VIDEO: Join a Group!

We are in the middle of a civilizational war and our leaders in politics, the media, universities and religious groups are failing us.

Our first step is to educate ourselves about the true nature of Political Islam, but that is not enough. After we educate our friends, family and others, we must join in with others to fight Political Islam and its apologists.

We must exert political pressure with mass rallies. We also need to be a member of a group that will plan and hold large protest meetings. If you can, join Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the Occident (PEGIDA).

RELATED ARTICLE: Suicide Attacks in 2015

VIDEO: On the LaVoy Finicum/Oregon Law Enforcement Confrontation and Shooting

You are about to watch the confrontation, including “shots fired” at Mr.  LaVoy Finicum in Oregon on January 26th, 2016.  Many stories, including so-called “eye witnesses” have communicated versions of the incident leading to the death of Mr. Finicum of Mohave County, Arizona who had been protesting in Burn, Oregon the past five weeks.

The most recent “eye witness” account distributed nationally was reported by Victoria Sharp.  Ms. Sharp’s account is false.  The video below is taken from the FBI plane following the Finicum vehicle, and shows the shooting event as it occurred.  A massive campaign has been launched nationally depicting Mr. Finicum as innocent and shot without provocation by the FBI.

As you will see (go to full screen) Mr. Finicum exits his vehicle upon hitting a snow bank attempting to avoid a police roadblock.  While there is no sound, and having been a police officer myself, I have to think commands were given to Mr. Finicum as he came to the rear of his vehicle.  As you will see, Mr. Fincium reaches into the left side of his coat making a clear gesture that he may be going for a weapon.

Shots were then fired by Oregon State Police, not by the FBI.

UPDATE: On day before his death, Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum spoke about potential encounters with government authorities:

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of deceased LaVoy Finicum, one of the leaders of a militia at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Jan. 10, 2016 (KOIN). Our thoughts and prayers go to the Finicum family.

How States Got Away with Sterilizing 60,000 Americans by Trevor Burrus

On the morning of October 19, 1927, the Commonwealth of Virginia sterilized Carrie Buck.

Dr. John Bell — whose name would forever be linked with Carrie’s in the Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell — cut her open and removed a section from each of her Fallopian tubes. In his notes, Dr. Bell noted that “this was the first case operated on under the sterilization law.”

Carrie Buck was an average, unassuming girl who grew up around Charlottesville. She wasn’t very smart, but she wasn’t dumb either. She didn’t come from the best circumstances, but she did the best with what she had.

Pictures show a plain young woman with short, dark hair, bobbed in the fashion of the time. In one photo, taken by Arthur Estabrook, an “expert” in eugenics whose testimony would help seal her fate, Carrie sits on a bench with her mother Emma at the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-minded, where both were institutionalized.

Estabrook’s photo of Carrie and Emma was taken on November 17th, 1924, the day before Carrie’s trial began. Estabrook had come to visit Carrie and Emma at the urging of Dr. Albert Priddy, the superintendent of the Virginia Colony.

Priddy was building a case against Carrie, a case for her forced sterilization, and he needed a purported expert in the “science” of “inferior genetics” — a.k.a. eugenics — to testify that Carrie, her mother, and Carrie’s six-month-old daughter Vivian were all congenitally and irredeemably “feeble-minded.”

In a different time, Estabrook, with his neatly parted hair and defined features, could have become a well-known character actor, a face “in all those movies.” But Estabrook was employed at the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring Harbor, New York, and he was more than prepared to testify to the inferiority of Carrie and her bloodline. Most of his life had been devoted to diagnosing and describing “defective bloodlines” that, in his view, held humanity back.

At the urging of Aubrey Strode, the lawyer for Dr. Priddy and the Virginia State Colony, Estabrook rushed down to Lynchburg to testify against Carrie. Strode believed that the testimony of a true expert in eugenics would be crucial to developing an unassailable legal record proving that Carrie, Emma, and Vivian all carried defective genes and, therefore, that the state had both the authority and the right to sterilize Carrie to prevent any further “feeble-minded” offspring.

He needed such expert testimony if the appellate courts, and possibly even the US Supreme Court, were going to uphold Carrie’s sterilization and thus ratify not only Dr. Priddy’s plans for the mass sterilization of “genetic defectives,” but also the plans of thousands of similar eugenicists around the country. Eugenics was Estabrook’s life work, so of course he came as quickly as he could.

It only took Estabrook a short time to be convinced that Carrie and Emma were hereditarily “feeble-minded.” In the picture he took, Carrie and Emma stare distantly at Estabrook’s camera, seemingly not too happy to have been interrogated by someone who presumed they were imbeciles from the outset.

Carrie and Emma Buck, taken by Arthur Estabrook, Nov. 17, 1924. From

We know Carrie’s story because her case eventually made it to the Supreme Court. But to the Commonwealth of Virginia in the 1920s, Carrie was just another congenitally “feeble-minded” woman who, in the parlance of the times, had a tainted “germ plasm” that would create generations of “socially inadequate defectives” if she were allowed to procreate freely. Carrie is the most famous of the (at least) 60,000 Americans who were forcibly sterilized in order to “cleanse the race” of undesirable genes.

The United States forcibly sterilized people through the 1970s. Many victims are still living. Virginia has apologized for its sterilization program, and, like North Carolina before it, voted to compensate still-living victims.

Yet, even today, many law professors seem to want to sweep Buck v. Bell under the rug. They’d rather talk about Lochner v. New York — when the Court overturned New York’s maximum work hour law as a violation of the liberty of contract — than Buck v. Bell. Judges are still said to be “Lochnerizing” when they are accused of legislating from the bench, but we don’t have a similar adjective form of Buck. Furthermore, because Lochner was overturned during the New Deal, its residual impact on our laws has been minimal. Buck v. Bell’s legacy is far bloodier.

Even for those familiar with the general facts of Buck v. Bell, Carrie’s story is worse than they realize. We now know that she was unknowingly a part of a plot to validate Virginia’s forced sterilization law, passed in 1924 to rid society of “idiocy, imbecility, feeble-mindedness or epilepsy.”

Even Carrie’s lawyer was a part of the plot, offering essentially no defense to the groundless claim that she was congenitally stupid. The simple — but far from stupid — girl from Charlottesville found herself at the center of what amounted to a conspiracy against her own reproductive future.

The judges and justices who ratified Carrie’s sterilization abdicated their responsibility to protect the weakest among us from the machinations of the powerful and the prejudices of the majority. Carrie needed protection from pseudoscience and groundless assertions, but all she got was an unquestioned seal of approval.

Instead of living out her unassuming life, Carrie became a poster-child for public policy run amok. This is the story of her case.

The “Feebleminded” Carrie Buck

Carrie Buck was born in Virginia on July 2, 1906, to Frank and Emma Buck. Her father was largely absent, and her mother apparently lived a hard life of odd jobs and persistent poverty.

As a result, Carrie spent much of her early life with her foster parents, John and Alice Dobbs.

