Joe and Gavin’s New Normal — Train Robbery, Looting, Vandalism, Protests = Lawlessness

We are now in an age when robbing and looting stores have become the new normal in California. America is now lawless thanks to Democrats.

When you defund the police you empower the criminal.

LOOTING, VANDALISM, PROTESTS: On May 31st, 2020 in San Diego, California we witnessed widespread looting, protests and rioters setting a store on fire at La Mesa Springs Shopping Center.

ROBBERY: On January 13th, 2022 we are witnessing train robbery.

The Bottom Line

Michael Finch wrote this poem in 2020. After seeing the story on the looting of the trains in the rail yards of Los Angeles his words struck us again once again, sadly.

Whence America?

by Michael Finch

Heading northbound, the 170 Freeway, trash heaps and waste, fall down and pile high on roads embankment, tents and filth, human costs and destroyed lives, of illness, drugs and wasted dreams.

Shattered might and factories hollow, rust belt and shredded lawns, boarded up stores, empty lots and broken glass and spent lives and churches barren, of jobs sold off and towns crushed and forgotten.

Global riches and coastal castles of wealth unseen since Rome’s finest of palaces, high upon hills of gold and towers gleaming over the Bay and harbors to the ends of earth, those eyes, hearts and souls gaze over the horizon with loyalties sailed off to faraway lands.

The revolt of the elites.

Spent lives, overdosed and buried in misery and ruin, long forgotten and none forgiven, a heartland once the citadel of power and might, the fortress, the big shoulders of the power of Atlas, of our might unchallenged, the arsenal of democracy, now discarded and shipped to a middle kingdom afar, new empires of fortunes, enriching few and for whose bidding?

This is America?

Coming back to a downtown of refuse, filth and thousands of hopeless lives, wasted and allowed, condoned from our elites and betters, of drugs and crime and to wallow in misery, America once, but America no more, cry our beloved land of God’s fading blessings.

This is a fallen greatness.

Michael Finch is the President of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the author of Finding Home, a book of poems.

Enough said. We are now witnesses to the great fall of America’s greatness.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: US Trains Being Openly Looted; Police Floored After Seeing What DA Does to Suspects

RELATED TWEET:

Do Politicians Exhibit Wisdom – Understanding – Knowledge or Ignorance – Callousness – Stupidity?

“Solomon and the wise men of Israel regarded wisdom, understanding, and knowledge as worthy pursuits in life. In fact, given the choice between wisdom and material wealth, they opted for wisdom, hands down. For them, clear thinking held the key to success in all areas of life.” – Pastor Chuck Swindoll


According to the Pew Research Center:

When it comes to religious affiliation, the 117th U.S. Congress looks similar to the previous Congress but quite different from Americans overall.

While about a quarter (26%) of U.S. adults are religiously unaffiliated – describing themselves as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular” – just one member of the new Congress (Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz.) identifies as religiously unaffiliated (0.2%).

Nearly nine-in-ten members of Congress identify as Christian (88%), compared with two-thirds of the general public (65%). Congress is both more heavily Protestant (55% vs. 43%) and more heavily Catholic (30% vs. 20%) than the U.S. adult population overall.

[ … ]

Jewish members also make up a larger share of Congress than they do of the general public (6% vs. 2%).

Nearly all non-Christian members of Congress are Democrats.

There are currently 9 Democrats and 1 Independent in the U.S. Senate and 26 Democrats, 2 Republicans in the House of Representatives who are Jewish in the 117th Congress.

CLICK HERE: To view a Pew infographic on The Religious Makeup of the 117th Congress.

Let’s look at where we as a people got our definitions for wisdom, understanding and knowledge.

  • WISDOM: For the Hebrews, wisdom (hakam) and its derivatives are the most commonly used terms denoting intelligence.
  • UNDERSTANDING: The Hebrew term for “understanding” is tebuna, which denotes intelligence or discernment.
  • KNOWLEDGE: The Hebrew term for knowledge is based on the verb yada, “to know.”

QUESTION: Are members of Congress exhibiting wisdom (hakam), understanding (tebuna) and knowledge (yada)?

Do members of Congress when “given the choice between wisdom and material wealth,” opting for wisdom?

Or are members of Congress driven by ignorance, callousness and stupidity?

It’s the Cultural War in America, stupid!

Solomon and the wise men of Israel prized wisdom, understanding, and knowledge as crucial to living prosperously, safely, and effectively. Even so, they recognized the limits of human thinking:

Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.
Do not be wise in your own eyes;
Fear the LORD and turn away from evil. (3:5–7)

Is the God of Abraham alive and well amongst the members of Congress? Or have they succumbed to the glitter of gold and power that they wield?

Has God, like Elvis, left the halls of Congress?

Writer, author and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith Kurt Mahlburg in his November 5th, 2021 column “It’s the culture war, stupid!” wrote:

Elections that follow a Presidential race routinely trend against the party in the White House, so Republicans were expected to do well in the assorted votes that took place around the country this week.

But no one quite expected Tuesday’s results.

[ … ]

So whence the red tsunami?

If there is a single takeaway from this week’s results, it is that American voters are far more engaged in the culture wars now than in any past election. While the economy and Covid mandates were also on the table, the role of parents in education was a leading concern. This was especially true in Virginia.

Republicans are looking to education as a winning issue ahead of next year’s midterm elections after putting it front and center propelled the party to a clear victory in Virginia on Tuesday,” reported The Hill.

The New York Times was even more blunt: “After Terry McAuliffe stumbled to defeat … a mild suggestion seems in order: Democrats probably need a new way to talk about progressive ideology and education.”

Virginia has been ground zero for a nationwide showdown between parents and school boards. For parents, the issues have been at least twofold: the sexualisation of their children through transgender bathroom policies and curriculum; and critical race theory which is souring race relations, especially in urban centres. [Emphasis added]

With Biden, who is only our second Catholic president, tanking in poll after poll it appears that his policies are not in favor with the people. Many argue that Biden, and Democrats in general, tend to display Ignorance – Callousness – Stupidity.

The Bottom Line

As Americans look at empty shelves, prices for gasoline, meat and food rising at an alarming rate, we remember the retort of Bill Clinton, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

Add to this “it’s the cultural war stupid” and you have a double whammy working against Democrats as we approach the mid-term elections on November 8th, 2022.

Rather than wanting one party to win and other lose, I would rather that all members of Congress get back to policies based upon Wisdom – Understanding – Knowledge.

Don’t you?

Remember these words of wisdom:

How much better it is to get wisdom than gold!, And to get understanding is to be chosen above silver. (16:16)

Discretion will guard you, Understanding will watch over you. (2:11)

The lips of the righteous feed many,  But fools die for lack of understanding. (10:21)

Understanding is a fountain of life to one who has it,  But the discipline of fools is folly. (16:22)

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Gun Control Comes from a Place of Privilege

Assuming we know what’s best for others is rarely a good idea.


The concept of privilege gets a bad rap in many circles, and understandably so. Many have taken it way too far, using it as a means of bullying their political opponents into submission. But while the excesses of this rhetoric are certainly problematic, I don’t think we should do away with the concept entirely. Behind all the moral grandstanding lies a kernel of truth, one that can provide some valuable insights if applied correctly.

The principle, essentially, is that certain people have unearned advantages, and those advantages can shape how they see the world. Affluence, for instance, can make someone blind to the needs of the poor. Likewise, those with an above average aptitude, intelligence, or physical appearance might find it difficult to relate to those who were not equally endowed with those gifts.

The problem with this blindness is that it can easily lead to hubris, that is, unwarranted self-confidence. Indeed, one of the hallmarks of privilege is thinking we know the best course of action for a given situation when we really don’t.

The classic example of this is the story of a famous French princess who, upon hearing that the peasants had no bread, simply replied, “then let them eat cake.” She was so unfamiliar with their circumstances that the solution she dismissively prescribed was positively laughable. Another example of privilege was when the lockdown elite told us to “just stay home,” seemingly oblivious to the fact that staying home is simply unfeasible for many working class people.

Now, progressives are typically pretty good at pointing out places where privilege is leading to blindness and hubris (indeed, they often see privilege even where it doesn’t exist). But there’s one occurance of privilege that always seems to get a pass, and that is the privilege associated with gun control.

