Majorityrights News > Category: War of Discourse

The key difference is that we are Left Ethnonationalists, therefore Not imperialists, not supremacists, with no aim of genocide or its denial; thus, if our organizational meetings were infiltrated the only possible complaint would be that we wanted separatism and sovereignty; we do not want “them” to be part of our government and governing; do not want them imposed upon us; and if they refuse our wish for separatism and sovereignty, then they are revealed as the imperialists, supremacists, the exploitative, the slave masters.

Independent, 20 Sept 2017:

“Anti-fascist activist goes undercover with ‘alt right’ to expose movement’s rapid European expansion.”

Hope Not Hate report reveals how the group is breathing new life into once dormant far-right and racist groups around the world. A toxic mix of antisemitism, Islamophobia and sexism is revealed at the heart of the “alt-right” movement, following an investigation by an openly-gay anti-fascist activist that sheds new light on the far-right’s rising influence over political parties on both sides of the Atlantic.

Members of the group were caught discussing “gassing Jews” and killing their left-wing opponents after Hope Not Hate conducted a major study of white supremacists in the US and Europe.

The exposé reveals how the “alt-right” is breathing new life into once dormant far-right and racist groups around the world, uniting them under one international movement.

It uncovers the infiltration of the “alt-right” in the UK, with Sheffield-born blogger Paul Joseph Watson among those using their online following to reach audiences the traditional far-right has until now been unable to muster.

As a general principle The Independent avoids using the term “alt-right”, on the basis it is a euphemism employed to disguise racist aims.

The report says a second, “moderate” wing – dubbed the “alt-light” – has become increasingly influential on right-wing politics in Britain, pushing Ukip and others into ever-more hard-line territory.

Far right banned from using their favorite meme.

Authors of the study The International Alternative Right: From Charlottesville to the White House also claim to have found links between the hard-right network and the Trump administration.

Speaking of his experiences infiltrating the network of white supremacists, Patrik Hermansson said: “For almost a year I’ve been at the heart of a world of extreme racism, antisemitism, Holocaust denial, esoteric Nazi rituals and wild conspiracy theories.

“What I found was a movement that sometimes glorifies Nazi Germany, openly supports genocidal ideas and is unrelentingly racist, sexist and homophobic.”

Mr Hermansson said he first gained access to the movement after joining the far-right “think tank” London Forum, having claimed to have come to the UK as a disillusioned Swede curious about the “alt-right” and inspired by Brexit.

He was then introduced to other groups, including the Extremists Club and the Traditional Britain Group, which aims to “preserve the ancient traditions, peoples and beliefs” of the UK.

He said: “In this world, Holocaust denial and conspiracy theories are commonplace, so much so that a whole group exists to cater specifically for them.

“I spent endless mind-numbing hours at meetings of the [conspiracy theorist group] Keep Talking, listening to speakers deny climate change, debate whether 9/11 was a false flag attack or if an ill-defined ‘they’ sold birth certificates on the stock market. Trestle tables at the edge of the hall were adorned with Holocaust denial books.”

The label “alt-right” was first adopted by white supremacist Richard Spencer, but was brought to mainstream attention by individuals with a larger social media presence such as Milo Yiannopoulos and Mike Cernovich.

READ MORE...

      * Please feel free to forward or pass on to other nationalists *

The 2017 Annual John Tyndall Memorial Meeting

Friday 6th October, 2017

Preston - Lancashire. 1pm – 6pm

Keith Axon: Meeting Chairman: - Longstanding friend of JT, former NF and BNP organiser

Speakers include (in alphabetical order):

Benny Bullman: - lead singer of the Blood & honour band Whitelaw, and longstanding British Movement activist

Mark Collett: - former Young BNP organizer, twice acquitted on ‘race-hate’ charges and author of Decline of Western Man

Richard Edmonds: - Longstanding friend of JT, National Front directorate member activist - former BNP national organiser

Stephen Frost: - National secretary of the British Movement and author of the Colin Jordan biography ‘TWAS A GOOD FIGHT’!

