Mediaboss Marketing

Ive studied numerous psychologists, from Freud to Jung, and from Berne to Maslow, but one of the most interesting psychologists out there is Timothy Leary.

Despite being a Professor at Harvard in the early 1960s, his seemingly stable position was completely pulled out from underneath him, due to his controversial work involving LSD. At one point, the US government even hated him so much that they gave him 30 years in prison for a minor possession of marijuana, which he claims they planted on him.

Leary, after years of extensive studies, research, and experimentation, developed a framework through which to understand the human mind: the 8 Circuits of Consciousness. The goal of this article is to better understand how leftists think, and what sort of childhood events would lead to such a vehement position on social justice. First, however, I will give a brief analysis of the 8 circuits.

A good introductory book to this theory, as I spoke about here, is Prometheus Rising by Dr. Robert Anton Wilson.Sadly the book is not in print anymore (its a hidden gem that not many people know about), but if you dont feel like buying the kindle version you can check out an hour long YouTube video that I made about the 8 Circuit Model.

In a nutshell, the model claims that human beings have 8 circuits of consciousness, or 8 ways of interpreting external information. When a child is born, he only uses the first circuit. Then, as he gets older, he activates the second. Then, he activates the third, and the fourth.

Most human beings stop here; only a select few have ever activated the latter four. Buddha likely activated the 6th circuit, Jesus the 5th, and Beethoven the 7th.

Due to the complexity of the latter four circuits, I will not discuss them. I will, however focus heavily on the first four, because they have a massive impact in creating a liberal robot. Once a circuit is imprinted, it is extremely difficult to undo. This is why it is so god damn hard to convince liberals of their misguided ways. As I go through this psychological model, and explain why liberals believe what they do, you should start to see just how robotized some people really are.

This is what Carl Sagan would call the Reptilian brain and what Freud would call the oral imprint. This circuit is activated when a child is first born, and is imprinted all the way up until he becomes a toddler. This circuit interprets environmental stimulus in one of two ways: either its pleasurable, or painful. Good, or bad. Safe, or unsafe. Typically, the mother plays the integral role in imprinting this circuit.

If this circuit receives ample conditioning that the world is a good place, by receiving enough food, enough love, and enough pleasure, the child will grow up to believe that the world is generally a very safe place.

If this circuit receives ample conditioning that the world is a bad place, by being frequently hungry, not receiving enough love, and experiencing a large amount of pain, the child will grow up to believe that the world is generally a very unsafe place.

Liberals are almost always indefinitely imprinted with a negative world-view. This is why liberals, when theyre adults, tend to the view the world as being an unsafe place. They need daddy government, to take care of everything for them, because the world is scary.

They need the strong patriarchy to stop hurting their feelings, because the world is too scary for them to handle.

This is what Carl Sagan would call the mammalian brain and what Freud would call the anal imprint. This circuit is activated around the time that a child becomes a toddler, and is imprinted all the way up until around age 6 or 7. This circuit interprets relationships with other human beings in one of two ways: am I dominant, or submissive? Am I top-dog or bottom-dog? Am I alpha male, or beta male? Typically, the father plays an integral role in imprinting this circuit.

Have you ever wondered why toddlers are so god damn emotional? Its because theyre starting to develop their egoam I dominant (anger) or submissive (fear)? This is why toddlers typically go through a mine phase, as well. Theyre claiming their territory, so to speak.

If a childs father is a strong, masculine man who is a good role model, the child will model himself after his father and be dominant in most interactions. Not in an obtrusive, egotistical way, but rather hell view himself as an alpha male; as the leader.

If a childs father is very weak and if that childs mother runs the relationship, this child will inevitably have a submissive, imprint in this circuit. He will typically be bullied in grade school, because others can sense his weakness.

Every single leftist has this submissive imprint, which is almost always due to an overbearing mother. Conversely, sometimes it can also be caused by an abusive father; regardless, this is the psychology of a liberal. This is why liberals typically need top dog government to help them. They feel the need to be submissive, and rely on someone else to take the lead (in this case the government).

This is why liberals typically dislike masculine men; it points out their own submissiveness and inadequacies. Its why leftists are typically very spineless and are afraid to stand up for anything that isnt the norm. This is also why they typically have a mother-boy dynamic in their romantic relationships.

