VIDEO: The ‘Sound Of Silence Military Tribute’ — God Bless Our Military

Combat veteran Richard Tavernaro  posted this stirring video titled “The Sound Of Silence Military Tribute” on YouTube.

Richard wrote:

As a combat veteran, I am very aware of the feelings expressed in each and every one of these photos…a tribute to all my brothers and sisters who have served and the toll it takes – put to haunting rendition of The Sounds of Silence by Disturbed

As a fellow combat veteran I thank you Richard for your service to our nation. Our military forces are due the respect they deserve.

©Dr. Rich Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.). All rights reserved.

Three Black Men Frame White Men for a Crime

In case you haven’t guessed, my title is another way of characterizing the hoax perpetrated by actor and malefactor Jussie Smollett, currently on trial for falsely claiming he was the victim of a 2019 “hate crime.” It’s a way of framing the frame that would be quite common were the races reversed.

Of course, a white guy today doesn’t have to falsely claim anything to be demonized in media. He just has to be guilty of DWW — Defending While White, à la poor Kyle Rittenhouse or Mark McCloskey. As for Smollett, he pulls a jump-the-shark version of a “hate crime” hoax, and the media (see Robin Roberts et al.) just nod sympathetically.

There’s nothing fanciful, after all, about claiming that two white, MAGA-hat-sporting Trump supporters running around Jussie’s Chicago neighborhood at 2 a.m. in sub-zero temperatures, carrying bleach and a noose (don’t leave home without them) attacked him and screamed “MAGA country!” (I mean, it’s not like Chicago is a liberal place or anything). Why, I myself was assaulted and called speciesist names last year by a transgender sasquatch carrying a hammer and sickle flag and singing “Sweet Transvestite” from the Rocky Horror Picture Show. These things happen.

What separates the Smollett hate hoax from most others, however, and makes it even more disgusting is a certain inversion of reality: It was yet another example of a rich, influential, left-wing individual not only playing the victim, but putting the onus on the relatively powerless. Reflecting Rittenhouse’s and the Covington Catholic kids’ background, the MAGA movement comprises mainly middle-class, Middle American people — the average guy. Yet it is he, not individuals such as the wealthy and famous Smollett, who’s cast as privileged and powerful.

This institutional power enjoyed by the world’s Smolletts is reflected in how the actor’s utterly ridiculous story was embraced by media, whether they believed it or not. Some did, of course. Leftists are detached from reality, and people who’ll swear that boys can will themselves into being girls may certainly fancy Smollett’s tale plausible. (You know how crazy those Trump supporters are, after all!) But there’s also this:

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it,” as Upton Sinclair put it.

Not only do leftists, dysfunctional people almost to a man, live in a world of rationalization, but the incentive to rationalize in the Smollett case was especially great. Consider:

Let’s say it’s early February 2019, and you’re a Robin Roberts or a Chris Cuomo (a pre-firing Fredo) and you retrieve your brain from where you checked it at the station door. You subsequently realize that Smollett’s story is about as plausible as Slick Willie’s saying “I did not have sex with that woman Monica Lewinsky.” You then report on the manifold holes in it. The result?

You’re condemned in social media, SJWs call for your head, and, even if you’re not fired, you become a pariah, suffer career damage and are expelled from the cocktail party circuit. And when you’re proven right sometime later, it doesn’t really matter, not nearly enough to negate the damage already done. This is for a simple reason.

In your Machiavellian milieu, the Truth is not relevant — the narrative is.

As in a criminal syndicate, telling the truth about misdeeds can be punished severely. The rule is: Don’t snitch. Don’t give up the game. It’s maintaining the lie that’s expected — and rewarded.

And part of the lie was that Jussie was oppressed, by something other than his own mental derangement, and that we live in a white supremacist nation.

Of course, if we did, the two co-conspirators who helped Smollett perpetrate his hoax, Nigerian immigrants Abimbola and Olabingo Osundairo, would never have been in this country in the first place. And if we did, we’d certainly be hearing as much about how three black men framed white men for a crime as we’d hear about a white-on-black frame-up that might occur today (but, strangely, never does).

Oh, and how much prison time would a white hate hoaxer get for filing a false police report and wasting thousands of hours of department manpower? Because it’s predicted that poor oppressed Jussie will skate with probation and community service.

Man, I’d like to get me some ‘a that there oppression.

Contact Selwyn Duke; follow him on GabMeWe, or Parler; or log on to SelwynDuke.com.

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

Muslim Political Candidates and Public Officials: Choosing Between Islamic Doctrine or the U.S. Constitution

People in public office in the United States at the local, state, and federal levels are required to take an oath of office in which they swear, or affirm, to support the U.S. Constitution. This is based on Article 6, Clause 3 of that Constitution (the “Oaths Clause”).

The Framers of the Constitution considered the “Oaths Clause” a way of binding those taking that oath “to abstain from all acts inconsistent with it,” and “to observe the limits” it placed on their authority.1

Thomas Jefferson explained it well:

“In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.” – Thomas Jefferson, The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, Jefferson’s Fair Copy2

But as I wrote about in my book Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials,3 there are irreconcilable conflicts between the U.S. Constitution and core tenets of Islamic Doctrine. It is only natural then to ask a Muslim running for office, or one currently in office, how they personally resolve those irreconcilable conflicts in order to swear to support the U.S. Constitution.

So, I decided to ask, and I created the Muslim Oath Project. In 2019 and 2020 I sent four specific questions to a total of 263 Muslim public officials and political candidates. Those four questions required a choice to be made between Islamic Doctrine or the U.S. Constitution. Those four questions are found in this brochure:

Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: Four Questions for Muslim Public Officials and Political Candidates

Of the 263 contacted, only 17 expressed support for the U.S. Constitution; of those 17, six preferred to remain anonymous. More information about the Muslim Oath Project, and a list, by state, of the 246 who would not express support for the U.S Constitution is here. For details about the rational and procedures for the Muslim Oath Project, see my article “Islam Versus The U.S. Constitution – The Muslim Oath Project.”4

In spite of the reluctance to express support for the U.S. Constitution by 94% of the then-Muslim candidates and public officials contacted, we are seeing an energized effort to increase the number of Muslims running for public office or seeking re-election to public office in 2022.

Congressman Andre Carson, a Muslim convert, summed it up well in 2019:

It’s more than just about having three Muslims in Congress. I think symbolically it has great value, but I won’t rest until 2020 we have five more members of Congress; 2022 and 24, we have ten more Muslims in Congress. In 2030 we may have about 30, 35 Muslims in Congress. Then we’re talking about Madame Chair Rashida. We’re talking about Madame Chair Ilhan. Hell, we could be saying Speaker of the House Ilhan, Speaker of the House Rashida, Senator Rashida, Governor Ilhan, President Fatima, Vice President Aziza, Inshah’ Allah…Each and every one of us has a directive to represent Islam, in all of our imperfections, but to represent Islam and let the world know that Muslims are here to stay, and Muslims are a part of America. And we will, we will have a Muslim caucus that is sizable, that is formidable, and that is there for you. – U.S. Congressman Andre Carson (a Muslim convert) – Indiana 7th District CAIR Community Congressional Reception, January 10, 2019

What to do?

So what is one to do? The answer is to ask Muslim candidates and public officials one or more
of the Four Questions found in the brochure on the previous page and then to publicize their
answers, or lack thereof. How should one prepare oneself? Here are some things to consider:

  1. Go to a political event with a few friends so multiple questions can be asked, but don’t sit
    together. Each of you can have your own question to ask the Muslim public official/candidate. Once you ask your question, the public official/candidate will not come back to you, so this then provides an opportunity for one of your other friends.
  2. Use one of the Four Questions that is listed in the brochure mentioned on the previous
    page. Review the chapter in Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution from which the particular question came and have the Koran chapter and verse, and/or the source for
    Muhammad’s teaching available in case you are asked for that information. Remember,
    4 Stephen M. Kirby, “Islam Versus The U.S. Constitution – The Muslim Oath Project,” PipeLineNews.org, May 1, 2020, a free PDF download of this book is available here.
  3. Be polite and calm.
  4. Read your question verbatim and push for a definitive answer.
  5. Be ready to handle evasive responses – use the information in this brochure: Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: Handling Evasive Responses
  6. Even if the Muslim candidate is evasive or refuses to respond, you are still educating
    those around you about Islam.
  7. Have the event recorded and post it to social media.
  8. Expect to be called an “Islamophobe,” so have this quote from CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) available: It is not appropriate to label all, or even the majority of those, who question Islam and Muslims as Islamophobes. CAIR Report 2013, Legislating Fear: Islamophobia and its Impact in the United States, p. ix

Conclusion

There is an importance attached to taking an oath of office to support the U.S. Constitution. As I noted above, the Framers of the U.S. Constitution considered the “Oaths Clause” a way of
binding those taking that oath “to abstain from all acts inconsistent with it,” and “to observe the limits” it placed on their authority.