Julie Lake: - former BNP organiser, now National Front & South West Forum organiser

Dr. James Lewthwaite: - former Bradford City Councillor, archaeology lecturer, organiser for the British Democrats and Orangeman

Eddy Morrison: - Longstanding White nationalist, former NF, BNP and WNP organiser – now editor of the online newsletter White Voice

Peter Rushton: - Assistant editor of Heritage and Destiny magazine & Russia Today and Press TV commentator

Jez Turner: – former soldier, Arabic & Pashtun translator, & now chairman of The London Forum

READ MORE...

Related Story: European & Asian Regional Alliance

The Hill, “Trump signs resolution condemning white supremacists”, 14 Sept 2017:

President Trump has signed a resolution condemning white supremacists following violence at a rally in Charlottesville, Va., last month, the White House announced late Thursday.

“As Americans, we condemn the recent violence in Charlottesville and oppose hatred, bigotry, and racism in all forms,” Trump said in a statement released by the White House.

“No matter the color of our skin or our ethnic heritage, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God,” he continued.

“We are a Nation founded on the truth that all of us are created equal. As one people, let us move forward to rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans.”

The White House announced that Trump signed the measure hours after the president revisited his controversial response to the white supremacist violence in Charlottesville, saying there are “some pretty bad dudes on the other side also.”

A bipartisan group of senators had introduced the measure amid concerns about Trump’s response to the violence, which erupted as white nationalists rallied to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee.

The resolution condemns “the racist violence and domestic terrorist attack” in Charlottesville, where a suspected white supremacist was accused of plowing a car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing one and injuring more than a dozen others. It also rejects “white nationalism, white supremacy, and neo-Nazism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values that define the people of the United States.”

The White House announced earlier this week that Trump would sign the resolution.

GoEagleSearch, “White House says Trump to sign resolution condemning white nationalists”, 13 Sept 2017:

WASHINGTON—The White House said Wednesday that President Donald Trump will sign a bipartisan congressional resolution condemning white nationalists, after the measure passed both chambers earlier this week.

The joint resolution targets the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and other hate groups and urges the Trump administration “to use all available resources to address the threats posed by those groups.”

Lawmakers said the legislation would put the president on the record opposing hate groups after violence erupted at a racially charged rally in Virginia last month.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Wednesday the president would sign the legislation.

New Observer, “Jewish Extremist Hate Group SPLC’s Secret Cayman Island Accounts Exposed; Do the Donors Know?”, 31 Aug 2017:

One of America’s most notorious Jewish extremist hate groups, the SPLC, has been exposed as stashing millions of dollars in cash—presumably from donors—in secret Cayman Island bank accounts, according to a new report in the Washington Free Beacon (WFB)  news service.

The SPLC, which poses as an “anti-racist” organization, is merely another Jewish extremist pressure group—like its sister organization, the ADL.

According to the WFB, the SPLC, which is registered as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt charitable organization, has pushed “millions of dollars to offshore entities.”

Additionally, the Free Beacon said, the SPLC “pays lucrative six-figure salaries to its top directors and key employees while spending little on legal services despite its stated intent of ‘fighting hate and bigotry’ using litigation, education, and other forms of advocacy.”

Quoting the SPLC’s own tax return records, the WFB said that the SPLC has

“ . . . ‘financial interests’ in the Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, and Bermuda. No information is available beyond the acknowledgment of the interests at the bottom of the form.

However, the Washington Free Beacon discovered forms from 2014 that shed light on some of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s transfers to foreign entities.

The SPLC’s Form 8865, a Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Partnerships, from 2014 shows that the nonprofit transferred hundreds of thousands to an account located in the Cayman Islands.

SPLC lists Tiger Global Management LLC, a New York-based private equity financial firm, as an agent on its form. The form shows a foreign partnership between the SPLC and Tiger Global Private Investment Partners IX, L.P., a pooled investment fund in the Cayman Islands. SPLC transferred $960,000 in cash on Nov. 24, 2014 to Tiger Global Private Investment Partners IX, L.P, its records show.

The SPLC’s Form 926, a Return by a U.S. Transferor of Property to a Foreign Corporation, from 2014 shows additional cash transactions that the nonprofit had sent to offshore funds.

The SPLC reported a $102,007 cash transfer on Dec. 24, 2014 to BPV-III Cayman X Limited, a foreign entity located in the Cayman Islands. The group then sent $157,574 in cash to BPV-III Cayman XI Limited on Dec. 31, 2014, an entity that lists the same PO Box address in Grand Cayman as the previous transfer.

