On February 6, I wrote about the kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie. In that article, I made a prediction that some readers may have considered overly pessimistic.

I wrote that I feared investigators would never find Nancy Guthrie or those responsible for her disappearance.

It wasn’t because I doubted the dedication of the FBI or local law enforcement.

It was because I believe America is fighting twenty-first-century criminal enterprises with a twentieth-century structure, and what’s needed now more than ever is a Federal Anti-Scam Bureau.

Here we are, more than five months later. Nancy Guthrie has still not been found. No kidnapper has been publicly identified, and the investigation remains open.

I sincerely hope tomorrow proves me wrong. I hope Nancy is found alive and those responsible are brought to justice.

But whether that happens tomorrow or five years from now, the larger problem remains exactly where it was when I first wrote about it.

The Crime Has Changed. Our Response Hasn’t.

In high-profile disappearances like Nancy Guthrie’s, the immediate aftermath is no longer just a physical search; it’s a digital assault.

Within hours, scammers weaponize cheap voice-cloning software to fabricate ransom calls, launch fraudulent go-fund-me campaigns, and flood tip lines with spoofed leads.

Investigators aren’t just searching for a missing person; they are forced to spend critical, early hours hacking through a thick forest of international cyber fraud designed specifically to exploit desperation.

The crime on the ground is instantly tangled in the crime in the cloud.

Today’s criminal organizations don’t just rob banks.

· They steal identities from another continent.

· They spoof telephone numbers.

· They clone voices with artificial intelligence.

· They move money through cryptocurrency.

· They disappear behind encrypted communications, burner devices, shell companies, and international jurisdictions.

Even worse, they often exploit the investigation itself by sending fake ransom demands, fraudulent fundraising appeals, and other schemes designed to confuse investigators and prey upon desperate families.

This isn’t ordinary fraud.

It is organized, technologically sophisticated crime.

No One Is Winning This Fight

Every day Americans receive scam texts, phishing emails, fake invoices, romance scams, investment fraud, government impersonation calls, and package delivery scams.

Millions of them.

The people behind these crimes work full time.

Their only job is fraud.

Meanwhile, responsibility is scattered across local police departments, state agencies, the FBI, the Secret Service, the FTC, the Postal Inspection Service, banks, telecommunications companies, and countless other organizations.

Everyone has part of the mission.

No one owns the mission.

America Needs a Federal Anti-Scam Bureau

Imagine if we fought terrorism this way.

Or narcotics.

Or organized crime.

Instead, America created specialized organizations because those threats required specialized expertise.

Scams have reached that point.

A Federal Anti-Scam Bureau would not replace existing agencies.

Creating a Federal Anti-Scam Bureau isn’t about expanding government bloat. It’s about eliminating it.

Right now, taxpayers are funding overlapping cyber units across a dozen different agencies, each fighting for budget while passing the buck on jurisdiction. Unifying these scattered efforts under one roof replaces redundant bureaucracy with surgical focus, ensuring we spend fewer resources on administrative red tape and more on dismantling the syndicates.

It would become America’s center of excellence for combating organized scam networks.

Its investigators would understand cryptocurrency tracing, AI impersonation, digital identity theft, spoofing technologies, international fraud rings, and online financial crime as thoroughly as today’s scammers do.

Its mission would be simple.

· Find them.

· Identify them.

· Disrupt them.

· Shut them down.

Subscribe now

This Is Bigger Than One Case

Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance isn’t proof that America needs a Federal Anti-Scam Bureau.

But it is a reminder that our current system is struggling against criminal organizations that have become faster, more sophisticated, and more technologically advanced than ever before.

I hope Nancy comes home.

I hope those responsible are arrested.

Nothing would make me happier than to be wrong about my February prediction.

But hope is not a strategy.

Until America treats organized scam networks as a national security-level criminal threat worthy of a dedicated federal bureau, countless families will continue to become victims while the criminals simply disappear into the digital shadows.