If we are to expect our public officials “to abstain from all acts inconsistent” with the U.S.
Constitution and to observe the limits it places on them, then it is only natural to raise specific questions when a public official or candidate for public office claims to follow a religion that is rife with teachings and commands in conflict with that Constitution. And it is incumbent on Muslim public officials and candidates to be willing to specifically answer how each resolves that conflict.

…the Constitution which at any time exists, ‘till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole People, is sacredly obligatory upon all. George Washington’s Farewell Address – September 19, 1796.

References:

1 Edwin Meese III, Matthew Spalding, and David Forte, The Heritage Guide to the Constitution (Washington DC: Regnery Publishing, 2005), p. 295.

2 “The Papers of Thomas Jefferson,” Princeton University.
3 Stephen M. Kirby, Islamic Doctrine Versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials (Washington DC: Center for Security Policy Press, 2019)

©Dr. Stephen M. Kirby, Ph.D. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Top Ten Myths Muslims Believe about Islam.

The Muslim Oath Project

“It’s more than just about having three Muslims in Congress.  I think symbolically it has great value, but I won’t rest until 2020 we have five more members of Congress; 2022 and 24, we have ten more Muslims in Congress.  In 2030 we may have about 30, 35 Muslims in Congress.  Then we’re talking about Madame Chair Rashida.  We’re talking about Madame Chair Ilhan.  Hell, we could be saying Speaker of the House Ilhan, Speaker of the House Rashida, Senator Rashida, Governor Ilhan, President Fatima, Vice President Aziza, Inshah’ Allah…Each and every one of us has a directive to represent Islam, in all of our imperfections, but to represent Islam and let the world know that Muslims are here to stay, and Muslims are a part of America.  And we will, we will have a Muslim caucus that is sizable, that is formidable, and that is there for you.” – U.S. Congressman Andre Carson at the CAIR Community Congressional Reception, January 10, 2019


People in public office in the United States at the local, state, and federal levels are required to take an oath of office that requires them to swear, or affirm, to support the U.S. Constitution.  This is based on Article 6, Clause 3 of that Constitution (the “Oaths Clause”).

The 2019 elections saw an increase in the number of Muslims re-elected and newly elected to public office across the United States, and as part of their oaths of office they each must swear to support the U.S. Constitution.  The upcoming 2020 elections have seen an increase in the number of Muslim candidates running for public office.  If elected, these candidates will have to take an oath of office in which they swear to support the U.S. Constitution.

However, as I showed in my latest book Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials, there are many core tenets of Islam that are irreconcilably in conflict with much of that Constitution.

It is only natural then to ask a Muslim running for office, or one currently in office, how they personally resolve the irreconcilable conflict between laws in the U.S. Constitution and core tenets of Islamic Doctrine.

So, I decided to ask.

On December 9th and 16th of 2019 I sent four questions to 80 Muslim public officials across the United States, asking them to choose between the U.S. Constitution or Islamic Doctrine.

On February 10, 2020 I sent these same four questions to 36 Muslim candidates running for public office across the United States.  On February 17, 2020 I sent the same questions again to those Muslim candidates who had not responded.

I have detailed this in these two articles:

Since February 2020, I have contacted over 100 additional Muslim public officials and candidates, resulting in a total of over 200 having been contacted.  Some responded to the four questions without expressing support for the U.S. Constitution over Islamic Doctrine.  Others responded by expressing support for the U.S. Constitution.  Those expressing that support are identified at the beginning of the list below.  However, most of the Muslim public officials and candidates have not expressed support for the U.S Constitution or simply not responded, and they are listed below by State.  More names will be added to the list as additional Muslim public officials and candidates are identified.


Interesting Replies

Multiple replies from Pious Ali – City Council of Portland, Maine:

  • The Inquisition ended in 1834… Where are you located again?  I have taking [sic] that oath three times, It [sic] never says I should answer to bigots who live outside my jurisdiction, I hope your week is going well…I will not answer any of your racist anti-Muslim questions.

Zainab Baloch – Former Candidate, Mayor of Raleigh, North Carolina:

  • I didn’t miss it [my first e-mail]. If I have time to respond to your harassing questions, I will. Have a great week!

Shahana Hanif – Candidate New York City Council, tweeted:

  • Just in case you’re wondering what it’s like to be a Muslim woman from Brooklyn running for office: [followed by the Muslim Oath Project questions]
  • Numerous comments from her supporters followed, none of which the candidate disavowed: “crap”, “POS”, “ridiculous”, “shameful”, “vile and ignorant”, “white privelaged male” [sic], “known bigot”, etc., etc.
  • Dr. Kirby replied: “We did have 14 Muslim public officials/candidates who were willing to express support for the U.S. Constitution. I’m sorry you were not one of them.”

The List

Expressed Support for the U.S. Constitution:

Deedra Abboudd – Candidate Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, Arizona
Dalia Al-Aqidi – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (MN-5)
Iman-Utopia Layjou Bah – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (AZ-2)
Christopher Benjamin – Florida State House of Representatives Response
Nada Elmikashfi – Candidate Wisconsin State Senate  
Mohammad Iqbal – Kane County Board, Kane County, Illinois
Turan Kayaoglu – Puyallup School Board, Puyallup, WA
Rashid Malik – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (GA-7)
Shammas Malik – City Council, Akron, OH

Ali Mazarei – Candidate California State Assembly
Imtiaz Ahmad Mohammad – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (FL-22)
Public Official Preferred Anonymity – Eastern U.S.
Candidate for Public Office Preferred Anonymity – Eastern U.S.
Candidate for Public Office Preferred Anonymity – Central U.S.

Public Official Preferred Anonymity – Western U.S.
Public Official Preferred Anonymity – Western U.S. 

Candidate for Public Office Preferred Anonymity – Western U.S.

Would Not Express Support for the U.S Constitution (by State)

Arizona

Yassamin Ansari – Candidate, Phoenix City Council
Muhammad Arif – Candidate United States Senate Response
Muktar Sheikh – Balsz Elementary School DistrictCalifornia

Kaisar Ahmed – Candidate San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors
Waseem Ahmed – Mayor of Chowchilla
Aziz Akbari – Alameda County Water District Director
Maimona Afzal Berta – Franklin-McKinley School Board
Shahid Buttar – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (CA-12)
Aliya Chisti – San Francisco City College Board of Trustees
Halim Dhanidina – Associate Justice for the Second District Court of Appeal
Omar Din – Sunnyvale City Council
Basim Elkarra – Twin Rivers Unified Board of Trustees
Javed I. Ellahie – Monte Sereno City Council
Hosam Haggag – Santa Clara City Clerk
Sam Hindi – Foster City, City Council

Fatima Shahnaz Iqbal-Zubair – Candidate California State Assembly
Al Jabbar – Anaheim Union High School District Board
Farrah N. Khan – Irvine City Council

Antonio Lopez – East Palo Alto City Council 
Anil Muhammed – Torrance Unified School District Board
Gregory A. Pulskamp – Judge Kern County Superior Court
Fauzia Rizvi – Western Municipal Water District (Riverside)
Ali Saleh – Mayor of the City of Bell
Cheryl Sudduth – West County Water District Board of Directors
Ali Sajjad Taj – Artesia City Council
Cenk Uygur – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (CA-25)
Aisha Wahab – Hayward City Council
Sabina Zafar – San Ramon City Council