When Carrie was 16, Clarence Garland, a visiting nephew of her foster family, sexually assaulted her. Years later, when Carrie was an old woman being interviewed by reporters, she would recall that Clarence “forced himself on me … he took advantage of me.”

Carrie became pregnant. Alice Dobbs now had a problem on her hands. Virginia society in the 1920s didn’t look kindly on illegitimate children, and Alice feared being burdened with a girl of “that type.” By squirreling her away with her mother at the Virginia State Colony in Lynchburg, the Dobbs family could be saved from disgrace.

C.D. Shackleford, the local Justice of the Peace, went over a standard commitment form with the Dobbses, featuring such bizarre questions as “does she take proper notice of things?” (answer: “No”), and “how was the peculiarity manifested?” (answer: “Peculiar actions”). He was told that Carrie was prone to “some hallucinations and some outbreaks of temper,” and that her pregnancy was proof enough of her “moral delinquency.” Additionally, two doctors also reported that Carrie was “feebleminded within the meaning of the law.” Satisfied, Shackleford ordered Carrie to be sent to the Colony.

But the Colony was not a place for a pregnant woman. Before being institutionalized, Carrie was allowed to have her baby on the outside. On March 28, 1924, Vivian Buck was born. Carrie was a mother for two weeks before she was sent away, leaving Vivian with the Dobbses.

Now known as the Central Virginia Training Center, the Colony sits just over the James River from downtown Lynchburg. The large, red brick “Mastin-Minor” building was built in 1913, and by the time Carrie came it housed approximately 800 inmates. Upon arrival, Dr. Priddy examined her and found no evidence of hallucinations or psychosis. He also found that Carrie could read and write, which is not surprising since she had had five years of school and been an average student.

The Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and the Feeble-minded. Photo courtesy of the Central Virginia Training Center.

In the Colony, Carrie was reunited with her mother. Colony records describe Emma Buck as a widow who “lacked moral sense and responsibility.” She had a reputation as “notoriously untruthful,” had been arrested for prostitution, and had allegedly given birth to illegitimate children. Perhaps most shockingly, her housework was “untidy.”

Emma was stamped with a diagnosis: “Mental Deficiency, Familial: Moron.”

The Eugenics Movement

The term “moron” is originally a “scientific” one, invented by Dr. Henry H. Goddard, a pioneer of the “science” of eugenics. His book, Feeble-Mindedness: Its Causes and Consequences, tried to classify and describe the attributes of those who are “incapable of performing his duties as a member of society in the position of life to which he was born.”

The feeble-minded were “ne’er do wells” who were “shiftless, incompetent, unsatisfactory and undesirable members of the community.” Goddard filled his book with pictures of his subjects, a supposed rogues gallery of the congenitally stupid.

Goddard created a taxonomy of the “feeble-minded.” “Idiots” were the lowest grade, with intelligence comparable to a child under two. Next, came “imbeciles,” those with intelligence comparable to a child from ages three to seven. Finally, came the “morons,” eight to ten.

It’s difficult to comprehend the extent of the popularity of eugenics during the first three decades of the twentieth century. According to one historian, eugenics ideas were integral to “the political vocabulary of virtually every significant modernizing force between the two world wars.” From marriage laws to immigration to schooling practices, eugenicists greatly influenced public policy — and in many ways, they continue to do so.

Eugenic goals were behind the Immigration Act of 1924, which created quotas for immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe that remained in effect until 1965. Harry Laughlin, one of the doyens of the American eugenics movement and, like Arthur Estabrook, also of the Eugenics Record Office, testified to Congress that immigration restrictions were necessary to defend “against the contamination of American family stocks by alien hereditary degeneracy.” Like those who today call immigrants “rapists and murderers,” anti-immigrant rhetoric often carries shameful, eugenical tinge.

Carrie was prosecuted under the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, but the anti-miscegenation part of that law wouldn’t be struck down until 1967 in the landmark case of Loving v. Virginia. At the time of Loving, Virginia’s marriage license not only required the couple to be of the same race, but also that the couple affirm that “neither is she nor am I a habitual criminal, idiot, imbecile, hereditary epileptic, or insane person,” all words which reek of eugenics origins. Loving would later become an essential precedent to overturning same-sex marriage bans in 2015’s Obergefell v. Hodges.

In 1925, only a few months after Carrie’s first trial, the country was enamored with the famous Scopes “Monkey” Trial, when Tennessee schoolteacher John Scopes was put on trial for teaching evolution, famously dramatized in the 1960 movie (based off the 1955 play) Inherit the Wind. What’s remembered now as a valiant struggle of science over superstition was also a fight over an explicitly eugenics-favoring biology textbook.

Scopes used George Hunter’s A Civic Biology, which included such eugenics-promoting passages as:

If such people were lower animals, we would probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity will not allow this, but we do have the remedy of separating the sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race. Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with success in this country.

Well into the later parts of the 20th century, eugenics-inspired laws left people sterilized, prohibited to marry, committed to state institutions, or barred from the country. Even presidents got on board. Woodrow Wilson was a fan. As governor of New Jersey he signed the state’s forced sterilization law, and Theodore Roosevelt once wrote that “society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind.”

The first US sterilization law was passed in Indiana in 1907. “Heredity plays a most important part in the transmission of crime, idiocy, and imbecility,” read the preamble, and therefore surgeons would have broad discretion to “perform such operation for the prevention of procreation as shall be decided safest and most effective.” Many states followed Indiana’s lead, including Virginia in 1924.

Dr. Albert Priddy of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-minded could fairly be described as a zealot of eugenics. Prior to 1924, Priddy had performed hundreds of forced sterilizations by creatively interpreting laws which allowed surgery to benefit the “physical, mental or moral” condition of the inmates at the Colony. He would operate to relieve “chronic pelvic disorder” and, in the process, sterilize the women.

According to Priddy, the women he chose were “immoral” because of their “fondness for men,” their reputations for “promiscuity,” and their “over-sexed” and “man-crazy” tendencies. One sixteen-year-old girl was sterilized for her habit of “talking to the little boys.”

Dr. Albert Priddy, superintendent of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and the Feebleminded, from

But Priddy got himself into hot water when he forcibly sterilized Willie Mallory and her daughter Jessie. In September, 1916, Willie, Jessie and seven other Mallory children were arrested in their home on suspicion of running a brothel. In reality, Priddy had directed police to the Mallory house because he felt the family was a particularly egregious case of congenital feeble-mindedness and immorality. Priddy felt the “germ plasm” of the Mallorys needed to be purged, and the charges were entirely manufactured. Once in Priddy’s hands, Willie was declared “unable to control her nerves” and sterilized, as was her daughter Jessie.

George Mallory, the husband and father, had been out of town when the arrests were made. When he found out what had happened, he fought to get his family back and to prevent any further sterilizations. After a protracted legal battle, Willie and the Mallory children were freed.

