Mediaboss Marketing

For years, the attitude towards Windows 10s built-in security was that its a nice idea, but you really shouldnt rely on it. That stared changing in 2019, with the major testing houses giving Windows Security top marks.

Could it be true? Can you really ditch your $100 annual antivirus subscription and rely on Microsofts native solution instead? Heres our opinion.

Windows Security is a very basic utility. In a way, it doesnt need to be fancy, since its part of Windows itself. If you need extras like backups or hard drive cleaning, you can find that in other parts of the OS.

The Windows Security dashboard.

Windows Security is accessible via the Start menu or an icon in the system tray. It has seven sections: Virus & threat protection, Account protection, Firewall & network protection, App & browser control, Device security, Device performance & health, and Family options.

The first five sections will display a green check mark when everything is fine or a yellow alert symbol when its not. Unfortunately, these alerts arent always being honest. The Account protection section alerts you when youre using a local account and not a Microsoft account. That means youll always have a yellow check mark on the Windows Security icon in the system tray unless you dismiss that particular alert, which few people do. Thats unfortunate, since more vital alerts could be ignored as the yellow alert status just blends into the background.

Windows Securitys virus scan section.

The Virus & threat protection is where Microsoft has really filled out its antivirus chops, and its AV program is still known as Windows Defender. In earlier versions, built-in security for Windows just did its job in the background. The current version allows you to run four different kinds of scans, all of which are pretty standard for antivirus.

You can run a quick scan to search the most common places that viruses and malware are likely to hide.Theres a longer full scan section that checks all files and programs on your hard disk. You can also choose a custom scan to check specific files or folders. Finally, theres the Windows Defender Offline scan that shuts down your computer and scans your device for particularly pernicious malware that other scans are unlikely to find.

For anyone who uses free, third-party antivirus, the new Windows Security offers pretty much all you need. Windows Security also has the added benefit of not harrassing you with notifications to upgrade to a paid product every few days.

Windows Defenders scan options.

Theres a lot more functionality inside Virus & threat protection. Under the settings area for that section we have a few on/off sliders for options such as real-time protection, cloud-delivered protection, automatic sample submission, and tamper protection. All of these options are turned on by default, and all of them have clear explanations about what they do if youre thinking about turning any of them off.

In addition, theres an option for controlled folder access to keep malicious programs away from sensitive folders. If Windows Security misidentifies an app as unfriendly you can also whitelist it. This section is also where you can set up OneDrive for ransomware data recovery.

Going back to the settings for Virus & threat protection, you can set up specific folders so they wont be scanned, and adjust your notification settings.

Again, thats a lot of basic antivirus protection packed into this suite that is active by default on new Windows 10 PCs.

Theres not a whole lot of interesting stuff in the Account protection section. If youre using a Microsoft account, this is where you can manage your sync settings, activate Windows Hello for sign-ins, and manage the Dynamic Lock feature that pairs a Bluetooth device to automatically lock the PC when you step away.

The firewall section in Windows Security.

The Firewall section lets you manage the built-in firewall, and allow apps through the firewall if necessary. Then the App & browser control is where you manage Windows SmartScreen for apps and file downloads, browsing on Microsoft Edge, and the Microsoft Store.

This section exposes one downside of Windows Security: It doesnt really do as much as other third-party suites can do for third-party browsers. If you stick with mainstream browsers they have their own built-in protections, and you can also add third-party blockers such as uBlock Origin to keep out a good chunk of potential ad-based malware penetrations. These moves wont catch everything, however, especially if youre visiting the less reputable corners of the web. Norton, for example, is often more proactive about blocking malicious activity than the browsers are. That said, regardless of your browser, Windows Security should have no trouble blocking potentially malicious file downloads.

Moving on, Device security is a section that does its work in the background and anything you see here is mostly informational. Device performance & health, however, gives a quick glance at the current hardware status, including battery life, storage capacity, software, and the Windows Time service. This is also where you can carry out a Fresh start to reinstall Windows.

Finally, the Family options area lets you manage your childs activities. Microsoft allows you to manage Windows 10 devices, Xbox One consoles, as well as Android devices if they have the Microsoft Launcher installed. Thats a great set of options, and is on par with a lot of other services. You can set screen time limits, and restrict time for specific apps and games. Theres also an option to implement buying restrictions on the Microsoft Store.