Colorado

Iman Jodeh – Candidate Colorado State House of Representatives

Connecticut

Saud Anwar – Connecticut State Senate
Maryam Khan -Windsor Board of Education

Delaware

Madinah Wilson-Anton – Candidate Delaware State House of Delegates

Florida

Anna Eskamani – State House of Representatives
Amira Dajani Fox – State Attorney, 20th Judicial Circuit
Noor Fawzy – Candidate Coral Springs City Commission
Saad Khan – Weston City Commission
Barbara Sharief – Broward County Commissioner 

Georgia

Amir Farokhi – Atlanta City Council
Ahmed Hassan – Clarkston City Council

Nabilah Islam – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (GA-7)
Sheikh Rahman – Georgia State Senate

Illinois

Junaid “J” Afeef – Candidate Kane County State’s Attorney
Hadiya Afzal – Candidate DuPage County Board
Bushra Amiwala – Skokie School District 3.5 Board of Education
Sadia Covert – DuPage County Board Member
Rush Darwish – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (IL-3)
Mohammed Faheem – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (IL-8)
Sarah Gad – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (IL-1)
Inam Hussain – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (IL-8)
Moon Khan – Candidate Circuit Court Clerk, DuPage County
Raabia Khan – Oak Grove School District 68 Board of Education

Karim Khoja – Village of Glenview Board of Trustees
Ameena Matthews – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (IL-1) Response
Azam Nizamuddin – Candidate Circuit Judge, Circuit Court of DuPage County
Anisha Patel – Article Heights School District 25 Board of Education
Abdelnasser Rashid – Candidate Cook County Board of Review
Sara Sadat – Lisle Board of Trustees

Alia Sarfraz, Candidate Illinois State House of Representatives

Indiana

Andre Carson – U.S. House of Representatives (IN – 7)
Fady Qaddoura – Senator-elect, Indiana State Senate

Iowa

Ako Abdul-Samad – Iowa State House of Representatives
Mazahir Salih – Iowa City, City Council

Maine

Pious Ali – City Council of Portland Response
Deqa Dhalac, City Council, South Portland Response
Marwa Hassanien – Bangor School Board
Safiya Khalid, Lewiston City Council
Yusuf Yusuf –  Portland School Board

 Maryland

Raaheela Ahmed – Prince George’s County Board of Education
Hasan M. “Jay” Jalisi – Maryland State House of Delegates
Fazlul Kabir – College Park City Council
Saafir Rabb – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (MD-7)
Sabina Taj – Howard County Board of Education

Massachusetts

Mehreen Butt – Wakefield Town Council 
Salina Chowdhury – Candidate Foxborough School Committee
Maya Jamaleddine – Melrose City Council
Afroz Khan – Newburyport City Council
Sarah Khatib – Vice Chair Walpole Planning Board
Ihssane Leckey – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (MA-4)
Fatima Mezdad – Concord School Committee

Nichole Mossalam – Candidate Massachusetts State House of Representatives

Muzammil Nazir – Candidate for Massachusetts State House of Representatives
Patricia O’Brien – Burlington Town Meeting Member
Sumbul Siddiqui – Cambridge City Council
  
Michigan

Dave Abdallah – Dearborn Heights City Council
Aamina Ahmed – Policy Advisory Committee, Plymouth-Canton Community Schools
Abraham Aiyash – Candidate for Michigan State Senate
Fadel Al-Marsoumi – Hamtramck City Council
Mohammed Alsomiri – Hamtramck City Council
Sam Baydoun – Wayne County Commissioner
Bill Bazzi – Dearborn Heights City Council
Hussein Berry – Dearborn School Board
Stephanie Fakih – Bloomfield Township Trustee
Nayeem Leon Choudhury – Hamtramck City Council
Susan Dabaja – Dearborn City Council
Dima El-Gamal, Candidate for Re-election Bloomfield Hills School Board
Salwa Fawaz – Crestwood School Board Response
Abdul “Al” Haidous – Wayne County Commissioner
Abdullah Hammoud – Michigan State House of Representatives
Fadwa Hammoud – Michigan Solicitor General
Mohammed Hassan – Hamtramck City Council
Ahmed Ismail – Grosse Pointe School Board
Angela Jaffer – Northville School Board
Yameen Jaffer – Pittsfield Board of Trustees
Saima Khalil – Candidate Macomb County Prosecutor
Yasir Khogali – Plymouth District Library Board
Adel Mozip – Dearborn School Board
Solomon Rajput – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (MI-12)
Bilal (Bill) Saad – Underground Storage Tank Authority Board
Mohammed Sabbagh – Crestwood School District Board
Eric Sabree – Wayne County Treasurer
Mike Sareini – Dearborn City Council
Rashida Tlaib – U.S. House of Representatives (MI-13)

Minnesota

Abdullahi Abdulle – New Brighton City Council
Fartun Ahmed – Hopkins School Board Director
Safia Ahmed – Candidate Minnesota State House of Representatives
Abdisalam Adam – Fridley School Board
Leila Shukri Adan (D), Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (MN-5) Response
Siad Ali – Minneapolis Board of Education Director
Hala Asamarai – Columbia Heights School Board Response
AJ Awed – Candidate Minneapolis City Council
Abdirizak Bihi – Candidate Minneapolis City Council

Sharon Dumas El-Amin – Minneapolis Board of Education
Jeremiah Ellison – Minneapolis City Council
Keith Ellison – Minnesota State Attorney General
Omar Fateh – Candidate Minnesota State Senate
AK Hassan – Minneapolis Park Board Commissioner
Hodan Hassan – Minnesota State House of Representatives
Amir Malik – Candidate Minnesota House of Representatives
Nadia Mohamed – St. Louis Park City Council
Mohamud Noor – Minnesota State House of Representatives
Sahra Odowa – Candidate Minnesota State Senate
Suud Olat – Candidate Minneapolis City Council Response
Ilhan Omar – U.S. House of Representatives (MN-5) 
Jamal Osman – Candidate Minneapolis City Council
Saciido Shaie – Candidate Minneapolis City Council
Abdi Warsame – Executive Director/CEO Minneapolis Public Housing Authority

New Hampshire

Aboul Khan – New Hampshire State House of Representatives

New Jersey

Alaa Abdelaziz – Paterson City Council
Fahim K. Abedrabbo – Clifton Public Schools Board of Education
Tahsina Ahmed – Borough of Haledon City Council
Assad Akhtar – Passaic County Freeholder
Mussab Ali – Jersey City Board of Education
Amani Al-Khatahtbeh – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (NJ-6)
Mounir Almaita – Borough of Haledon City Council
Mustafa Al-Mutazzim Brent – City Council of East Orange City Response
Sahar Aziz – Westfield School Board
Alp Basaran – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (NJ-9)
Ibrahim Baycora – Chief of Police, Paterson
Jamillah Beasley – Irvington Municipal Council
Cynthia Brown – City Clerk East Orange
Adam Chaabane – Woodland Park Board of Education
Yasmin Elshami – Saddle River Board of Education
Ted Green – Mayor East Orange City
Mohammed Hameeduddin – Mayor of Teaneck
Rashon Hasan – Board Chair Roseville Board of Education
Dawn Haynes – Newark Public Schools School Board
Melinda Huerta – West Orange Board of Education
Mohammed Hussain – Prospect Park Board of Education
Smita Nadia Hussain – Bloomingdale Board of Education
Sadaf Jaffer – Mayor of Montgomery Township
Mohamed T. Khairullah – Mayor of the City of Prospect Park
Shahin Khalique – Paterson City Council
Alaa Matari – Prospect Park City Council
Alfred Mohammed – Linden City Council
MD Hossain Morshed – City Council of Atlantic City
Raghib Muhammad – Montgomery Township Board of Education
Nuran Nabi – Plainsboro Township Committee
Niaz Nadim – Prospect Park Board of Education
Salim Patel – Passaic City Council
Kamran Quraishi – Montgomery Township Committee
Mohammad Ramadan – Haledon Board of Education
Yousef Saleh – City Council of Jersey City
Denise Sanders – Teaneck Board of Education
Kaleem Shabazz – City Council of Atlantic City Response
Khizar A. Sheikh – Mountain Lakes Borough City Council
Siaka Sherif – Orange Board of Education
Dr. Nancy Uddin – Monmouth Regional High School District Board of Education
Hazim Yassin – Red Bank City Council
Adnan Zakaria – Prospect Park City Council
Esllam Zakaria – Prospect Park Board of Education
Muhammad ‘Anjum’ Zia – City Council of Atlantic City