Although the courts did not overturn the sterilization program, Priddy worried that it now rested on shaky legal foundations. What he needed was a new law and then a test case to validate it once and for all. And in order to prove his theory of hereditary feeble-mindedness to the highest court in the land, he would need at least three generations of verifiable “imbeciles.”

Notes from the Eugenics Records Office on Carrie’s alleged lineage. From

The Trial

Carrie Buck found herself in the Colony in June of 1924, shortly before her 18th birthday. Priddy quickly made the connection between Emma and Carrie, and he knew about the recently born Vivian. He began building his case.

Designed to withstand legal challenge, the new Virginia law provided more due process than the previous ad hoc regime that rested entirely on official discretion. Carrie’s case first had to go before the Colony Board.

Priddy testified that Carrie was “congenitally and incurably defective” with a mental age of only nine, and that she had borne “one illegitimate mentally defective child.” The Board agreed that “Carrie Buck … is the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring,” and that sterilization would benefit both her and society at large.

What did Carrie think of all this? During the hearing before the Board, we have the only contemporaneous record of Carrie’s reaction to her unfortunate circumstance:

Q: Do you care to say anything about having this operation performed on you?

A: No, sir, I have not, it is up to my people.

In order to fully validate the law to Priddy’s satisfaction, the Board’s determination had to be defended in court. Thus, Irving Whitehead was appointed to “defend” Carrie from the Board’s ruling. Whitehead was not only a close friend of Priddy, but he was a former member of the Colony Board and, unsurprisingly, a staunch believer in forced sterilization.

In order to build an ironclad case against Carrie and her genes, Priddy needed to verify that Carrie’s daughter, the 8-month old Vivian, was also feeble-minded. Vivian’s mental status had been merely asserted before the Colony Board. Priddy knew the court would demand more.

Enter Arthur Estabrook, the recognized expert in eugenics from the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Under questioning from Aubrey Strode, Estabrook explained how feeble-mindedness propagates due to “bad blood” and a “defective germ plasm” — “where two defectives’ germ plasms meet, the effect again appears.” Estabrook then gave his opinion of Carrie and Vivian:

Q: Did you give Carrie Buck any mental tests to determine her mental capacity?

A: Yes, sir. I talked to Carrie sufficiently so that with the record of the mental examination — yes, I did. I gave a sufficient examination so that I consider her feeble-minded.

Q: Have you a definition of “feeble-minded”?

A: Yes, I have.

Q: What is it?

A: A feeble-minded person is a person who is so weak mentally that he or she is unable to maintain himself or herself in the ordinary community at large.

Q: Now, what is a socially inadequate person?

A: That is anybody who by reason of any sort of defect or condition is unable to maintain themselves according to the accepted rules of society.

Q: From what you know of Carrie Buck, would you say that by the laws of heredity she is a feeble-minded person and the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring likewise afflicted?

A: I would.

The questioning turned to Vivian:

Q: Did you see Carrie Buck’s child?

A: I did.

Q: Were you able to form any judgment about that child?

A: I was.

Q: What is it?

A: I gave the child the regular mental test for a child of the age of six months, and judging from her reactions to the tests I gave her, I decided she was below the average for a child of eight months of age.

What is “the regular mental test” to determine if an 8-month old is feeble-minded? Easy, just wave a coin in front of her face and see if the infant’s eyes track it to a satisfactory degree. Vivian apparently failed that test.

Throughout Carrie’s trial, a succession of witnesses offered testimony that was hearsay, contentious, speculative, and simply absurd. Because Priddy and Strode felt it crucial to establish that Carrie’s entire family “stock” was defective, witnesses who had never met Carrie testified to rumors and anecdotes surrounding her and her family.

One witness, John W. Hopkins, the Superintendent of the Albemarle County Home, testified that he did not know Carrie, Emma, or Vivian, but he did have this probing insight to offer about Carrie’s half-brother:

Q: Do you know Roy Smith, a half-brother of Carrie Buck here?

A: Yes, sir

Q: What do you know about him?

A: Well, all I know, I have just seen him passing through the place back and forth. That is the extent of my acquaintance with him.

Q: But you haven’t told us anything yet that you know about him. You say you have seen him passing through the place: do you know anything about him?

A: I don’t know anything particular about him. I think he is rather an unusual boy.

Q: In what way?

A: He struck me as being right peculiar.

Q: He is a peculiar boy?

A: I think so.

Q: Now, why can’t you tell us what you know about him?

A: Well, the only thing I know that could cause me to have an opinion about him at all is, he came through the place one day — he was going to school. He stopped and was waiting on the path, and I asked him who he was waiting for. He said he was waiting on some other children, they was going home to spend the night with him. I said: “Boy, those children have gone home,” and he said well, they was coming with him tomorrow night. He had been standing there waiting I suppose twenty or thirty minutes.

The trial goes on in that fashion, with various residents of Charlottesville testifying that Carrie’s siblings, half siblings and other family members were “right peculiar” in some way.

One of the few witnesses to testify with first-hand knowledge of Carrie, a nurse from Charlottesville who had intermittent contact with Carrie over the years, recalled that in grammar school Carrie had been caught writing notes to boys. Priddy, of course, had once sterilized a girl for that transgression. For his testimony, Priddy felt the need to point out that Carrie had a “rather badly formed face.”

Carrie’s lawyer offered essentially no defense. Not only did he call no witnesses, but Irving Whitehead did not challenge the prosecution’s witnesses’ lack of firsthand knowledge or their dodgy scientific claims. He did not even call Carrie’s teachers, who could have proven, with documented evidence, that Carrie had been an average student, including one teacher who wrote that Carrie was “very good” at “deportment and lessons.”

Instead, it seemed that Whitehead was often testifying against his own client, taking it for granted that she was of “low caliber.” He did not challenge the claim that Carrie was illegitimate, which was false as a matter of Virginia state law because Carrie’s parents were married at the time of her birth. Nor did he argue that Carrie’s supposed “immorality” and Vivian’s illegitimacy were due to a rape by the Dobbs’ nephew, Clarence Garland.

Why would he? After all, Whitehead served 14 years on the Colony’s Board and had always supported Priddy’s devotion to sterilization. In fact, only a few months before Carrie’s trial, the Colony named a building after him.

Buck v. Bell

Carrie lost in the trial court. On appeal, Whitehead offered a 5-page brief to the state’s 40-pager, and Carrie lost there too. Her only recourse was to the US Supreme Court, but that was merely an illusion. She lost her case when a charlatan was put in charge of defending her.

Even if Whitehead had put forth an effort, Carrie’s case was put before a Supreme Court with at least two avowed believers in eugenics: Chief Justice (and former president) William Howard Taft and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

In 1915, Taft had written the introduction to the book How to Live, which contained a sizable portion devoted to eugenics. As for Holmes, in 1921, he told future justice Felix Frankfurter that he had no problem “restricting propagation by the undesirables and putting to death infants that didn’t pass the examination.”

Scary words coming from the justice who, in Lochner — the legal professoriates’ favorite bête noire — accused the majority of reading their prejudices into the Constitution. In Lochner, Holmes had also accused his fellow justices of reading Herbert Spencer’s Social Statics into the Fourteenth Amendment.

