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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flanked by coal miners and Cabinet members, Trump vowed to spark an “energy revolution” that would put coal miners across the country back to work. “Today’s energy independence action calls for an immediate re-evaluation of the so-called Clean Power Plan,” he said during a ceremony at the Environmental Protection Agency that lasted less than 30 minutes. “We’re ending the theft of American prosperity and rebuilding our beloved country.” 

The order instructs all agencies to identify all policies that “serve as obstacles or impediments to energy production,” said the official, who spoke on background. The White House provided no timeline for implementing the order, but said that EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt was “ready to hit the ground running.” 

The executive order takes other measures to protect the coal industry, such as instructing the Department of the Interior to lift a temporary ban on coal leasing on federal lands that the Obama administration put in place last year. The order scraps federal guidances instructing agencies to factor climate change into policymaking, and to disband a team tasked with calculating the “social cost of carbon.” 

Much of the blame for the bill's failure was placed on the Freedom Caucus, a secretive group of Republicans who refused to get in line behind Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and Mr Trump. The Freedom Caucus emerged in 2015, in response to complaints that then-Speaker of the House John Boehner tried to jam through legislation in defiance of House rules - specifically, legislation they thought wasn't conservative enough.

The caucus is "concerned about procedure, but also concerned about procedure because they're concerned about policy," said Dr Laura Blessing, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Government Affairs Institute. The group formed to restore power to the rank-and-file Republicans, and lead the charge in opposition to the Affordable Care Act. Popular ideals among Freedom Caucus members include balanced budgets and shrinking the size of government. 

The meeting took place just hours after the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) debated its controversial Agenda Item 7, which makes alleged Israeli “human rights abuses” a permanent discussion item. The WJC released a statement affirming the secretary-general reiterated comments similar to those he had previously made on Israeli radio, in which he said, “It is completely clear the Temple that the Romans destroyed in Jerusalem was a Jewish temple.”

During the meeting, Lauder expressed frustration regarding the UNHRC’s “obscene” bias against Israel. “The UN was built on the broken bones of the Jewish people after World War II… It is an institution dedicated to making sure that what happened in the Holocaust never happens again,” he said, adding, “So it is particularly outrageous that the UN has been hijacked by Israel’s enemies to delegitimize the Jewish state.”

The WJC also noted that Guterres is committed to curtailing biased anti-Israel pronouncements at the UNHRC, but stopped short of making a vow to prevent anti-Israel resolutions from passing in the council.

As it would be doled out by the banking elites, the price for misbehavior at the Kremlin could be ostracization from this global commerce vehicle. But that isn’t the end of the story… Putin is readying his people to divorce from the international banking system altogether, and start over with a nationalistic platform, backed by thousands of tons of gold, and growing alliances with Europe, China and the BRICS nations, the Middle East and several emerging powers.

A major attempt to bring Russia under heel could result in the greatest schism the global system of finance has ever seen. Will there be economic wars, or outright World War III? Nobody knows for sure, but things could get very tense very quickly. Already, loose allegations are flying at an unprecedented rate. Somebody wants to egg this thing on.

Russia under Putin has seen a significant challenge to a world order that has, for some time, been ultimately controlled by the central banking elite.

The Rothschild presence in Russia has been challenged; Soros-front NGOs have been kicked out, and it seems that only all out war will ever settle these power plays for the dominance or death of the US petrodollar, which is ultimately controlled by the same few hands that steer and control the central banks of nearly all the world’s nations. Only by stealth and monotony have these activities remained in the shadows.

Indeed, the only countries left on the map which have not yielded to yoke of the central bank are the countries that are most at threat of being drawn into war: Syria; Iran; North Korea; Cuba. With that list so close to complete, a reversal could be a real blow to global order, and to maintaining orderly deposits.

One key measure of US corporate borrowing is falling at the fastest rate since the onset of the Lehman Brothers crisis. Money supply growth in the US has also slowed markedly. These monetary and credit signals  tend to be leading indicators for the real economy.

Data from the US Federal Reserve shows that the $2 trillion market for commercial and industrial loans peaked in December. The sector has weakened abruptly as lenders tighten credit, especially for non-residential property. Over the last three months it has dropped at a rate of 5.4 percent on annual basis, a pace of decline not seen since December 2008.

While they are not yet alarmed, their concerns are worth heeding. Credit has tended to pick up signs of trouble several weeks before equity markets in recent episodes of financial stress. "Without another big dose of momentum, the cracks in the global reflationary consensus are liable to grow bigger. All around, existing trends are being called into question," said Matt King, global credit strategist at Citigroup.