New Mexico

Abbas Akhil – New Mexico State House of Representatives

New York

Tahanie Aboushi – Candidate Manhattan District Attorney
Shaniyat Chowdhury – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (NY-5)
Charles Fall – New York State Assembly
Shahana Hanif – Candidate New York City Council
Mahfuzul Islam – Candidate New York State Assembly

Robert Jackson – New York State Senate
Mary Jobaida – Candidate New York State Assembly
Badrun Nahar Khan – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (NY-14)
Zohran Kwame Mamdani – Candidate New York State Assembly

Oz Sultan – Candidate New York State Senate

North Carolina

Nida Allam – Candidate Durham County Commissioner
Zainab Baloch – Candidate Mayor of Raleigh Response
Nasif Majeed – North Carolina State House of Representatives
Mujtaba A. Mohammed – North Carolina State Senate

Ohio

Dr. N. J. Akbar – Akron Board of Education
Mohamed Al-Hamdani – Dayton Public Schools Board of Education

Mohamud Jama – Candidate Ohio State House of Representatives
Basheer Jones – Cleveland City Council
Reem Subei – Candidate Ohio State Senate
Omar Tarazi – Hilliard City Council

Oklahoma

Mauree Turner – Oklahoma State House

Oregon

Mohamed Alyajouri – Portland Community College Director
Nafisa Fai – Washington County Commissioner
Nadia Hasan – Beaverton City Council

Pennsylvania

Rochelle Bilal – Philadelphia City Sheriff
Jason Dawkins – Pennsylvania State House of Representatives
Curtis Jones Jr. – Philadelphia City Council
Nusrat Rashid – Delaware County Court of Common Pleas
Omar Sabir – Philadelphia City Commission
Sheikh Siddique – Upper Darby Township Council
Sharif Street – Pennsylvania State Senate


Tennessee

Zulfat Suara – Nashville Metropolitan Council

Texas

Salman Bhojani – Euless City Council
Rabeea Collier – Judge for the 113th Civil District Court of Harris County
Nuzhat Hye – Irving Independent School District Board of Trustees
Dalia Kasseb – Candidate for Brazoria County Municipal Utility District Board Director
Naushad Kermally – Sugar Land City Council
Letitia Plummer – Houston City Council
Shahid Shafi – Southlake City Council

Utah

Mohamed Baayd – Candidate Salt Lake City School Board
Fatima Dirie – Candidate Utah State House of Representatives

Virginia

 Naila Alam – Herndon Town Council
Hala Ayala – Virginia State House of Delegates
Buta Biberaj – Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney
Ghazala Hashmi – Virginia State Senate
Haseeb Javed – Manassas Park City Council
Babur Lateef – Prince William County School Board
Harris Mahedavi – Loudon County School Board

Zainab Mohsini – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (VA-11)
Abrar Omeish – Fairfax County School Board
Atif Qarni – Secretary of Education

Qasim Rashid – Candidate U.S. House of Representatives (VA-1)
Sam Rasoul – Virginia State House of Delegates
Ibraheem Samirah – Virginia State House of Delegates
Mohamed E. Seifeldein – Alexandria City Council
Lisa Zargarpur – Prince William County School Board

Washington
 
Zak Idan – Tukwila City Council
Riaz Khan – Mukilteo City Council
Varisha Khan – Redmond City Council

Washington DC
Marcus Goodwin – Candidate Washington DC Council At-Large

Wisconsin
Syed Abbas – Alderman of the Madison Common Council
Samba Baldeh – Alderman of the Madison Common Council
Minza Karim – Middleton-Cross Plains Board of Education
Akram Khan – Mequon School Board member

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Skirmish -Libertato.US column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

December 7, 1941 – “A Date Which Will Live in Infamy”

Today, the Thomas More Law Center remembers the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor 80 years ago, on December 7, 1941.  The attack started at 7:55am local time in Hawaii. After two hours of bombing, 21 U.S. ships were sunk or damaged, 188 U.S. aircraft were destroyed, and 2,403 Americans were killed and 1,282 were wounded. All of this happened while the U.S. and Japan were officially engaging in diplomatic negotiations for possible peace in Asia.

The next day, December 8, President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed a joint session of the 77th United States Congress, calling December 7 “a date which will live in infamy.

Continued President Roosevelt,

“But always will our whole Nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.”

Please watch this video of President Roosevelt’s address:

TMLC Pearl Harbor Day Video 12072021 from Thomas More Law Center on Vimeo.

Within an hour of Roosevelt’s speech, Congress declared war on the Empire of Japan.

God Bless you.  God bless America!

EDITORS NOTE: This Thomas More Law Center column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Myth That Our Planet Faces an Overpopulation Crisis

The world is not in danger of being overpopulated, so why do so many insist it is?


Shortly after my wife graduated from college, she joined Zero Population Growth. Looking back, she tells me it was an emotional reaction fueled by reading Paul Ehrlich’s apocalyptic claims. In his book, The Population BombEhrlich wrote: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Ehrlich’s book, despite being spectacularly wrong, influenced millions. Zero Population Growth has morphed into the Population Connection. Ehrlich is unrepentant and still claims the collapse of civilization is a “near certainty” in the not too distant future.

Ehrlich is not the only voice proclaiming the end is near. The UK’s “Optimum Population Trust (OPT) believes Earth may not be able to support more than half its present numbers before the end of the century,” The Telegraph summarized. The OPT movement has attracted followers such as David Attenborough.

In the US, Bernie Sanders recently vowed to support “empowering women and educating everyone on the need to curb population growth” as a response to climate change.

Moreover, James Lovelock advanced the Gaia hypothesis that Earth is one “self-regulating organism.” Lovelock forecasts the population of the Earth will fall to one billion from its current total of over seven billion people. Given Lovelock’s cheerfulness about such carnage, it is easy to see why Alan Hall, a senior analyst at The Socionomist, wonders whether “today’s drives to limit consumption and population” are ideologically related to the eugenics movement from the past century. In his essay “A Socionomic Study of Eugenics,” Hall writes in the Socionomist:

Circa 1900, influential intellectuals in Europe and the U.S. voiced concerns about uncontrolled procreation causing a supposed decline in the quality of human beings. Today, similar groups voice concerns about uncontrolled population growth and resource consumption causing a decline in the quality of the environment…Today’s green advocates brandish images of an overrun, dying planet.

Today, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is working to aid the lives of children living “in extreme poverty.” In his book, Factfulness, the late professor of international health Hans Rosling, reports on critics of the Gates Foundation who reject such efforts. “The argument goes like this,” Rosling writes. “If you keep saving poor children, you’ll kill the planet by causing overpopulation.”

In the face of advocates for such beliefs, no wonder Hall asks us to reflect on whether we “will make the cut” if those seeking to cull humanity are successful.

We’ve all heard the SparkNotes version of Malthusian predictions of doom caused by overpopulation. Malthus thought food production could not keep pace with population growth. In his 1798 “Essay on the Principle of Population,” Malthus anticipated the suffering that awaited humanity.

The power of population is so superior to the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction; and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague, advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and ten thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world.

Unlike Ehrlich and others, Malthus had reason to be a pessimist in his lifetime. If Malthus had been writing history or predicting the near future, he would not have been far from the mark.

“The good old days were awful,” observes Johan Norberg in his book Progress: Ten Reasons to Look Forward to the Future. The year 1868 was one of famine in Sweden. Norberg shares this powerful testimony of a survivor remembering back to his childhood.

We often saw mother weeping to herself, and it was hard on a mother, not having any food to put on the table for her hungry children. Emaciated, starving children were often seen going from farm to farm, begging for a few crumbs of bread. One day three children came to us, crying and begging for something to still the pangs of hunger. Sadly, her eyes brimming with tears, our mother was forced to tell them that we had nothing but a few crumbs of bread which we ourselves needed. When we children saw the anguish in the unknown children’s supplicatory eyes, we burst into tears and begged mother to share with them what crumbs we had. Hesitantly she acceded to our request, and the unknown children wolfed down the food before going on to the next farm, which was a good way off from our home. The following day all three were found dead between our farm and the next.

Sweden was so poor back in the 19th century, Norberg observes, that “it was poorer, with shorter life expectancy and higher child mortality than the average sub-Saharan African country.”