The nonprofit pushed millions more into offshore funds at the beginning of 2015.

On March 1, 2015, SPLC sent $2,200,000 to an entity incorporated in Canana Bay, Cayman Islands, according to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) records and run by a firm firm based in Greenwich, Ct. Another $2,200,000 cash transfer was made on the same day to another fund whose business is located at the same address as the previous fund in the Cayman Islands, according to SEC records.

No information is contained on its interests in Bermuda on the 2014 forms. SPLC’s financial stakes in the British Virgin Islands were not acknowledged until its 2015 tax form.

Lucinda Chappelle, a principal at Jackson Thornton, the public accounting firm in Montgomery, Ala., that prepared the SPLC’s tax forms, said she does not discuss client matters and hung up the phone when the Free Beacon contacted her in an attempt to get the most updated forms from the group in relation to its foreign business dealings.

Tax experts expressed confusion when being told of the transfer.

“I’ve never known a US-based nonprofit dealing in human rights or social services to have any foreign bank accounts,” said Amy Sterling Casil, CEO of Pacific Human Capital, a California-based nonprofit consulting firm. “My impression based on prior interactions is that they have a small, modestly paid staff, and were regarded by most in the industry as frugal and reliable. I am stunned to learn of transfers of millions to offshore bank accounts. It is a huge red flag and would have been completely unacceptable to any wealthy, responsible, experienced board member who was committed to a charitable mission who I ever worked with.”

“It is unethical for any US-based charity to invest large sums of money overseas,” said Casil. “I know of no legitimate reason for any US-based nonprofit to put money in overseas, unregulated bank accounts.”

“It seems extremely unusual for a ‘501(c)(3)’ concentrating upon reducing poverty in the American South to have multiple bank accounts in tax haven nations,” Charles Ortel, a former Wall Street analyst and financial advisor who helped uncover a 2009 financial scandal at General Electric, told the Free Beacon.

In addition, the WFB said, the SPLC “pays lucrative salaries to its top leadership,” using as an example its president and chief executive officer, Richard Cohen, who got $346,218 in base compensation in 2015, and $20,000 more in other reportable compensation and non-taxable benefits.

The minimum amount paid to an officer, director, trustee, or key employee in 2015 was $140,000 in base salary, not including other compensation.  The SPLC spent $20 million on salaries throughout the year, but reported spending only $61,000 on legal services in 2015.

The Fetch, “Sabotaging Success – Blaming the “Goy” for “their failures”, 7 Sept 2017:

Have you ever heard, or more acutely, how often have you heard Jews and/or their agents say things like, “You just blame Jews for everything”, or “You are not taking responsibility for your own failures”, or any number of permutations that might run off of these sentiments?  Well, with the ongoing purge of Nationalists social media accounts, the de-funding or “deplatforming” of Nationalist oriented websites from such financial platforms as Paypal, Patreon, and other crowd funding sites, the idea that “the goy” are responsible for “their own failures” is rapidly being exposed as a complete and utter sham.

It is clear that Nationalists as well as ANYONE opposed to or presenting views that clash with the largely nameless and ever encroaching Bolshevik thought police are being targeted. This targeting is taking place on largely Jewish controlled platforms.  It is estimated that Facebook, for example, is censoring or deleting over 1,000,000 posts per week at present, while Youtube’s new “Googlag” restricted video mode is chewing up an untold number of videos and views.  Not all of these necessarily speak directly about a “Jewish Question”, but rather address issues that are brought about by Jewish political interests such as the mass flooding of Europe with sub-Sahara African migrants.

Never mind that Jewish policies have been an unqualified failure for Western nations.  Lost opportunities to citizens of nations affected by Jewish policies is very real but difficult to quantify.  Job losses to those speaking out against Jewish policies is becoming a near daily advertised occurrence in Jewish media, even as anti-White professors stump for massive reprisals and oppression of Europeans living within their own nations.

The recent assaults on business owners, such as O’Mei Restaurant in Santa Cruz, CA, and Club Jäger in Minneapolis, MN, only highlights that there remain ongoing sabotage of American businesses who dare support political efforts of those that Jewish media routinely demonize.