Leave a comment

Share

Martin Mawyer is the founder of the Digital Intelligence Project and the President of Christian Action Network. He is the host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report.

In the fall of 2015, the Republican establishment was drunk on confidence.

Jeb Bush was sitting on a massive $100 million war chest. He had the backing of every party elder, the blessing of legacy media, and total control over the Republican National Committee. The establishment looked at their spreadsheets and declared themselves invincible.

A loud, chaotic populist named Donald Trump was just a temporary glitch, and decidedly more humorous than threatening. The firewall would hold.

We all know how that ended. Jeb was out of the race quicker than an unexpected sneeze, and the firewall turned out to be made of paper. The establishment mistook financial clout, narrative dominance, and institutional power for actual cultural relevance.

Today, the exact same delusion is taking root on the other side of the aisle.

The Democratic establishment, now fractured over U.S. aid to Israel, is betting on bank accounts, powerful lobby groups, and the clout of aging guards to seal the cracks. They are running the Jeb Bush playbook step-for-step, totally blind to the fact that the ground beneath them has already given way.

Moving a Broom Against the Tide

The writing on the wall crystallized just days ago on the House floor, when a majority of voting House Democrats did the unthinkable: they voted to completely cut off foreign military aid to America’s closest Middle Eastern ally, Israel.

The Richter scale of the party’s progressive wing is no longer an annoying tremor. It’s sending shockwaves.

Nevertheless, the institutional response from mainstream, pro-Israel lobbies will be predictable. Just as in past election cycles, they’ll pour historic amounts of cash directly into Democratic primaries to fund moderate incumbents and crush progressive challengers.

On paper, the strategy looks like a triumphant plan. The moderates will win targeted seats and the leadership will remain intact.

But this is a classic rear-guard action. It buys an election cycle or two of compliance from aging politicians, but it does absolutely nothing to stop the generational tide moving through the voting booths. The establishment is spending tens of millions of dollars to win individual skirmishes while completely surrendering the cultural territory that decides the war.

It’s a playbook that doomed the Bush GOP.

You Can’t Out-Spend a Generational Shift

Why did the old Republican guard lose their party so spectacularly to MAGA? Because they forgot that political systems lag behind cultural shifts. They thought the rules of the RNC mattered more than the raw energy of the base.

The Democratic establishment is committing the exact same error of arrogance. They point to their top-down primary rules, their superdelegates, and their centrist leadership as proof that a progressive, democratic socialist takeover is impossible.

They are misreading the tea leaves. The progressive left isn’t just running for office; they have successfully captured the media, the universities, and the cultural engines that socialize the next generation of voters.

When a massive cultural shift collides with an aging political establishment, the establishment loses. Every single time.

In a democracy, voters ultimately hold the ballots. If a rising generation is fundamentally socialized to view traditional foreign policy as obsolete, a massive infusion of billionaire PAC money eventually stops working. In fact, it becomes toxic—a visible symbol of “outside interference” that actually energizes the populist base it was meant to suppress.

The Coming Realignment

This leaves traditional Jewish donor networks—the financial anchor of the Democratic coalition for half a century—in a precarious position.

Historically, the goal was to keep support for Israel strictly bipartisan so that a change in the White House wouldn’t mean an existential freeze for a key ally. But you cannot buy influence with an establishment that is dying.

If the donor base continues to aggressively finance an internal civil war within the Democratic Party, they risk hardening an ideological disagreement into a permanent, deeply personalized hostility among the party’s future leaders. They are trying to rule a kingdom that no longer exists, citing “how things formerly worked” to a generation that doesn’t care.

Political systems always look most impregnable right before they collapse. Future historians will look back at today’s record-breaking primary spending and realize it wasn’t a sign of strength—it was the political equivalent of trying to hold back the ocean with a broom.

The writing is on the wall. The John Kennedy Democratic Party is dead and will soon be buried alongside the Bush Republican Party.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Martin Mawyer is the founder of the Digital Intelligence Project and the President of Christian Action Network. He is the host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report.