The population of Sweden in 1868 was a bit over 3.5 million. Today Sweden’s population is almost 300 percent larger. Is Sweden more overpopulated today than it was in 1868?

Norberg writes, “In 1694, a chronicler in Meulan, Normandy, noted that the hungry harvested the wheat before it was ripe, and ‘large numbers of people lived on grass like animals.’”

Today people live like animals in North Korea. They, too, eat grass and bark off trees.

Geographically, North Korea is almost 25 percent larger than South Korea. The population of modern South Korea is about double the population of starving North Korea.

Overpopulation is relative to the ability of an economy to provide a decent standard of living, adequate nutrition, and minimize the impact on the environment. Using that measure, North Korea, with more land and fewer people, is overpopulated compared to South Korea. Nineteenth-century Sweden was overpopulated compared to today’s Sweden.

If you think South Korea, with its more modern economy, inflicts more harm on the environment than the poor economy of North Korea, you would be wrong.

In North Korea, some rivers run black from uranium mining.

The poor people of North Korea “harvest forests for fuel and to make fields during a succession of famines… Some people resorted to eating bark,” the Scientific American noted earlier this year. The result has been widespread deforestation and a denuding of the landscape.

Ecologist Margaret Palmer visited North Korea, and she saw the “entire landscape was lifeless and barren.” She saw a Malthusian nightmare:

Emaciated looking farmers tilled the earth with plows pulled by oxen and trudged through half-frozen streams to collect nutrient-rich sediments for their fields.

“We went to a national park where we saw maybe one or two birds, but other than that you don’t see any wildlife,” Palmer said.

Dutch soil scientist Joris van der Kamp reports on the North Korean environmental collapse. “The landscape is just basically dead. It’s a difficult condition to live in, to survive.”

Van der Kamp added, “There are no branches of trees on the ground. Everything is collected for food or fuel or animal food, almost nothing is left for the soil.”

Elon Musk dreams of colonizing Mars, but he can find in North Korea a dead landscape with warmer temperatures, more oxygen, and minuscule travel costs compared to the Red Planet. When communism collapses in North Korea, capitalism will terraform the country at an inestimably small fraction of the cost of terraforming Mars.

Based on its ability to support its human population and protect its environment, sparsely populated North Korea is one of the most overpopulated countries in the world.

Norberg explains what Malthus got wrong.

[H]e underestimated [humanity’s] ability to innovate, solve problems and change its ways when Enlightenment ideas and expanded freedoms gave people the opportunity to do so. As farmers got individual property rights, they then had an incentive to produce more. As borders were opened to international trade, regions began to specialize in the kinds of production suited to their soil, climate and skills. And agricultural technology improved to make use of these opportunities. Even though population grew rapidly, the supply of food grew more quickly.

The more specialization and exchange, the wealthier and better fed a growing population will be. In countries like North Korea, Venezuela, and Mao’s China, central planning leads to reduced specialization, which leads to starvation. As Matt Ridley explains in his book The Rational Optimist:

[I]f exchange becomes harder, [people] will reduce their specialisation, which can lead to a population crisis even without an increase in population. The Malthusian crisis comes not as a result of population growth directly, but because of decreasing specialisation. Increasing self-sufficiency is the very signature of a civilisation under stress, the definition of a falling standard of living.

Ridley explains that embracing specialization increases human ingenuity and increases the possibility that more people “can live upon the planet in improving health, food security and life expectancy and that this is compatible with cleaner air, increasing forest cover and some booming populations of elephants.”

In short, Ridley writes, “Embracing dynamism means opening your mind to the possibility of posterity making a better world rather than preventing a worse one.”

In their book, Empty Planet: The Shock of Global Population Decline, Darrell Bricker and John Ibbitson have startling facts for those who believe the population will continue to explode.

No, we are not going to keep adding bodies until the world is groaning at the weight of eleven billion of us and more; nine billion is probably closer to the truth, before the population starts to decline. No, fertility rates are not astronomically high in developing countries; many of them are at or below replacement rate. No, Africa is not a chronically impoverished continent doomed to forever grow its population while lacking the resources to sustain it; the continent is dynamic, its economies are in flux, and birth rates are falling rapidly. No, African Americans and Latino Americans are not overwhelming white America with their higher fertility rates. The fertility rates of all three groups have essentially converged.

Looking at current trends and expecting them to continue is what Hans Rosling calls “the straight line instinct.” That instinct often leads to false conclusions.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE ANNUAL WORLD POPULATION GROWTH RATE  (1950-2100) CHART

Rosling explains why critics of the Gates Foundation’s efforts to save children are dead wrong.

“Saving poor children just increases the population” sounds correct, but the opposite is true. Delaying the escape from extreme poverty just increases the population. Every generation kept in extreme poverty will produce an even larger next generation. The only proven method for curbing population growth is to eradicate extreme poverty and give people better lives.

With better lives, Rosling writes,

parents then have chosen for themselves to have fewer children. This transformation has happened across the world but it has never happened without lowering child mortality.

In the past 20 years, “the proportion of the world population living in extreme poverty” has fallen by half. Rosling adds that already the “majority of the world population live in middle-income countries.”

When feverish dreams of doom are used to justify controlling the lives of others, restricting personal and economic freedom, expect more poverty and environmental degradation with real overpopulation like that of North Korea. It is capitalism and freedom that lift humanity out of poverty, vanquish overpopulation, and offer a sustainable future.

Barry Brownstein

Barry Brownstein is professor emeritus of economics and leadership at the University of Baltimore. He is the author of The Inner-Work of Leadership. To receive Barry’s essays subscribe at Mindset Shifts.

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

Tyranny with a Needle

“A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of a higher obligation…To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus, absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means.” – Thomas Jefferson, Letter to J.B. Colvin, September 20, 1780

“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent, we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” – George Washington

“The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.” – Patrick Henry

“Tyranny is tyranny, no matter what its form; the free man will resist it if his courage serves.” Judge Learned Hand


Our only weapon is the truth and, in the end, the truth must always defeat the lie. Ten years ago, we would have been shocked and outraged by the very idea of censorship, but I’m afraid we’ve all become acclimated to cruelty and injustice by being exposed to it in steadily increasing doses throughout the years.

Intolerable wrongs we accept now as a matter of course, would have provoked marches in the streets and calls for new elections only a few years ago.  I cannot accept injustice any more now than I did as a teenager with my mother constantly educating me on the evils that could befall America. Fear laden propaganda has become steadily more oppressive where citizens are tempted to believe whatever our Pravda media and medical hierarchy tell them.

How quickly medical staff bowed to the “protocols for Covid patients,” when so many of the tests were false positives, many died unnecessarily and early treatment was ignored. That didn’t stop hospitals, corporations and schools from genuflecting to the Covid jab mandates.  It was never about life saving treatment, it was about the jab.

America’s Health Care Decline

If you haven’t purchased a copy of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, The Real Anthony Fauci, you are missing a great and informative read on a vile and odious man who has done nothing to improve America’s health care and is an unelected autocratic leader.  Fauci is a combination of Hitler, Mengele and Goebbels, the evil leader, doctor and propagandist.

Robert Kennedy states, “When Dr. Fauci took office, America was still ranked among the world’s healthiest populations. An August 2021 study by the Commonwealth Fund ranked America’s health care system dead last among industrialized nations, with the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy.  ‘If health care were an Olympic sport, the US might not qualify in a competition with other high-income nations,’ laments the study’s lead author, Eric Schneider, who serves as Senior Vice President for Policy and Research at the Commonwealth Fund.”

“Following WWII, life expectancy in the US climbed for five decades, making Americans among the longest-lived people in the developed world.  IQ also grew steadily by three points each decade since 1900.  But as Tony Fauci spent the 1990s expanding the pharmaceutical and chemical paradigm, instead of public health, the pace of both longevity and intelligence slowed.  The life expectancy decrease widened the gap between the US and its peers to nearly five years, and American children have lost seven IQ points since 2000.”

Congress had specifically charged Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) to investigate and prevent certain illnesses within the American public.  Instead, allergies, autoimmune and chronic illnesses have mushroomed to afflict 54 percent of children, up from 12.8 percent when Fauci took over NIAID in 1984.

