DC ANTIFA LEADER Josef "Jose" Alcoff CHARGED WITH ‘ETHNIC INTIMIDATION’ RELATED TO ATTACK ON MARINES

Washington, D.C. Antifa leader Joseph “Jose” Alcoff, also known as “Chepe,” was arrested and charged with multiple felonies in Philadelphia on Jan. 10 in connection to the Antifa mob attack against two Marines in November.

Alcoff faces 17 charges, including multiple counts of aggravated assault, ethnic intimidation, conspiracy and terroristic threats, and one count of robbery while inflicting serious bodily injury.

An affidavit filed in the case reveals that The Daily Caller News Foundation’s reporting on Alcoff’s connection to violent Antifa groups was an integral factor leading to his arrest. (RELATED: Revealed: Antifa Leader Relied On Anonymity To Push Radical, Violent Communist Agenda)

The Marines, Alejandro Godinez and Luis Torres, testified in December that a group of 10 to 12 Antifa members called them “Nazis” and “white supremacists” and attacked them on the street despite their denials that they had no association with the right-wing group demonstrating nearby.

During the attack, Godinez said he shouted “I’m Mexican” at the mob, which allegedly led the attackers to call him a “spic” and “wetback.”

Thomas Keenan and Thomas Massey were arrested in November in connection to the beating. Keenan, who has been called a “leader” of the Antifa contingent in the Philadelphia area, was arrested and charged with rioting alongside Alcoff in New Jersey in 2011.

Torres notified detectives in Philadelphia that Alcoff was a member of the group that attacked him after reading TheDCNF’s reporting detailing Alcoff’s connection to Keenan, Philadelphia Magazine reported, citing an affidavit filed in Alcoff’s case.

Torres provided police pictures of the suspects at the time of the attack, leading investigators to “strongly agree” that Alcoff was the person in his photos, the affidavit states.

Alcoff is an organizer of Smash Racism DC, the Antifa group responsible for mobbing Fox News host and DCNF co-founder Tucker Carlson’s house in November and for chasing Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz from a D.C. restaurant in September.

Alcoff made significant efforts to separate his true identity from his fanatical personas, “Chepe” and “Jose Martin,” TheDCNF reported in December.

When speaking as Chepe and through his Twitter handle @sabokitty, Alcoff has called for the killing of the rich and encourages using violence to bring “a world without capitalism, without private property … that is socialist and communist.”

Alcoff pled not guilty to the charges and is currently out on $15,000 bail. His lawyer did not immediately return a comment.
Please share this.

How Women Weaken Nations (and why men let them)

Please share this.

Roe v. Wade Attorney Sarah Weddington’s Shocking Answer When Asked, “Whatever Happened to Roe?”

February 18, 2017, Norma McCorvey passed away. Her long, hard journey on this harsh Earth behind her, she finally rests in the peace of our Lord. At last.

Norma was one of the most broken people I have ever met, but her impact on the lives around her cannot be measured.

Norma carried a crushing, unbearable weight around for most of her life. She felt the burden of the 58 million lost lives since the Roe v. Wade decision because Norma was Roe. I hate to type that because she was so much #morethanroe.

Why do I detest the pro-abort feminist movement? Norma McCorvey.

Let’s hit the Wayback Machine to 1987. I was a young impressionable university student leader. I was responsible for bringing concerts, comedians, and lecturers to the University of Nevada campus. I had the opportunity to meet many incredible people – musicians, intellects, opinion leaders and Hunter S. Thompson.

One of my all-time favorite lecturers was Sarah Weddington, the attorney who successfully argued the Roe v. Wade decision. She was articulate, gracious, funny, smart and THE FEMINIST ICON. And best yet, she took a liking to me at the many booking conferences that I attended. After a couple of years, I finally secured a date for my mentor to speak on campus. The lecture was brilliant. The event was successful, even though a few pro-life demonstrators stood quietly protesting outside the venue.
After the event, a group of students and I took her to dinner and were entertained by more exciting, interesting stories. Over dessert, I asked, “whatever happened to Roe?”

Sarah’s gracious demeanor and beautiful smile changed instantaneously.