Consider, for example, someone who’s from a wealthy, safe neighborhood. They know very little about what it’s like to live in a high-crime area. They have probably never been robbed or threatened with violence from a total stranger. And if they do face threats, they have no qualms with calling the (armed) police who are usually responsive and happy to help.

Now compare that to the experience of someone from a rougher part of town. First, the cops there are probably not as responsive. What’s more, the cops can often become antagonistic, poking their nose where it doesn’t belong (see below) and sometimes arresting the very people they arrived to help.

Unsurprisingly, confidence in police is noticeably lower in these communities.

So what do you do if you live in a high-crime area where you can’t trust the police to help you? For many, the answer is to buy a gun. Indeed, 88 percent of gun owners cite crime protection as one of the main reasons they own a gun, and people who have been recent crime victims report higher rates of gun ownership than those who have not been recent victims.

This brings us to the point about privilege. To many people who grew up in these rough neighborhoods, saying “just call the cops” is like saying “let them eat cake.” It isn’t actually helpful advice. It just demonstrates how little we know about their circumstances and how unqualified we are to speak to their issues.

To be sure, the people in these communities are often divided over the issue of gun control themselves. Even so, if someone is buying a gun, there’s a good chance it’s because they don’t feel safe without it. So before we tell them they are better off disarmed, perhaps we should take stock of how privileged we are to not need guns ourselves.

A Decades-Old Problem

The connection between gun control and privilege may sound new to many, but it’s actually an issue that goes back decades. In 1978, for instance, the economist and libertarian philosopher Murray Rothbard drew attention to this problem in his book For a New Liberty. To make his point, he quotes an article written by Don Kates for the Cato Institute’s Inquiry Magazine. Kates, for his part, pulls no punches.

“Gun prohibition is the brainchild of white middle-class liberals who are oblivious to the situation of poor and minority people living in areas where the police have given up on crime control,” Kates writes. “Such liberals weren’t upset about marijuana laws, either, in the fifties when the busts were confined to the ghettos. Secure in well-policed suburbs or high-security apartments guarded by Pinkertons (whom no one proposes to disarm), the oblivious liberal derides gun ownership as ‘an anachronism from the Old West.’”

Kates goes on to highlight exactly what kind of people are being impacted by gun control policies. Citing a 1975 national survey, he notes that the leading subgroups who owned a gun only for self-defense were blacks, the lowest income groups, and senior citizens. “These are the people,” Kates eloquently warns, “it is proposed we jail because they insist on keeping the only protection available for their families in areas in which the police have given up.”

Four decades later, FBI data showed African Americans were still disproportionately impacted by anti-carry laws, accounting for 42 percent of all possession charges even though they accounted for just 13 percent of the overall population.

Of course, none of this will make gun control any less contentious. There is no silver bullet here. But perhaps this paradigm can at least give us a lesson in humility. Namely, don’t assume you know what’s best for someone if you haven’t walked a mile in their shoes.

COLUMN BY

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Florida Will Not Enforce Vaccine Mandate Upheld by SCOTUS for Healthcare Providers

Multiple news organizations are reporting the Florida will not enforce the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services’ vaccine mandate. It appears that reason is now returned to fight back against the bureaucracy when it comes to mandating getting vaxxed, in spite of what the SCOTUS ruled.

Here’s what Governor DeSantis said during his State-of-the-State address on healthcare freedom and the biomedical security state:

We’re sure that this may lead to another lawsuit. Time will tell but we hope that Florida once again is leading the way when it comes to choosing to get jabbed or not to get jabbed. Florida is the my body my choice state.

Florida won’t enforce federal health care worker vaccine mandate

By 

TALLAHASSEE — The Supreme Court has ruled. The Biden administration’s vaccine mandate on health care workers will go into effect.

Except Florida won’t do its part to enforce it.

The rule requires employees at federally regulated health care facilities like hospitals and long-term care facilities to be vaccinated. It conflicts with a state law passed in November that limited employers’ ability to mandate vaccines.

If health care companies decide not to abide by the Biden administration’s requirement that 100 percent of workers be vaccinated or qualify for an approved exemption, they risk losing Medicare or Medicaid funding. Both federal programs are major funding sources for health care providers.

If those companies enact the federal vaccine mandate without offering employees a series of broad, state-specified exemptions, firms with fewer than 100 employees risk a $10,000 state fine every time they fire a worker for being unvaccinated. For larger companies, the fine would be $50,000 per violation.

Read more.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Dr. Peter McCullough: Is Fauci Really “Science”?

Gov. DeSantis won’t enforce vaccine mandate for health care workers in Florida

RELATED ARTICLES:

Gov. Ron DeSantis won’t enforce Supreme Court’s ruling impacting COVID-19 vaccines for health care workers

DeSantis: Florida won’t enforce health care worker vaccination requirement

Athletes Who Had COVID Will Be Considered ‘Fully Vaccinated,’ NCAA Says in New Guidelines

Biden’s True Agenda: The ‘Building Back of Bureaucracy’

“In any bureaucracy, there’s a natural tendency to let the system become an excuse for inaction.” – Chris Fussell, leader of McChrystal Group Leadership Institute.

“Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy.”  – Franz Kafka, German novelist and short-story writer.

“A democracy which makes or even effectively prepares for modern, scientific war must necessarily cease to be democratic. No country can be really well prepared for modern war unless it is governed by a tyrant, at the head of a highly trained and perfectly obedient bureaucracy.” – Aldous Leonard Huxley, English writer and philosopher.


Joe Biden’s campaign slogan was “Build Back Better.” Since his inauguration his policies, actions and administration has set its agenda to Build Back Bureaucracy.

While the U.S. Supreme Court struck down OSAHA’s vaccine mandate for business with over 100 employees, it left in place this bureaucracy’s ability to impact the lives of doctor, nurses and other healthcare professionals.

But Biden and his administration are not the only ones Building Back Bureaucracy. Democrat controlled states like Washington are doing the same.

In a January 8th, 2022 Gateway Pundit article titled “Washington Bill Authorizes ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated FamiliesAlicia Powe reported:

WAC 246-100-040, a proposed revision to include Covid protocol under the state’s Communicable and Certain Other Diseases act, outlines “Procedures for isolation or quarantine.” The measure would allow local health officers “at his or her sole discretion” to “issue an emergency detention order causing a person or group of persons to be immediately detained for purposes of isolation or quarantine.”

Health officers are required to provide documentation proving unvaccinated residents subject to detention have denied “requests for medical examination, testing, treatment, counseling, vaccination, decontamination of persons or animals, isolation, quarantine and inspection and closure of facilities” prior to involuntarily confinement in quarantine facilities, the resolution states.

The amended law would also allow health officers to deploy law enforcement officials to assist with the arrest of uncompliant Washington residents. [Emphasis added]

But this isn’t all. Now Biden has created a new bureaucrat in the “federal environmental justice representative.”

The U.S. Energy Department is now recruiting 1,000 workers for the “Clean Energy Corps” to fight climate change in largest expansion  of this federal government bureaucracy since 1977.

We now have yet another bureaucrat who is enforcing the myth of environmental justice via a Clean Energy Corps, whatever that is.

The Federal “Environmental Justice Representative”

On December 8th,  2021 Biden signed “Executive Order Catalyzing America’s Clean Energy Economy Through Federal Sustainability.”

The order adds a new level of bureaucracy in a federal environment justice representative:

Advance equity and environmental justice. The federal government will advance the goals of the Administration’s Justice40 Initiative by ensuring that economic equity and environmental justice are key considerations in operations planning and decision making. A federal environmental justice representative will serve on the newly established Chief Sustainability Officer Council. To incorporate equity, agencies will implement this executive order consistent with the President’s Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, which helps ensure that government contracting and procurement opportunities are available on an equal basis. [Emphasis added]

The Executive Order directs the federal government to “use its scale and procurement power” to achieve five goals:

  • 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity (CFE) by 2030, at least half of which will be locally supplied clean energy to meet 24/7 demand;
  • 100 percent zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) acquisitions by 2035, including 100 percent zero-emission light-duty vehicle acquisitions by 2027;
  • Net-zero emissions from federal procurement no later than 2050, including a Buy Clean policy to promote use of construction materials with lower embodied emissions;
  • A net-zero emissions building portfolio by 2045, including a 50 percent emissions reduction by 2032; and
  • Net-zero emissions from overall federal operations by 2050, including a 65 percent emissions reduction by 2030.