Taken in total, the idea that Jews are not actively sabotaging the West should no longer be relegated to “conspiracy”. From global “boycotts” organized by Jews to support Jewish political interests, to the odd Twitter account that gets banned for “wrong think” (and there are tens of thousands of these), Jewish efforts to destroy peoples ability to succeed are being seen and felt everywhere.

It is clear: Jews DO sabotage “Goy” success, and then want to project that the failures of “goys” have everything to do with the Goy, but nothing to do with the targeted destruction being brought about by Jewish political pressure and power. The whole projection is straight from the “How to be a Psychopath” instruction manual.

This following video, an out-take from the end of nearly 2.5 hours of recorded material, speaks directly to this issue.  Consequently, there is a little bit of fluff to begin the conversation, but the conversation heats up and is quite astute and poignant: https://www.bitchute.com/video/sQvHNoqNWPoD/

Let us know what you think.

Note:  This video is embed from RadioITEL page on Vid.me and is also available on RadioITEL’s new BitChute page.  Join us on each of these.  YT has placed this video in the Youtube Googlag restricted mode through the Brian Ruhe Show page.

Background Briefing recently interviewed Johathan Taplin about his book, Move Fast and Break Things: How Google, Facebook and Amazon Cornered Culture and Undermine Democracy, and his op-ed at The New York Times, Google’s Disturbing Influence Over Think Tanks.

Some highlights: The New America Foundation funded a group called The Open Markets Group, which was headed by a guy named Barry Lynn; and they were the most important group of scholars looking at monopoly in America. When the EU sanctioned Google with a 2.7 billion dollar fine, The Open Markets Group put out a statement applauding the EU and saying American anti-trust regulators should follow their example. Eric Schmidt, the Executive Chairman of Google, who provides most of the financing for the New American Foundation, was incredibly angry about this and essentially told the leader of New America, Ann Marie Slaughter, that she had to get rid of the Open Markets Group. She then wrote Barry Lynn an email saying that they had to leave by September 1, and essentially fired them. This is exactly the kind of political pressure that Google plies all over the world in terms of not just academic institutions, but think tanks and others in order to keep the political narrative in their favor and not have people who oppose them.

They pay off academics and think tanks, getting them to write favorable articles (totaling a hundred from each) about Google and denying their monopoly. This is how Google curries influence by dominating the communications channels of Washington D.C.

Eric Schmidt, who is the biggest funder of the New American Foundation and who is one of the top executives at Google, was the number one visitor during the Obama administration. He was logged in more times visiting the White House than any other single person in the entire eight years of the administration.

Google’s regulatory capture: not only was Schmidt the most frequent White House visitor, more than any other CEO, by a long shot. But then Schmidt was able to put people from Google into the various agencies in the Obama administration. So, the person who ran the Patent Office was formerly the person who ran Google’s patent practice; the person who was the Assistant Attorney General for anti-trust in the Obama administration was the person who had been Google’s anti-trust attorney. Google had people high-up in The Federal Communications Agency. It was pernicious, it was everywhere…

One could say “Eric Schmidt is a liberal” and “he’s helping Hillary Clinton”, but literally the day after Clinton lost he was out there communicating with Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner in the hopes of getting in bed with Trump. Not only did he extend invitations to them to come to his conference in Italy; but he also went to the White House and railed on about how Trump was going to be a great help to the economy with his new initiatives; so, its very clear that he has very little political conscience what-so-ever; he’s just going to go where the money is.

People from all sides are recognizing the Google has too much money and power to frame narratives, to shape and influence culture; its platforms such as Facebook and Youtube are not only the way 3/4 of Americans get real news, but also conduits of propaganda: e.g., Steve Bannon and the Mercers used market targeting in their campaign to defeat Hillary Clinton, used social media very skillfully with fake news, used Russian bots to amplify their effect. An interesting note along with that, the intelligence community observes that Eric Schmidt’s daughter worked for SCL, the company that controlled Cambridge Analytica - the company that Mercer owns and that Steve Bannon’s on the board of.

They couldn’t have done what they did if there hadn’t been these two open platforms, Facebook and Youtube, which you could totally manipulate; there was nobody at the control of these platforms to block fake news in favor of Trump. However, there is no pornography on Youtube, which means that Youtube has very sophisticated technology which could filter out fake news, propaganda, etc., if desired.