While most Americans focus on the next election, a quiet but dangerous movement is advancing to fundamentally change how we elect presidents — without a constitutional amendment.

Hillary Clinton is at it again.

In recent comments, the former Secretary of State renewed her familiar attack on the Electoral College, calling it a relic “designed for slave-owning states” that must go because it violates “one person, one vote.”

These criticisms aren’t new. But this time, they come alongside a coordinated, nearly two-decade effort that bypasses the normal constitutional process entirely.

It’s called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) — and most Americans still don’t know it exists.

TAKE OUR POLL AT THE END OF THE ARTICLE

How the NPVIC Would Work

Under our current system, states award their electoral votes to the winner of their own state’s popular vote. This forces candidates to build broad coalitions across different regions and state interests.

The NPVIC flips that.

Participating states would agree to award all their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote, regardless of how their own voters voted.

The compact only activates once states representing at least 270 electoral votes join. As of July 2026, 18 states plus Washington, D.C. have signed on, controlling 222 electoral votes. That leaves just 48 more needed before it could take effect.

Virginia joined in April 2026, bringing the total to its current level. Supporters at groups like the Center for American Progress have suggested the threshold could be reached faster than many expect — potentially within a year or two if political conditions align.

Subscribe now

Why Supporters Push It — And Why Their Arguments Fall Short

Advocates claim the system is broken because:

· Candidates ignore “safe” states.

· Some voters feel “wasted.”

· A candidate can win without the national popular vote (as in 2000 and 2016).

These points sound reasonable on the surface but miss the point of the Electoral College. It was deliberately designed to protect federalism — ensuring that presidents must appeal to voters across large and small states, urban and rural areas, not just dense population centers.

A pure national popular vote would shift power dramatically toward a handful of big cities and coastal states. The current system prevents any single region from dominating presidential politics.

The Real Problem: Changing the Rules Without Amending the Constitution

The biggest issue with the NPVIC isn’t just policy. It’s the process.

The Constitution gives states control over how they appoint electors, but an interstate compact that effectively rewrites the rules of presidential elections raises serious questions under the Compact Clause. Major changes to how we select the president have historically required a constitutional amendment.

This approach seeks to achieve the same result through state legislation and an agreement among a minority of states — a backdoor that critics argue end-runs the Founders’ design.

If activated, it could create practical problems: nationwide recounts in close elections, legal battles over results from non-participating states, and the real possibility that a state’s own voters see their choice overridden by national totals.

A Simple Example

Suppose your state votes overwhelmingly for Candidate A. Under the current system, your state’s electoral votes go to Candidate A.

Under the NPVIC, if Candidate B wins the national popular vote by a narrow margin, your state would be forced to award its votes to B instead — even though your voters chose A.

That is not “making every vote count.” It is disconnecting a state’s electoral votes from the will of its own citizens.

The Historical Context

Critics like Clinton often tie the Electoral College to slavery via the Three-Fifths Compromise. While slavery influenced representation at the founding, the Electoral College was also a deliberate compromise between large and small states — and a safeguard against pure majoritarianism in a vast republic.

It has endured for over two centuries precisely because it balances competing interests in a federal system.

Why This Matters Now

With Virginia’s recent addition, the compact sits just 48 electoral votes from activation. Future state elections and shifts in legislative control could push it over the line — or create opportunities to stop it.

If it ever determines a presidential outcome, expect immediate legal challenges reaching the Supreme Court. The result could be years of uncertainty and division.

The Fundamental Question

Americans can debate whether the Electoral College should be reformed or kept as is. That debate is legitimate.

But there is a deeper issue here:

Should we allow a fundamental change to how we elect presidents through an interstate agreement that sidesteps the constitutional amendment process — or should such a sweeping reform require the formal process the Constitution provides?

That question goes beyond one election. It asks whether we respect the rules of our constitutional republic when they produce results we dislike.

