Here is the recording of our latest group discussion. The hardest test for any liberty movement is determining when tolerance becomes a weakness. Our latest daily session confronted this specific dilemma. We are a group dedicated to liberty. Yet we were forced to debate whether the West is allowing its own principles to be weaponized by its enemies. The discussion was heated and exposed a critical fault line in how we apply our values to reality. One faction of the room held the absolute libertarian line. They argued that "sunlight is the best disinfectant" and that censorship is always a mistake. Their stance was clear. If you ban hateful ideologies like radical Islamism or Communism, you do not destroy them. You only force them underground where they grow stronger. We argued that a free society needs to see the enemy clearly in order to defeat it in the open. The opposing view challenged this as naive. This side argued that we are not fighting a fair fight. We are facing billions of hostile actors and state-sponsored bot farms that flood our networks with propaganda. They warned that maintaining "absolute" free speech in the face of enemies who want to destroy us is not liberty. It is suicide. The debate moved toward a crucial distinction regarding the "Non-Aggression Principle." We discussed where speech crosses the line into violence. The conclusion was not that we should abandon liberty. The conclusion was that we must define exactly where our tolerance ends so we do not become the architects of our own destruction. Our daily sessions are not passive lectures. They are active strategy councils where we sharpen our arguments against the threats facing Western civilization. You need to be on the line to understand the true gravity of what is coming. Check the calendar to find the next scheduled session: https://www.skool.com/libertypolitics/calendar

The Nice Attack = radical Islamists, The Paris Attacks = radical Islamists, The Shoe Bomber = radical Islamists, The Orlando attack = radical Islamists, The Beltway Snipers = radical Islamists, The Fort Hood Shooter = radical Islamists, The Underwear Bomber = radical Islamists, The Westminster Attack = radical Islamists, The 2005 Bali Bombings = radical Islamists, The murder of Lee Rigby = radical Islamists, The U.S.S. Cole Bombers = radical Islamists, The London Bridge Attack = radical Islamists, The Madrid Train Bombers = radical Islamists, The Charlie Hebdo Attacks = radical Islamists, The San Bernardino Attacks = radical Islamists, The Surabaya bombings = radical Islamists, The Minnesota Mall stabbings = radical Islamists, The 7/7 bombers = radical Islamists, The Moscow Theatre Attackers = radical Islamists, The Boston Marathon Bombers = radical Islamists, The Ankara Airport Attack = radical Islamists, The Manchester Arena bombing = radical Islamists, The Pan-Am #103 Bombers = radical Islamists, The Iranian Embassy Takeover = radical Islamists, The Air France Hijackers = radical Islamists, The 2002 Bali Nightclub = radical Islamists, The Batta Meena Attacks = radical Islamists, The Beirut Embassy bombers = radical Islamists, The Libyan U.S. Embassy Attack = radical Islamists, The Yazidi Massacre of 2014 = radical Islamists, The Beheading of French priest = radical Islamists, The Buenos Aires bombers = radical Islamists, The Israeli Olympic Team Attack = radical Islamists, The Kenyan U.S Embassy bombers = radical Islamists, The Khobar Towers Bombers = radical Islamists, The Beirut Marine bombers = radical Islamists, The Beslan School Attackers = radical Islamists, The First WTC bombers = radical Islamists, The Beheading of Daniel Pearl = radical Islamists, The Achille Lauro Hijackers = radical Islamists, The Bombay Attackers = radical Islamists, The 9/11 hijackers = radical Islamists.

When the Bondi Beach terrorist attack happened, the West saw a wave of Muslim condemnation in English. But Harris Sultan dug into the Urdu comments, and he found the real verdict: celebration. This isn't just an opinion. The screenshots tell the story. Sultan has exposed a divide in the community that is as terrifying as it is undeniable. On the surface, we have the polished press releases. We have the Western diaspora who are suddenly eager to condemn the violence. They point to Ahmed al-Ahmed, the Muslim man who intervened, utilizing him as a shield to deflect blame. It is a convenient narrative. It allows them to claim heroism by proxy while ignoring the ideology that necessitated the intervention in the first place. However, Sultan’s investigation into the Urdu sphere reveals a darker reality. The dominant sentiment there is not grief. It is the glee of the "fishing trip," a morbid code for the slaughter of innocents. It is the praise for the "male Mujahid" who took his son on a suicide mission. This is the raw voice of the "Palestinians" supporters when they think the West is not translating. We are mistaking survival instinct for moral reform. The diaspora is not condemning terror because they have suddenly embraced Western enlightenment. They are condemning it because they feel the walls closing in. They fear deportation. They fear the inevitable rise of cultural nationalism. They know the tide is turning, and they are scrambling for cover. I recognize this panic because I am Iranian. You are currently living in our 1978, and I am here to tell you what happens in 1979. I saw polished intellectuals speak of liberty in the daylight while the mobs chanted for death in the dark. We believed the polite fiction and lost our civilization. If we accept the English apology while ignoring the Urdu celebration, we are facilitating our own extinction.