Spencer was a famed laissez-faire thinker who is often unfairly accused of advocating “social Darwinism,” that is, eliminating socially beneficial programs and laws in order to kill off the poor and unfit. Perhaps the only problem Holmes had with this view (which Spencer himself never espoused) was that it wasn’t proactive enough.

Taft assigned the opinion to Holmes, who went at his task with a zealotry that bordered on bloodlust. His first draft was apparently even more brutal and was criticized by colleagues for substituting rhetorical flourishes about eugenics for legal analysis. The Chief Justice asked Holmes to focus on the supposed line of hereditary defects in Carrie’s case:

Some of the brethren [the other justices] are troubled about the case, especially [Justice Pierce] Butler. May I suggest that you make a little full [the explanation of] the care Virginia has taken in guarding against undue or hasty action, proven absence of danger to the patient, and other circumstances tending to lessen the shock that many feel over the remedy? The strength of the facts in three generations of course is the strongest argument.

Holmes would certainly highlight those three generations. He would take just over 1000 words to sentence Carrie Buck to forced sterilization, writing that the majority has a right to “prevent our being swamped with incompetence.” A Civil War veteran, he invoked the moral clarity of war — “we have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives” — and curtly explained how Carrie had received ample due process because “the very careful provisions” of the law “protect the patients from possible abuse.”

He punctuated his paean to brutality by penning arguably the most heartless line in Supreme Court history: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

And that was that. Only Justice Pierce Butler dissented, possibly because he was a Catholic, but he didn’t offer a written opinion.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Aftermath and Lessons

Buck v. Bell carries with it eternal lessons that are relevant as long as governments purport to use science to deal with “public health” problems. More and more, we characterize issues as “public health” matters — from guns to smoking to eating cheeseburgers — and, without a proper respect for individual rights, there is no feasible stopping point for “public health” crusades.

Are home swimming pools, which kill hundreds of people a year, a public health issue? How about not exercising? Riding motorcycles? Cooking with butter? Science can be an important tool for effective public policy, but if it is not tempered by skepticism and an unfailing respect for individual rights, then it can become a mask for deplorable policies.

After Holmes’s opinion, the rate of sterilizations around the country increased dramatically. According to historian Edwin Black, between 1907 and 1927, the year the Court decided Buck v. Bell, approximately 6,000 people were forcibly sterilized. In just the 13 years after Buck, there would be 30,000 more. Virginia alone would sterilize about 8,300 citizens. The 1924 law was altered over the years, for example by removing “epileptics” from the list in 1968, and then finally repealed in 1974.

Carrie’s “feeble-minded” daughter Vivian would be an honor roll student in second grade, but, in 1932, she died of an intestinal infection. She was the last of the Bucks.

Vivian Buck’s (listed as Dobbs) 2nd grade report card showing that she was on the “April Honor Roll.” From

Carrie was released from the Colony in 1929, and she married in 1932. Her husband died in the 1950s, and Carrie spent most of her life in poverty. Carrie’s story, and Carrie herself, were rediscovered by reporters in 1980, prompting a flurry of stories.

In the early 1980s, Carrie was living near Charlottesville with her sister Doris. Doris had spent years trying for children, only to have a researcher reveal to her that he had uncovered papers showing the state had secretly sterilized her during a supposed appendectomy. Carrie’s case was also rediscovered by legal historian Paul Lombardo, whose research into true history of Buck v. Bell has been invaluable to all subsequent accounts, including this one.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. sat on the Supreme Court for 30 years and is one of our most famed jurists. For his entire career he insisted on letting majorities “embody their opinions in law,” and this would include not just forcibly sterilizing people, but also arresting those who distributed anti-draft literature (Schenck v. United States).

Holmes’s view of judging generally required bending over backwards to accommodate the views of the majority. He later called Buck v. Bell one of his proudest moments, a part of his legacy, telling one friend, “One decision that I wrote gave me pleasure, establishing the constitutionality of a law permitting the sterilization of imbeciles.”

Buck v. Bell has never been explicitly overruled.

The last photograph of Carrie Buck, taken in 1982 by legal historian Paul Lombardo, at the nursing home where she lived in the last years of her life. From

This post first appeared at Reprinted with permission.

Trevor BurrusTrevor Burrus

Trevor Burrus is a research fellow at the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies. His research interests include constitutional law, civil and criminal law, legal and political philosophy, and legal history. He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.

Trump Support Growing Among Black Voters

The National Black Republican Association’s endorsement of Donald Trump for President of the United States has been very well received by other Republican black leaders across the country. The response has been overwhelming, with other leaders contacting us to add their support of the NBRA’s endorsement of Mr. Trump.

Highlighted below are the leaders who gave us their permission to release their names to the public. Our subsequent press releases during the general election will include the names of other leaders who endorse Mr. Trump when he has become our party’s presidential nominee, which we expect will be the decision of the majority of Republican Party primary voters.

In our view, Mr. Trump’s nomination will be well-deserved, since we believe he is the only candidate who can both unify our party and attract new, independent and conservative black voters.

Bill Calhoun

Bill Calhoun

As Chairman of the Texas Federation for Republican Outreach (TFRO), Bill Calhoun has this to say regarding his endorsement of Donald Trump: “Our members are dedicated to identifying and engaging independent, black voters with two issues that hit closest to home: jobs and school choice.  Despite the fact that they overwhelmingly vote for Democrat candidates, the economic conditions for far too many African Americans is marginal.

The Republican Party has a positive message and we have been  talking to voters about it.  We share information with them on two critical issues – how to increase their income in this new economy that the Democrats have created and the new strategies they must adopt to save and accumulate wealth to pass on to their families. It’s time for Republican candidates to help us by engaging black voters early in the primary season with an economic message that puts the blame for these conditions where it belongs, squarely in the hands of the Democrats and their public policy programs.  Donald Trump seems to be the only candidate for President willing to do this.”

mason weaver

Mason Weaver

Mason Weaver

Mason Weaver’s impressive biography shows that he is changing the way people think about how they do business; how they interact with their families, friends and the world. He has been training, educating, teaching and reaching thousands with his messages of hope for the future and empowering individuals with the tools they need to become the driving forces for positive change.

Mr. Weaver stated that his YouTube endorsement of Donald Trump is based on Mr. Trump’s business success and his focus on “making America great again.”  In a YouTube video, Mr. Weaver explains the Trump phenomenon: “no matter who he attacks or who attacks him, his polling numbers claim higher.”

deborah honeycutt

Dr. Deborah Honeycutt

Dr. Deborah Honeycutt

Deborah Travis Honeycutt is a Conservative Political Activist, Public Speaker and family medicine physician. In 2004 Dr. Honeycutt was President of the Georgia Academy of Family Physicians and in 2005 served as Chairman of the Board of Directors. On the national level she has served on many committees as well as a five-year appointment to the American Academy of Family Physicians’ Commission on Education.

