up in, and our desire to preserve Western values and history for our children. She had grown up in Upstate New York, and only a few decades before had learned in public school that Robert E Lee was an American hero, worthy of respect by all Americans. She, too, thought the trip to Virginia to fight for his statue was worthwhile.

When I arrived at my hotel late Friday afternoon, it was swarming with police officers who had apparently driven in from other parts of the state as reinforcements for the event and were being put up there overnight. In the morning, I met up with my friend to go to the rally. An online acquaintance had informed me that there was a staging area at MacIntyre Park about a mile away from Lee Park, with plenty of parking and free shuttles to the rally. We parked, got in the line for the shuttle, and made small talk with others in the line as we waited. We met a friendly man from my home state, a father of five, who was attending the rally alone. We talked about our children. Hundreds of people were milling around in the MacIntyre parking lot. There were a variety of groups gathered and I saw lot of different flags, many of which I did not recognize. I did not see any Nazi flags at all.

There were dozens of police officers walking about, and my friend and I made a point to wave, smile, and say "thank you!" to all of them. We wanted them to know that the attendees did not view law enforcement as our enemy.

Once we got off the shuttle, we followed the crowd towards Lee Park which was a block or two away. It was late morning, and as the sun climbed, the combination of the August heat and the thick crowd were making things feel very stifling and uncomfortable.

As we were propelled forward by the crowd, we saw that people up ahead were being funneled into a narrow pathway marked by portable, waist-high barriers. A black man who had been peacefully protesting approached my friend and me, both middle-aged women in everyday clothing, with a look of concern. He warned us that we would be passing through a gauntlet of people wielding mace and flinging feces before reaching the park, and asked the men in line with us to protect us. I was deeply touched by his kindness and concern. We thanked him profusely.

I did not observe any police officers as we made our way from the shuttle to the park.

Thanks to luck and a line of well-prepared rally attendees holding up shields along the pathway, we arrived in the park safely. Once inside barriers, however, I immediately witnessed 3 or 4 people lying on the ground in pain, red-faced with runny eyes, apparently having been maced. Others who had had the foresight to bring first aid supplies were tending to them. I also saw a number of people with stained clothing, and learned that they had been beset by Antifa flinging a mixture of paint, human waste, and other unknown noxious chemicals. There was a faint haze in the air from smoke bombs that protesters had thrown inside the park, an easy task since they were bridled only by a row of low, portable barriers.

I then spotted some police officers in riot gear on one side of the park. They were gathered together in a group, and did not seem to be interacting with rally attendees or protesters at all, despite the fact that there was plenty of chaos in the area.

While milling amongst the crowd in the relative safety of the inner park, I was excited to spot one of the scheduled speakers, Pax Dickinson. I had never met him, but I knew who he was from social media. Pax had once been the Chief Information Officer at Business Insider, until some of his enemies in the corporation dug up some old tweets which were deemed offensive. The result is that he was not only ousted from his job, but blacklisted from his entire industry. Because of the free speech issues raised by his plight, he had been interviewed by John Stossel and featured in Mike Cernovich's documentary about censorship, Silenced. My friend and I introduced ourselves to him and we made small talk for a few minutes.

While we were waiting inside the park for the events of the day to begin, a voice on a loudspeaker announced that our assembly had been declared unlawful, and that we must disperse or face arrest. I was baffled. I had been following Jason Kessler's court battle for the rally permit closely because I had to drive a long way to attend, and I knew he had secured the permit. The crowd was abuzz with confusion. My friend was quickly spiraling into a panic, since we were being forced into an armed, hostile mob of protesters, and we were a mile away from our car. She was frantically searching the crowd for a VIP who, we had noticed earlier, had private security in tow, in the hopes that we could escape safely by latching on to them. The police had been passively allowing the crowd to run amuck all day, and there was no reason to believe they would be of any help.

Meanwhile, a gaggle of men wearing white polos and headsets, apparently involved with rally operations, were looking around and conferring with businesslike concern. They quickly disbanded and started giving directions to attendees in the crowd. They had fashioned a plan to evacuate as many people as possible in an orderly fashion through a corner of Lee Park, and back to the staging area at MacIntyre Park. We asked Pax Dickinson, who was still standing nearby, if he wanted to join us in leaving with the group. He indicated that he and a few of the other scheduled speakers were going to "stay and do the civil disobedience thing." [Note: His account of the events of that day, particularly his harrowing interaction with the police, is a must-read for anyone who wants to know the truth about what happened in Charlottesville.] 

We joined the orderly, double-file line and nervously exited the park. The men in the line were shielding us from the crowd, and we got through the thick of it unscathed. The white Polo-wearing men stood alongside the line as we made our way on foot the entire mile back to MacIntyre, continuously reminding us to tighten up the line and move quickly. The line stretched as far as I could see in both directions – hundreds of people. There were protesters (and a few supporters) along the road for nearly the entirety of our trek.

Back at MacIntyre Park, people scattered. There was mass confusion. Many people who had been separated from the other members of their party, or were far away from their cars, were trying to figure out what to do next. Others were looking at their phones, sharing information and rumors, and trying to figure out WHAT IN THE HELL HAD JUST HAPPENED?? Luckily we were able to get into our car and back to the hotel without any trouble.

Thankful to be safely back at the hotel, I showered, settled into the bed, and turned on the TV. I was stunned and appalled by what I saw. The talking heads were breathlessly reporting about the events in Charlottesville, and they were presenting it as though a group of Nazis had laid siege to the city. They showed still photos of rally attendees who had (wisely, in retrospect) brought helmets, shields, and sticks for self-defense, and implied that they were on the attack. They had it all wrong! I wanted to scream, "NO! THEY ARE NOT NAZIS! AND THEY WERE FIGHTING THEIR WAY THROUGH A HOSTILE CROWD THAT THE AUTHORITIES FORCED THEM INTO!" 

It would have been pointless. The politically inexperienced new right was outplayed by the treacherous old school. The damning photos were taken that could be used to create the desired narrative: that the new right were dangerous, Trump-inspired Nazis. The death of Heather Heyer later in the day further cemented that narrative.

Based on my experience, I CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT THE AUTHORITIES INTENDED TO CREATE AS MUCH MAYHEM AS POSSIBLE. Despite what is widely believed, it was the rally organizers who acted to minimize the violence. Their quick thinking and action saved lives. I am sure of it.

The next morning, my friend and I had breakfast in the hotel lobby before driving back to our respective hometowns. There were some uniformed police having breakfast, and others checking out at the front desk. Overnight, my feeling towards them had gone from appreciation to anger and disgust. How dare they wear that uniform if they are going to sit idly by as people are maimed and killed? I wondered why they had even bothered to come to Charlottesville.

It was an infuriating and helpless feeling, seeing the false narrative take on a life of its own over the next few days and weeks. It was also surreal knowing that I had been in the midst of something that had such a huge impact on the nation, when I had expected it would probably only make the local news. I had honestly expected that the most dangerous part of attending the rally would be the drive to Virginia. 

Since August of last year, I given a great deal of thought to what I witnessed in Charlottesville, and the impact that the event, and the lies that have been told about it, have had on the nation. I have wondered what purpose my experience there could serve, and whether God drew me to this event, unlike anything I have ever done in my life, for a reason. Maybe that reason is so I can tell you the truth.

Note: Please also see my companion piece, 5 Myths about Charlottesville.