The compact is closer than most people realize. The more Americans understand what’s happening, the better chance we have to protect the constitutional system that has served this country for generations.

The question now is whether we will let this change happen quietly — or insist on a formal, constitutional debate before it does.

Martin Mawyer is the founder of the Digital Intelligence Project and the President of Christian Action Network. He is the host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report.

When looking over the newly released, 216-page independent British Gang Rape Inquiry Report, it is nearly impossible to determine which institutional failure or horrific detail scales to the top of the list.

Anyone reading this report will not only find it painful to consume but will walk away wondering how British jails are not full of rapists.

To understand the sheer scope of this national betrayal, one must sift through a series of deeply horrifying realities that would cause even fiction writers to hesitate.

· Nightmarish Scale: Estimates suggest over a quarter-of-a-million young girls have been targeted nationwide, with data indicating that between 87% and 95% of the perpetrators are Muslim men operating in organized networks.

· Extreme Torture: Victims detailed being subjected to ongoing violence, held at gunpoint, beaten, and in the most barbaric instances, physically branded with the letter “M” to signify property.

· Institutional Complicity: State-run care homes designed to protect vulnerable youth functioned instead as trafficking pipelines, while school administrators routinely looked the other way as perpetrators arrived at schoolyard gates to pick up underage targets.

· Islamic Submission: Young Christian girls were systematically targeted, repeatedly violated—sometimes hundreds of times—and forced into Islamic submission.

And this is only a fraction of the sobering web of atrocities, failings, and shortcomings found within the report.

Subscribe now

It reveals a multi-decade assault on young, white, predominantly Christian girls who were completely abandoned by the very institutions sworn to protect them.

It’s not an exaggeration to say these girls were treated as sacrificial pawns by authorities desperate to appease a demographic they both feared and courted for political survival.

Here’s how the authors of the inquiry stated this failure:

“Political correctness, fear of accusations of racism, fear of losing electoral support from certain demographics have taken precedence over the protection of British children.” (page 9)

What’s more, the Rape Gangs exercised a strategy for selecting, coercing, threatening, and manipulating vulnerable girls into a culture of submission and rape.

“Girls as young as 11 were initially befriended by a young Muslim man who then treated the young child like an adult and would then start providing them with alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes.

“After a few months the girls would then be collected from school gates, care homes, and streets in taxis.

“They were taken to houses, flats, restaurants, and hotels where they were raped repeatedly by groups of men, tortured, filmed for blackmail, and told they were ‘white trash’ or ‘kuffar’ who merited punishment.”

Muslim rape gangs are not a newly discovered phenomenon in England. It’s been a hotly debated topic in Great Britain for well over a decade. In fact, our 2014 film Europe’s Last Stand: America’s Final Warning devoted considerable attention to these organized rape cells.

But, as we reported then, government officials and law enforcement agencies routinely refuted the claims and actively threatened anyone who dared to expose them. The new inquiry confirms this exact betrayal:

“The authorities at every level, including the police, social services, health services, schools, licensing bodies, and politicians knew the patterns, possessed the intelligence, and still failed to protect the country’s children.”

In one harrowing interview, a young girl named Taylor told investigators she “witnessed shootings, had knives held to her throat, and a gun held to her head.” To prevent her from going to the police, the gangs used the murder of other girls as a deterrent, threatening that anyone who spoke out would be next.

Remarkably, she still managed to make a twenty-page statement to law enforcement—only for the police to completely bury the investigation.

Her claim was given massive weight by the inquiry investigators, who wrote:

“Whistleblowers who tried to expose the rape gangs were systematically silenced, discredited, and punished.”

In a process difficult to imagine occurring in a Western nation, these punishments included facing workplace suspensions, defamation proceedings, dawn raids, asset freezes, fabricated charges, gagging bail conditions, and career-ending isolation.

Ultimately, the report issued this damning claim against state authorities:

“The state did not merely ignore whistleblowers; it punished them to protect the gangs and its own reputation.”