She was twice the Minority Constituency Delegate and twice the Georgia State Delegate to the American Academy of Family Physicians. While providing her endorsement of Donald Trump as our next president, Dr. Honeycutt stated: “Mr. Trump is the only candidate strong enough to withstand the media backlash when he begins to repeal Obamacare and unravel what the Democrats have done to put our national security and economy in jeopardy.”

ken and brenda jordan

Ken and Brenda Jordan

Ken Jordan and Brenda Battle Jordan

Ken Jordan and Brenda Battle Jordon are on the Genesee County Republican Executive Committee in Michigan, as well as the Flint Right To Life Board. Brenda is the former Director of Black Americans of Genesee County and is currently a member of the Westwood Heights School Board. The Jordans said they are sadden by how our school system is designed to benefit teachers’ unions – major donors to the Democratic Party – at the expense of black children trapped in failing urban schools.

At the time the Jordans announced their endorsement of Donald Trump, Brenda stated: “Mr. Trump is self-financed and will not be deterred by union money from returning control over our schools back to parents and local communities, such as the Westwood Heights School District in Flint, Michigan.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Why Black Voters Are Turning to Trump

RELATED VIDEO: Black Pastor’s reflections on Donald Trump at Cleveland Rally:

Girl faces charges for protecting herself against Muslim sexual attack

Why don’t they just install a Muslim migrant as Prime Minister and declare their willingness to submit and pay the jizya now? Why drag out the process?

Denmark refugees and police

“Outrage in Denmark as 17yo girl faces fine for using pepper spray against sex attacker,” RT, January 27, 2016:

A Danish teenager who said she was sexually assaulted now faces a fine for using pepper spray against her attacker. The man who pulled her to the ground and tried to undress her fled the scene without any charges.

The incident took place in the center of the small town of Sonderborg in southern Denmark at about 10 p.m. local time Wednesday. She told police that an English-speaking man knocked her to the ground, tried to unbutton her pants and undress her.

However, she was apparently able to protect herself as she pulled out pepper spray and used it against the man, who escaped the scene and hasn’t been charged.

Police say that the girl may face a fine.

“It is illegal to possess and use pepper spray, so she will likely be charged for that,” local police spokesman Knud Kirsten said, as cited by TV Syd.

According to The Local, the girl’s fine could be about 500 kroner ($72) and that has sparked outrage on social media.

Readers of the story on TV Syd’s website said they were ready to pay the girl’s fine.

“It is so completely and terribly wrong with the Danish system… Self-defense is a human right,” wrote one user, while another ironically added: “Perhaps the offender must seek compensation…Have we become mad in Denmark?”…

Yes, quite mad.


Iran’s President: Insulting people’s faith not part of freedom of expression

Milwaukee: Muslim plotted jihad mass murder at Masonic Temple

Climate Confusion

Many Americans are again confused over how the President and the United Nations can say we are at grave risk from man-made global warming (a.k.a climate change) when we continue to get pummeled by brutal, record shattering, winter storms. If this situation has you confused, take heart. You are not alone.

Once again the natural world has slapped the ‘warmist’ community down hard with yet another record breaking blizzard in the northeastern US between January 22 and January 24, 2016. Winter storm ‘Janus’ (a Weather Channel designation) dumped record snow totals in the major cities of the USA with a major snowstorm that stretched from Arkansas to Massachusetts. Here are but a few examples of the storm’s wrath:

New York City saw 26.8 inches of snow fall in Central Park, the second highest ever recorded. It missed tying the all time record by one tenth of an inch. JFK Airport had 30.5 inches of snow. Washington’s Dulles airport measured 28.3 inches, the second highest ever. Baltimore had 29.2 inches, its largest snow total ever recorded. The list of snow events and the breadth of this winter calamity that dumped record snow from the central US to the mid-Atlantic states to the Northeast was truly one for the record books.

What is also shocking about this ‘snowmageddon’ is that according to the manmade global warming crowd, none of this was possible. We were told by United Nations scientists there was not supposed to be any snow anywhere on the planet after 2003!  And who can forget the previous terrible winter of 2014-2015 here in the US, where new temperature and snow records were routinely broken. Again, that mercilessly long and cold winter was not possible either according to the climate models from the UN and the U.S. government. How can the impossible happen so often?

We should not forget other monstrously bad predictions, the ‘warmist’ community has proffered. NOAA scientists were telling us along with Al Gore, that the Arctic sea ice would be completely gone by 2008, then revised that to 2013. Of course neither happened. Global sea ice, especially in Antarctica, is in fact, growing rapidly.

Greenhouse gas emissions recently reached 400 ppm, yet the predicted overheating of the Earth is not happening – on the contrary. The 800 lb gorilla in the climate laboratory that the manmade warming community ignores is, that there has been no meaningful growth in global temperatures for eighteen years! That includes the so-called warmest year ever – 2015. Unfortunately, my colleagues and I have observed that the US government can no longer be relied upon to tell the truth about the Earth’s climate or its temperature.

The United Nations certainly cannot be trusted either. The corruption of climate science via its climate reports issued since 1990, has been so deep seated within that organization for so long, that we must now conclude they simply are unable and unwilling to be truthful. The UN climate models of which they, the US media, and our government are so enamored, are well over 100% in error in many of the models in predicting global temperature variation. Yet, the predictions from these failed models are still offered up as evidence of the need to shut down coal and CO2 production worldwide. Further, recent data suggests that the Earth’s climate appears to be relatively insensitive to CO2!  Even the UN is now confused.

It is my fondest hope that we can put the sad era of manmade global warming behind us soon and begin the preparations needed for the rapidly approaching cold epoch, a message I have been spreading since 2007. Starting this year, a long term decline in global temperature begins. It will be at the bottom during the 2020’s through the 2030’s. This time will be grim for our species as the cold era starts its destruction of crops around the world.

We humans are easily confused about the climate. Many of us actually believe what we want to believe, and not what the facts tell us we should. Worse; we are often intentionally deceived by our leaders.

The natural world does not suffer from these afflictions. It is never confused.

RELATED ARTICLE: 300 Scientists Want NOAA To Stop Hiding Its Global Warming Data

Open Letter to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Fox News major Share holder


Prince Alwaleed bin Talal

Dear Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal,

As the Fox News-parent company News Corp’s second-largest shareholder you will lose a ton of money tomorrow night when Mr. Trump raises money for wounded veterans instead of pandering to the Fox News CEO’s.

Fox News has an agenda based on their biased reporting and support of GOPe (formerly knows as RINO) presidential candidates like Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. Perhaps you are behind this?

Saudi money will not own Mr. Trump. The media conglomerates will not own Mr. Trump and I urge all Americans across this nation to not watch the GOPe biased Fox News diatribe but instead tune in tomorrow night and watch the veterans event hosted by Mr. Trump.