Overall, Windows Security has a good set of options for security, from antivirus scans and ransomware all the way down to parental controls.

A malicious file warning from Windows Security in Windows 10.

Judging Windows Security performance is a little tough since the utility is built right into Windows. Nevertheless, you can turn off a lot of the functionality to get a sense of its impact on PCs.

Running PCMark 10s Extended Creative test saw a dip of just five points between Windows Security in active and dormant modes.

The large-file transfer test was a different story, with the test PC scoring a slightly slower speed by 23 seconds with Windows Security active. Again, not a huge drop but lower-end PCs might see a difference when transferring large files. The other performance tests included the archive and unarchive test, with a difference of about 20 seconds. The bottom line is that most PCs wont suffer much of a performance impact, if any, from Windows Security.

As for the testing houses, AV-Test gave Windows Defender (the AV portion of Windows Security) a 100 percent score for both its 0-day and prevelant malware tests, using 368 samples and 13,000 samples, respectively. The testing period covered July and August 2019.

AV-Comparatives also gave Windows Defender a high rating. In its real-world protection test for July and August, using 352 samples, Windows Defender blocked 100 percent of the threats. Thats fantastic, but Windows Defender also had the highest false positives rate at 39.

AV-Comparatives malware protection test from September 2019 was a mixed bag. In that test of more than 10,000 samples, Windows Defender had a 29.7 percent offline detection rate, which is terrible and the second lowest. The online detection rate was the absolute lowest at 76.3 percent, whereas most security suites are hitting around 97 to 99 percent. The online protection rate, however, was very high at 99.96 percent. There were 13 false alarms, which is a mid-range result.

Finally, we looked at SE Labs, which gave Windows Defender a AAA rating. SE Labs put Microsoft in the second tier of AAA products along with ESET and McAfee, all of which missed one public threat, but stopped everything else including targeted attacks.

From these results we can gather that Windows Security is highly cloud dependent for malware detection, and probably isnt up to the job if your PC spends a good amount of time disconnected from the internet. It also means there are still far better choices for protection despite Windows Defenders top ranking.

Windows Security has all the elements you need in a solid security suite, including antivirus scans, ransomware protection, and parental controls. It doesnt have a lot of the extras youll see in other suites, but some of those things, such as automated backups, are built into other parts of Windows.

If youre all about the added features of a top-tier security suite then Windows Security will not be a satisfying option. It doesnt have encrypted cloud storage for sensitive documents, secure file erase, a password manager, or a VPN subscription. Granted, many of these features would likely land Microsoft in hot water with anti-trust authorities. For that reason we wouldnt expect Microsoft to push much beyond the equivalent of third-party free antivirus suites, which is what were seeing now.

Windows Security offers good protection, but if you look at the testing comparisons to other suites, there are still better options. Nevertheless, Windows Security has come a long way and should continue to improve its basic protection and detection capabilities.

Read more from the original source:
Windows Security review: There are better options, but not for the 'price' - PCWorld

The first article in this series discussed the psychology behind alt-right radicalization onlinewho is most vulnerable to extremist indoctrination, the risk factors correlated with such vulnerability, and the forms that the process of radicalization can take. Now, the next question to be asked concerns the actual implications and dangers of online alt-right extremist movements and their recruitment efforts. We have seen too often that radicalization in the virtual world can lead to real-world violence; we have seen terrible acts of mass violence that have been connected with members of the alt-right online, such as in Christchurch and El Paso. But are these acts of violence the only dangers posed by the activities of the alt-right online? The second part of this series will explore whether, in a hypothetical world devoid of the tragedy of alt-right violence, the virtual activities of the alt-right would still have real-world implications.

There is a tendency in alt-right activity to weave dark humour into online content, meaning that the rest of us often struggle to distinguish between honestly-held, hateful beliefs and ironically-presented hate speech. A leaked style guide from a neo-Nazi site proves that this is actually a tactic of the alt-right in some cases: The unindoctrinated should not be able to tell if we are joking or not.Anonymous imageboards like 4chan are not dedicated to any specific ideology, which makes it especially difficult to determine whether or not users actually believe the appalling things they are writing, or whether it is all part of some sort of ironic, competitive game to see who can say the most abhorrent thing, or share the most despicable, hateful meme.