“She’s a stupid piece of white trash. She’s pro-life and a Christian,” she snarled throwing in a few decidedly ungracious and unrepeatable curse words. “She’s a piece of trash. She was stupid when we found her and she’s worse now.”

I quickly paid the check and the evening ended. Her words and her demeanor hung in the air that night and honestly, I have never been able to forget them.

And that, right there, was the end of a chapter. I would no longer blindly follow a feminist agenda that defined progress on the backs of dead babies. I began a journey from pro-choice to pro-life. Why? Because Roe v. Wade, the decision that supposedly was the rallying cry for all feminists, was achieved by taking advantage of a “stupid piece of trash” not fighting for the rights of all women. Just another example of a rich liberal white woman imposing her beliefs on those that shouldn’t be allowed to think or believe.

I will leave the rest of my pro-life journey to another time, because Norma’s story is so much more important.


Over 20 years later, our state pro-life group brought Norma McCorvey in to speak at the January rally. I don’t think I understood what was about to happen. As I sat listening to Miss Norma, I was overwhelmed with the burden she carried. She told her story of meeting with Sarah Weddington and the other attorneys, the Roe v Wade decision, her coming out as Roe, her strident advocacy for the legalization and normalization of abortion, her conversion to seeing the humanity of the unborn caused by the patient and loving efforts of young pro-lifers, her acceptance of Christ and her lifetime efforts to reverse a Supreme Court decision that she felt she caused.

Her speech wandered, halting here and there. Her delivery was not great and she was most definitely not articulate. But I don’t think I have ever been so moved by any speaker as I was by her story of victimization, loss, despair, redemption, triumph and crushing guilt. When she said, “I am responsible for the death of 50 million unborn babies,” I couldn’t hold the tears back. I, like everyone in the room, was forever changed.

When I met Miss Norma, she knew in her head that she had been forgiven and redeemed, but she struggled with the demons of despair and guilt. That guilt drove her to open her wounds for all to see in her fight for the unborn. She endured the most horrendous internet trolls who sought to silence her. Yet she pressed on. It was hard to watch. But for her there was no other way.

After her speech, I had the opportunity to speak to her privately. I asked her, “whatever happened to Sarah Weddington and the other attorneys?” Miss Norma’s face transformed. It softened and saddened. “I haven’t heard from them in years. They were not nice women. They were not nice to me.” Then she added, “I heard she has breast cancer. I pray for her.”

That right there is what the feminist movement should be. Lifting our sisters up during their times of difficulty, not taking advantage of them and throwing them to the curb when we have used them up.
Norma McCorvey, rest in peace.

LifeNews Note: Melissa Clement is the president of Nevada Right to Life.

Please share this.

SHOCKING Leftists Are Working Overtime to Shut Down Movie “Killing Free Speech” on Media Bias and Border Security

Liberty is dying in America, Michael Hansen, the director of Killing Europe, released his latest production Killing Free Speech on how the U.S. is going down the same self-destructive road as Europe.

The film exposes the radical left’s actions to silence free speech and the mainstream media’s efforts to shut down any point of view impeding an open-border agenda from Antifa violence in the streets to CAIR-imposed censorship, to hijab-wearing teachers teaching Islamic values in our schools.

The film also includes commentary by The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft.

The film features embattled Border Patrol agents and shocking undercover footage of far-left extremist groups operating in America. Killing Free Speech reveals their tactics and lays bare the open-borders agenda on the radical left.

The National Border Patrol Council 1613 wants the public to know the truth about what is going on at the border so that they can make informed decisions as to what is truly needed to secure the borders effectively, humanely and safely.

Killing Free Speech gave the agents a voice and an opportunity to speak the truth and it is a powerful testament to the men and women of the Border Patrol who risk their lives every day.

The first screening date of “Killing Free Speech” was Monday, October 15, 2018. It was previewed at the National Border Patrol Council Local 1613.

The film was such a hit with the border patrol agents that they planned to have the Texas Border Patrol set up a screening as well.

However, when select media outlets learned of the screenings, they wrote scorching articles accusing the border patrol union of “endorsing extremist video featuring white nationalists.”