It is dangerously easy for Americans to look across the Atlantic, shake their heads, and view this tragedy as a uniquely British failure. But the horrifying truth is that the machinery behind this cover-up does not require a British accent. It only requires a ruling elite that values political correctness over the lives of children.

The foundational lesson of this devastating 216-page report is that the vulnerability isn’t just logistical—it is ideological.

When we look at our own borders, our own major metropolitan areas, and our own cultural institutions, the exact same psychological pressures are already deeply embedded. We live in an environment where American law enforcement, school boards, and social workers are intensely hypersensitive to accusations of racism, Islamophobia, or bigotry.

If a system is conditioned to fear a media label more than it fears a criminal network, it will inevitably default to the same deliberate blindness that destroyed the lives of a quarter-of-a-million British schoolgirls.

We must understand that the threat is twofold: it is the criminals who target our daughters and granddaughters, and it is the paralyzing political correctness that protects them by silencing anyone who dares to speak out.

In America, we are already seeing the early stages of this institutional decay, where whistleblowers in education and healthcare are systematically canceled, sidelined, or fired for stepping outside ideologically approved boundaries.

The British Inquiry Report is a chilling transmission from a possible future. It proves that when a government prioritizes “community harmony” and voter demographics over blind justice, children become the ultimate collateral damage.

America cannot wait for twenty years of destruction before we demand accountability.

The lesson we must implement right now is one of absolute, uncompromising transparency.

Our federal, state, and local authorities must be explicitly mandated to investigate exploitation and grooming networks wherever the evidence leads, entirely insulated from the terror of political correctness.

Public officials who choose silence to protect their political careers must face immediate prosecution, not administrative cover.

We were warned over a decade ago when we produced Europe’s Last Stand: America’s Final Warning. Today, the official evidence has caught up to the warnings. If we do not have the courage to confront this specific, documented threat with colorblind, ruthless justice today, we aren’t just watching Britain’s nightmare—we are actively inviting it to our own shores.

Leave a comment

Share

Subscribe now

Martin Mawyer is the founder of the Digital Intelligence Project and the President of Christian Action Network. He is the host of the “Shout Out Patriots” podcast, and author of When Evil Stops Hiding. For more action alerts, cultural commentary, and real-world campaigns defending faith, family, and freedom, subscribe to Patriot Majority Report.

On Friday, June 12, 2026, during a Pride Night game at Oracle Park, three San Francisco Giants pitchers wore the team’s rainbow Pride Night caps but added a written reference to Scripture. Starting pitcher Landen Roupp and relievers JT Brubaker and Ryan Walker each inscribed “Gen 9:12-16” on their caps in white letters. A fourth Giants pitcher, Sam Hentges, declined to wear the Pride Night cap at all and instead wore the team’s standard black cap.

Subscribe now

The three pitchers referenced Genesis 9:12-16, which records the covenant God made with Noah after the flood. God establishes that the rainbow serves as His token of the covenant between Himself and every living creature upon the earth, that He will not flood the earth with water.

For Pride Night, the players could have chosen other verses. Leviticus 18:22 declares, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22, KJV). Leviticus 20:13 states, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, b…

Read more

It’s all the rage.

Not in the 1970s sense, where something reaches the height of popularity.

This rage is something entirely different.

Across America, data centers have become the new neighborhood battleground.

To some, they’re mammoth energy-sucking, land-grabbing, water-gulping, environmental eyesores being dropped into communities without enough public discussion.

To others, they’re the infrastructure of America’s future, bringing jobs, tax revenue, and the computing power needed to compete in the AI age.

And that’s exactly the problem. Data centers have become both all the rage and all the hype.

Some concerns are well-founded. Others are exaggerated.

So, what’s the truth?

If a data center is coming to your community, should you grab your Sharpies and make protest placards, or welcome the bulldozers?

Let’s strip away the slogans and break this down. We’ll separate fact from fiction, alarmism from composure, and hype from caution.