The first article in this seriesdiscussed the dangers of anonymous-poster imageboards like 4chan. This danger stems from the power such sites have to provide exposure to alt-right content and to engender a link between violence, hate, and commonplace humour in peoples minds. Inherent to the structure of 4chan itself is a tendency to provide gateway content to extremist discoursewith a single click, users can be taken from one thread discussing video games or current events to another thread full of hate-ridden rants against minorities and women. 4chan users near-ubiquitous use of darkly ironic humour with regard to almost any subject means that terroristic violence, hate crimes, and bigotry are talked about in such a way thatmake people laugh and belittle their importance. This creates a link between toxic content and humour: people find themselves amusedby hateful thoughtswhether they accept them or notmaking hate speech appear more readily acceptable and less harmful.

Dr. Ghayda Hassan is the founder and director of the Canada Practitioners Network for the Prevention of Radicalization and Extremist Violence (CPN-PREV) and a UNESCO co-chair on Prevention of Violence Radicalization and Extremist Violence. She gives credence to the idea that, in certain cases, users of sites like 4chan may be participating in a collective exorcism of hate-feelings which they dont actually accept. That is, people may congregate online and express feelings of hatred which they neither accept, nor believe; indeed, they may even appear to advocate hate crimes, without actually subscribing to any part of what they are saying.

We all have hate-feelings, says Hassanhaving hate-feelings is part of being human. Neither acceptingnor acting on these very human feelings, however, isnatural, andboth can lead to discourse and actions which the majority of us would consider utterly inhumane. Normally, says Hassan, we have positive social spaces in which we can experience and express our feelings of hate without it meaning that we actually want to destroy the target of our hate. The danger comes when these constructive spaces are replaced by unmediated online platforms where real-world regulatory processes no longer exist. In the real-world, people around us react to our expressions of hate and help us to understand hate-feelings and how to deal with them in a healthy way. Online, however, anyone can say anything anonymously, and there isnt always a constructive reaction or discussion that follows in order to help somebody work through their hate-feelings in a positive way, explains Hassan.

There is the obvious concern that online alt-right content and recruitment efforts will generate more hate and inspire more radicalization, or at least expose more people to extremist ideologies than would be the case without this virtual outlet. While this may be the case, expressing hate-feelings online, even without mediation to help you interpret and dismiss them, doesnt mean that an individual will act on those feelings in real life, says Hassan.Although the risk is certainly greaterwith the lack of divide that once existed between the virtual world and the real world, activities in the virtual space can bleed into the real world, desensitizing people to violence and prejudice, and normalizing expressions of hate.

Dr. Hassan points out that, while there is certainly no guarantee of social upheaval in the foreseeable future, a look at history shows us that increased polarization of the population and increased hate around otherness can contribute to civil conflict. Thus, radicalism and expressions of hate speech that occur in the unmediated arena of the Internet have the potential to increase hatred towards others. Previous wars have all been accompanied by highly de-humanizing discourse, she continues, and we are definitely preparing the social space for a more tense relationship that, [in the] long-term, may lead to civil unrest or disruption.

Carrie Rentschler, an Associate Professor of Communications Studies at McGill University, focuses on social movements and media activism. She points to online hate-speech and the alt-rights tactics of doxxingas well as rape- and death-threats as culprits in the creation of an intense culture of fear. In such a culture, people, particularly women, are afraid to speak out against hate and condemn the alt-right for fear of retaliation against themselves or those they are close to. Whether or not rape- and death-threats are realized, the fear of that realization is often enough to shut down would-be vocal opponents of the alt-right. The very threats made by radicals online are harmful, says Rentschler; whether it is carried out or not, the threat itself says you are not safe.

Examining the practice of doxxing gives us a better understanding of just how scared targeted individuals can be. Doxxing is an attempt to stop the target from participating in a certain kind of discourse, engaging with a particular cause, or challenging a specific group or ideology online. Doxxers destroy an individuals privacy and anonymity online in an attempt tolegitimize their threats and make the target feel exposed, vulnerable, and afraid. Doxxers will reveal the real name, occupation, face, and even address about loved ones of the targeted individual. By frightening and shaming their opponents into silence, doxxers create a culture of fear wherein people are threatened away from voicing their opinions. It is a tactic used by both the alt-right and their opponents, and hasunfortunately become increasingly mainstream.

