Don R.

Each year, I buy YWAM's Personal Prayer Diary and Daily Planner. For the most part, I've been very pleased with it. But last year, I started having some concerns.

Each month, there's a writeup about a people group to pray for. Well, last July, they had an article about "racism" within the Church. However, it seemed very "woke." For instance, 1) it implied that Obama (simply because he's black) wasn't prayed for by Christians the way other Presidents have been; 2) it needlessly capitalized the word "black," while patronizingly referring to whites as "Anglos"; and 3) it made ample use of the odious term "African American." And that's not all. Basically, the whole tone of the article smacked of political correctness. Anyway, about halfway through the article, I just gave up in disgust—and that's the first time I've ever done that with an article in their diary.

And now this month, they have an article about Ukraine that portrays the vile World Economic Forum in a positive (or at least neutral) light. Here's an excerpt: "Another [Ukrainian] boy, twelve years old, shared his story at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland... Hopefully, the world leaders who heard this and other similar firsthand horror stories were shaken to the core and will take action." Gimme a break! The goal of the World Economic Forum seems to be world depopulation (and many other evil things), so the idea that they would actually care about the plight of precious Ukrainian children is unbelievably naive! Wake up, YWAM!

Anyway, I contacted YWAM through their Web form and expressed my concerns. The next day, a guy named Warren called me. While he was polite, he basically just jumped to their defense, and it was hard to get a word in with him edgewise. His main goal seemed to be to rationalize their articles, not to listen to my concerns. And he also said, "I'm sorry you feel that way," but not that he was sorry for their content! In fact, according to an article at "Psychology Today," that expression is actually a type of gaslighting (a form of verbal abuse)! From the article: "A non-apology is used to deflect, pretend to apologize, and ultimately win the disagreement by placing blame back on the individual... [The phrase] 'I'm sorry you feel that way,' [is just] '...a quick way to use the correct apology language to end an argument without having to admit fault'...The 'I'm sorry you feel that way' approach, along with avoiding an argument in lieu of admitting fault, is good old-fashioned gaslighting."

Instead, Warren should've just: 1) listened to my concerns patiently and nondefensively; 2) said something like, "I can definitely understand your concerns"; 3) apologized for any content that seemed woke or offensive; and 4) finally said something like, "We appreciate your feedback, and will work to improve."

As I said, the guy was polite, but I didn't get any indication that he took my concerns seriously or that they will actually try to change. In fact, he almost seemed to imply that I was simply overreacting, not that my concerns were actually valid, which I believe they are. I did tell him, though, that I may stop buying their diary if this stuff continues, so hopefully he has sufficient concern for YWAM's bottom line. LOL.

Anyway, I've been buying their Personal Prayer Diary for years, and have enjoyed it up till now. But with my latest concerns, while I would still recommend it, I would give it a qualified recommendation.

I had a very damaging experience with Clay McLean a long time ago. I was in an extremely desperate situation, didn't know what to do, and was earnestly seeking hope. And I thought that he might have been able to help me.

Well, not only did McLean not help me, he was incredibly verbally abusive and condemning. The Bible says that ministers are to be gentle and slow to anger, but McLean was anything but that. In fact, he seems to have a hair-trigger temper. He was also extremely condescending. Starting off with a token "I feel your pain," he then basically proceeded to berate me and tell me what a horrible sinner I was. I was absolutely stunned—his spiritual and verbal abuse was the last thing I was ever expecting. It was obvious that he didn't care one bit about helping me. The whole incident was unbelievably confusing--it felt like an assault. In fact, it was spiritual terrorism. I believe that there was a demonic element to McLean's behavior as well. He actually made Job's friends look like saints. And it felt as though I had merely been casting pearls before swine. As Jesus pointed out, "By their fruits you will know them." The Bible also says that Satan is the accuser of the brethren.

Looking back, I can see that McLean was actually projecting his own issues onto me. In other words, every thing that he accused me of was, I believe, a serious problem in his OWN life. I suspect that he was struggling with a lot of self-hatred. What's more, his vicious verbal abuse almost drove me to suicide. It's a miracle, in fact, that I survived the abuse. It's also interesting that, as a so-called Christian minister, McLean did not ONCE offer to pray for me! Addressing similar situations in her book "Sealed Orders," Christian author Agnes Sanford wrote that she knew of four instances in which a deeply troubled person went to a minister for help, failed to receive any prayer at all, and then never came home again. And unlike McLean, those ministers weren't necessarily abusive—they just did not pray for those seeking help. Well, think about how much worse it would be to receive abuse on top of that! Trust me—it's absolutely horrific.