Google’s market capture is profound, its users provide content and profiles (which marketers value, of course) which competitors cannot match. Google is not just a virtual monopoly, not just one of the most wealthy companies, it is the richest company and perhaps the most powerful monopoly ever. More:

New York Times, “Is It Time to Break Up Google?”, 22 Aug 2017:

By Johathan Taplin

In just 10 years, the world’s five largest companies by market capitalization have all changed, save for one: Microsoft. Exxon Mobil, General Electric, Citigroup and Shell Oil are out and Apple, Alphabet (the parent company of Google), Amazon and Facebook have taken their place.

They’re all tech companies, and each dominates its corner of the industry: Google has an 88 percent market share in search advertising, Facebook (and its subsidiaries Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger) owns 77 percent of mobile social traffic and Amazon has a 74 percent share in the e-book market. In classic economic terms, all three are monopolies.

We have been transported back to the early 20th century, when arguments about “the curse of bigness” were advanced by President Woodrow Wilson’s counselor, Louis Brandeis, before Wilson appointed him to the Supreme Court. Brandeis wanted to eliminate monopolies, because (in the words of his biographer Melvin Urofsky) “in a democratic society the existence of large centers of private power is dangerous to the continuing vitality of a free people.” We need look no further than the conduct of the largest banks in the 2008 financial crisis or the role that Facebook and Google play in the “fake news” business to know that Brandeis was right.

While Brandeis generally opposed regulation — which, he worried, inevitably led to the corruption of the regulator — and instead advocated breaking up “bigness,” he made an exception for “natural” monopolies, like telephone, water and power companies and railroads, where it made sense to have one or a few companies in control of an industry.

Could it be that these companies — and Google in particular — have become natural monopolies by supplying an entire market’s demand for a service, at a price lower than what would be offered by two competing firms? And if so, is it time to regulate them like public utilities?

Consider a historical analogy: the early days of telecommunications.

In 1895 a photograph of the business district of a large city might have shown 20 phone wires attached to most buildings. Each wire was owned by a different phone company, and none of them worked with the others. Without network effects, the networks themselves were almost useless.

The solution was for a single company, American Telephone and Telegraph, to consolidate the industry by buying up all the small operators and creating a single network — a natural monopoly. The government permitted it, but then regulated this monopoly through the Federal Communications Commission.

AT&T (also known as the Bell System) had its rates regulated, and was required to spend a fixed percentage of its profits on research and development. In 1925 AT&T set up Bell Labs as a separate subsidiary with the mandate to develop the next generation of communications technology, but also to do basic research in physics and other sciences. Over the next 50 years, the basics of the digital age — the transistor, the microchip, the solar cell, the microwave, the laser, cellular telephony — all came out of Bell Labs, along with eight Nobel Prizes.

In a 1956 consent decree in which the Justice Department allowed AT&T to maintain its phone monopoly, the government extracted a huge concession: All past patents were licensed (to any American company) royalty-free, and all future patents were to be licensed for a small fee. These licenses led to the creation of Texas Instruments, Motorola, Fairchild Semiconductor and many other start-ups.

True, the internet never had the same problems of interoperability. And Google’s route to dominance is different from the Bell System’s. Nevertheless it still has all of the characteristics of a public utility.

We are going to have to decide fairly soon whether Google, Facebook and Amazon are the kinds of natural monopolies that need to be regulated, or whether we allow the status quo to continue, pretending that unfettered monoliths don’t inflict damage on our privacy and democracy.

It is impossible to deny that Facebook, Google and Amazon have stymied innovation on a broad scale. To begin with, the platforms of Google and Facebook are the point of access to all media for the majority of Americans. While profits at Google, Facebook and Amazon have soared, revenues in media businesses like newspaper publishing or the music business have, since 2001, fallen by 70 percent.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, newspaper publishers lost over half their employees between 2001 and 2016. Billions of dollars have been reallocated from creators of content to owners of monopoly platforms. All content creators dependent on advertising must negotiate with Google or Facebook as aggregator, the sole lifeline between themselves and the vast internet cloud.