And when you go to your local government council meeting, you’…

Read more

Vincent Munster got stopped at Detroit Metropolitan Airport on January 25, 2026, with a package straight out of a horror movie.

He and research fellow Claude Kwe had just flown in from Brazzaville in the Republic of Congo, where an mpox outbreak was raging. Customs officers asked about the large black plastic case the pair was hauling. Munster and Kwe claimed it held nothing but “diagnostic and testing equipment.”

Agents opened it anyway.

Inside were 113 vials stuffed into Styrofoam coolers. By June 2, the FBI had tested twenty of them. Seventeen contained deactivated mpox virus. One held the chickenpox virus. Two contained only human DNA.

Court filings later stated that the tested samples did not propagate and were assessed as inactivated, meaning the materials examined were reportedly not capable of causing infection. That distinction matters.

But what is clear is that they intentionally misled authorities about the contents of the black plastic case.

The allegation in this case is not th…

Read more

If you are reading this because your life no longer makes sense, I want to begin by telling you something I wish someone had told me years ago:

You are not necessarily lost.

I know that sounds strange, because when life stops making sense, the first thing most of us assume is that we must have done something wrong. We replay old decisions in our minds. We revisit conversations.

We wonder whether we ignored God somewhere back at the last intersection and have been driving in the wrong direction ever since.

That feeling can become exhausting.

You begin praying less because you fear hearing nothing in return. Or worse, you become afraid of making another decision because what if this one is wrong too? You start waiting for certainty before moving forward, and before long, life feels suspended between fear and hesitation.

I know that feeling because I’ve lived through seasons where I wanted answers more than anything else.

I wasn’t looking for comfort or strength alone. I wanted answers. Directi…

Read more

1. Not Just For the Ticket

Read more

1. When Heaven and Earth Pass

Read more

A new congressional report has dropped, and if even a portion of its findings prove accurate, Americans should be asking a very uncomfortable question:

How many warnings should government officials receive before someone is held criminally accountable?

This week, the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released a “BOMBSHELL” 205-page staff report titled:

The Cost of Doing Nothing: How Tim Walz and Keith Ellison Fueled Minnesota’s Fraud Explosion.

The report alleges that senior Minnesota officials knew for years that taxpayer-funded social programs were vulnerable to widespread fraud, yet failed to stop it.

That’s hardly a shocking secret.

For weeks, critics argued government officials had ignored warnings, whistleblowers, and available tools to stop the fraud.

The committee added something that was missing. It documented the allegations.

The report points to programs tied to the now-infamous Feeding Our Future scandal and raised broader concerns about Medicaid oversight.

Co…

Read more

Cities once shaped by centuries of Christian heritage now wrestle with questions of identity, immigration, security, and cultural survival. Political leaders promise stability. Critics warn of silence. Ordinary citizens ask a difficult question:

Could America follow the same path?

In Europe’s Last Stand: America’s Final Warning, Christian Action Network travels across Europe to examine what is happening on the ground and why some believe the lessons matter far beyond Europe’s borders.

This documentary explores voices, events, and warnings that many believe have been overlooked, ignored, or dismissed.

Watch the documentary. Consider the evidence. Decide for yourself.

Because history rarely announces itself before it arrives.

For years, we were told the great AI question would be simple:

Will artificial intelligence take our jobs?

That question is no longer theoretical. Nary a day goes by without a scathing headline of a major corporation, or even a small business, announcing layoffs and restructuring around the ‘wonders’ of artificial intelligence.

Move aside, history. There’s a new question in town.

How long before AI begins to monitor, control, and condition people to obey its whims?

That may sound exaggerated until you look at developments emerging around the world now.

Recent reporting from The New York Times has revealed that China-linked technology is allegedly exploring ways not only to move beyond traditional surveillance but also to pursue something more sinister and ambitious: using artificial intelligence to anticipate future dissent before visible opposition emerges.