Another leftist lie

This was, of course, fake news. Must conservatives featured in the documentary are in fact members of minority communities in this country. Terence Shigg, National Border Patrol Council Local 1613 President, is himself African American, and as Terence points out, “Nowhere in the article do the journalists actually identify what white nationalist appear in the movie.”

The far left articles prove the film is right about the mainstream media. Sadly, the articles worked to their intention. Border Patrol National was put under so much pressure that any additional screenings were off the table, and for the time being, the media was able to silence the Border Patrol and their free speech rights.

This brings us to the government shutdown and the border wall.

** Why is the mainstream media misrepresenting what is going on at the border?
** Why do journalists discredit the Border Patrol for endorsing films that give them a voice?
** And why is the Democratic Party against the border wall so much so that they are willing to shut down the government?

“The reality is that border patrol agents are saying ‘We want this wall, we need this wall, it will work.’
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/01/shocking-leftists-are-working-overtime-to-shut-down-movie-killing-free-speech-on-media-bias-and-border-security-watch-it-here/

Please share this.

Fashion’s Dirty Secrets

• If you think buying new clothes is a fun activity with few consequences on human health and the environment, you may want to watch the BBC documentary “Fashion’s Dirty Secrets”
• According to BBC investigative reporter Stacey Dooley, fashion is second only to oil on the list of the top five most polluting industries in the world
• It can take 4,000 to 5,000 gallons of water to conventionally grow the cotton needed to make a single pair of jeans
• Waterways around the world are being irreversibly harmed by textile growers and manufacturers, who are collectively creating climate change, human health risks and environmental damage
• You can do your part to help fix this broken system by selecting organic fabrics, refusing to participate in “fast fashion” and buying only the clothes you truly need and will wear for a long time

Please share this.

Canada’s gun control debate is still tainted by bad information

Bad information, once loose, persists. A false report is remembered long after a correction. But the ongoing debate about gun control in Canada is tainted by bad information. Let’s see what we can do about that.

Last year was a violent one in Toronto. Shootings were sharply up. A new record for homicides was set, with 96. In July, a particularly horrific attack in the Danforth neighbourhood left two people dead and 13 more injured. Toronto mayor John Tory, a generally sensible fellow who once (rightly) dismissed handgun bans as a symbolic gesture, reversed himself and called for one. Tory claimed that his position had changed because the facts had changed — more handguns being used in Toronto crimes, he said, were being procured by licensed Canadian owners.

And it seemed like the mayor was onto something. The Canadian Press, shortly after the Danforth shooting, published an article quoting a Toronto police detective at length. The article specifically claimed that guns that could be traced back to Canada were now the leading source for criminals in the city, eclipsing the traditional source: smugglers bringing guns in from the United States.

The number of “crime guns” — which in Toronto can mean not only guns used in crime, but also those illegally altered, or seized during criminal investigations — traced back to Canadian owners was “surging,” the article reads. “[Some Canadians] go get their licence for the purpose of becoming a firearms trafficker,” Det. Rob Di Danieli told the Canadian Press.

The Canadian Press provides news articles to most major news organizations across the country, Global News included. The piece was widely reprinted and was also cited in other reporting. It directly supported a renewed call for a handgun ban in Canada, a call that was taken up by city councils in Toronto and Montreal and is now being studied by the federal Liberals, who have campaigned on a handgun ban before — it was a key plank in Paul Martin’s failed 2006 campaign. It formed a central part of the debate that those calls provoked.

Its main claim — the surge in domestic guns used in crimes beginning around 2012 — was entirely based on the CP’s interview with Det. di Danieli. There appeared to be no independent verification. Dennis R. Young, a researcher and writer based in Alberta, filed a Freedom of Information request with the Toronto police, seeking precise figures dating back many years. The police obliged, and Young published the data verbatim online.

Below: Data shows the number of ‘crime guns’ seized by Toronto police based that can be traced back to Canada and the U.S.