The Anti-Trump Network: Fox News Money Flows into Open Borders Group

Trump Just Revealed Details of What He’s Doing Instead of Fox News Debate, Many Will Love It

1 in 3 Americans Say Donald Trump Is the No. 1 Presidential Candidate for Their Money

LA86996LOGOLOS ANGELES, CA /PRNewswire/ — In anticipation of the upcoming presidential primaries for the 2016 presidential election, leading personal finance website surveyed nearly 8,000 Americans to find out which candidate they think will be best for their money.  Although Donald Trump was the top pick overall from those surveyed, nearly 50 percent of millennials ages 18 to 24 said Bernie Sanders’policies would be best for them financially.

The survey posed the question, “Which presidential candidate would be best for you financially?” and is representative of the U.S. online population with a margin of error of 3 percent.

Respondents’ Answer Choices:

  • Donald Trump — 29%
  • Bernie Sanders — 26%
  • Hillary Clinton — 20%
  • Ted Cruz — 9%
  • Marco Rubio — 8%
  • Ben Carson — 8%


Of those surveyed, 37 percent of the respondents answered “none of the above,” indicating that their favorite candidate was not listed or that they had not yet decided. The percentages listed above were taken from the remaining population of respondents.

See the full survey findings here.

“The economy is growing, but many Americans are still dissatisfied with slow-growing wages, high taxes or other fiscal policies that affect their bank accounts,” said Elyssa Kirkham, the GOBankingRates finance writer on the study.

“In the 2016 election, voters should be looking for a candidate who can help them build greater financial security as individuals, families and communities,” Kirkham said. “But opinions on the best way to do this are very divided, and this survey shows that many candidates are offering solutions that voters find favorable.”

Additional Findings:

  • 49 percent of millennial voters (ages 18 to 24) say that Sanders would be best for them financially, most likely because he supports free college and a $15 minimum wage.
  • Two-thirds of adults age 65 and older chose either Clinton or Trump as the candidate who would be best for them financially. Those two candidates have said they won’t cut Social Security.
  • For fiscal policy, women favor Democrats, whereas men favor Republicans.

To see which presidential candidate Americans in your state think is best for their money here.

Methodology: Through a Google Consumer Survey, GOBankingRates surveyed 7,728 respondents online from Dec. 10-16, 2015. The survey posed the question, “Which presidential candidate would be best for you financially if elected?” and offered the following six candidates as options, displayed randomly: (1) Ben Carson, (2) Hillary Clinton, (3) Ted Cruz, (4) Marco Rubio, (5) Bernie Sanders and (6) Donald Trump, along with the option to select “None of the above.” The survey has a margin of error of 3 percent, and answers are representative of the U.S. online population.

About GOBankingRates is a leading portal for personal finance and consumer banking information, offering visitors the latest on everything from finding a good interest rate to strategies for saving money, investing for retirement and getting a loan. Its editors are regularly featured on top-tier media outlets, including U.S. News & World Report, Forbes, Business Insider, Daily Finance, Huffington Post and more. It specializes in connecting consumers with the best financial institutions and banking products nationwide.

Sweden Deporting 80,000 Muslim Migrants

AFP reports that Sweden’s Interior Minister plans to eject tens of thousands of largely Muslim  asylees and migrants from conflicts throughout the Ummah that flooded the Nordic country in 2015, “Sweden plans to expel up to 80,000 asylum-seekers: says Interior minister:”

Swedish Interior Minister Anders Ygeman said Wednesday,”We are talking about 60,000 people but the number could climb to 80,000,” the minister was quoted as saying by Swedish media, adding that the government had asked the police and authorities in charge of migrants to organize their expulsion.


Ygeman said the expulsions, normally carried out using commercial flights, would have to be done using specially chartered aircraft, given the large numbers, staggered over several years.

Sweden, which is home to 9.8 million people, is one of the European Union countries that has taken in the largest number of refugees in relation to its population. Sweden accepted more than 160,000 asylum seekers last year.

But the number of migrant arrivals has dropped dramatically since Sweden enacted systematic photo ID checks on travellers on January 4.

Swedish officials on Tuesday called for greater security at overcrowded asylum centres a day after the fatal stabbing of an employee at a refugee centre for unaccompanied youths.

The alleged attacker was a young male residing at a centre for youngsters aged 14 to 17 in Molndal near Gothenburg on Sweden’s west coast.

The employee was 22-year-old Alexandra Mezher, according to Swedish media reports, whose family was originally from Lebanon. A motive for the attack was not immediately clear.

Her death has led to questions about overcrowded conditions inside some centres, with too few adults and employees to take care of children, many traumatised by war.

Kent Ekeroth inför EU-valet 2014

Kent Ekeroth, Jewish deputy in Sweden Democrats Party.

Sweden’s Social Democratic government has finally confronted the realities of why it has foolishly let in 160,000 asylum seekers who represent a clear and present danger to this country of less than 10 million with a sizable Muslim minority of 700,000.. We have a special guest on this Sunday, January 31, 2015,  Lisa Benson Show, Kent Ekeroth, a Jewish pro-Israel deputy in the opposition Sweden Democrats. For an expression of his  views about support for Israel, see this Times of Israel Interview  with Ekeroth in October 2014, “In pro-Palestine Sweden, far-right Jewish lawmaker embraces Israel.”  You may have seen our NER/Iconoclast posts with videos of Ekeroth’s debate with Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom about the latter’s accusations against Israel for “extra judicial killings”.

See:“Israel PM Netanyahu Slams Swedish Foreign Minister Wallstrom over Extrajudicial Killings Accusations.” Ekeroth should have lots to say about what prompted the Social Democrats to expel 80,000 Asylees and more about Sweden and other countries like German and Austria in the broken Schengen border less system who welcomed this horde of Muslim refugees and migrants with no ability to vett them.

Our other returning guest is Counter terrorism expert, Dr. Sebastian Gorka who will comment on problems of vetting Muslim refugee resettlement in both  Europe and the US. Listen in Sunday at 3:00 p.m. EST to The Lisa Benson Show and find out what the media is not telling you.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

VIDEO: Common Core $1.3 Billion Bid Rigging Scandal

You have to see what this former textbook publishing employee reveals about a major Common Core scandal involving rigged bidding for a $1.3 billion contract in this new breaking undercover video.

Click the video below to watch now.

When he reveals the details of the scandal, we ask him why it was not part of what was shown on the news. His reply? “Maybe nobody has discovered it yet.”

Well now we have. And we’re going to discover a whole lot more with your continued commitment to blowing the lid off Common Core corruption.

Make sure you watch the whole video to learn how publishing companies lie to schools in order to boost their bottom lines.

What our videos have revealed about corruption in public education is appalling, and we are just getting started.

Thanks to our generous supporters, we’ve now been able to release four videos revealing the truth about Common Core, but we need more resources to continue our momentum.

I hope after you watch and share our latest breaking video about this Common Core contract scandal, you’ll take a moment and make a tax-deductible contribution today.

EDITORS NOTE: Be one of the first to see Project Veritas’s latest video uncovering a major scandal involving the country’s largest textbook publisher and how a $1.3 billion contract was rigged in their favor. If you haven’t made a donation to this project yet, please do so today. Your commitment is vital to our continued success.