It’s not just newspapers that are hurting. In 2015 two Obama economic advisers, Peter Orszag and Jason Furman, published a paper arguing that the rise in “supernormal returns on capital” at firms with limited competition is leading to a rise in economic inequality. The M.I.T. economists Scott Stern and Jorge Guzman explained that in the presence of these giant firms, “it has become increasingly advantageous to be an incumbent, and less advantageous to be a new entrant.”

There are a few obvious regulations to start with. Monopoly is made by acquisition — Google buying AdMob and DoubleClick, Facebook buying Instagram and WhatsApp, Amazon buying, to name just a few, Audible, Twitch, Zappos and Alexa. At a minimum, these companies should not be allowed to acquire other major firms, like Spotify or Snapchat.

The second alternative is to regulate a company like Google as a public utility, requiring it to license out patents, for a nominal fee, for its search algorithms, advertising exchanges and other key innovations.

The third alternative is to remove the “safe harbor” clause in the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which allows companies like Facebook and Google’s YouTube to free ride on the content produced by others. The reason there are 40,000 Islamic State videos on YouTube, many with ads that yield revenue for those who posted them, is that YouTube does not have to take responsibility for the content on its network. Facebook, Google and Twitter claim that policing their networks would be too onerous. But that’s preposterous: They already police their networks for pornography, and quite well.

Removing the safe harbor provision would also force social networks to pay for the content posted on their sites. A simple example: One million downloads of a song on iTunes would yield the performer and his record label about $900,000. One million streams of that same song on YouTube would earn them about $900.

I’m under no delusion that, with libertarian tech moguls like Peter Thiel in President Trump’s inner circle, antitrust regulation of the internet monopolies will be a priority. Ultimately we may have to wait four years, at which time the monopolies will be so dominant that the only remedy will be to break them up. Force Google to sell DoubleClick. Force Facebook to sell WhatsApp and Instagram.

Woodrow Wilson was right when he said in 1913, “If monopoly persists, monopoly will always sit at the helm of the government.” We ignore his words at our peril.

The intimidating posts have been appearing all over Twitter (Picture: Twitter)

By contrast to the typical right-wing claim that “they” are trying to divide us with racial conflict (DDRR: dems da real racists), we should of course encourage racial divisiveness. However, it must be said that Tweets alleged of black gangs in the Houston area, of their intent to ‘loot the property of Trump voters” appear to be a ham-fisted attempt (e.g., using Sambo language) to instigate such division - not that we should put it past blacks to loot and terrorize the vulnerable and that is precisely the point: there is no need to exaggerate or characterize their criminality and hyper-aggression to the detriment of our ethic genetic interests.

There is no reason to doubt that there would be blacks taking advantage of vulnerable property in the wake of hurricane Harvey, but there are not many confirmed reports - yet.

Metro, “Gang members brandish guns and joke about looting ‘white neighborhoods’ in Hurricane Harvey”, 28 Aug 2017:

Gang members are boasting about looting homes as thousands are rescued from floods after Hurricane Harvey battered Texas.

Unverified Twitter accounts and hashtags like ‘harveylootcrew’ show men brandishing guns in posts about breaking into Houston houses and stealing goods.

One account shows a man wearing a bandanna with someone pointing two handguns at the camera. It’s captioned: ‘We out here lootin shit from white neighborhoods.’

Another post included a photo of a gun stuffed into his pants pocket and the comment: ‘I stay strapped when we out here lootin this bitch.’

Photos and videos on this particular account have since been deleted. The authenticity of these accounts are not known.

  Blacks might talk this way, but they are unlikely to write this way - “foh racist Trump supporters.”

Many people on Twitter are reporting them by looping in the Houston Police Department in the gang’s tweets.

A spokeswoman for Houston Police Department told Metro US officers are aware of four cases of looting that have taken place since Hurricane Harvey hit, and arrests have been made in each of those cases.

However, she said she could not speak to the Twitter accounts and hashtags which appear to show gangs making claims of looting.

At least six people have died in the chaos since Hurricane Harvey struck landfall on Friday.

Parts of Texas are bracing for up to 25 more inches of rain as Hurricane Harvey continues to batter the area.

Alexendre Jorge evacuates Ethan Colman, four, from a neighborhood severely affected (Picture: AP)