Have you ever seen hyper-liberals with their wives? They typically act like a little boy afraid of offending mommy and her feminist ideologies. This is why. Theyre conditioned to be submissive from a young age, which allows a nanny state to easily come into play, breaks apart the family unit, and creates a man without a backbone.

This is what Carl Sagan would call the human brain. Interestingly enough, Freud skips over this one, likely because, like a fish surrounded by water, Freud is so surrounded by his ideology that he cant even see it.

This circuit is typically imprinted from the ages of 7 to 13, when a child goes through rigorous schooling on how to write, how to read, etc. Its concerned with creating a map to better understand reality; in other words, its your religion, your beliefs, your opinions, and your political ideology. Its your general world-view put into words. This circuit is not binary (only A or B) like the previous ones; it can have an almost unlimited number of imprints.

The catch, however, is that because most people dont use logic to understand reality, this circuit is typically just an extension of circuits 1 and 2. For example, as I said before, most liberals have a negative first and second circuit imprint: they believe the world is very unsafe, and that theyre bottom-dog/submissive. So, what do you think happens when they start to form a map of reality?

They become a socialist. Now, of course this belief stems from their deeply seeded feelings of inadequacy, fear, and weakness, which is why they want daddy government to take care of them, but they arent even aware of this.

Their third circuit will come up with all sorts of justifications and logical fallacies to explain away these gnawing feelings:

Despite the obvious flaws within these statements, liberals literally cannot even comprehend why theyre wrong. As Roosh said before, its because liberals argue fromemotionnot from reason.In other words, their first and second circuits create the reality map that is their third circuit.

Their third circuit basically, then, does nothing but go back and justify their original imprints and emotions. They will selectively seek out information to confirm their biases, and ignore any and all information that contradicts them.

This is why hyper-liberals can claim that men are useless pigs, despite the fact that men are the very ones who are giving them the right to vote, protecting them in war, and paying taxes for their welfare. This is why Leftism isliterallya mental disorder.

For the liberal, their third circuit is merely a logical extension and justification of their underlying fear, depression, feelings of inadequacy, and general victim-complex.

This is what Freud would call the sexual imprint. Its much more than that, howeverits when a child begins to develop deeper connections with those around him. This circuit is responsible for tribal information. What is the reality-tunnel that your local tribe, school, church, or community has?

This circuit is how religious beliefs, political beliefs, and other ideologies, are typically passed down from generation to generation. Its a survival mechanism that ensures we are able to fit in, lest we be ostracized and end up starving to death.

This is why liberalism infecting our schools is so god damn insidious. Hyper-liberals take advantage of this critical period, when children are most vulnerable to being imprinted with various ideologies, norms, and sexual practices. Its why homosexuality is practically the norm now, why transgenderism is on its way, and why pedophilia and zoophilia are next up.

Prior to the internet and media, it was the local high school, the neighbors, and the church that imprinted a child with various cultural beliefs. Now, however, the brainwashing box right in front of our noses has been tearing these strong pillars of culture down.

What a child is exposed to during this time period is of the utmost importance; it will, for the most part, determine his lifelong sexual interests and cultural beliefs. Most Leftists, during this time in their lives, are exposed to homosexuality, transgenderism, and cultural Marxism by their schoolteachers, their peers, and the media. This only exacerbates their previous imprinting (circuits 1-3).

This is why leftists become pan-sexual, or any other weird deviancy. They believe that theres something fundamentally wrong with them; it goes so deep that it even changes their sexuality.

This is why once leftists grow up, they dye their hair and break social norms. They are so desperate to be bullied (and confirm their first circuit bias that the world is unsafe and their second circuit bias that theyre bottom dog) that they go out of their way to dress up in a bunch of weird shit that they know will get them made fun of.

This is why leftists preach equality and become political activists. They use this to meet other like-minded degenerates and can all hide their feelings of inadequacy and self-hatred by trying to bring others down.

Feminism is cancer.

During a leftists early childhood, his mother likely doesnt pay enough attention to him. Hes frequently hungry, in pain, and deprived of love. This creates the foundation of leftism; that the world is generally unsafe.