Rentschler explains that when people are afraid to challenge hateful ideologies for fear of harm being done to them or their families, our society becomes one in which the hate-mongersare empowered because there are fewer and fewer voices to counter hateful, radical ideas. Rational discourse and debate can no longer take place when too many people are frightened into silence, andhate-speech is made dangerously prominent and powerful in such a society.

Online hate speech has the potential to indoctrinate non-radicals into extremist ideologies, normalize certain kinds of violent or discriminatory discourse, desensitize people to the idea of viewing of even committing acts of violence, and create a society in which people are afraid to stand up and speak out against hatred and violence. Knowing all this, one might ask: what steps can we as a society take to combat the powerful effects of online extremism, and to protect ourselves from its influence in the real world?

Rentschler emphasizes the importance of de-platforming, moderation, and holding people to higher standards on internet platforms. There is promising evidence that banning users who share hateful and extremist content on social media platforms is an effective way to reduce the amount of hate speech that is shared. Holding people to particular standards online is essential, says Rentschler, but currently, there is very little in place to stop online hate speech and harassment. Likes, popularity votes, and upvotes are key to the proliferation of extremism online, Rentschler explains; the more popular content is, the more available and accessible it is made. This means that the more likes an alt-right post receives, the more mainstream exposure it might be given.

In terms of developing a solution to mitigate dangerous online activity, while some might think that it would be easier to discuss and challenge toxic ideas through free debate so as to prevent their normalization and acceptance into mainstream society.However, when asked, Rentschler was more skeptical: Im not sure that the fact that its out there means were discussing it and debating it, says Rentschler; unless were actively and constantly challenging such speech, its relative prominence might do far more harm than good.

And what about free speech? Isnt it important that we defend the right of even the most bigoted extremist to freely express themselves, even if what they say is abhorrent? Rentschler points out that at a certain point, the right to free speech of the alt-right infringes on that same right of those who would stand up against them, exemplified in part by the effectiveness of doxxing and similar practices. Theres an important question to be asked, she saysWho cant speak, out of fear of harassment and harm? We might champion free speech as a pillar of what makes ours a free and safe society, but when it comes to online extremism and the very clearconcerns it poses in the real world, the issue is far from black and white.

Featured imageflat screen computer monitors on table photobyKaur KristjanonUnsplash.

See the rest here:
Unmasking the Alt-Right: Real-World Implications of a Virtual Movement - The McGill International Review

Taylor Swift fans are fervent, sure, but nothing truly brings a community together like a man whittling a successful woman down to her reproductive parts.

On Monday night, far-right Canadian Youtuber known for his promotion of scientific racism and eugenics," according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote, I cant believe Taylor Swift is about to turn 30 she still looks so young! Its strange to think that 90% of her eggs are already gone 97% by the time she turns 40 so I hope she thinks about having kids before its too late! Shed be a fun mom. :).

Understandably, the Twitter factions rioted in the comments. And, let me tell you, the burns were sick.

RELATED: Why Taylor Swift Said Demi Moore's Memoir Was One of Her Favorite Books of 2019

Honestly, if you somehow cant come to your own realization that posting about a womans egg count is a bad and very gross idea, maybe consider the fallout?

View post:
The Internet Is Coming to Taylor Swift's Defense After an Alt-Right Troll Tweeted About Her Egg Count - Yahoo Lifestyle

(JTA) Andrew Yang, a former tech executive, has never held public office. But that hasnt stopped him from running the most successful dark horse campaign of the election cycle.

His platform is based around creating a universal basic income giving every American citizen over the age of 18 $1,000 per month, in place of other welfare programs. His Freedom Dividend proposal has ignited debate and made him a favorite among many, especially young people, looking to shape up the economic status quo.

Yang has no experience in government, which makes figuring out where he stands on Jewish issues more challenging. However, there is one Jewish issue Andrew Yang has made headlines for:

Andrew Yang is against circumcision.

At one point he said he would incorporate that view into public policy, according to The Daily Beast.

Its sort of pushed on parents in many situations, Yang said, calling circumcision a cultural onus.

From what Ive seen, the evidence on it being a positive health choice for the infant is quite shaky, he added.