The details are in my column from September, and the data — the Toronto police’s own stats — showed no “surge” in guns traced back to Canadians. None. There was some ebb-and-flow across different years, but nothing like an emerging pattern, let alone a surge. The overwhelming majority of Toronto crime guns are never traced back to any particular source. Of those that can be traced either to the United States and Canada, the U.S. leads in most years, Canada in two, with one tie. There is nothing like a surge to be seen among domestic guns.  BELOW: Data comparing the number of crime guns seized by Toronto police that can be traced back to the U.S. or to lawful Canadian gun owners.

In September, I had obviously requested comment from Det. di Danieli and the CP. The police acknowledged my request to speak to the detective, and then never got back to me and ignored all follow ups. An editor at the CP told me that they were aware of and looking into the matter, and then ignored my follow ups.

This pissed me off. Not in a sense of personal affront. I’ve been ignored before. But this incident is, to my mind, a black mark for both the Toronto police and the CP.

Policing and reporting are both supposed to be about the truth. The police and the CP had combined to put out inaccurate information, and that inaccurate information was driving public debate. At minimum, a correction, or some comparable acknowledgement, was absolutely required.

None came. Until a few days ago.

On Dec. 27, in that quiet lull between Christmas and New Year’s, the Canadian Press published a new article. It wasn’t a retraction or a correction to their previous report. Indeed, the new article didn’t even refer directly to the CP’s earlier reporting. The new CP article, written by the excellent reporter Michelle McQuigge, detailed a year-end press conference by Toronto Police Service Chief Mark Saunders.

And this article, finally, sets the record straight. There indeed has been no surge in crime guns traced back to legally-licensed Canadian owners. “[Firearms] imported from the U.S. were implicated in … crimes more often than domestically sourced firearms in eight of the past 11 years,” writes McQuigge. “Domestically sourced crime guns only surpassed U.S. imports in 2010 and 2015, with the two figures tied in 2016.”

As for the police, they have also, ahem, expanded upon their earlier statements. They told the CP that the majority of rifles and shotguns seized as crime guns by Toronto police are linked back to Canadians (which doesn’t surprise me). But they also finally admitted what should have been said months ago. Again, quoting a Toronto police spokesperson from McQuigge’s piece: “The majority of crime guns that are handguns seized by the Toronto Police Service are sourced via the U.S.”

Well then.

Canadians have spent four months having a debate, including public consultations, based in part on bad information. Information that was known to be bad months ago, but that went uncorrected until two days after Christmas, when news readership is typically way, way below usual levels.

I’m not suggesting for an instant that there is not a problem with domestically sourced guns in Canada. The police definition of a crime gun is problematic — it includes guns seized during investigations that may not ever have been used in a crime, and also includes objects such as air guns that aren’t firearms under the law. So you have to take some of the stats with a grain of salt. But still. We should always have an open mind about ways to make our gun control system more effective at reducing crime.

But there is simply no evidence that there is a worsening problem among lawful Canadian handgun owners, the people targeted by the proposed ban — in effect, held up as partially responsible for tragic deaths and senseless crimes. The Toronto police numbers don’t show it. Nationally, the Public Safety Ministry has conceded that it has no data to support claims by Minister Ralph Goodale that domestic owners now provide the majority of crime guns. That entire narrative, embraced wholeheartedly by the mayor and somewhat more cautiously by federal Liberals, is based on bad information that should not have been reported.

To call all this disappointing would be an understatement. In an era when news organizations all over the world are being accused of peddling fake news, and when every police force recognizes the challenge of retaining public trust, this is absolutely appalling.

I’m a reasonable guy. Stuff happens. Errors are made. The public is owed honesty, not perfection. Mistakes, when made, should be publicly corrected, as quickly as possible. Four months is too long.

Canadians got their honesty, eventually. Better late than never, I suppose. But damage has been done. My satisfaction in the truth finally being acknowledged — and there is some — is soured by that grim reality. Bad information lasts forever.

All we can do now, as properly informed citizens, is hold politicians accountable when they repeat that bad information, whether they’re doing so in ignorance or with malice. I’ll do my part. The rest is up to you.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4815321/despite-a-correction-canadas-gun-control-debate-is-still-tainted-by-bad-information/
Please share this.