People from every nation would journey to America to receive the finest in health care worldwide.  That is no longer true.

Drs. Fauci, Birx and Redfield were chosen by VP Michael Pence, the Trojan Horse within the Trump administration. Trump chose Pence to head the Covid Task Force, so the buck stops with our 45th President.  It took Pence’s January 6th failure to save the Trump presidency and the Republic before our favorite 21st century president realized the deep state neo-con he had chosen stabbed him in the back, and the Republic in the heart.

Coverup to Catastrophe

People are being damaged every day via Covid inoculations and Covid doesn’t even exist anymore.  Many of the vaxxed who carry 251 to 1000 of the viral loads in their nasal and oral pathways are spreading the enhanced variants.

The lie is that the uninoculated are spreading the virus!  No, it’s the twice or thrice jabbed who are spreading illness and death. Look at the highly inoculated states compared to the lower jabbed states…it’s obvious.  There are more people sick and dying who have been vaxxed than those who have abstained.  (Michael Yon calls us “pure bloods.”)  According to the New York Times, the least vaccinated states of West Virginia, Idaho, Wyoming, Mississippi and Alabama are seeing a fall in case numbers.

Attorney Aaron Siri has published an initial report addressing information he demanded and received via civil lawsuit from the Federal Drug Administration (FDA). Those subpoenaed FDA files prove they knew the Pfizer vax has dangerous side effects.

That hasn’t stopped our Pravda media from making demands of their illegitimate leader.  CNBC host Jim Cramer called on President Joe Biden to not only require forced vaccination of all Americans, but he also wants the military to enforce it!  Cramer adds that in order to put an end to this “pandemic,” the federal government needs to require vaccines, including booster shots, for everyone in America by, say, January 1st.”

On Steve Bannon’s November 26th show, Peter Navarro said, “There has to be an end immediately to the universal vax policy.  It’s very clear and Dr. Malone can talk about the science of this, and that we are running the risk of creating vaccine resistant mutations. They are proliferating. That could wind up doing great harm to people around the world who, ironically, are vaccinated.  That policy is not working.  The Malone/Navarro doctrine is to vaccinate only the most vulnerable targets. Always remember that we are not really vaccinating people, that is not a vaccination.”

Peter Navarro and Dr. Robert Malone are still pushing this vax for the “most vulnerable.”  Who are they?  The elderly, often referred to as “useless eaters” by the proponents of depopulation and genocide, are most likely to have deleterious side effects from the jab.

Bill Gates believes we must reduce the population of the world by at least a billion people and this will be done by abortion and vaccine euthanasia, whereas United Nations Agenda 21/30 believes the world population must be reduced by 85 percent.  Most of their vaccination program had disastrous results, causing the very illness, polio for example in India, and sterilizing young women in Kenya with modified tetanus vaccines. Many of the children died. Many of the programs were carried out with the backing of the World Health Organization (WHO) and, yes, the UN Agency responsible for the Protection of Children, UNICEF.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is calling for “Investigations into the ‘Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’ for Medical Malpractice and Crimes Against Humanity.” Also see, Coronavirus – No Vaccine Is Needed to Cure It.

All Roads Lead to the Vaccine

There are places in Southeast Asia and Europe where the groundwork is being laid for compulsory vaccination, where you’ll be forcibly jabbed.  That is how bad the stakeholders want vaccination.  The stakeholders are Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, AstraZeneca, the CDC, NIH, FDA, AMA, the White House, Gates Foundation and WHO.  We’ve never had this before, this massive propaganda program.

It’s a “needle in every arm,” as Dr. Peter McCullough has explained in many interviews.  As for Covid recovered patients, why would these stakeholders want a needle in every arm when recovered have God’s natural immunity?

Only two months of investigations were done for these jabs that could give you everything from a sore arm to death.  They take your information, get you to sign a release and you are now in a database.

Recent visits to two new hand surgeons, since my previous surgeon retired early, have let me know that they are all about the protocols to save their sorry backsides, and they refuse to believe in God’s natural immunity. They tell me I should get the vax despite recovery from C-19 and verified antibodies.  I have been in the home of a friend who is 48 and has Delta and was very sick.  I am not worried that I will catch anything.

North Carolina just passed a law that 12-year-old youngsters can make their own decisions on the vax, and it could be their fatal decision. In America and in Europe, thousands die on days one, two, and three after the vaccine.  This is despotic tyranny.

Why are we pushing this in a way where people’s jobs, education and livelihood decide on a position that is potentially fatal?  So many parents want their children to go to college this year, but they don’t want them forced into taking an experimental jab that could kill or cripple them.  The internet is full of these cases; blood clots, strokes, immediate death, pericarditis and myocarditis to name just a few.  Dr. Peter McCullough says that he cannot recommend this injection because it has passed all thresholds to being a safe product.  It’s not just Johnson and Johnson, in fact, more of the safety events have occurred with Pfizer and Moderna.

There are now papers by prominent worldwide scientists calling for a halt in the program. There are prominent virologists, including Nobel Prize winners who have said, “If we vax to the long-gone Wuhan Covid spike protein, it’s going to grow super bugs that will really wipe out populations.” Dr. Michael Yeadon, former top scientist and VP at Pfizer has said, “You are 50 times more likely to die of the vax than of Covid.”

I believe this is what is wanted by the stakeholders…depopulation via genocide and vaccine euthanasia.

Dr. Peter McCullough believes indiscriminate vaccination is a horrendous bioweapon that has been thrust onto the public and will cause great personal harm which it already has accomplished.

VAERS

Only one percent of the vaccine death and adverse events are reported on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in America.  Why?  It takes a half hour to fill out the report and at the end of every page it says, “Warning, federal offense and severe fines and penalties if falsified reports.”

People are talking to each other; they know the vaccines are not safe and now they want children without parental oversight to have these jabs! And get this…now they want to be in the church!  If your church promotes this, run to the nearest exit!

Whitney Webb, a professional writer, researcher and journalist said that this is what globalists have been waiting for.  Whitney believes they’re waiting for a way of marking people.  When you get a vaccine, you’re marked in the database and this can be used for trade, commerce, behavior modification. Dr. McCullough says you can see it in Dallas where they’ve announced that you can’t go to a Dallas Mavericks game unless you’re vaccinated.

Colleges today are announcing they’re not giving any credits even to natural God given immunity.  And it goes against all previous science.  Have you had chicken pox, measles, mumps, whooping cough?  You’re immune for life!  Every scientist in the world knows that natural immunity is way better than the vax immunity.  Why is faulty vax immunity the priority and natural immunity doesn’t count?

Dr. McCullough agrees with Whitney Webb and believes the vax is a way of marking people, similar to communist China’s social credit system.  The vax is just the starter, they’re already prepping people for numerous boosters.  McCullough asks, “What product is there that is indemnified, where if something goes wrong, you have no recourse?”  When a pregnant woman gets vaccinated, she has no maternal fetal rights.   Something happens to her baby and she’s out of luck?  This is extraordinary what Americans are doing and accepting.

As of December 4th, 2021, 2,809 dead babies were reported in VAERS following Covid shots.  New documents prove Pfizer, the FDA, and the CDC knew the shots were not safe for pregnant women.

The Nuremberg Code was enacted to stop sadistic human medical experimentation from ever happening again, but individual European states and now the entire E.U. are ready to scrap the code.

A Nuremberg 2.0 trial against world leaders for crimes against humanity has kicked off in Poland.  Attorneys, doctors and researchers are joining together and are willing to go into an international court and testify about the genocidal efforts of those who launched the viral bioweapon and the death shots.  Let us hope and pray that this proves successful for the survival of humanity.

Vaccine Safety Data

Not just our older vaccines, but newer vaccines like shingles, Hepatitis B, Meningococcal vaccines demand a minimum of two years of safety data codified into regulatory rules for the manufacturers.  That was all thrown out for the Covid vax and it was two-month “warp speed.”  The idea that we could vaccinate people who were not even tested in the trials has never been done before.  The very first pregnant woman vaxxed in the US was done without any knowledge of safety or efficacy.