This makes Yang an intactivist one of those who advocate for keeping penises intact, as they like to say, or uncircumcised.

Despite this, doctors say that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks.

An anti-circumcision policy would greatly impact the Jewish community: a bris, or brit milah, is the Jewish ritual of circumcision usually performed on the eighth day after a baby boy is born, and a sign of entering into the Jewish covenant.

After a backlash, Yang seemed to walk back his statements, tweeting that he would not pass a universal policy on circumcision.

I support the freedom of parents to adopt circumcision for any religious or cultural ritual as desired. Actually have attended a brit milah myself and felt privileged to be there Always up to parents.

Still, he never said he would end his anti-circumcision advocacy.

Besides the circumcision controversy, has Yang waded into other waters that Jews should be concerned about?

Oddly enough, Yang is a bit of a hit with the alt-right.

For one thing, some of them applauded his comments on circumcision. But as The Verge reported in March, Yang has a following on forums on the site 4chan that are full of anti-Semitic memes.

One meme showed Yang redistributing wealth from a Jewish banker caricature, the kind of noxious anti-semitism thats common on [the 4chan forum] /pol/, Russell Brandom reported.

Yang has strongly denounced this form of support.

I denounce and disavow hatred, bigotry, racism, white nationalism, anti-Semitism and the alt-right in all its many forms. Full stop. For anyone with this agenda, we do not want your support. We do not want your votes. You are not welcome in this campaign, he said in a statement to The Verge.

What else has Yang said about anti-Semitism?

He tweeted support for Jews in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting.

I know its true for everyone but I feel terrible and terrified for my Jewish friends. So many have lost family members to violence and anti-Semitism. It hits home for them like for very few others because of their history of persecution. Imagine having your worst fears realized, Yang tweeted.

But further along in that same Twitter thread, he went on to push for universal basic income, saying that it would decrease economic and social tensions and potentially help to stop violent shootings.

Economic stress adds to social polarization and violence, he said. If youre walking around worried about how to survive month-to-month you are more likely to lash out and respond to hateful messages and ideas.

On Yangs blog, he expanded on his plan to fight anti-Semitism, with the help of UBI.

Would a Universal Basic Income have prevented the violence in Pittsburgh? Perhaps not but I believe it would have a better chance of preventing the next one than just about anything else we could do. And yes, that includes thoughts and prayers.

What does Yang say about the movement to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel commonly referred to as BDS?

Yang has not specifically addressed BDS.

What about relationships with Jewish groups?

Yang hasnt appeared with any, though he did submit a minute-long video message to J Street.

There is also a Jews for Andrew Yang Twitter account. As of this writing, it has just under 3,000 followers.

Does he have a foreign policy with regard to Israel?

Not a very detailed one, but he has come out in favor of a two-state solution.

The only acceptable end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict involves a two-state solution that allows both the Israeli and Palestinian people to have sovereign land and self-determination, Yang told the Council on Foreign Relations.

I dont want to prescribe the specifics of a two-state solution, as the Israeli and Palestinian people both need to be leading any conversation, and I look forward to engaging with all stakeholders to come up with confidence-building measures, such as a ceasefire and an end to the expansion of settlements, as we look towards building a sustainable peace.

Where does he stand on aid to Israel?

In March, Yang acknowledged to voters in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, that he did not know enough about aid generally to pronounce on aid to Israel. Im not going to get into the specifics of foreign aid, he said when asked about the annual defense assistance Israel gets. It could be the $3.8 billion in the context of money we give to other countries is appropriate.

In terms of the money we are giving to an ally like Israel, my first instinct would be like, why would we reduce it, you know? Yang said, speaking off-the-cuff at a meeting in Plymouth, New Hampshire.

In his video to J Streets 2019 conference, Yang said that under his administration, aid to Israel and Gaza would continue, and also, aid to Palestinians under U.S. Aid would be restored.

Jewish fun fact

In Yangs corner or part of the Yang Gang, we should say is Sam Altman, a Silicon Valley investor who last month threw a fundraiser for him. Altman has experimented with supporting universal basic income. In a 2016 New Yorker profile, Altman joked about how his younger brothers urged him to run for president. Lets send the Jewish gay guy! Altman said. Thatll work!

Click here for all of the other 2020 candidates positions on anti-Semitism, Israel and other issues that matter to American Jewish voters.