14 Things You Should Know About VIOLENT CRIME and FIREARMS in CANADA

The debate over the regulation of firearms in Canada is often influenced more by emotion than by facts. Since good public policy should be based on solid evidence, following are a few facts for consideration:

1. Violent crime is decreasing in Canada.

The number of people charged in violent criminal code violations has decreased by about 25% over the last 20 years – from almost 700 per 100,000 persons to just over 500.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.action?pid=3510017701

2. Canada’s homicide rate is trending downward.

As reported by Statistics Canada, “Despite year‑to‑year fluctuations of Canadian homicide statistics, the rate of homicide in Canada has generally been decreasing over the years.” Homicides in Canada peaked in 1975 and have been trending downward ever since. In fact, since 1975, the homicide rate in Canada has dropped by almost half.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/54879-eng.htm
• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.action?pid=3510006801

3. The use of firearms in homicides is trending downward.

The use of firearms in homicides has been trending downward since 1974. There was a 20% increase between 2013 (the lowest rate of fatal shootings ever recorded) and 2016, which according to Statistics Canada, “…was driven by a substantive increase in gang-related homicides over that period.” In spite of this increase, the long term trend continues to point downwards.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-005-x/2018001/article/54962-eng.htm

4. Knives are used more often than guns in homicides.

Since 1974, the use of knives in homicides has been trending upwards, while the use of guns has been trending downwards. Between 2007 and 2016, more homicides were committed by stabbing than by firearms in 7 out of 10 of those years.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.action?pid=3510006901

5. Guns are rarely used in the commission of violent crimes in Canada.

Statistics Canada says that a “small proportion of police-reported violent crime involves firearms”. To illustrate, in 2016, there were 265,555 reported instances of violent crime. Only about one fifth (21.5%) of these involved the use of a weapon. This weapon was a firearm in only 2.7% of police-reported violent crime incidents and a handgun only 1.6% of the time – the equivalent of 1 out of every 63 reported incidents of violent crime.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-005-x/2018001/article/54980/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-005-x/2018001/article/54980/tbl/tbl01-eng.htm

6. Increased gang activity has substantially contributed to the homicide rate in recent years.

Statistics Canada reports that the recent increase in homicides has been “driven by a substantive increase in gang-related homicides.” Between 1996 and 2016, gang-related homicides increased by almost 400 percent.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/85-005-x/2018001/article/54962-eng.pdf
• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/54879-eng.htm

7. One in four homicide victims in 2016 had links to organized crime or a street gang.

Statistics Canada reports that, “In 2016, police reported 141 gang‑related homicides, an increase of 45 from the 96 reported in 2015. These represented almost one‑quarter of the homicides in 2016 where police knew whether or not the incident was gang‑related. Overall, gang‑related homicides accounted for 30% of homicides that occurred in Census Metropolitan Areas in 2016.”

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2017001/article/54879-eng.htm

8. Most gun crimes are not committed with legally-owned firearms

According to the federal government, “The vast majority of owners of handguns and of other firearms in Canada lawfully abide by requirements, and most gun crimes are not committed with legally-owned firearms.”

• https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cnslttns/hndgn/rdcng-vlnt-crm-en.aspx

9. Handguns have been registered in Canada since 1934.

Not many people appear to be aware of this fact, but it’s true: Handguns are already restricted weapons and have been registered in Canada since 1934. In spite of this, handguns are more commonly used in homicides than long guns. 

• http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/pol-leg/hist/con-eng.htm

10. The number of people being charged for breaking the Firearms Act is minuscule.

In 2017, the rate of persons being charged for breaking the Firearms Act was .22 per 100,000 persons or 2.2 per million persons. This rate is the lowest it has been since 2001 and has been trending downwards for over 15 years.

• https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.action?pid=3510017701

11. Banning handguns or introducing more firearm regulations does not reduce gun violence.

This fact is noted on the website of Public Safety Canada, “In all cases the data does not conclusively demonstrate that these handgun or assault weapon bans have led to reductions in gun violence… ". According to gun control experts, "No methodologically sound studies exist supporting the effectiveness of general firearms laws."