The Executive Order requires federal government [bureaucracy] “to orient its procurement and operations efforts in line with the following principles and goals”:

  • Achieving climate resilient infrastructure and operations;
  • Building a climate- and sustainability-focused workforce;
  • Advancing environmental justice and equity;
  • Prioritizing the purchase of sustainable products, such as products without added perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS); and
  • Accelerating progress through domestic and international partnerships.

The Myth of an Environmental Justice Bureaucracy

In a January 14th column titled “41 Inconvenient Truths on the ‘New Energy Economy’Mark P. Mills, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, wrote:

Bill Gates has said that when it comes to understanding energy realities “we need to bring math to the problem.” He’s right.

A week doesn’t pass without a mayor, governor, policymaker or pundit joining the rush to demand, or predict, an energy future that is entirely based on wind/solar and batteries, freed from the “burden” of the hydrocarbons that have fueled societies for centuries. Regardless of one’s opinion about whether, or why, an energy “transformation” is called for, the physics and economics of energy combined with scale realities make it clear that there is no possibility of anything resembling a radically “new energy economy” in the foreseeable future. Bill Gates has said that when it comes to understanding energy realities “we need to bring math to the problem.”

He’s right. So, in my recent Manhattan Institute report, “The New Energy Economy: An Exercise in Magical Thinking,” I did just that.

Herein, then, is a summary of some of the bottom-line realities from the underlying math.

Here are just 20 of Mark Mills’ 41 Inconvenient Truths showing that “Environmental Justice” is not just a joke but a myth used designed to grow the federal bureaucracy.

  1. Hydrocarbons supply over 80 percent of world energy: If all that were in the form of oil, the barrels would line up from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles, and that entire line would grow by the height of the Washington Monument every week.
  2. The small two-percentage-point decline in the hydrocarbon share of world energy use entailed over $2 trillion in cumulative global spending on alternatives over that period; solar and wind today supply less than two percent of the global energy.
  3. When the world’s four billion poor people increase energy use to just one-third of Europe’s per capita level, global demand rises by an amount equal to twice America’s total consumption.
  4. A 100x growth in the number of electric vehicles to 400 million on the roads by 2040 would displace five percent of global oil demand.
  5. Renewable energy would have to expand 90-fold to replace global hydrocarbons in two decades. It took a half-century for global petroleum production to expand “only” ten-fold.
  6. Replacing U.S. hydrocarbon-based electric generation over the next 30 years would require a construction program building out the grid at a rate 14-fold greater than any time in history.
  7. Eliminating hydrocarbons to make U.S. electricity (impossible soon, infeasible for decades) would leave untouched 70 percent of U.S. hydrocarbons use—America uses 16 percent of world energy.
  8.  Since 1995, total world energy use rose by 50 percent, an amount equal to adding two entire United States’ worth of demand.
  9. Batteries produced annually by the Tesla Gigafactory (world’s biggest battery factory) can store three minutes worth of annual U.S. electric demand.
  10. To make enough batteries to store two day’s worth of U.S. electricity demand would require 1,000 years of production by the Gigafactory (world’s biggest battery factory).
  11. Every $1 billion in aircraft produced leads to some $5 billion in aviation fuel consumed over two decades to operate them. Global spending on new jets is more than $50 billion a year—and rising.
  12. Every $1 billion spent on data centers leads to $7 billion in electricity consumed over two decades. Global spending on data centers is more than $100 billion a year—and rising.
  13. Over a 30-year period, $1 million worth of utility-scale solar or wind produces 40 million and 55 million kWh respectively: $1 million worth of shale well produces enough natural gas to generate 300 million kWh over 30 years.
  14. It costs less than $0.50 to store a barrel of oil, or its equivalent in natural gas, but it costs $200 to store the equivalent energy of a barrel of oil in batteries.
  15. Politicians and pundits like to invoke “moonshot” language. But transforming the energy economy is not like putting a few people on the moon a few times. It is like putting all of humanity on the moon—permanently.
  16. Storing the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil, which weighs 300 pounds, requires 20,000 pounds of Tesla batteries ($200,000 worth).
  17. 37. Carrying the energy equivalent of the aviation fuel used by an aircraft flying to Asia would require $60 million worth of Tesla-type batteries weighing five times more than that aircraft.
  18. It takes the energy equivalent of 100 barrels of oil to fabricate a quantity of batteries that can store the energy equivalent of a single barrel of oil.
  19. A battery-centric grid and car world means mining gigatons more of the earth to access lithium, copper, nickel, graphite, rare earths, cobalt, etc.—and using millions of tons of oil and coal both in mining and to fabricate metals and concrete.
  20. China dominates global battery production with its grid 70 percent coal-fueled: EVs using Chinese batteries will create more carbon-dioxide than saved by replacing oil-burning engines.

The Bottom Line

President John F. Kennedy in a commencement speech at Yale University said,

“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”

Biden and his administration are furthering the persistent and unrealistic myth of climate change to do one thing and one thing only to control our freedom to choose. Choose what we drive, how we power our homes, what type of fuel we purchase and how we simply live our lives.

I have learned three absolute truths about the climate:

  1. The climate changes.
  2. These changes in the climate follow natural cycles (e.g. summer, fall, winter, spring).
  3. There is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.

In a column titled “Green is the new Red wrote:

The intent of the Green New Deal is not to “save the planet,” but rather to use climate alarmism as an excuse to destroy America’s capitalist economy.

[ … ]

No rational person can fail to see that the Democratic Party is using climate alarmism as a ruse to fundamentally transform the United States of America.  But because the human ego is loathe to admit it’s been duped, many patriotic Democrats will continue allowing themselves to be led like sheep into the closing noose of the hammer and sickle.  By the time they realize what happened, it will be too late.

You see climate change (GREEN) is the new RED. Obey or else.

Biden is creating a new Politburo, аппара́тчик, which was a full-time, professional functionary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union or the Soviet government apparat (аппарат, apparatus), someone who held any position of bureaucratic or political responsibility.

Biden’s bureaucracy mirrors that of the former Soviet Union. What does that tell you?

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Howard Dean: Rightwing Zealot Supreme Court is a ‘Threat’ to America

Thursday on MSNBC’s The Beat, former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean said that the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for large private companies is a threat to America because millions will die.

“The disturbing thing about this, of course, is in their right-wing ideological zealotry, they have substituted their judgment for public health judgment, which they’re totally unqualified to do,” Dean claimed about the Supreme Court justices. “They did the same in the abortion case in Mississippi, where they look like they are headed that way, where they substitute their judgment for the judgment of doctors and patients. This is an ideologically-motivated court.”

Democrats have no problem with an ideologically-motivated court, unless it’s the wrong ideology.

He continued, “This situation is going to kill probably more Americans than died certainly in World War II. Maybe even, if we keep going at this pace, kill more Americans than died in the Civil War, which is the war that did more damage to this country than any other. The court is not helpful. They’re not using common sense.”

This is typical fear-mongering from the perpetually-unhinged Dean. Pandemic mandates have done nothing to stem the spread of COVID-19. More patients are dying of it in areas where lockdowns are more draconian and where strict vaccine mandates are in place, than in areas more committed to liberty and choice.

Dean added, “The Mississippi decision, the voting rights decision, the Citizens United where corporations are now people and can put as much money as they want into political stuff and in many cases not be found out, the court is a threat to the United States of America. This is actually a threat to individual lives. There will be a great many of them, in seven figures, as a result of this.”

Translation: the Supreme Court is a mass-murdering threat to America when it doesn’t vote the way radicals like Dean want it to.


Howard Dean

65 Known Connections

In December 2012, Dean appeared on MSNBC and said the following about Republicans:

“The fact of the matter is you cannot peddle hate of immigrants, gays and lesbians, and women by saying that God’s will was to make women pregnant when they were raped. You can’t — if that’s what you believe, if that’s what conservative principles are, you might as well go someplace else because this country has not bought it anymore. We’re done. The argument is over and these guys are going to have to change their philosophy, not just their ground game …They can win if they change themselves. They have to stop beating up on gays, stop beating up on immigrants, stop beating up on Muslims, and understand what America is really about. And it is really about opportunity. And the young people, who I think voted 65% for Obama, they would vote Republican if it was just on fiscal grounds. But they’re not going to vote Republican when Republicans are preaching hate with the people they grew up and who are their friends. That’s just not going to happen.”

