Okay, so I speak my mind... @profreedom - Tumblr Blog

jardinssteve

donateliferecipient

godisarepublican

FREEDOM!

thinkbig-1911

What??? You insinuate we can't. You can as long as you are not a little bitch.

unabashedbanditshoedragon

Ha!

leyenra8

THE RELEASE OF ELON MUSK’S POST PROMOTING ARMIE HAMMER’S FILM “CITIZEN VIGILANTE” HAS SPARKED SIGNIFICANT GLOBAL BACKLASH DUE TO ITS EXTREME VIOLENCE AND ANTI-IMMIGRANT THEMES

BANS AND CRITICISM

GERMANY: THE FILM HAS BEEN EFFECTIVELY BANNED DUE TO ITS VIOLENT CONTENT AND PORTRAYAL OF MIGRANTS.

PUBLIC BACKLASH: MANY HAVE CONDEMNED THE FILM FOR ITS MESSAGING, LABELING IT AS DANGEROUS AND INCENDIARY.

ELON MUSK’S INVOLVEMENT

ELON MUSK SHARED THE FILM ON HIS X ACCOUNT, ALLOWING USERS TO WATCH IT FOR FREE FOR 48 HOURS. THIS MOVE HAS BEEN SEEN AS A SIGNIFICANT ENDORSEMENT, FURTHER FUELING THE CONTROVERSY.

HE STATED THAT THE FILM REPRESENTS “WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO SEE,” WHICH HAS DRAWN IRE FROM CRITICS AND ADVOCATES ALIKE.

“CITIZEN VIGILANTE” – OFFICIAL TRAILER

FILM SYNOPSIS

TITLE: “CITIZEN VIGILANTE”

DIRECTOR: UWE BOLL

RELEASE DATE: JUNE 19, 2026

PLOT: THE FILM FOLLOWS ARMIE HAMMER AS A WEALTHY AMERICAN BUSINESSMAN IN CROATIA WHO TAKES JUSTICE INTO HIS OWN HANDS AGAINST IMMIGRANTS HE PERCEIVES AS CRIMINALS.

CONTROVERSIAL THEMES

VIOLENCE: THE FILM IS NOTED FOR ITS GRAPHIC DEPICTIONS OF VIOLENCE.

ANTI-IMMIGRANT MESSAGING: CRITICS ARGUE THAT IT PROMOTES HARMFUL STEREOTYPES ABOUT IMMIGRANTS, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF RISING FAR-RIGHT SENTIMENTS IN EUROPE.

unabashedbanditshoedragon

Always reblog

retired-extremely-dangerous

"If one, then, asks me the meaning of our flag, I say to him, It means just what Concord and Lexington meant, what Bunker Hill meant; it means the whole glorious Revolutionary War, which was, in short, the rising up of a valiant young people against an old tyranny, to establish the most momentous doctrine that the world had ever known - the right of men to their own selves and to their liberties."

-- Henry Ward Beecher

trainer0084

profreedom

Guess what the 2A doesn't restrict?

Full auto IS legal!

keepingitcountryon

jardinssteve

theredqueendom

http://www.facebook.com/pages/p/102416041800702

profreedom

It's the purpose of the Aimish militia.

oldinfidel

theredqueendom

💯 🎯 http://www.facebook.com/pages/p/102416041800702

hootershoney234-deactivated2026

Charlton Heston American Patriot ,2nd Amendment supporter.

theredqueendom

👍 http://www.facebook.com/pages/p/102416041800702

usafphantom2

Robin Olds: “If we keep flying the way they tell us to, we’re not coming home.”

The US Air Force was operating under strict doctrine designed far from real combat. Flight routes were predictable. Strike timings were effectively known. Enemy pilots could anticipate when and how American aircraft would arrive. Losses kept increasing, and command treated them as acceptable attrition.

Olds had already survived one war. He saw the pattern immediately. American pilots were being guided into predictable traps because bureaucracy valued procedure over adaptation. The system demanded obedience. It did not reward deviation, even when deviation meant survival.

Olds made a decision that broke doctrine at multiple levels. He designed a deception operation that imitated vulnerable aircraft to lure enemy fighters into combat on his terms. The plan required altered call signs, modified flight patterns, and deliberate misdirection toward higher command.

The defining moment came when Olds approved the mission anyway. The operation worked. Enemy fighters responded exactly as expected and were taken down in large numbers. Losses on the American side dropped significantly afterward. The balance in the sky shifted almost instantly. The enemy was forced to adapt because predictability had been broken.

Official reports praised the success while avoiding the method behind it. Commanders were relieved by the outcome but unsettled by what it exposed. Olds had revealed a dangerous truth. That the doctrine itself was flawed. That strict obedience had been the real weakness.

Olds was recognized publicly but restricted privately. Promotions slowed. Assignments changed. He was respected for his effectiveness but viewed with caution as someone willing to break rules when lives were at stake.

Olds understood something institutions resist admitting. That in combat, survival often depends on controlled disobedience. That rigid systems punish those who prove they are wrong.

History remembers the victories. It rarely remembers the risk. That one man accepted personal consequences as the price of challenging a system that preferred predictable loss over uncomfortable truth.

The uncomfortable truth is this. Military institutions claim to reward initiative, but only after it succeeds. Until then, the people who save lives by breaking the rules are treated as problems to be managed, not lessons to be learned.

#TheVietnamWar #USAF

#RIP

@SoldiersWisper via X