The argument was that Covid was a very bad illness and 600K people died so everyone needs the jab and they need it now.  But as Dr. McCullough and other outspoken and honest physicians and scientists have stated, 85% of those people could have been saved with early home treatments which were actively suppressed and quashed by the stakeholders and Pravda media.  Let’s see the “safety” of these vaccines, because there is none being shown!  Americans never received weekly updates on vaccine safety from federal officials.  The lack of these two things are the largest examples of medical malfeasance, wrongdoing by those in authority, in all medical regulatory history.

There were no updates on treatment, no promotion of early treatment to reduce hospitalization and death, and now when we release the vaccine, why are there no safety updates, why are there no attempts for risk mitigation in terms of making the vaccine program safer?

Dr. McCullough stated, “Never, out of the box, is a brand-new technology tried on a pregnant woman.  We know this vax technology produces the dangerous spike protein. The Wuhan spike protein, the spicule on the ball of the virus itself which damages blood vessels and causes blood clotting, and all of them do, we would never unleash that into a pregnant woman’s body.  Something is very wrong with what’s going on.  What’s going on now in the world, these are examples, clear cut examples, of wrong doing, that is at such a high level.  The group think is in the wrong direction in such a consistent and overwhelming way that people are being harmed in an extraordinary fashion.”

Conclusion

The stakeholders have continually promoted Sars-coV-2 as something far worse than it is to push everyone into accepting the Covid inoculations. Loneliness and lockdowns actually did more damage, but was the impetus to “a needle in every arm.”  Early treatment was the key, but an early treatment meant there was no need for a “vaccine.” Treatment was quashed while thousands needlessly died, and Americans were told normalcy would only return with the “warp speed” vax. The fear propaganda worked and Pravda media promoted mass “vaccination.”

Vaxxing the elderly and infirm came first, then pregnant women, and the unborn died in record numbers.  Next were injections for the Covid recovered.  Now they’re on to our children and soon to our babies.  How many have to die before this evil is stopped?  The limit to shut down a vax program is 25 to 50 deaths as we saw with the swine flu in 1976.  We have lost thousands in America alone.  Scroll through the VAERS summary for Covid jabs, remembering this is only one percent of reported deaths or adverse effects.

In America, with about 100 million receiving the Covid jab, this is far and away the most lethal, toxic, biologic agent ever injected into a human body in American history and it’s going strong.  There is no mention of safety by our officials, with wild enthusiasm by our hospitals and hospital administrators, with doctors supporting it, many of whom are saying they won’t see patients in offices if they’re not jabbed.

It has never been about the virus; it has always been about the vaccine.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Dangerous Dope AOC: Smash and Grab Robberies Not Really Happening

From the story: New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was slammed by Republicans and business leaders following an interview where she cast doubt on whether rampant smash-and-grabs are actually occurring. “A lot of these allegations of organized retail theft are not actually panning out,” Ocasio-Cortez said in an interview with The Washington Times last week. “I believe it’s a Walgreens in California cited it, but the data didn’t back it up,” she added (Yahoo).  Her comments were not appreciated by those suffering from the crimes (Washington Times).

AOC slammed for comments on smash-and-grab thefts

The congresswoman is being slammed after she said allegations of theft “are not actually panning out.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is being slammed by Republican colleagues and business owners over comments she made last week seemingly dismissing “smash-and-grab” theft claims during an interview with The Washington Times.

“A lot of these allegations of organized retail theft are not actually panning out,” the Democratic Socialists of America member said. “I believe it’s a Walgreens in California cited it, but the data didn’t back it up.”

A viral video from June shows a man loading a garbage bag with loot from a Walgreens in San Francisco.

Five Walgreens in San Francisco were closed last month due to “ongoing organized retail theft,” Walgreens told ABC 7.

“Organized retail theft continues to be a challenge facing retailers across San Francisco, and we are not immune to that. Retail theft across our San Francisco stores has continued to increase in the past few months to five times our chain average,” Walgreens stated.

Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) told the Washington Times, “I don’t know what data she is talking about.”

“You don’t really need much data from someplace in San Francisco or California. All you need to do is walk down the street to the CVS in Eastern Market,” he said. Eastern Market is about one mile from the U.S. Capitol.

“I’ve seen on multiple occasions when I’ve been in there buying things, someone will come in and raid a shelf and walk out,” the Illinois Republican said.

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) said Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks were “tone-deaf and offensive” to the family of the TV news security guard who was shot and killed in San Francisco last week while protecting a news crew covering a smash-and-grab theft.

Retail Industry Leaders Association official Jason Brewer told the Times, “Respectfully, the congresswoman has no idea what she is talking about. Both the data and stack of video evidence makes fairly clear that this is a growing problem in need of solutions.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s office did not respond to the Washington Times’ request for further comment.

A crime wave of smash-and-grab theft is sweeping across the nation. Just on Black Friday, Chicago, Minnesota and Los Angeles were hit by mobs of thieves.

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.

TAKE ACTION: U.S. Senate considers Build Back Better $5 trillion socialist spending bill.

U.S. Senate considers Build Back Better $5 trillion socialist spending bill. Please send email to moderate Democrat Senators.


Click here to send your email to urge Senators Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Mark Kelly, Maggie Hassan, Jon Tester, Chris Coons, Tom Carper and Angus King to vote against the Build Back better bill.


To see this alert in your internet browser and share this article click here.

The United States Senate is currently considering the $1.75 trillion Build Back Better bill after it passed in the House of Representatives.  CBO scores the bill at $1.68 trillion.   However, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the current cost at $2.2 trillion but rising to $4.9 trillion with extensions.

Senator Bill Hagerty slams Biden’s Build Back Better, says it’s designed to create government reliance.  Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ is the very definition of cradle-to-grave, big-government dependency.  Democrats would pull the ladder from aspiring Americans and create a permanent status of government-run mediocrity.  Senator Lindsey Graham said this about Build Back Better. “This is the biggest step toward socialism in my lifetime.”  Socialism is hostile toward a wide range of liberties that Americans have cherished for hundreds of years.  Socialism is very oppressive toward religious liberties especially towards Christians and Jews.  Socialism has a long history of suppressing freedom of speech which is witnessed daily in the leftist run “cancel culture.”

The Build Back Better bill will most likely add more inflationary spending that will further exacerbate grocery costs, gasoline prices, and home energy costs.  It will also increase the tax burden on taxpayers, take valuable resources needed to strengthen Medicare, expand socialist spending and increase the national debt.

Not only will the additional new spending proposed for green energy likely increase inflation it would also most likely impair the production of current affordable energy sources that Americans have relied upon for decades.

It is estimated that Medicare will run out of funds in 2026. Instead of wasting trillions of dollars on ineffective green energy and creating new social programs congress should be legislatively working to find ways to strengthen Medicare.

Many provisions of Build Back Better are priced for the short term but when calculations consider extensions the cost of the bill drastically increases close to $5 trillion.

President Biden tells Americans that “Build Back Better will reduce not increase inflation.”  He tells Americans that the “bill is fully funded and won’t cost taxpayers a dime.”  Americans are tired of such lies and have had enough of irresponsible public policies that have hurt their family budgets and threatened their public safety.

Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send to urge moderate Democrat Senators Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Mark Kelly, Maggie Hassan, Jon Tester, Chris Coons, Tom Carper and Angus King to vote against the Build Back better bill.

To send your email, please click the following link, enter your name and email address then click the “Send Your Message” button. You may also edit the subject or message text if you wish.


Click here to send your email to urge Senators Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Mark Kelly, Maggie Hassan, Jon Tester, Chris Coons, Tom Carper and Angus King to vote against the Build Back better bill.


Contact information:

Senator Joe Manchin
info@joemanchinwv.com
wes_kungel@manchin.senate.gov

Senator Kyrsten Sinema
kyrsten@kyrstensinema.com
info@kyrstensinema.com
meg_joseph@sinema.senate.gov

Senator Mark Kelly, Arizona
mark@markkelly.com
info@markkelly.com
jennifer_cox@kelly.senate.gov

Senator Maggie Hassan, D-N.H.
Marc Goldberg, Chief of Staff
info@maggiehassan.com
maggie@maggiehassan.com
marc_goldberg@hassan.senate.gov

Senator Jon Tester, Montana
info@jontester.com
dylan_laslovich@tester.senate.gov

Senator Chris Coons, Delaware
chris@chriscoons.com
info@chriscoons.com
jonathan_stahler@coons.senate.gov

Senator Tom Carper, Delaware
tom@carperfordelaware.com
info@carperfordelaware.com
lucy_xiao@carper.senate.gov

Senator Angus King, Maine
info@angusformaine.com
cathleen_connery_dawe@king.senate.gov
info@joemanchinwv.com

Renewable Energy Experts Cast Doubt On Biden’s Wind Power Plans

The Biden administration’s aggressive plans to transition away from fossil fuels to a decarbonized electric grid may be impossible to achieve, according to energy experts.