VIDEO: I Challenge President Obama to a Debate

Wayne LaPierre says that President Obama has chosen to attack what he misunderstands most about America—the Second Amendment, gun owners and the NRA. Obama even announced a federal gun force that will be four times the size of the Special Forces units he deployed against ISIS terrorists. LaPierre concludes by challenging the president to a one-on-one, one-hour fair debate.

View the Wayne LaPierre series on NRA News:…

VIDEO: If you think Jew hatred ended with the Holocaust, think again!

auschwitz holocaustThe Jewish Federation of Sarasota/Manatee produced a video showing that Jew hatred is alive and well in Florida. The student senate at the University of South Florida voted to divest from the state of Israel for “humanitarian reasons.” Since that vote the student body president vetoed the resolution.

Hate groups such as CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Students For Justice in Palestine, the Muslim Student Association, Jewish Voices For Peace and others are the NEW ANTI-SEMITES.  These groups have “crept” into University of South Florida Tampa campus in a major way.

One group is fighting to protect Jewish students on America’s campuses. The group is called the AMCHA Initiative. It is an on-line data base reporting anti-Semitic incidents occurring with rising frequency  on U.S. college campuses. The Initiative was created to protect Jewish students  and  staff on campuses. The 2015 AMCHA report cite more than 302 anti-Semitic incidents at 109 campuses in more than 28 states, among them are five colleges in Florida.

Click here to view the U.S. campus anti-Semitic tracker.

Those behind the resolution to divest from Israel failed to mention that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East or that the other Arab states are at best theocracies that deny basic human rights or are failed nations controlled by terrorist groups such as the Islamic State.

The video below tells the story of Jew hatred, which is alive and well in Florida and across the United States:

RELATED VIDEO: Crossing the Line 2: The New Face of Anti-Semitism on Campus:


Benjamin Netanyahu Marks Holocaust Remembrance Day

Florida: Muslim convert pledges ‘allegiance to Allah’ planned Islamic State style execution

Canada’s PM Trudeau’s statement on the Holocaust doesn’t mention Jews

Iran’s Supreme Leader uploads Holocaust denial video on Holocaust Memorial Day

Benjamin Netanyahu Marks Holocaust Remembrance Day

Muslims fill German refugee camp with swastikas, anti-Semitic graffiti

Give the Nazis What They Want: Call Them National Socialists by B.K. Marcus

If you called Donald Trump a Nazi, he’d probably take offense, even though his nationalism is socialistic. If you called Bernie Sanders a Nazi, you’d be dismissed out of hand, though his socialism is avowedly nationalistic. But did you know that Adolf Hitler himself took offense when the word was applied to him and his political party?

“He would have considered himself a National Socialist,” writes word nerd Mark Forsyth in The Etymologicon.

Sure, but as Steve Horwitz reminds us in “Why the Candidates Keep Giving Us Reasons to Use the ‘F’ Word” (Freeman, winter 2015), “Nazi is short for National Socialist German Workers Party [Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei].” So why would even Hitler be offended by the epithet?

Because “Nazi is, and always has been, an insult,” according to Forsyth.

Hitler’s “opponents realised that you could shorten Nationalsozialistische toNazi. Why would they do this? Because Nazi was already an (utterly unrelated) term of abuse. It had been for years.”

The standard butt of German jokes at the beginning of the twentieth century were stupid Bavarian peasants. And just as Irish jokes always involve a man called Paddy, so Bavarian jokes always involved a peasant called Nazi. That’s because Nazi was a shortening of the very common Bavarian name Ignatius. This meant that Hitler’s opponents had an open goal. He had a party filled with Bavarian hicks and the name of that party could be shortened to the standard joke name for hicks.

Something similar has been happening in the Middle East, with opponents of the self-described Islamic State deciding that the group should be called instead Daesh.

Sarah Skwire explains:

ISIS does not want to be called Daesh. The group considers the acronym insulting and dismissive. An increasing number of its opponents do not want it to be called the “Islamic State.” They fear that this shorthand reifies the terrorist group’s claims to be a legitimate government. (“The Islamic State by Any Other Name,” December 8, 2015)

Totalitarians and terrorists shouldn’t get to bully us into using the terminology they prefer, especially when their preferred terms smuggle semantic baggage past our defenses, but neither should we reflexively refuse to apply accurately descriptive names just because it’s what the bad guys say they want.

Whether you consider “Islamic State” to be an appropriate moniker hinges on how you feel about both the nature of Islam and the nature of the state.

But how appropriate was Hitler’s preferred appellation? No one denies that nationalism was central to his ideology, but whether or not he deserved to call himself a socialist depends on how you feel about individual liberty, private property, central planning, and state ownership of industry. It also depends on how much you want the word socialism to carry a connotation of internationalism and social liberalism.

Horwitz writes, “The Nazis were undoubtedly socialist … as even a quick glance at their 1920 platform will tell you.” And those of us who associate private property with public welfare will tend to agree. But ours was not the dominant perspective in the countries that received National Socialism’s exiles.

As Forsyth tells it,

Refugees started turning up elsewhere complaining about the Nazis, and non-Germans of course assumed that this was the official name of the party.… To this day, most of us happily go about believing that the Nazis called themselves Nazis, when, in fact, they would probably have beaten you up for saying the word.

I suspect, however, that the confusion Forsyth describes was less innocent than his story implies. Those who fled east to get out of Germany would have found themselves under the authority of self-described socialists of the Soviet variety. Those who fled west landed among social democrats who, whether or not they were comfortable with the term “democratic socialism,” certainly didn’t want to give weight to the growing association between socialism and totalitarianism.

In the United States, the S-word was never as popular with the general public as it was in Europe, but many in the American intelligentsia did and still do seek to defang socialism in the popular imagination. The more we use the old Bavarian insult as if it were the National Socialists’ name for themselves, the more we cooperate with that agenda.

But you don’t have to oppose socialism to call the German fascists by their party’s proper name. You need only prefer historical accuracy and semantic precision to linguistic confusion — or politically motivated obfuscation.

B.K. MarcusB.K. Marcus

B.K. Marcus is editor of the Freeman.

University of South Florida: ‘Ground Zero’ for the anti-Israel Boycott, Divest and Sanction Battle

Miami, FL – Mr. Stanley G. Tate, Chairman of Proclaiming Justice to the Nations’ (PJTN) Board of Directors is calling on the University of South Florida’s Board of Trustee’s to veto the student government’s recent passage of a BDS Resolution, calling the effort a “blatant act of anti-Semitism and a disgrace to the prestigious reputation of the Florida university system”.  The resolution was instituted by the Students For Justice in Palestine (SJP) an anti-Zionist, pro-Palestinian college student activism organization with ties to Muslim Brotherhood terrorist groups.