See the article here:
Where does Andrew Yang stand on anti-Semitism, Israel and other issues that matter to Jewish voters in 2020? - JTA News

Michelle Malkin appeared on the YouTube channel of prominent white nationalist content creator Vincent James on Tuesday, where she applauded young alt-right supporters for having come to the epiphanies that for me took a long time in the making.

It appears that Malkin, after becoming a pariah among mainstream conservatives, has decided to lean into her support among the far-right.

Writers and members of the mainstream GOP began distancing themselves from Malkin after she explicitly endorsed anti-Semitic and white nationalist YouTube political personality Nicholas Fuentes in a speech at UCLA in November. Subsequently, Young Americas Foundation cut ties with Malkin. Washington Examiners Tiana Lowe chided Malkin for affiliating with racists because [Malkin] sees them as the most potent allies available to back a militantly xenophobic agenda. Jonathan S. Tobin wrote in the New York Post that Malkin thinks these haters are allies in a crusade to halt all non-European immigration (ironic, since Malkins parents were Filipino immigrants).

Malkin said she met Vincent James, who also goes by the pseudonyms of Vincent Foxx and Vincent James OConnor, at the UCLA event, adding that it was excellent to make that connection. James is a far-right YouTube political entertainer who often pushes white nationalist and conspiratorial content and was spotted perusing the perimeter of the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference with Fuentes.

During her 42-minute interview with James, Malkin said her recent embrace of the self-described groyper alt-right made sense to her because it was in line with the type of politics she had been trying to engage in for the last 25 years.

I feel like theres a good synergy and partnership here because thats the work that Ive been trying to do for 25 plus years. Its been frustrating because so many people dont care. And so, when I see a glimpse, a glimmer of a spark of energy and hope and optimism, yeah, hell yeah, Im going to run to that, Malkin said. Thats what I did.

Earlier in the interview, James had vouched for Malkin to the groyper crowd, which recently co-opted Trumps America First slogan to brand its latest efforts.

I cant stress this enough. Michelle Malkin supports America First. Michelle Malkin tells the truth. Michelle Malkin is standing up against the conservative establishment, James said.

In one portion of the duos conversation, James asked Malkin to stop him when one of the following policy proposals sounded white nationalist: an immigration moratorium for at least 10 years, prosecuting employers who hire undocumented immigrants, banning welfare for undocumented immigrants, and requiring high school students visit a third-world country so that they see how great they have it here.

Malkin did not stop him.

Malkin alleged that conservatives know and believe that demographic changes in the United States could negatively affect them, but says they dont talk about it publicly for monetary reasons. (Malkin does not seem to consider the possibility that conservatives could try appealing to immigrants instead.) Malkin also praised America First activists who hung a banner over a bridge in Virginia that featured a design scheme remarkably similar to the one used by American Identity Movement, the rebranded white nationalist group Identity Evropa.

During his interview with Malkin, James scrolled through her Twitter profile and revealed that he is the operator of The Red Elephants Fan Account on Twitter. James has been banned from Twitter before, and banned users often pose as fan accounts to gain access back onto the platform.

James has appeared on a neo-Nazi podcast and was filmed in 2017 asking members of Rise Above Movement, a violent white supremacist group, to recite the white supremacist slogan 14 Words on camera. Members of that white supremacist group have since faced federal charges for engaging in violence at the 2017 Unite the Right white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. The same year, James blamed Jews for social media bans, saying that the people responsible for fact-checking articles on Facebook were very similar in DNA to [Facebook COO] Sheryl Sandberg, who is Jewish. James once kept a Holocaust denier on his payroll who later ran the failed Senate campaign of neo-Nazi Patrick Little.

As Right Wing Watch reported in 2018, James uses his platform tohostprominentwhite nationalistspeakers and sympathizers,bolstersuch white nationalist organizations as Identity Evropa,stokeracist fears about immigrants,advancerace war narratives, andspeakto aggrieved white people at-large. Last year, James dedicated one video to arguing that the Trump administration should not hire black people and especially not black women.

James denies having ever advocated for anti-immigrant, white nationalist, or anti-Semitic ideas, claiming such accusations are a tactic of communists.

Read the rest here:
Michelle Malkin Appears on White Nationalist YouTube Show - Right Wing Watch