To learn more about Howard Dean, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Russia Threatens To Send Armed Troops Into Cuba In Another EPIC BIDEN FAIL

Biden gave them the pipeline ……. what will give them now?

Russia Suggests Military Deployment to Venezuela, Cuba if Tensions With U.S. Remain High 

Deputy foreign minister says Moscow couldn’t exclude sending military infrastructure to the two countries.

By: Wall Street Journal, Jan. 13, 2022:

Russia’s deputy foreign minister said talks with the U.S. over the security situation in Ukraine had stalled and suggested that Moscow could dispatch a military deployment to Venezuela and Cuba, as the Kremlin seeks to pressure Washington to meet its demands to halt Western military activity that Russia claims poses a threat.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Thursday that Moscow couldn’t exclude dispatching “military infrastructure” to Venezuela or Cuba if tensions with Washington—which have soared in recent weeks over a huge buildup of Russian troops on Ukraine’s border—continue to rise.

“I don’t want to confirm anything, I will not rule out anything…. Depends on the actions of our American colleagues,” Mr. Ryabkov told privately owned Russian-language television network RTVi in an interview Thursday in Moscow. Mr. Ryabkov said he saw no immediate grounds for fresh talks with the U.S., after several rounds of negotiations this week yielded little progress in defusing the crisis in Ukraine.

In Washington later, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan said U.S. and European officials would confer in the coming days, but that no dates have been set for further discussions with Russia.

“I’m not going to respond to bluster in the public commentary that wasn’t raised in the discussions at the Strategic Stability Dialogue,” Mr. Sullivan said of Mr. Ryabkov’s remarks about a potential deployment in Latin America, referring to talks Monday between U.S. and Russian officials in Geneva.

“If Russia were to move in that direction, we would deal with it decisively,” he said.
What’s Next for U.S. and Russia as Tensions Grow Over Ukraine
You may also like

A military buildup along the Ukrainian border is further straining ties between Russia and the U.S., after clashes over cybercrime, expulsions of diplomats and a migrant crisis in Belarus. WSJ explains what is deepening the rift between Washington and Moscow. Photo Composite/Video: Michelle Inez Simon

The remarks from the senior U.S. and Russian officials follow several rounds of talks this week between the West and Russia over the military buildup on the border with Ukraine. Moscow has sent more than 100,000 troops there, claiming the troops are on a military exercise. That has triggered fears in Ukraine and the West that Russian President Vladimir Putin intends to invade Ukraine or is generating a crisis to exact security concessions from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Russia is demanding a halt to NATO’s expansion, notably into Ukraine; curtailment of the alliance’s ties with Ukraine and parts of the former Soviet Union; and restrictions on military deployments on the territory of the alliance’s Eastern European members.

Western officials have rejected those demands, saying countries are free to associate with any countries they choose.

On Thursday, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, a 57-country grouping that helped to foster peace during the Cold War since its founding in the 1970s, discussed the Ukraine situation. The talks followed a U.S.-Russia meeting in Geneva on Monday and a NATO-Russia gathering in Brussels on Wednesday.

RELATED ARTICLE: White House Considers Backing Insurgency…

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Sinema Doubles Down On Filibuster Support, Dealing Likely Fatal Blow to Dems’ Steal The Vote Bills

Conservatives – beware. Sinema is no conservative, she’s just not a lunatic.

Senator Manchin also announced on Thursday that he will not support a bill to weaken or end the filibuster. This combined with Biden’s defeat at the SCOTUS over COVID lockdowns, made Thursday the most humiliating day for the Biden Administration since Afghanistan.

Sinema doubles down on filibuster support, dealing likely fatal blow to Dems’ election bills

Sinema is a longtime supporter of the filibuster

By Fox News, January 13, 2022

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema said Thursday that she will not vote to weaken the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster threshold, bucking her party leaders yet again and dealing a major blow to Democrats’ election reform effort.

The comments, which match Sinema’s long-held stance on the filibuster, are effectively the final nail in the coffin of Democrats’ longshot effort to pass two elections bills over unified Senate GOP opposition.

“There’s no need for me to restate my longstanding support for the 60-vote threshold to pass legislation. There’s no need for me to restate its role in protecting our country from wild reversals of federal policy,” Sinema, D-Ariz., said. “This week’s harried discussions about Senate rules are but a poor substitute for what I believe could have and should have been a thoughtful public debate at any time over the past year.”

She added: “But what is the legislative filibuster, other than a tool that requires new federal policy to be broadly supported by senators, representing the broader cross-section of Americans… Demands to eliminate this threshold from whichever party holds the fleeting majority amount to a group of people separated on two sides of a canyon, shouting that solution to their colleagues.”

The House of Representatives passed a bill Thursday morning combining both of those original pieces of legislation: The John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act. But it won’t get 60 votes in the Senate, which is split 50-50 on party lines.

Any changes to the filibuster would need all 50 Senate Democrats on board. With Sinema taking a hard stance in favor of the filibuster Thursday, it appears Democrats will not be able to get there.

“These bills help treat the symptoms of the disease, but they do not fully address the disease itself. And while I continue to support these bills, I will not support separate actions that worsen the underlying disease of division affecting our country,” Sinema also said Thursday.

“Some have given up on the goal of erasing our divisions and uniting Americans. I have not,” she added. “I’ve worked hard to demonstrate in my public service, the value of working with unlikely allies to get results.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden All but Concedes Defeat on Voting, Election Bills Biden acknowledges election overhaul bills may fail in the Senate

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Jeffrey Epstein Brought EIGHT Young Girls With Him To See Bill Clinton At The White House

And Hillary covered for that pig terrorizes his victims. That’s the Democrat choice to replace te demented child-perv segregationist in the White House.

Photo: The disgraced financier was first admitted as a guest in February 25, 1993 – just a month after Clinton’s inauguration. He stopped by again months later on September 29, 1993 with Maxwell (pictured) for a reception organized by the White House Historical Association after he donated $10,000.

CLICK HERE for an Infographic on Epstein’s 17 visits to the Clinton White House.

EXCLUSIVE: Jeffrey Epstein brought EIGHT young women with him on his trips to see Bill Clinton at the White House: Displayed photos of himself posing at the Briefing Room podium at his Palm Beach mansion

Visitor logs obtained by DailyMail.com reveal Jeffrey Epstein was not always alone when he visited the Clinton White House between 1993 and 1995

Records show he brought along eight women, including his girlfriends Celina Midelfart, Eva Andersson, Francis Jardine, and Ghislaine Maxwell

His relationship with the four other women who accompanied him – Jennifer Garrison; Shelley Gafni; Jennifer Driver; Lyoubov Orlova – is unclear

Flight logs from Epstein’s private planes tally with White House visitor records showing the eight women were with him during his visits

Maxwell’s high-profile trial in New York heard sensational claims that Epstein was seeing Midelfart, now 48, – a Norwegian heiress – in the mid 1990s

Andersson, 61, a physician and former Miss Sweden, was also a witness in the sex trafficking trial where she confirmed she dated Epstein in the 80s and 90s

The nature of Epstein’s accompanied visits is not disclosed in White House visitor logs, but one of them coincided with a swanky dinner in the Blue Room

Never-before-seen photos also reveal the disgraced financier kept pictures of himself at the White House Briefing Room podium at his Palm Beach mansion

Jeffrey Epstein paid more than a dozen visits to the Clinton White House throughout the former president’s first few years in office – even bringing along with him multiple women, including four known to be his girlfriends, DailyMail.com can reveal.

Unearthed visitor logs last month confirmed the late pedophile had visited the Executive Mansion at least 17 times during Bill Clinton’s first term, beginning shortly after his inauguration in 1993.

Additional records exclusively obtained by DailyMail.com now reveal that Epstein was not always alone during his trips to the White House, where he was joined by eight different women between 1993 and 1995.