Mr. Tate went on to say, “No one cares more deeply than I do about our college program.  My goal has always been to make the college experience possible for students from all ethnic and religious orientations.  This BDS effort seeks to do one thing, intimidate Jewish and Christian Zionist students across the state. That is morally reprehensible and completely unacceptable.”  Mr. Tate, a resident of Miami, Florida was instrumental in the early development of the Florida Prepaid College Program where he served as Chairman of the Foundation from 1987 to 2005.

BDS is an international anti-Israel, anti-Zionist propaganda campaign and by extension, an anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish campaign. The BDS movement calls for:

  • Boycotting Israeli products, academics, and cultural leaders.
  • Pressuring companies to stop doing business with Israel and divesting from companies that do business with Israel.
  • Sanctioning Israel for its legitimate self-defense measures to protect Israelis of all ethnicities from terrorism, and Hamas rocket/missile attacks.

Numerous nationwide BDS efforts have increased to boycott Israeli political leaders and businesses. One of the companies targeted in the USF BDS Resolution was Lockheed Martin, a leading defense company employing thousands of individuals across the state.  The effect of the USF Resolution could have a devastating impact on Florida’s economy.

PJTN’s President Laurie Cardoza-Moore stated, “It’s time to remove anti-Semitic groups like SJP from college campuses!  How can SJP, a group with known ties to terrorist organizations, be allowed to operate on our college campuses? These terrorist supporting groups are not only trying to undermine and delegitimize Israel and ultimately dehumanize the Jewish people, they violate the rights of other students through anti-Semitic threats and intimidation.”

Former USF professor Sami Al-Arian was a great example of the spread of extreme anti-Semitism on campuses. He was indicted in 2003 on multiple counts related to supporting a Palestinian group on the State Department’s terrorist list. Upon firing Al-Arian, USF President Genshaft stated, “We have determined that USF must sever all ties to Sami Al-Arian once and for all. His use of this educational institution for improper, non-educational purposes will not be tolerated.”  SJP, like Al-Arian, has a long track record of ties to terrorist groups like the Muslim American Society and the Muslim Student Association.

As the number of anti-Semitic attacks and violent demonstrations against Jewish and pro-Israel students on university campuses continues to grow in Florida, parents, students and taxpaying citizens are demanding that groups such as SJP be banned. Floridians will not allow their students to be terrorized on their campuses.

Utilizing legislative action, several states across the nation have fought back by introducing a landmark PJTN resolution to confront the BDS movement. In Florida, State Senator Miguel Diaz de la Portilla (R – Miami) and State House Representative Lori Berman (D-Lantana) introduced SR1184/HR1001, a bi-partisan resolution to condemn the BDS movement and halt the increasing incidents of anti-Semitism on Florida campuses.

Through multiple media outlets, PJTN is launching a statewide campaign to expose these anti-Semitic groups that hide behind the terrorist supporting “social justice” banner.   Ms. Cardoza-Moore is also calling on the State University System of the Florida Board of Governors to adopt the U.S. State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism and to establish guidelines to monitor anti-Semitic activity on campuses across the state. She stated that, “our state governments must be proactive in providing a secure learning environment for all students.”

As a supporter of Israel and the Jewish people, Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best, “when people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews.  You’re talking anti-Semitism.”

UPDATE: Student-Body-President-vetoes-divestment

Is Ted Cruz the Answer?

Folks, my political activism is not rooted in winning elections at all cost. It is about preserving who I grew up thinking we were as a country; my corny love for my country, belief that good triumphs over evil and my sense of right and wrong. I know. I know. I sound like a bad Frank Capra movie. However, I will not apologize for who I am.

Numerous times, I have shared that my dad was among a handful of blacks who broke the color barrier becoming Baltimore City firefighters in the early 1950s. Despite humiliating, racist and unfair work conditions, Dad won Firefighter of the Year two times. Well I am sorry folks, but that made a huge impression on me. All my dad wanted was an opportunity to compete for the job; no lowered standards or special concessions due to his skin color. Dad’s example taught me not to run around thinking everyone owes me something.

Striving for excellence and doing things God’s way won Dad the respect of his white fellow firefighters who once resented him. One of Dad’s most vehement adversaries risked his life, going back into a burning building and saved Dad’s life. The incident birthed a lifelong friendship between the two men.

Employers hire employees to benefit their business. Period. The more you benefit my business via education and heightened skills, the more valuable you are to me, the more I increase your pay to keep you. Such reasoning is not evil or unfair. And yet, today in America, unskilled workers are demanding a starting hourly wage enough to raise a family with flat-screen TVs and cell phones. This mindset is arrogant, wrong and actually cost jobs when implemented. I do not care that some folks do not like me saying this. Demanding a minimum wage that is not rooted in economic sense reflects the new entitlement mindset; a deterioration of who we are as a country.

I also have a huge problem with people trashing achievers and thinking that they are entitled to what others have worked for. This mindset troubles me to my core. When you read the autobiographies of many achievers, the common thread is they paid a great price to become successful. While others were dating and partying, future achievers where studying, working long hours, two and three jobs, sacrificing relationships, risking and often losing their life savings. Then, when an entrepreneur finally makes it, everyone has their hand out demanding “their” portion; claiming the achiever is the beneficiary of white or some other absurd privilege. It turns my stomach folks. The owner of a small meat processing company told me his employees’ salaries were higher than his for the first ten years.

At my local gym, the dozen or so televisions in front of the aerobic exercise machines illustrates the relentless promotion of America’s cultural rot; everything from sexual deviancy to lie filled liberal bias news reporting and people celebrated for behaving badly.

Folks, I am so sick of various groups of Americans running to microphones to claim their victim status. It is so beneath the legacy of our founders. What has happened to backbone, self-reliance and true grit. If I hear one more wimpy millennial whine about not feeling “safe”, I will barf.

Every Oscar season, black actors now demand that black films, producers and actors receive Oscar nominations or Hollywood will be accused of racism. In essence, held hostage. Thus, mediocre black movies and performances must be awarded or else. Well Hollywood, you created this monster, relentlessly promoting the narrative that America is a hellhole of racism. Your chickens have come home to roost.

As I said folks, my political activism is all about restoring and preserving who we are as a people, a great nation.

Planned Parenthood does a little dance every time they score an intact dead baby head because it can be sold at a premium price. And yet, politicians kiss the baby killers’ derrieres and fund them annually to the tune of $500 million for political purposes. Who and what are we becoming folks?

These are the reasons why I disagree with those who say the social issues do not matter. “Let’s just elect a candidate who will get our economy in order and seal our border; someone who will compromise, negotiate and punt the social stuff.” Building on a foundation of the economy and border security alone is like building on sand. It “ain’t” enough folks.

Here I go sounding corny again. America is exceptional because it was founded/built on the rock (God) and the extraordinary unique idea of individual freedom and liberty. Government cannot tell you what to say, think and how to worship. And yet, such infringements are happening more and more in America today. We are losing our country and our morals and far too many Americans do not see it.

It is crucial that we elect a leader who is rooted in the Constitution and faith in God, just like our founding fathers. That presidential candidate is Ted Cruz.