So then, when the leftist becomes a toddler, he is plagued by a chronic fear. This leads others to pick on him, which only further reinforces his first circuit imprint that the world is unsafe, and creates a new imprint: that hes bottom dog (second circuit binary imprint).

These two imprints create what is known as a victim complex. Victims typically view the world as being very unsafe, and they view themselves as being very weak, and not capable of protecting themselves from the perils that surround them. Does this not sound exactly like a liberal?

Then, when the liberal hits the age of cognition, when his neo-cortex starts to develop further, he enters into the third circuit imprinting period. Here he forms a number of beliefs that merely serve to justify his prior imprinting, such as:

From here, they start to enter the fourth circuit, primed and ready to fully accept liberal social principles. They often times take on a deviant sexual imprint, or they hate themselves so much that they cant even bear their own gender, so their fourth circuit effectively becomes an extension of their first two circuits.

From here, they go out into the world and get involved in social media and political activism, by grouping up with other like-minded individuals. This surrounding of themselves by liberals only enforces their fourth circuit imprinting that homosexuality, transgenderism, pansexualism, and whatever-the-fuck-else-ism is normal.

It is extremely difficult to undo a liberals imprinting without using unethical methods (LSD re-imprinting, brainwashing them, controlling their food and water supply to revert them to a childlike state, etc.). And even if these things werent unethical, we dont have the resources to do them.

So, what I propose, is that we simply become aware of this phenomena and work to stop it. I know this sounds so cliche, and Ive said it a million times, but we NEED TO start creating more masculine men in the world. And it starts with our youth. It starts with you and me.

Take a martial art, work out, and get your finances in check.Slowly we will start to undo the monstrosity that is modern liberalism. The most important thing, however, is that wetake action.

Dont put up with your girlfriend treating you like shit. Instead, learn how to actually get girls, so that you arent afraid to leave her. Dont accept bitchyexcuses. Be a fucking man and do what you need to do to get what you want to have.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read More: Analyzing The 5 Main Alpha Archetypes

More here:
The Psychology That Explains How People Become Liberals ...

Our allies in the fight against ISIS, handle their returning jihadis by stripping them of their citizenship or assassinating them on the battlefield but Canadas weak response is to rehabilitate these traitors, and this should concern all Canadians.

As ISIS is decimated on the battle fields of Syria and Iraq following new direction under General Mattis and President Trump, those fighters with citizenship or roots in the west will either find another soft spot from which to continue their fight or return home to the West.

According to CSIS director Michael Coulombe, 60 of the 180 Canadians who have left to fight abroad have thus far returned home from participating in terror activities abroad.

When they come home, the Canadian government offers 'reintegration' to these individuals who present real security threats.

Watch as I explain how the UK is approaching this very real threat, and then try to imagine a member of our Liberal government suggesting such a tough approach.

Instead, last week Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale told CBC News:

"Canada does not engage in death squads, With the battlefield activity winding down, there is a very real question about where the foreign fighters go"

We know Trudeau is against stripping the Canadian citizenship of terrorists, a practice the previous Harper Conservatives employed. This past June the Liberals passed a law barring it even in the case of individuals convicted of terror ties.

Between Goodale's comments and the actions of our authorities, it seems the Liberals believe in being nice and compassionate to terrorist returnees, but where are the treason charges or the terror related charges?

See more here:
Liberals to reintegrate Canadian ISIS fighters (while ...

Add this infamy to all the other crimes of the liberal establishment its poisonous influence has converted the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in the eyes of the American people, from a proud institution dedicated to upholding the law into just another suppurating bureaucratic pustule. Where once we saw FBI agents as heroes many of us ancients grew up watching Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., every Sunday night now we see careerist hacks looking to suck-up to the Democrat elite while bending the law and subverting justice to do it. Truly, everything liberals touch dies.

The revelations about Oh-So-Special Agent Peter Strozk shouldnt surprise anyone, as bad as they are. Even that hack Robert Mueller couldnt keep him all-board the Russia Soft Coup Express after Strozks anti-Trump texts to his FBI mistress came out. Shocker this is the same Democrat-loving clown who watered down the Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit investigation conclusions (helpfully drafted months before the investigation concluded). Oh, and he oversaw the unsworn, unrecorded interview of his special gal (not the one he was cheating with; the one with the taste for Chardonnay and failure who would have helped his career as a reward for his slavish devotion had she not botched running against Donald Trump). He was also in on the ambush of LTG Mike Flynn, who he and his scuzzy compadres decided to prosecute while the Harpy, Huma and all the rest of the Clinton Nostra got a pass.