Never-before-seen footage also shows the disgraced financier – who on three occasions visited the president’s house twice in one day – kept framed pictures of himself at the podium of the White House Briefing Room at his Palm Beach mansion.

The nature of Epstein’s accompanied visits is not disclosed in the visitor logs, however, they show one of them coincided with a dinner in the Blue Room attended by dozens of well-heeled guests.

Records show the late pedophile brought along eight different women, including four of his girlfriends, Celina Midelfart (pictured with Epstein in 1997) Eva Andersson-Dubin (right) Francis Jardine, and Ghislaine Maxwell

Many of the women Epstein took on his trips to Washington were known to have had romantic relationships with him.

They include Celina Midelfart, then 21, Eva Andersson-Dubin, then 33, Francis Jardine, who was believed to be in her 20s, and his one-time girlfriend turned madam, Ghislaine Maxwell, who was 32.

The four other women who also appear in the logs are Jennifer Garrison, Shelley Gafni, Jennifer Driver, and Lyoubov Orlova.

DailyMail.com was unable to reach the four women and confirm the purpose of their visits, however, flight logs from Epstein’s private jet tally with White House visitor records showing they were with him at the time.

Maxwell, now 60, was found guilty last month of recruiting and trafficking underage girls for the disgraced financier between 1994 and 1997, and is currently awaiting sentencing behind bars.

Her high-profile trial in New York heard sensational claims that Epstein was seeing Midelfart – a Norwegian heiress who also once dated Donald Trump – in the mid 1990s around the same time he was dating Maxwell and other women.

Andersson, a physician who won Miss Sweden in 1980, was also a witness in the sex trafficking trial where she confirmed she dated Epstein for 11 years.

The fourth woman, Francis Jardine, a former model, was also said to have had a relationship with Epstein, and was mentioned numerous times in the flight logs that were released as evidence in court.

Footage obtained by DailyMail.com also reveals Epstein had photos of his visits to the White House displayed at his Palm Beach home. They could be seen in video taken by police officers when they raided the house in 2005

Hung in the hallway of his mansion, the picture shows Epstein standing with an unidentified brunette woman at the podium of the White House Briefing Room

Another photo from the same podium, apparently taken on a different date, shows him standing with a blonde woman (lower left)

Below the wall of picture frames, a green fold out massage table can be seen which appears to be the same one Epstein’s victims claimed he used to sexually abuse them

According to visitor logs, Midelfart, now 48, entered the White House with Epstein twice on July 28, 1994, at 2pm and 6:30pm.

Flight records from Epstein’s private plane one day earlier showed he and a woman named ‘Salina’ had flown from Palm Beach to Teterboro, a private airport just outside New York.

The following day, the day of the White House visit, Epstein and ‘Salina’ flew from Teterboro to Reagan National Airport in Arlington, Virginia.

The plane repositioned to nearby Washington Dulles Airport and picked up Epstein, ‘Salina’ and ‘1 Female’ who was flown back to Teterboro.

On the day of Epstein’s visit, the White House had hosted a dinner in the Blue Room attended by the president and first lady Hillary Clinton, records show.

According to the president’s daily schedule, Clinton gave a lecture and a toast after which there was entertainment, most likely from a live band.

A lawyer representing Midelfart denied that she ever dated Epstein. However, three witnesses at the Maxwell trial contradicted those claims.

Kyrre Eggen said: ‘My client’s business relation with Epstein was in the period 1994 to 1997 when my client studied at London School of Economics and Stern School of Business respectfully, and ended upon her return to Oslo upon completing her degree.

DailyMail.com previously revealed Epstein had visited the White House on 14 separate days and stopped by twice in one day on three occasions during Bill Clinton’s first term +19
DailyMail.com previously revealed Epstein had visited the White House on 14 separate days and stopped by twice in one day on three occasions during Bill Clinton’s first term

The disgraced financier was first admitted as a guest in February 25, 1993 – just a month after Clinton’s inauguration. He stopped by again months later on September 29, 1993 with Maxwell (pictured) for a reception organized by the White House Historical Association after he donated $10,000 +19
The disgraced financier was first admitted as a guest in February 25, 1993 – just a month after Clinton’s inauguration. He stopped by again months later on September 29, 1993 with Maxwell (pictured) for a reception organized by the White House Historical Association after he donated $10,000

‘That business relation ended 25 years ago, and could thus impossibly have any relevance whatsoever to the very serious charges against Maxwell and Epstein, charges that my client had no knowledge about 25 years ago, a time where Epstein furthermore was regarded as a skilled and highly regarded businessman with good reputation and extremely good connections’.

Epstein would visit the White House again months later on September 26, 1994, this time with Andersson and Jardine, entering at 6:30pm, records show.

Clinton was out of town at the United Nations General Assembly, according to the president’s schedule.

Flight logs from Epstein’s planes showed Epstein, Andersson and Jardine had traveled from Palm Beach to Reagan Washington Airport that day and flew into Teterboro later on.

During her testimony at Maxwell’s trial last month, Andersson, now 61, said she dated Epstein between 1983 and around 1991.

In July 1994, two months before her White House visit, she married hedge fund billionaire Glenn Dubin with whom she went on to have three children.

Andersson still remained close friends with Epstein through the years, even after his 2008 plea deal for having sex with underage girls.

The couple’s youngest child, also named Celina, became Epstein’s goddaughter and referred to him as ‘Uncle Jeff’, according to reports.

Celina Midelfart, Norwegian heiress and former girlfriend of Epstein, is seen alongside him at a reception at the Mar-a-Lago estate, Palm Beach, Florida, March 19, 1995

A spokeswoman for Andersson declined to comment when contacted by DailyMail.com.

During her testimony Andersson also appeared to refer to Jardine, saying she remembered a woman named ‘Francis’ dating Epstein, but was not sure of her second name.

In a statement, Jardine, who lives in South Africa and now goes by Francis Jardine-Deuess, said that she first met Epstein in New York in 1994 through her work as a model.

‘He tried to expose me to a larger world, open my mind and stimulate my belief in myself that I could be many things as I was sorely lacking in true confidence when I first met him,’ she said.

‘I asked Jeffrey for help, he was many things to me over a period of years, trying to address the various areas that were holding me back as a human being, helping me find my way into a future that would suit my level of sensitivity and my proclivity to jump into relationships too quickly.

‘He wanted me to develop skills and shared the importance of making the right choices. People around me misinterpreted my relationship with him because he was definitely more way out than the average man’s idea of what a woman could be or should be to a man’.

Jardine said that she would ‘always be grateful to have known him (Epstein) no matter how people have slated him’.

She said: ‘I loved him and grieve for the way his life has turned out. I would have wished I could have expressed myself in a way that might have saved his life’.

RELATED ARTICLE: Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton – Both Deviants!

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Islamo-Leftism [Part 10]

Editor’s note: The following is a translation by Ibn Warraq and Robert Kerr of Michel Onfray’s L’Art d’Etre Francais (The Art of Being French, Bouquins, 2021), published here for the first time. Part 1 is here. Part 2 is here. Part 3 is here. Part 4 is here. Part 5 is here. Part 6 is here. Part 7 is here. Part 8 is here. Part 9 is here.


Let’s have a few laughs when we read the rest of the paragraph in which, on the subject of “the visibility of Muslims in the public space”, Edwy Plenel castigates “recurring polemics, made up of media exaggerations in which a journalism of opinion rather than of information flourishes” (p. 107). Indeed, everyone knows that our author is a news journalist who obviously has nothing to do, but really nothing at all, with opinion journalism!

Fifth: denial. Plenel writes: “Between money and terrorism, the wealth of obscurantist regimes and the violence of fundamentalist radicals, the Muslims of France are caught in a universal reprobation, made guilty of misdeeds and crimes that are distant and foreign to them, simply because of their sense of belonging, origin or belief” (p. 64). Duly noted.

But where and when, by whom and with whom, in what circumstances and on what occasions did Edwy Plenel see that “the Muslims of France,” a new essentialization, were “caught in a universal reprobation,” that they were “made guilty of misdeeds and crimes”? What allows him to assert that the crimes of Muslims, claimed as such at the time they were committed by their perpetrators, who are closely followed by the Islamic State, would have nothing at all to do, nowhere, never, no way, with a certain type of Islam that Plenel encompasses in his plea for Muslims?