• https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cnslttns/hndgn/rdcng-vlnt-crm-en.aspx
• http://clcjbooks.rutgers.edu/books/arming-and-disarming/

12. There is no association between an increase in gun ownership and the homicide rate.

Despite concerns to the contrary, research shows that increased legal gun ownership does not result in an increase in homicide.

• https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/SECU/Brief/BR9880543/br-external/LangmannCaillin-e.pdf
• 
  

13. There is no correlation between levels of gun ownership and suicide rates.

In 1998, a Department of Justice study noted that: "In Canada, provincial comparisons of firearm ownership levels and overall rates of suicide found that levels of firearm ownership had no correlation with regional suicide rates. Furthermore, the Canadian rate of firearm suicides has dropped without evidence of a similar reduction in the rate of firearm ownership."

• https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/wd98_4-dt98_4/wd98_4.pdf

14. Background checks under the Firearms Act have had no impact on homicide or spousal homicide rates.

In his brief to the House of Commons Committee on Public Safety and National Security, Dr. Caillin Langmann noted that background checks on individuals applying for a firearm license have had no impact on homicide and spousal homicide rates where firearms were involved.

• https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/SECU/Brief/BR9880543/br-external/LangmannCaillin-e.pdf

Please share this.

Men 'face MORE discrimination than women'

Men 'face MORE discrimination than women': Global study claims males receive the raw end of the deal with harsher punishments for the same crime, compulsory military service and more deaths at work

    Men are disadvantaged in 91 countries compared to 43 nations for women 
    The UK, the US and Australia all discriminate against men more
    Italy, Israel and China are harder environments for women, according to study
    Scientists created the Basic Index of Gender Inequality to assess inequality
    Closer the BIGI score is to zero the greater the level of equality is in the country 

Women are better off in more countries than men are, a new study has found. 

A method that assesses the forms of hardship and discrimination facing men and women has revealed males have it harder in 91 countries out of 134.

Women were disadvantaged in only 43.

A study looked at 6.8 billion people around the world and scientists developed a new way of measuring gender inequality.

The UK, the US and Australia all discriminate against men more whereas Italy, Israel and China are harder environments for women, according to the study.

Researchers say this is due to men receiving harsher punishments for the same crime, compulsory military service and more occupational deaths than women.

The study was carried out by the University of Essex and the University of Missouri-Columbia and published in the journal Plos One.

Scientists created a database which deciphers a nation's discrimination called the Basic Index of Gender Inequality (BIGI).

The closer the BIGI score is to zero the greater the level of equality is in the country.

If it is a negative number it indicates females are better off and if the BIGI score is positive it shows males are less discriminated against. 

The index is based on three factors: educational opportunities, healthy life expectancy and overall life satisfaction. 

Professor Gijsbert Stoet, from the Department of Psychology at Essex, explained: 'We're not saying that women in highly developed countries are not experiencing disadvantages in some aspects of their lives.

'What we are saying is that an ideal measure of gender equality is not biased to the disadvantages of either gender.

'Doing so, we find a different picture to the one commonly presented in the media.'

Researchers found the most developed countries in the world come closest to achieving true gender equality but there was a slight advantage for women.

Women in the least developed countries however, nearly always fall behind men.

The authors of the research say this is predominantly due to fewer opportunities to get a good education.

There is an equal amount of nations with medium-level development that see men and women falling behind.

On balance, they say, the men's disadvantage is largely due to a shorter healthy lifespan. 

Professor David Geary, from the Department of Psychological Sciences at the University of Missouri in the United States, added: 'We sought to correct the bias towards women's issues within existing measures and at the same time develop a simple measure that is useful in any country in the world, regardless of their level of economic development.'

The University of Essex, which performed the research, made headlines in 2016 when it gave female staff a one-off pay rise in order to close the gender pay gap.

It moved female professors up three newly created pay levels to raise their average salaries to the same as their male counterparts.   
Please share this.

The Anti-American Dream

The quickest way to create a captive society is to educate children to hate their own freedom. Nobody’s feelings were consulted during the making of this video. Anyone who has a problem with that can drop dead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Uz19w7tf1U

Please share this.