I think it's highly ironic that, far from being able to help me, McLean actually needed a whole lot of help himself, it seems. One thing's for sure—happy people don't act the way he did. Maybe he's in the wrong profession and would be much happier doing something else. He'd probably be a lot *better* at something else too.

One time, in an interview, author Leanne Payne stated that if McLean (who was one of her associates) hadn't gotten healing, then: "He'd be dead or would have killed somebody." Well, from what I experienced with him, I can totally believe he would've killed somebody! Whatever "healing" he may have experienced, it was nowhere near enough. McLean is the most abusive minister I've ever dealt with—and he should never have been allowed anywhere near a "ministry." I mean, have you ever heard of anybody else in the ministry with murderous tendencies like that? I sure haven't. And ever since my traumatic encounter with him, I've found it extremely difficult to trust any other minister. Spiritual abuse also makes it difficult to trust God again. Ezekiel 34:2–4 sums up my experience with him: "Woe to the shepherds of Israel who feed themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? You eat the fat and clothe yourselves with the wool; you slaughter the fatlings, but you do not feed the flock. The weak you have not strengthened, nor have you healed those who were sick, nor bound up the broken, nor brought back what was driven away, nor sought what was lost; but with force and cruelty you have ruled them."

In addition, 1 Peter 5:3 says, in its advice to the shepherds of God's people: "Not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." Well, McLean did exactly the opposite. He was basically just a big bully—and deep down inside, bullies are insecure cowards.

What's more, spiritually abusive ministers like McLean usually have a "Jekyll and Hyde" personality. In other words, they're public saints, but private sinners. They can change colors just like a chameleon, without missing a beat, whenever it suits them. In fact, they're experts at it. That's why when many folks hear tales of spiritual abuse, they go into denial about it, with predictable reactions like: "It's not possible. I've known this minister for YEARS. He couldn't possibly do such a thing." Yeah, riiiiiiight. As author Patricia Evans, an expert on verbal abuse, points out: "'Nice and friendly' is the persona of many an abuser." I'm pretty sure that if there had been an audience, McLean would've never said the abusive things that he did to me, because he would've looked like an ogre.

As we all know, one of the hallmarks of Christ's teaching was the Golden Rule. If McLean himself had been in an extremely desperate place, seeking some ray of hope, would he have wanted to be treated the same way he treated *me*? I can say without hesitation that the answer is a big fat NO!

Another thing to keep in mind is that McLean named his ministry after himself. Well, that's the epitome of narcissism. Whenever ministers do that, they are basically promoting *themselves*, not Christ. I've never seen an exception to this. Why do so many ministers do this kind of thing? The sin of pride, of course. So, that's one more red flag—stay away from ministers who name their ministries after themselves. And besides the outright narcissism, they are actually the CEOs of their own organizations, meaning they answer to NO ONE but themselves. However, all ministers are supposed to be accountable to other leaders in the Church, so such a "ministry" is completely unbiblical. In fact, it's really nothing more than a business. Ka-ching! And in John 10:13, Jesus warned about the hireling, who cares nothing about the sheep. The only thing the hireling cares about is money—and himself.

Ronald Enroth, who wrote the book "Churches That Abuse," puts it like this: "All that is needed for abuse is a pastor accountable to no one and therefore beyond confrontation." That describes McLean exactly. I mean, what other leader in the Church is he directly accountable to?

In another of her books, Agnes Sanford offers this humorous advice: "If we pray for the gift of wisdom, we may know by God's grace what manner of praying people to avoid. Yes, I do avoid some of them. I flee as from the plagues of Egypt." Well, McLean is one of those people to flee from! Jesus had much to say about wolves in sheep's clothing, and sadly, McLean seems to be one of them. Abusive Christians like him should not be trusted with any kind of spiritual power.

So, please stay far away from McLean and his "ministry." While I forgive him for his abuse, I definitely want to warn others. Obviously, I can't change what happened, but at least maybe I can help prevent something similar from happening to someone else.

As I said in the beginning, my experience with McLean happened a long time ago, so hopefully he's matured and worked through a lot of his issues since then. Nevertheless, according to author Jeff VanVonderen, the symptoms of spiritual abuse mirror, point by point, those of incest. In other words, no matter how long ago it happened, the trauma—and confusion—is not something you ever really forget.

Dr. Mark McDonald runs Dissident MD, a site devoted to challenging the lies that the government and media tried to ram down our throats during the plandemic. And he has written a couple of books, the first one describing how America fell victim to "mass-formation psychosis," a state of delusional paranoia. His latest book, just out, is about how to break free from this fear that has paralyzed our nation. He also writes regular articles on Substack, most of which are very insightful. So far, so good.