Oh, but for the lefty in-crowd, its Bros before Bureaus. The new head honcho Christopher Wray Where the hell is he hiding anyway?Is he locked in a gimp box somewhere in the Hoover Building? didnt even fire Strozk though intermural adultery is allegedly against the rules at the FBI. Nope, nothing builds confidence in a law enforcement agencys organizational integrity like bending the rules to protect your bigwig buddies.

Oh, wait outright payoffs do too! Dont even start on Andrew McCabe and his wifes Democrat contributions to her. Yeah, the wife of the FBI second-in-command got money from the Democrat Party and hes still not recused from this fake investigation. Are you kidding?

By the way, have we got even a single iota of information on what the unholy hell happened since Special Agent Johnson and Special Agent Johnson took over the investigation of the Las Vegas shooting?

Its long past time to lance this boil. Its sad when you have to accept that you cant talk to the FBI, that they cant be trusted to do justice, that you must protect yourself from being railroaded like LTG Flynn was and always always always always demand to speak to your attorney and demand that the FBI not question you if they come sniffing around. LTG Flynn trusted them not to have an agenda. Look what happened, and learn.

Its heartbreaking, because the FBIs real legacy a legacy field agents largely live today is a legacy of heroes.

Flashback to Miami, April 11, 1986. Eight agents make a felony stop on a car with two suspected bank robbers, igniting a firefight that demonstrated the bravery and devotion that should be what first comes to mind when any American thinks of the FBI.

William Russell Matix and Michael Lee Platt were ex-military and had killed before and they packed an arsenal that ensured they were not going quietly. The FBI agents, lightly armed with under-powered handguns and a couple 12 gauges came under intense rifle fire that the light vests some wore could not stop. In the end, seven of the eight agents were hit and Special Agent Benjamin Grogan and Special Agent Jerry Dove died fighting.

This was no long-range stand-off they fought it out with these psychos from just a few feet. Matix and Platt were both hit, but they were not going down. The agents were literally shot to pieces, but despite being outgunned, they didnt back off. Not one inch.

His forearm shattered by a .223 rifle slug, Special Agent Edmundo Mireles, Jr. (no surprise, a former Marine from Texas), pumped his Remington 870 shotgun with his one good arm again and again as he engaged the criminals. His buddies dead or wounded all around him, bleeding out, Mireles then drew his .357 and advanced on the pair, in the open and totally exposed, as they attempted to drive away in one of the FBI cars. He put six magnum slugs into the criminals and finally put them down.

Matix took six hits to kill, Platt a dozen. And Mireles? This hero went back on the job, and actually worked with my former battalion commander Colonel (Ret.) Bill Wenger in Afghanistan in the 2000s on assignment there for the FBI. Now thats a patriot. Now thats what the real FBI is all about.

This dramatization gives you a good idea of what happened. The legendary Miami shootout has been studied for three decades to gather lessons learned about proper tactics and equipment, but the most important lesson it teaches is about courage.

Thats the courage that these desk-riding bums in Washington are dishonoring every time they sell their souls and their honor to kiss up to skeevy politicians.

You see that sanctimonious clown James Comey on Twitter presuming to quote the Bible, and its all you can do to keep your lunch from launching. These timeserving ladder-climbers are not what the FBI is, but their petty institutional gamesmanship has now seared that impression into the consciousness of millions of Americans. When you would say FBI to a liberal, he/she/xe would snarl, seething at the Bureaus reputation for taking out the foreign and domestic terrorists progs love to play footsie with. But the tragedy is that when you say FBI to a conservative today, you get a sad shake of the head because we can no longer trust the Bureau because the top ranks are manifestly riddled with vindictive partisans angling for their own advantage.

Mueller, then Comey, and their progeny have done this. As liberals inevitably do, they have disgraced yet another proud institution. Imagine yourself a field agent, dedicated to upholding the law, and having to not only live under this corrupt regime but to have to share in the contempt the American people have learned to feel for it.