There is no universal disapproval of these acts – just go to Iran, the Gaza Strip, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and many other countries; not even French disapproval! Anti-Semitic crimes committed by Muslims who claim their religion to legitimize their acts are numerous, as we know. The list is impressive. What macabre catalogue could an Islamophile produce that would include the crimes and murders committed in France against Muslims on the sole pretext that they are Muslims?

Elsewhere, Plenel goes even further and writes that “never have the crimes been committed by so-called [sic] Muslims” (p. 129) – etc. The title of the journalist’s book is clear: he chose “the” and not “of”, thus “all”. What to do then with those who are undeniably Muslims, observant, who perform the obligations of Islam, do their five daily prayers, respect the prohibitions and practice the rituals, live the observances and have chosen warlike, conquering, military, murderous Islam? What about jihadism? It’s simple: in the eyes of Edwy Plenel, they are not Muslims… The matter is thus easily settled. In my place, on the other side of the fence, Edwy Plenel would probably speak of “revisionism” or “negationism” to describe such a cover-up.

In this vein, in connection with 9/11 and its aftermath, Plenel speaks of “terrorism identified with Islam” (p. 133) – not of Islamic terrorism. To name things, or not to name them, is food for thought. The fact that no mention is made of jihadism in a book devoted to defending “the” Muslims is significant, because if there is a problem, it is not with the Muslims, but only with some Muslims – a minority that besmirches the rest of the community, and it is a serious political and ethical sin, if not a religious and theological one, not to make this distinction.

Sixth, and this will be my conclusion: amalgamation. In the same way that Edwy Plenel rejects essentialization but practices it to excess, he also rejects amalgam [24](p. 164) but practices it with the same ardor… These are probably­­ the mysteries of neo-Trotskyite dialectics! For our author combats only the amalgam that consists in lumping all Muslims together in order to make the entire community pay for a crime (which, incidentally, he does not recognize…) committed by only a handful. With Islam, he does not separate the peaceful wheat from the terroristic chaff – which is a journalist’s pure ideological bias that is tantamount to a discreet blessing of the terrorist cause.

For it is another amalgam to imagine that those who assert that Muslims are all guilty of the crimes of a minority are wrong, whereas he would be right when he asserts that none are. For there are at least among “Muslims” those who perpetrate terrorist attacks and those who do not see anything wrong with them, and even some who support them and who are not a negligible quantity[25].

This is the danger and the trap of essentialization: if we speak of Muslim as an indivisible whole, they must be either all good or all bad. And Plenel has chosen: they are all good. Consequently, what appears to be bad cannot be Muslim. How then can we still have a debate?

COLUMN  BY

REFERENCES:

[24] It is quite common in French newspapers and magazines to warn readers after each terrorist attack to refrain from automatically associating Islam with Terrorism, by adding the phrase “pas d’amalgam.

[25]  [Onfray’s footnote]:An ICM poll published by Newsweek reveals that 16% of French Muslims support the Islamic State. This support rises to 27% among 18-24 year olds. A Pew Research Center poll shows that 42% of young Muslims in France support suicide bombings.

RELATED ARTICLE: Turkey’s Long Persecution Against Pontian Christians

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Pakistan’s Talibanization [Part One]

The “marked intensification of the ‘Talibanization’ of Pakistan…reached a crisis and turning point in early December 1998,” wrote House Taskforce on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare Director Yossef Bodansky in 1999. His bookBin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America, documented the recurring destabilizing dominance of Islamic politics in Pakistan.

Bodansky defined this “‘Talibanization’ of Pakistan” as the “transformation of the state and society into the kind of harsh ultraconservative regime run by the Taliban in Afghanistan.” This process

has been in progress since late summer 1998. Faced with insoluble social, political, and economic crises that threatened the very existence of Pakistan, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif sought to compensate by adopting a strict version of the Sharia as the country’s legal system.

Bodansky elaborated:

By mid-September, Islamabad was arguing that Islamization offered the only chance of holding Pakistan together as it slid toward political and social collapse amid technical bankruptcy and increasing political assertiveness by the local Islamist parties. Relying on their powerful militias and allied Kashmiri terrorist organizations, the Islamist parties flexed political muscle Nawaz Sharif could no longer confront. By the end of the month the Pakistani government was hanging by a thread, and the crisis was exacerbated by economic disaster and a collapsing social order that brought the country to the verge of a civil war. The Islamist members of the army and ISI high command warned Nawaz Sharif that the only alternative to chaos was to implement “Talibanization”—the transformation of Pakistan from a formally secular pseudo-democracy into a declared extremist Islamic theocracy.

Pakistan’s National Assembly voted 151 to 16 on October 9, 1998, for what Bodansky described as a “constitutional amendment formalizing the Talibanization of Pakistan,” namely by implementing Islamic sharia law. As Guardian journalist Jon Boone wrote in 2013, “Sharif tried to turn Pakistan into an Islamic caliphate ruled by sharia.” However, the bill died in Pakistan’s upper house, the Senate, where Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League—Nawaz (PML-N) was in the minority, after the Senate refused to vote on the amendment. This qualified Bodansky’s assertion that Pakistan had become “formally an Islamist theocracy committed to the spread of militant Islam.”

Nonetheless, Sharif had other avenues to promote Pakistan’s Islamization, such as by magnifying long-term trends in the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). As Bodansky noted,

Sharif orchestrated a profound purge of the entire military and ISI high command, throwing out the Westernized elite and replacing them with Islamists who are ardent supporters of bellicosity toward India, active aid for the war by proxy in Kashmir, and assistance to the Taliban in Afghanistan and other Islamist jihads.

Sharif’s promotion of sharia preceded his 1997-1998 term as prime minister. During his first administration in 1990-1993 as Pakistan’s chief executive, he introduced the 1991 Enforcement of Shariat Bill, which both of Pakistan’s legislative houses adopted by simple majority. As Pakistani journalist M. Ziauddin noted, this “Act sought interpretation of all laws in the light of Shariah and also sought setting up of commissions for Islamisation of educational and economic systems and the media.”

As finance minister and then chief minister in Pakistan’s Punjab state in the 1980s, Sharif had previously accepted the Islamization campaign under military dictator General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq (1977-1988). As the Pakistani journalist Khaled Ahmed wrote:

When ideology stiffened under the pious military ruler, General Zia, Nawaz Sharif was with him, following the lead given by him and didn’t object when the laws against blasphemy and desecration of the Quran were passed and even made more draconian. Zakat tax meant to be spent on the poor can’t be spent on non-Muslims who are counted among the poorest communities in Pakistan. Muslims who are born in Christian hospitals and study in English-medium schools funded by Christian charity don’t mind if poor Christians are not helped with Muslim charity.

Another Pakistani general, Pervez Musharraf, overthrew Sharif in 1999, leading to his exile in Saudi Arabia in the years 2000-2007. When he returned to Pakistan, he reentered politics and became prime minister for an unprecedented third term in 2013-2017. At the time of his election, Boone noted, “old foes and longstanding friends say Sharif is a changed man.” “One former enemy said the years living in exile in Saudi Arabia had partly cured Sharif of any enthusiasm he might have once had for giving religion an even bigger role in national affairs,” the journalist explained.

Boone observed why some would

argue that the 63-year-old leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) is the best equipped to tackle a daunting in-tray, including a failing economy, chronic energy shortages and an ever-rising tide of extremism. Sharif has scored full marks for refusing to conspire with the army to bring down the last government, something of a tradition in a country that has seen three bouts of military rule. Instead he chose to allow the stumbling coalition led by the PPP [Pakistan People’s Party] to become the first elected government ever to finish a full five-year term.

Given such daunting problems in Pakistan, minor changes of heart in leaders such as Sharif are small consolation. Moreover, support for Islamization in Pakistan extends far beyond a few political figures, as the next article in this series will discuss.

COLUMN BY

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Releases Video Depicting Assassination of Trump

My latest in PJ Media:

It’s readily available on Twitter, of course: the website of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has released a video showing the assassination of Donald Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the golf course at Mar-a-Lago. This comes as Iran has been issuing a barrage of threats against Trump for the killing of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in Jan. 2020. As Biden’s handlers persevere in their attempts to appease Iran at the nuke talks in Vienna, the Islamic Republic grows more emboldened, audacious, and aggressive by the day.