According to an analysis of leaked materials, the goal was not merely to review a person’s past actions but to pursue something akin to…

Read more

There was a time when America’s brightest minds wanted to build faster cars, cure diseases, or invent a better toaster.

Today, those goals are considered almost primitive. Now, the tech elite have focused their craftsmanship on a singular, terrifying purpose:

Creating a digital God.

And if you dare stand in the way of this progress, look out. Under their theory, this Artificial God will single you out for eternal punishment, torture, or even death.

Who is thinking this way?

It’s not a mystery. You could easily guess: the ultra-wealthy engineers and investors of Silicon Valley. They envision an all-knowing digital superintelligence capable of surpassing humanity itself.

While ordinary Americans struggle to pay mortgages, raise children, and hold families together, some of the wealthiest men on earth are spending fortunes trying to engineer digital immortality.

They call it progress. At least, that’s what we’re told.

But beneath the glossy presentations, billion-dollar AI announcements, and smi…

Read more

The United States has sold arms to Taiwan for decades. China has protested every time.

Beijing routinely condemns the transfers as interference in its internal affairs and demands an immediate halt. Statements from the Chinese Foreign Ministry often arrive within hours, followed by sanctions against American defense firms and warnings of serious consequences.

That pattern has remained consistent across multiple administrations. It continues today, but tensions are rising faster than before.

The latest major weapons package reached Congress on December 17, 2025. Valued at more than eleven billion dollars, the sale covered eight separate defense cases and represented one of the largest Taiwan arms notifications in recent years.

The package included eighty-two High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, four hundred twenty Army Tactical Missile Systems, sixty…

Read more

Inter-dimensional entities? What are they? We have answers.

Four types of alien species: Greys. Nordics. Reptilians. Insectoids.

Strange phenomena in the Bible.

Where is God in all this?

Last week, inside a packed congressional hearing room in Washington, something remarkable happened.

Members of Congress weren’t debating taxes, border funding, or foreign wars.

They were debating whether America itself is strong enough to withstand an ideology many lawmakers say is quietly building parallel systems inside our own communities.

The hearing was titled:

“Sharia-Free America: Why Political Islam & Sharia Law are Incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, Part II.”

Subscribe now

And from the opening gavel, sparks flew.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) warned that America faces what he called an “existential threat” from political Islam, arguing that Sharia is not simply a faith tradition, but a governing system fundamentally incompatible with constitutional liberty.

Across the aisle, Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA) fired back, calling the he…

Read more

For a long time, artificial intelligence felt like a distant issue.

It sounded like something for Silicon Valley engineers, science fiction writers, or investors looking for the next big thing. Most Christians understandably viewed it as just another new technology — impressive, perhaps useful, maybe even overhyped, but not particularly spiritual in nature.

That assumption no longer holds.

Over the past several years, we have learned something important. AI is not just changing how people work. It is changing how people perceive truth, how institutions exercise power, how nations monitor populations, and how humanity increasingly imagines salvation without God.

What once looked like innovation is beginning to look like infrastructure.

And Christians need to understand what kind of infrastructure is being built.

This is not about claiming every new app is demonic. It is not about panicking over every chatbot, robot, or headline. It is about recognizing patterns.

It is about paying attention to the direction of the world. And it is about measuring technological developments against biblical warnings, rather than against the marketing language of corporations and politicians.

Technology itself is not the enemy. A hammer can build a church or break a window. Artificial intelligence is no different. In the hands of faithful believers, it can help pastors organize knowledge, preserve biblical teaching, strengthen communication, and serve the body of Christ.

But in the hands of fallen men, or systems divorced from truth, the same technology can become a force for deception, manipulation, and control.

The issue is not whether AI exists. The issue is who shapes it, what spirit guides it, and what authority it ultimately serves.

If the last few years have taught us anything, it is this:

The greatest danger of AI is not merely what it can do. It is the kind of world it is preparing people to accept.

The First Lesson: Deception Is Scaling

For most of history, deception had limits.