Its heartbreaking, because the reality of the FBI is not the Muellers and the Comeys and the McCabes and the Strozks and whoever Strozk was having an affair with. Its Special Agent Benjamin Grogan, Special Agent Jerry Dove, Special Agent Edmundo Mireles, Jr. and thousands of others who put their lives on the line for us every single day. They arent in the big upper-floor offices at HQ hiding documents from Congress or leaking to their pals at the WaPo. They arent mingling with Democrat bigwigs, schmoozing for their next step up the ladder. Theyre doing their job.

Maybe the FBI can recover its reputation someday I sure hope so. Maybe it can earn our trust and respect again. But the first step is for the President and Congress to pop this bureaucratic zit and clean out the pus.

Read the original here:
Liberals Have Turned The FBI Into A Disgrace - Kurt Schlichter

What in the sweet name of Santa Claus is wrong with liberals?

A popular doughnut shop in Portland, Maine, was forced to apologize to the community after it offended customers by working with the Salvation Army to provide Christmas to a needy family.

Click here for a free subscription to Todds newsletter: a must-read for Conservatives!

The Holy Donut had asked customers to help them with a gift drive for a local family with five children. Those customers who participated received free doughnuts.

The Holy Donut should be commended for helping a family in need and spreading a bit of Christmas cheer.

The doughnut shop reached out to the Salvation Army to find the family in need,the Press-Herald reports.

Instead of saluting the doughnut shop for doing a good deed an online mob stormed their Facebook page. Many accused the Salvation Army of being anti-gay and discriminating against the LGBT community.

It was all untrue, of course but the truth doesnt really matter these days.

They proselytize to the people in their programs, they reject LGBT people from their shelters, one outraged customer wrote. They have tried to scrub their image, but still discriminate.

For the record, the Salvation Army is a well-respected Christian ministry that provides shelter for the homeless, addiction programs and of course the iconic red kettles at Christmas time.

Nevertheless, some freedom-loving, donut eaters defended the popular mom-and-pop establishment.

Going after a doughnut shop because they dont like their politics is exactly why people voted for Trump, one observer wrote online.

I dont care if someone is L, G, B or T, but when they stand in the way of people helping people simply because their own personal noses are out of joint, they lose my respect and any sympathy I have for their cause, wrote another.

But the Press Herald reports that the anti-doughnut mob was unrelenting going so far as to threaten boycotts unless the donut shop renounced its association with the Salvation Army.

In case you forgot, a solid 70 percent of your clientele is part of the LGBTQ community, one rabble-rouser wrote. Youre making a silent statement that youre completely fine with their choices.

Ah yes, nothing quite like an old-fashioned yuletide public shaming.

We do not support the Salvation Army or consider them our partner for this project, they simply linked us to a needy family, the store owners wrote on Facebook. We have nothing to gain here, we just wanted to help a family in need.

As unthinkable as it might be a good number of the pro-LGBT protesters were upset that the donut shop dared to help a family in need during the Christmas season.

To quell the growing controversy, The Holy Donut threw themselves at the mercy of the surging mob.

We take this opportunity to sincerely apologize to anyone that we have offended, the store owners wrote on Facebook. We are an organization which prides itself on our track record of kindness and acceptance of everyone.

The Holy Donut should be commended for helping a family in need and spreading a bit of Christmas cheer.

They should also be commended for make delicious doughnuts.(Ive been privileged to sample their Maple Bacon Maine Potato Donut).

And shame on all of you folks out there for harassing these good people and spreading out-right lies about the Salvation Army. Shame!

No doughnuts for you.

Read the original:
Liberals attack doughnut shop's good deed -- What in the ...

The writer is a political economist.

PAKISTANS liberals ought to be utterly flattered now that a potential prime minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan, has suggested that they are the most dangerous constituency in the country, and that these liberals are so well organised and politically relevant, that they seek blood. These words must sound particularly reassuring to Pakistani liberals, each morning, as they read their English-language newspapers and the many articles and editorials which have been written about and after the Faizabad dharna.