The establishment media has been dragging its feet about covering the threats from Iran. After all, it isn’t as if Khamenei threatened Old Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi. Threats to Trump? Big deal. So it was perhaps understandable that a reporter was slow on the uptake regarding the blizzard of threats the Iranians have issued against Trump and others.

A reporter asked White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki Monday if there had been any threats at all: “Jake Sullivan had a statement over the weekend with regards to Iran and sanctions and he alluded to the threats against American officials. Should we interpret from that that the U.S.’s intelligence — that there have been threats, in particular against Trump officials who were involved in the Soleimani strike?”

Psaki answered tepidly, without naming the dreaded Trump: “Well, I’m not going to get into intelligence here, from the podium.  But we’ve certainly seen concerning public rhetoric from Iranian officials about individuals from previous administrations, even before sanctions from this weekend, and that’s unacceptable.” Previous administrations? The Iranians are actually threatening to murder people from only one administration, the one that didn’t bend over backward to appease the bloodthirsty regime in Tehran.

Psaki did go on to suggest that Biden’s handlers would be working to protect those who were threatened, even their nemesis Trump: “As the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, said in his statement over the weekend that you just referenced: ‘As Americans, we have our disagreements on politics…on Iran policy,’ and other issues, of course. ‘But we are united in our resolve against threats and provocations.  We’re united in the defense of our people.’ And we’re going to protect and defend our own people. But I’m not going to get into more specifics.”

Nor did Psaki bother to explain that the Iranians are only bold enough to issue all these threats because the Biden administration has been so supine and appeasement-minded. The Iranians even saw this coming: it is enlightening to remember what former Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said on Nov. 5, 2020: “the next U.S. administration will surrender to the Iranian nation.” This wasn’t just tough talk. In light of Biden’s handlers’ apparent willingness to give the mullahs all they want and more, it was a sober assessment of the geopolitical situation.

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rockets Fired at US Embassy in Baghdad by Iran Backed Terrorists

Iran: Anti-regime activists take credit for torching of Soleimani statue right after its unveiling

MSNBC’s Jason Johnson: Republican Party is ‘a dime store front for a terrorist movement,’ ‘they’re the PLO to Hamas’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

FLORIDA: Teen converts to Islam, murders 13-year-old boy for ‘disrespecting his Muslim faith’

The murder of Jovanni Sierra Brand should have been the occasion for a national discussion about the phenomenon of converts to Islam becoming violent, which keeps happening, and what should be done about it. Instead, the whole thing was swept under the rug, as always.

Note the ever-witless Daily Mail’s headline: “White ISIS enthusiast…” The Mail always tries to make jihad a racial issue. It is not in this case, nor in many others where the media coverage plays up a race angle.

White ISIS enthusiast and Muslim convert, 21, is sentenced to life in prison for murdering boy, 13, and knifing two others at a birthday sleepover in 2018 after the victims ‘disrespected his faith

by Andrea Blanko, DailyMail.com, January 13, 2022 (thanks to Henry):

A white ISIS enthusiast and Muslim convert who killed a 13-year-old boy during his birthday sleepover party and injured two other people in Florida in 2018 has been sentenced to life in prison.

Corey Johnson, 21, was found guilty of first-degree murder and two counts of attempted murder in November 2020.

Johnson was 17 years old when he killed Jovanni Sierra Brand and knifed Elaine Simon, 43, and her 13-year-old son, Dane Bancroft, at Jovanni’s birthday sleepover, claiming that the victims had ‘idolized celebrities and disrespected his Muslim faith.’

Johnson, who considered Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Kim Jong Un as his role models, was known for making disparaging remarks about Jews and homosexuals, expressing support for the KKK and was described by others as a white supremacist.

His defense tried to argue the violent attack had been sparked by Johnson’s traumatic childhood and mental health issues, local news station WPBF reported.

Palm Beach County Judge Cheryl Caracuzzo sentenced Johnson to life in prison and said on Thursday she did not believe rehabilitation was likely for Johnson after he remained emotionless during the heartfelt testimony of Jovanni’s mother.

The gruesome attack happened in March 2018, at the BallenIsles Country Club in Palm Beach Gardens, where Simon and Dane, one of Jovanni’s friends, lived.

Johnson was at the sleepover because he was a friend of Dane’s older brother, Kyle Bancroft. Before the tragedy, the boys had been to dinner to celebrate Jovanni’s thirteenth birthday and had decided to spend the night at Simon’s.

Johnson told police he read the Quran on his phone to give him ‘courage’ to carry out the bloody stabbing spree during the sleepover.

During his statement in court Thursday, Johnson said he wanted to apologize to the victims for his radical and violent attack, adding that he couldn’t begin to imagine the pain he had caused.

‘I wish I could take it back, I wish I could do something to make this right,’ Johnson said. ‘I’d like to apologize not because it will change anything, but because I’m really truly sorry.’

His defense had attempted to argue insanity, citing that both his parents had also dealt with depression and that, as a child, he had witnessed the verbal and physical abuse his father perpetrated on his mother….

Johnson also said he regretted following the Islamic extremist group ISIS, and that he hoped to help people to compensate for the crimes he had committed.

At the time of his arrest for the killing of Jovanni in 2018, Johnson already had federal charges pending against him for threatening a Catholic school in England.

In January 2017, local law enforcement agencies and FBI agents met with staff at William T Dwyer High School, where Johnson was a student at the time to discuss information suggesting that the teen had reached out to ISIS online saying that he wished to join the murderous terrorist group.

A sheriff’s detective interviewed the 17-year-old to assess his mental state and concluded that Johnson was a terrorist sympathizer, according to the report.

The FBI later informed the Jupiter Police Department that an unspecified European counter-intelligence agency was investigating Johnson in connection to threats that were made in Instagram threats that were made in October 2016 against McAuley Catholic High School in Doncaster, England.

Authorities said the threats were so serious that up to 100 students withdrew from the school for fear of an attack.

One of the threatening posts read: ‘We have our sights set on you, and by Allah we will kill every infidel student at this school inshallah) #McAuleySchoolMassacre.’ The threatening message came from an account named 81daesh48. Daesh is an alternative name for ISIS….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: This Week in Jihad with David Wood and Robert Spencer

ISIS Bride From Alabama Loses Supreme Court Appeal to Return to the U.S.

MSNBC’s Jason Johnson: Republican Party is ‘a dime store front for a terrorist movement,’ ‘they’re the PLO to Hamas’

Spain: Ex-cop says National Police corps carried out 2017 Barcelona jihad massacre

Turkey’s Long Persecution Against Pontian Christians

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VICTORY: City of Asheville Agrees to End Discriminatory ‘Black Only’ Scholarships and Grants

The City of Asheville, North Carolina, settled our federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. The city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators. The City Council approved the settlement on January 11.

In October 2021, we filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina on behalf of a North Carolina citizens group, WNC Citizens for Equality, Inc., whose members include high school students who were ineligible for a scholarship program only because they are not Black (WNC Citizens for Equality, Inc., v. City of Asheville et al. (No. 1:21-cv-00310)). (The Legal Insurrection Foundation partnered with us in the lawsuit.)

Here’s the background. On May 5, 2021, the City of Asheville entered into an agreement with the Asheville City Schools Foundation to establish and administer the City of Asheville Scholarship Fund. According to the agreement, the City of Asheville Scholarship is “awarded in perpetuity to Black high school students within Asheville City Schools, with special consideration given for Black students pursuing a career in education.” (In July 2020, Ashville’s City Council unanimously approved what is called a “reparations initiative,” that provided “funding to programs geared toward increasing homeownership and business and career opportunities for Black residents.”)

To settle our civil rights lawsuit, on January 11, 2022, Asheville’s City Council approved a resolution that removes the racial criteria for the scholarship:

[T]he scholarship will give preference to applicants whose household members, including parents and/or guardians have a high school education or less, these applicants representing “first generation” college students.

The City Council also removed racially discriminatory language for a scholarship program for educators and staff of Asheville City Schools.

The scholarship agreements were also amended to prohibit discrimination based on race and other categories.

Our clients, a group of Asheville residents, including high school students, courageously challenged this blatantly discriminatory and illegal scholarship program in federal court.