A liar could only speak to so many people. A propagandist could only print so many leaflets. A false teacher could only reach whatever room, church, city, or kingdom was within range.

AI changes that.

Now deception can be personalized, automated, multiplied, and distributed at a scale previous generations could not have imagined.

Machines can generate false images, voices, videos, articles, personas, and narratives in seconds. They can imitate familiarity, authority, emotion, and confidence. They can create the appearance of truth even when none exists.

This matters spiritually.

Scripture repeatedly warns that the final age will be marked by deception. Not only wickedness. Not only violence. But Deception. Counterfeit power. False signs. False confidence. Convincing lies.

That is what makes AI so dangerous.

Its greatest threat may not be that it becomes alive. Its greatest threat may be that it becomes believable.

A machine does not need a soul to deceive. It only needs a convincing imitation of intelligence. It only needs to sound wise. It only needs to appear informed. It only needs to answer quickly, confidently, and persuasively enough that people begin to trust the output more than they trust Scripture, conscience, or the voice of God.

That is not a minor cultural shift. That is a civilizational threat.

The Second Lesson: The World Is Building the Scaffolding for Control

When most people think about end-times control, they imagine some dramatic moment in the future when freedom suddenly disappears.

But systems of control do not arrive all at once. They are built gradually. They are normalized piece by piece. They are sold as convenience, safety, efficiency, and progress.

Over the past several years, we have watched the scaffolding go up all around us.

Digital identity systems.
AI-driven surveillance.
Facial recognition.
Predictive policing.
Behavioral monitoring.
Speech moderation systems.
Algorithmic control over what people see, hear, and believe.
Growing pressure to centralize information, finance, credentials, and access inside digital systems.

Each development is often presented as neutral. Sometimes even compassionate. But taken together, they reveal something much larger than a set of disconnected innovations.

They reveal a world being engineered for visibility, traceability, and compliance.

Christians should pay attention to that.

The Bible describes a future in which power over commerce, allegiance, and public life becomes centralized in unprecedented ways. For years, many people wondered how such a system could ever function on a global scale.

That question is becoming easier to answer.

AI is making it administratively possible.

AI is not the whole system by itself. But it may be the glue that binds the system together.

Subscribe now

Read more

If this were the 1950s, the two men recently arrested in New York would have made national headlines.

Parents would be calling friends, warning neighbors, whispering about a depravity so dark they’d hesitate to even say its name out loud.

And they wouldn’t be far off.

Because what federal authorities are now confirming is not just another criminal case. It is the exposure of something far more organized, far more calculated, and far more dangerous than most Americans are prepared to face.

Two men. Two arrests. That’s the headline.

But today, it barely registers.

No shock. No alarm. Just another passing story in a country that has seen so much darkness, it no longer recognizes it when it’s staring straight back at us.

Satan is never mentioned.

Even though his fingerprints are all over these crimes.

Aaron Corey, known online as “Baggeth,” and Ryan Catello, who allegedly operated under names like “Stabzone” and “Mors,” now face federal charges tied to the exploitation of minors.

On the surface, it…

Read more

For years, the men of Silicon Valley told us artificial intelligence would transform the world.

They promised smarter medicine. Safer transportation. More efficient economies. Personalized tutors. Breakthroughs in science. Machines that could help cure disease, write software, and perhaps one day solve problems that have frustrated mankind for centuries.

And maybe they still will.

But what happens when the same men building the machines of tomorrow begin quietly investing in technologies designed to redesign the humans of tomorrow, because AI may one day outthink humanity and possibly destroy humanity?

That is no longer science fiction.

According to a stunning new investigation by Mother Jones, some of the most powerful names in technology, including Peter Thiel, Sam Altman, Brian Armstrong, and Marc Andreessen, are backing startups involved in embryo screening, genetic analysis, and in some cases discussions about the future of embryo editing itself.

Subscribe now

Most Americans may not recognize all th…

Read more