Unfortunately, McDonald's behavior doesn't quite match up to the "dissident" persona that he peddles. Why not? Well, one BIG reason that mass-formation psychosis was able to gain such a stronghold over our nation was Big Tech: Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, etc. All of these places are actively trying to censor the truth and stir up fear in everyone. So, in order to break the spell over our nation, wouldn't one of the most obvious first steps be to stop *feeding* that beast? Well, you'd think so. But maybe that's a bit too logical for some.

While McDonald accurately diagnoses the problem of fear addiction in America, he seems to be blind to his *own* Big Tech addiction. For instance, if you visit his Web site, at the upper-right corner is a "Buy Now" button to purchase his books. And guess where it leads? Right to Amazon! Next to this button, he has links to his Facebook and Twitter pages too. Does that really sound like a "dissident" to you? A true dissident would've kicked Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter to the curb ages ago, and found alternative platforms to promote his message. I mean, there are literally *dozens* of alternative platforms out there, so there's no excuse for any conservative to cling to Big Tech like a coward.

So, why hasn't McDonald put his money where his mouth is and moved over to "alt-tech" instead? The answer seems pretty obvious. Like so many "conservatives," McDonald seems to be mostly about self-promotion. Thus, he's unwilling to make any sacrifices that might jeopardize the size of his audience or influence. Ultimately, it's about love of money and power. For example, he has about 6,000 followers on Twitter, and it appears that he's afraid to dump Twitter because he might *lose* many of those followers. Similarly, he likely doesn't want to dump Amazon because that would mean less MONEY. Sadly, he seems to be the kind guy who won't ever let his "principles" get in the way of self-promotion.

Ironically enough, it seems that McDonald won't dump Big Tech mainly because of FEAR—fear of losing power and status. But he's going to lecture OTHERS on how to overcome their fear addiction? Well, maybe he should push through his *own* fears and overcome his Big Tech addiction before attempting to teach others. Part of his problem seems to be sloth as well. Finding new platforms is a lot of WORK, and hey, why do that when staying put is so much *easier*?

Like so many hypocritical authors, McDonald would do well to follow his own advice. For instance, two principles that he teaches are: "Face the mirror" and "Don't be a sheep." So, Mr. McDonald, why don't you face the mirror and see that by clinging to Big Tech, you're being a big sheep yourself? It's time for you to man up—stop being a sheep and kick Big Tech to the curb. Until you do so, then you're enabling their evil, and your message rings hollow.

Anyway, as I said, McDonald has written a lot of helpful stuff, and what he says is well worth listening to. But is he really a *dissident*? Sadly, he seems to be only half dissident—and half big sheep.

"Dissident MD"? Make that "Sissident MD" instead. ;)

If you've ever wanted to know what evil, left-wing companies to stay away from, this BIG list gives you exactly what you need.

It's always being updated, so be sure to check back frequently. Obviously, no one can boycott ALL these companies all the time. But at the very least, boycott the worst offenders (Amazon, Google/YouTube, Facebook/Instagram, Twitter, Apple, Microsoft, etc.)—and then avoid the rest as much as you can.

And be sure to share this helpful list with your family and friends!

The only minor negative thing I can think of about this site is that sometimes the owner, whose name is William Foster, can be kind of rude. For instance, a couple of times I've submitted a correction or suggestion about his content but got no response at all. The last time I tried to contact him, I suggested a good news site that offers a lot of conservative content. Well, not only did Foster not take up my suggestion, he didn't even bother to respond. So... I wouldn't waste my time trying to offer this guy any suggestions, since he doesn't seem to appreciate them.

Anyway, this site has great content and is a very valuable resource.

Think Newsmax is "conservative"? Think again.

Apparently they were bought and paid for by the Biden "Administration" to promote the Covid jabs. Don't believe me? Then please do a Web search on this title: "Fox News & Newsmax Took Biden Money To Push Deadly COVID Vaccines To Its Viewers."

Don't be fooled—Newsmax is just another "fake news" outlet. They'll say whatever they're paid to say. Please stay away.

I've used FreeTaxUSA several times to do my taxes, and have always been quite satisfied with the results. The interface is pretty straightforward and easy to navigate. And even if you decide not to pay the $15 to file your state taxes, the program still tells you the amount you owe the state or vice versa.

Overall, I find the experience simple and effective, and would recommend this site to others.

I learned about this Web site recently, which has a lot of helpful articles. In particular, they have a hard-hitting piece called "501c3: The Devil's Church," which discusses how Christian organizations have "sold their souls to the devil" to reach tax-exempt status. Christopher Johnson, the site owner, pulls no punches in calling out this evil behavior. In fact, he doesn't make *any* excuses at all for churches or other "Christian" organizations that have chosen to go the 501(c)(3) route.