Thankfully, the City of Asheville did the right thing in quickly ending these indefensible race-based scholarship programs.

This federal lawsuit and the resulting remarkable settlement should serve as a wake-up call to those activists and allied politicians pushing the extremist leftist agenda to segregate and discriminate based on race.

RELATED ARTICLE: ILLINOIS: School District Defends ‘After School Satan Club’ for 1st-5th Graders: ‘Equal Access’

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

41 Inconvenient Truths on the ‘New Energy Economy’

Bill Gates has said that when it comes to understanding energy realities “we need to bring math to the problem.” He’s right.


A week doesn’t pass without a mayor, governor, policymaker or pundit joining the rush to demand, or predict, an energy future that is entirely based on wind/solar and batteries, freed from the “burden” of the hydrocarbons that have fueled societies for centuries. Regardless of one’s opinion about whether, or why, an energy “transformation” is called for, the physics and economics of energy combined with scale realities make it clear that there is no possibility of anything resembling a radically “new energy economy” in the foreseeable future. Bill Gates has said that when it comes to understanding energy realities “we need to bring math to the problem.”

He’s right. So, in my recent Manhattan Institute report, “The New Energy Economy: An Exercise in Magical Thinking,” I did just that.

Herein, then, is a summary of some of the bottom-line realities from the underlying math. (See the full report for explanations, documentation, and citations.)

1. Hydrocarbons supply over 80 percent of world energy: If all that were in the form of oil, the barrels would line up from Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles, and that entire line would grow by the height of the Washington Monument every week.

2. The small two-percentage-point decline in the hydrocarbon share of world energy use entailed over $2 trillion in cumulative global spending on alternatives over that period; solar and wind today supply less than two percent of the global energy.

3. When the world’s four billion poor people increase energy use to just one-third of Europe’s per capita level, global demand rises by an amount equal to twice America’s total consumption.

4. A 100x growth in the number of electric vehicles to 400 million on the roads by 2040 would displace five percent of global oil demand.

5. Renewable energy would have to expand 90-fold to replace global hydrocarbons in two decades. It took a half-century for global petroleum production to expand “only” ten-fold.

6. Replacing U.S. hydrocarbon-based electric generation over the next 30 years would require a construction program building out the grid at a rate 14-fold greater than any time in history.

7. Eliminating hydrocarbons to make U.S. electricity (impossible soon, infeasible for decades) would leave untouched 70 percent of U.S. hydrocarbons use—America uses 16 percent of world energy.

8. Efficiency increases energy demand by making products & services cheaper: since 1990, global energy efficiency improved 33 percent, the economy grew 80 percent and global energy use is up 40 percent.

9. Efficiency increases energy demand: Since 1995, aviation fuel use/passenger-mile is down 70 percent, air traffic rose more than 10-fold, and global aviation fuel use rose over 50 percent.

10. Efficiency increases energy demand: since 1995, energy used per byte is down about 10,000-fold, but global data traffic rose about a million-fold; global electricity used for computing soared.

11. Since 1995, total world energy use rose by 50 percent, an amount equal to adding two entire United States’ worth of demand.

12. For security and reliability, an average of two months of national demand for hydrocarbons are in storage at any time. Today, barely two hours of national electricity demand can be stored in all utility-scale batteries plus all batteries in one million electric cars in America.

13. Batteries produced annually by the Tesla Gigafactory (world’s biggest battery factory) can store three minutes worth of annual U.S. electric demand.

14. To make enough batteries to store two day’s worth of U.S. electricity demand would require 1,000 years of production by the Gigafactory (world’s biggest battery factory).

15. Every $1 billion in aircraft produced leads to some $5 billion in aviation fuel consumed over two decades to operate them. Global spending on new jets is more than $50 billion a year—and rising.

16. Every $1 billion spent on data centers leads to $7 billion in electricity consumed over two decades. Global spending on data centers is more than $100 billion a year—and rising.

17. Over a 30-year period, $1 million worth of utility-scale solar or wind produces 40 million and 55 million kWh respectively: $1 million worth of shale well produces enough natural gas to generate 300 million kWh over 30 years.

18. It costs about the same to build one shale well or two wind turbines: the latter, combined, produces 0.7 barrels of oil (equivalent energy) per hourthe shale rig averages 10 barrels of oil per hour.

19. It costs less than $0.50 to store a barrel of oil, or its equivalent in natural gas, but it costs $200 to store the equivalent energy of a barrel of oil in batteries.

20. Cost models for wind and solar assume, respectively, 41 percent and 29 percent capacity factors (i.e., how often they produce electricity). Real-world data reveal as much as ten percentage points less for both. That translates into $3 million less energy produced than assumed over a 20-year life of a 2-MW $3 million wind turbine.

21. In order to compensate for episodic wind/solar output, U.S. utilities are using oil- and gas-burning reciprocating engines (big cruise-ship-like diesels); three times as many have been added to the grid since 2000 as in the 50 years prior to that.

22. Wind-farm capacity factors have improved at about 0.7 percent per year; this small gain comes mainly from reducing the number of turbines per acre leading to a 50 percent increase in average land used to produce a wind-kilowatt-hour.

23. Over 90 percent of America’s electricity, and 99 percent of the power used in transportation, comes from sources that can easily supply energy to the economy any time the market demands it.

24. Wind and solar machines produce energy an average of 25 percent–30 percent of the time, and only when nature permits. Conventional power plants can operate nearly continuously and are available when needed.

25. The shale revolution collapsed the prices of natural gas & coal, the two fuels that produce 70 percent of U.S. electricity. But electric rates haven’t gone down, rising instead 20 percent since 2008. Direct and indirect subsidies for solar and wind consumed those savings.

26. Politicians and pundits like to invoke “moonshot” language. But transforming the energy economy is not like putting a few people on the moon a few times. It is like putting all of humanity on the moon—permanently.

27. The common cliché: an energy tech disruption will echo the digital tech disruption. But information-producing machines and energy-producing machines involve profoundly different physics; the cliché is sillier than comparing apples to bowling balls.

28. If solar power scaled like computer-tech, a single postage-stamp-size solar array would power the Empire State Building. That only happens in comic books.

29. If batteries scaled like digital tech, a battery the size of a book, costing three cents, could power a jetliner to Asia. That only happens in comic books.

30. If combustion engines scaled like computers, a car engine would shrink to the size of an ant and produce a thousand-fold more horsepower; actual ant-sized engines produce 100,000 times less power.

31. No digital-like 10x gains exist for solar tech. Physics limit for solar cells (the Shockley-Queisser limit) is a max conversion of about 33 percent of photons into electrons; commercial cells today are at 26 percent.

32. No digital-like 10x gains exist for wind tech. Physics limit for wind turbines (the Betz limit) is a max capture of 60 percent of energy in moving air; commercial turbines achieve 45 percent.

33. No digital-like 10x gains exist for batteries: maximum theoretical energy in a pound of oil is 1,500 percent greater than max theoretical energy in the best pound of battery chemicals.

34. About 60 pounds of batteries are needed to store the energy equivalent of one pound of hydrocarbons.

35. At least 100 pounds of materials are mined, moved and processed for every pound of battery fabricated.

36. Storing the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil, which weighs 300 pounds, requires 20,000 pounds of Tesla batteries ($200,000 worth).

37. Carrying the energy equivalent of the aviation fuel used by an aircraft flying to Asia would require $60 million worth of Tesla-type batteries weighing five times more than that aircraft.

38. It takes the energy equivalent of 100 barrels of oil to fabricate a quantity of batteries that can store the energy equivalent of a single barrel of oil.

39. A battery-centric grid and car world means mining gigatons more of the earth to access lithium, copper, nickel, graphite, rare earths, cobalt, etc.—and using millions of tons of oil and coal both in mining and to fabricate metals and concrete.

40. China dominates global battery production with its grid 70 percent coal-fueled: EVs using Chinese batteries will create more carbon-dioxide than saved by replacing oil-burning engines.

41. One would no more use helicopters for regular trans-Atlantic travel—doable with elaborately expensive logistics—than employ a nuclear reactor to power a train or photovoltaic systems to power a nation.

This article is republished with permission from Economics 21. 

COLUMN BY