Almost without exception, every newspaper has lamented the fact that Pakistan has lost its purpose and direction, that the non-state actors and right-wing Islamic parties have taken over both political and public spaces, and that the state of Pakistan has capitulated to the demands of such Islamists. Reading such editorials and articles, Pakistani liberals must breathe a huge sigh of relief, and offer thanks, for being recognised as such a powerful political and social entity, at a time when, one presumes, they were thoroughly heartbroken and despondent. Imran Khan has given them hope and much-needed reaffirmation.

The term liberal is much used in the public sphere, but is often misunderstood or misconstrued in its meaning and use. Liberal and liberalism have emerged from a political philosophy which dates back some centuries and encapsulates numerous meanings and connotations in what the terms mean. Liberals, to start out with, were against an absolutist state, against the monarchy, and one can in todays world assume that political liberals are also against the authoritarian government of the military.

Liberals also, on account of being against such absolutist oppression, believed in the will, or sovereignty, of the people, which made them at least democratic, or favouring the representation of the people through individuals who were usually elected. By this minimalist account, Imran Khan and his ally, the Jamaat-i-Islami as well as Maulana Samiul Haq, are also part of the liberal frame, even though they have supported military interventions and military dictators in the past. By this definition of the term, Gen Pervez Musharraf is anything but a liberal in the substantive sense, and is merely a lifestyle-liberal.

Imran Khan has given the liberals hope and much-needed reaffirmation.

It is here where things get complicated. Most people, even trained scholars, end up using the term liberal only in a lifestyle sense, where they think that someone who supported or promoted certain behaviours and lifestyle choices, often supposedly western, would be considered a liberal.

But such simplistic definitions often make matters worse, even when one examines something as straightforward as sartorial choices. For instance, if some women wear jeans or trousers, they would immediately be labelled as liberal, even though, as in many Muslim countries, women wear jeans often with a hijab indicating their religious inclination or cultural beliefs. Many Pakistani women, when they go abroad, do exactly the same. So, getting mixed signals jeans with a hijab makes the declaration of someones lifestyle being liberal quite meaningless. Other examples would only emphasise this point.

Being a liberal in a wider sense brings with it far greater attributes than what one wears or drinks. For example, there are clear demarcations of what a liberal, or increasingly neoliberal, economic policy is, compared to one which is conservative. All political parties, including Imran Khans as well as all Islamic parties, believe in free markets, privatisation, the World Banks good governance, less government involvement in the provision of public goods, all of which are attributes of a neoliberal economic order.

By these standards, Imran Khan and the Jamaat-i-Islami are also liberal, for they do not advocate closed borders, economic nationalism, state ownership of assets, or other indicators supposedly of an illiberal economic policy.

Imran Khan doesnt understand how bechara Pakistans liberals really are in todays world. They give a call on Facebook about some political cause such as about the disappeared, and perhaps five of them turn up at some press club to have their picture taken. They are not like the supporters of the Tehreek Labaik Ya Rasool Allah, who braved the rain and sat on the roads in Faizabad for three weeks, nor like the supporters of Imran Khan or Tahir ul Qadri who sang and danced at D-Chowk in Islamabad for four months.

Liberals would never have had the stamina, resources or commitment to last as long. At best, liberals can write op-eds, light candles for some deceased comrade killed by a militant, or now write blogs. Clearly, the political activities of Pakistans liberals, which are supposed to be so dangerous, are limited to Twitter, Facebook and other forms of social media.

They barely have a real political presence, since there is very little differentiating between conservative and awami political parties. These parties have the same economic and social agenda and programme, their representatives bend over backwards trying to appease religious lobbies, they believe that the IMF can bail out Pakistan, and their whole faith rests in CPEC. Occasionally political parties and their representatives might take some positions which are termed liberal in a broad political sense, but these are increasingly infrequent.

Yet, one can understand why Imran Khan considers liberals to be dangerous. For one, they want society to be tolerant of differences, even religious belief, and they would want religious minorities to be equal citizens having equal rights. Some, sadly though not all, liberals might even want equal rights for women in society, while many others want peace in the region supporting better relations with India.

Liberals might even advocate for better and increased public services. But these are just well-meaning desires, and unless liberals represent themselves as organised political actors and entities, not only will they not be dangerous, they will continue to remain completely irrelevant.

The writer is a political economist.

Published in Dawn, December 12th, 2017

More here:
Liberals are dangerous - Newspaper - DAWN.COM