So far, so good. Unfortunately, Johnson displays some hypocritical behavior. First off, he provides links to a ton of his teaching videos on YouTube. Well, as corrupt as Google (which owns YouTube) has become, what is he still doing on YouTube? Why doesn't he move his teaching videos to alternative sites like Rumble or UGETube instead?

In addition, he has links to other corrupt Big Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter. Again, what is he still doing on these evil Web sites when there are plenty of alternative sites that aren't censoring the truth?

Anyway, I sent him a comment through his feedback form. I said that, while I think he has a lot of great content on his site, I find it hypocritical that he's still promoting Big Tech companies, which censor the truth, helped steal the 2020 election, are destroying free society, etc.

And guess what? He never responded at all. So, one can only conclude that he cares more about the "exposure" he can get on evil sites like YouTube and Facebook than he does about principles. He also accepts donations from the extremely corrupt liberal company PayPal. Sadly, it's always about MONEY. Well, so much for his "principled stand" on the 501(c)(3) issue. As Jesus said, you cannot serve both God and Mammon.

Anyway, this site does have a lot of articles worth checking out. But just remember that, unfortunately, Mr. Johnson seems to be a "do as I say, not as I do" kinda guy. The thing is, if you don't practice what you preach, then why should anyone listen to anything you have to say?

China Aid stands up for persecuted Christians in China, which is a great thing. In addition, they've called for a boycott of the leading sponsors of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing.

In the past, I've contributed to this ministry several times. But when I visited their Web site about a week ago, I noticed that they have prominent links to evil, Leftist corporations like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.

So, I went to their contact form and told them that, as a donor, I was extremely disappointed that they're associating with such corrupt organizations. In fact, it's very hypocritical to be calling for a boycott of certain corrupt companies, but not other corrupt companies!

Anyway, I told them that, as long as they're associating with these disgusting companies, I will NOT be contributing further to their organization. And guess what? I got NO response at all!

So... I guess they don't care what their contributors think! Well, that makes me a *former* contributor. Anyway, apparently they care more about promoting their brand on the evil Big Tech Web sites (which means MONEY) than they do about principles.

While this organization does a lot of good, sadly, it seems their "Christianity" takes a back seat to Big Tech (or Mammon).

Julie Roys writes Christian "journalism" exposing various problems in the Church. And some of what she writes is excellent. Unfortunately, too much of her material seems like tabloid journalism, where she's just slinging mud to get clicks. And the Bible warns about trying to pick the speck out of your brother's eye while ignoring the beam in your own.

In many ways, Roys just doesn't seem very "Christian." For instance, she's fallen hook, line, and sinker for the official government Covid-19 narrative, and seems to want to demonize any Christian leaders, like John MacArthur, who have different views. She's also hosted questionable guests on her program, like fringe Southern Baptist pastor Wade Burleson, who is pro-homosexual.

In addition, Roys seems to enjoy showing cleavage in the "professional" pictures of herself on the Internet. In one of the pictures, her outfit was so low-cut that I was shocked. Maybe she thinks she's a Hollywood star or something? The Bible strongly warns about dressing modestly, but perhaps she feels the rules don't apply to a "star" like her! Roys is not unattractive, but maybe she dresses like this to help compensate for low self-esteem? Ironically enough, showing cleavage does *not* make her look sexy—it merely makes her look like a clown who is desperate for attention and is not to be taken seriously. In fact, it seems her main goal is maximum "exposure." LOL.

Roys is also very rude. One time, I posted a comment on her Web site. In her response, she accused me of something I never even said. Well, when I pointed this out to her and she realized her mistake, what did she do? Instead of apologizing, she immediately DELETED both my comments and hers, to keep herself from looking bad! This woman seems to have a huge ego.

And now it has come to light that Roys herself was guilty of spiritual abuse against a female student (who she refers to as Sarah) many years ago. Apparently she liked playing the role of "mother" in this young woman's life, and spun an abusive web of manipulation and control around her. To read more details, please do a Web search on the article "The Spiritual Abuse of Julie Roys." It reaches this powerful conclusion: "The rest of us need to realize [Roys] has no business acting in the role of a defender of the abused. She is manifestly disqualified – convicted by her own words."

In a nutshell, I would advise staying away from Roys and her "journalism," because instead of promoting Christ and the truth, all she seems to care about is promoting herself. And this latest revelation of her abuse and hypocrisy is even more reason not to listen to anything she has to say.