To achieve President Joe Biden’s net-zero emissions by 2050 goal, for example, the U.S. would need to triple its existing transmission line infrastructure, according to a 2020 Princeton University study. The U.S. would also need to invest $3.4 trillion in transmission line expansions, including lines connecting new solar and wind energy generation to the grid, the study concluded.

“The current power grid took 150 years to build. Now, to get to net-zero emissions by 2050, we must build that amount of transmission again in the next 15 years and then build that much more again in the 15 years after that,” Jesse Jenkins, a Princeton researcher and co-author of the study, said, E&E News reported.

Since Biden took office, he has pledged to cut U.S. emissions 50% by 2030, have a 100% carbon-free grid by 2035 and have the economy reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. As part of the president’s clean energy agenda, the Department of the Interior unveiled plans to fund up to seven offshore wind farms nationwide with a total capacity of 30 gigawatts (GW) by 2030 in October.

However, the 30 GW of power proposal falls far short of the 300 GW that offshore wind farms on the East Coast would need to produce to achieve net-zero, Tufts University environmental engineering expert Eric Hines said, according to E&E News.

“Once we get beyond that first 30 GW, we are really going to have our hands tied as an industry,” Avangrid Renewables president Bill White said during a recent conference, E&E News reported.

The Oregon-based Avangrid is a major developer of renewable energy technology that owns a 50% stake in a wind project off the coast of Massachusetts. The project, which is under construction and is on pace to be the first of its kind in the U.S., will consist of 62 wind turbines and generate 800 megawatts per year.

Overall, there are just 14 offshore projects in development along the East Coast, E&E News reported. While the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) continues to coordinate with a number of states on several projects, the agency has noted that the U.S. will need more wind projection to reach its energy goals.

“We will indeed need more capacity,” BOEM’s head of renewable energy, James Bennet, said, according to E&E News.

Wind and solar generation, though, have been criticized for being unreliable sources of energy since they almost never produce the amount of power they are capable of. Offshore wind, for example, produces just 45% of its energy capacity because of its intermittent production capability, Energy Information Administration data showed.

“We’ve supplanted geographically-specific policies for a general policy that wind and solar are generally good and fossil fuel is bad,” American Institute for Economic Research senior faculty Ryan Yonk previously told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “And that puts the ability to consistently produce energy at a reasonable price in jeopardy.”

COLUMN BY

THOMAS CATENACCI

Energy and environment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Cannot Power The World With Solar Panels And Wind Turbines Alone’: Bipartisan Lawmakers Advocate For Increased Nuclear Energy

RELATED VIDEO: Florida Governor DeSantis Exposes “Climate Change” Agenda.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Vaccines are NOT safe and effective!

It’s only been two weeks since I last reported to you on COVID vaccine injuries and deaths, but there’s a lot going on.

Since my last report, the number of adverse reaction reports filed about COVID vaccines in the U.S. has topped 900,000 and the number of deaths shortly following COVID vaccination now exceeds 19,000, according to official government numbers.  The adverse reactions and deaths associated with COVID vaccines dwarf all other vaccines combined since the vaccine injury reporting system began 30 years ago.  The numbers for prion brain diseases and unborn baby deaths follow the same pattern.  But the COVID vaccines are ‘safe and effective’, right?  That’s what your government wants you to believe.  What do you think, after hearing these numbers?  Think there might be a problem here?

If numbers don’t grab you, real stories about what happened to real people might.  A Texas man died from heart problems shortly after being forced to take the Moderna vaccine to stay eligible for a lung transplant.  A 13-year-old Canadian girl’s heart stopped after getting the vaccine, leaving her in critical condition.  A former Australian pro basketball player suffered pericarditis heart problems after getting the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.

The government, apparently, refuses to do the indicated safety studies, but other research is starting to come in.  Research scientists found a possible explanation for why the Astra Zeneca COVID vaccine may cause blood clots.  They published their findings in a scientific journal.

Twitter labeled the American Heart Association website unsafe after the Association published a report linking COVID vaccines to heart inflammation.  Watch out, or the government’s narrative enforcers like Twitter will break your kneecaps if you dare go against the narrative.   At least the American Heart Association’s research got published.  Similar research findings have been completely suppressed.

Meanwhile in Europe, where the vaccine injury numbers are just as bad, hundreds attended a ‘March of the Dead’ in Parma, Italy to mourn the loss of loved ones they believe were killed by COVID vaccines.  A similar vigil was held in South Korea.

But don’t worry, the vaccines are ‘safe and effective’.  I know because my government told me so.

If you believe that, ask yourself why the government has established a compensation fund for injuries and death resulting from COVID vaccines.  Kind of blows up the narrative, doesn’t it?  There haven’t been any payouts yet, but liability is continuing to mount as the adverse reaction and death numbers grow by the day.  It looks like 40,000 Americans are already permanently disabled by COVID vaccines.  How much is that gonna cost and who’s gonna pay?  You can be a sheep and not question your government, but you can’t do it for free, there’s a price to pay.

Visit The Daily Skirmish

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Dr. Fauci Tells Americans Should Require Holiday Guests To Prove They Are Vaccinated

Jeff Crouere: Opposition Grows to Vaccine Mandates.

RELATED ARTICLE: COVID-19 and the Ghosts of Europe’s Past

RELATED TWEET:

Rubens’ “Elevation”

Brad Miner: Peter Paul Rubens’ greatest painting calls us to ask ourselves: How weighty are our sins? How backbreakingly heavy are the sins of the world? And how does evil cooperate in our redemption?


Some think of the paintings of Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) as mostly images of voluptuous (sometimes nude) women. (His The Judgment of Paris is a good example.) If I see a full-figured woman, I reflexively think: Rubenesque. Other artists, Pierre Auguste Renoir is one, painted women who were zaftig (a lovely Yiddish synonym), but nobody says Renoiresque.

But that aspect of Rubens’ work is really the celebration of the human form in the spirit of Michelangelo (1475-1564). And Rubens was probably the greatest Catholic artist of the Baroque period (c. 1600 through 1750), as Michelangelo had been in the Renaissance. In painting, especially, the Baroque style is the artistic manifestation of the Catholic Counter-Revolution, the energetic reassertion of Catholicity against the iconoclasm of the Protestant Reformation.

Of all the Catholic paintings by Rubens, none stands taller than “The Elevation of the Cross” – literally: the triptych in which “Elevation” is the centerpiece stands more than 11 feet tall and is over 15 feet wide. (The image below, showing a woman standing before it in the Cathedral of Our Lady in Antwerp, gives some perspective on its size and impact.)

“The Elevation of the Cross” may be the greatest of all Baroque religious paintings. This is not to say that Rubens was the greatest Baroque painter. To my mind, that honor goes to Caravaggio (1571-1610). In his short life, Caravaggio produced fewer than 100 paintings (not counting copies) but many of them masterpieces, whereas a catalog of Rubens’ work lists 1,403. Caravaggio, along with Michelangelo and Titian (c. 1489-1576), strongly influenced Rubens, who studied the Italian painters during extended stays in Venice, Rome, and Florence.

Caravaggio was a quintessential live-hard-die-young artist; Rubens was a live-long-and-prosper one. We don’t think of 62 as particularly long-lived today, but it was a full life in Rubens’ time. He was also well-educated and, in his way, powerful: a diplomat and the friend of kings. The home-and-studio-and-gardens complex he eventually built in Antwerp is a true mansion. All his success, unrivaled at the time by any other living artist, did not spoil him, and that was in large measure because of his grounding in Catholicism.

You’d be surprised to tour a decent art museum anywhere in the world and not find a “Crucifixion” in the collection. More than likely, it will be by a Catholic artist. But not always. Marc Chagall, probably the most celebrated Jewish artist of the 20th century, painted a number of Crucifixion scenes, each an expression of the artist’s conviction that Christ suffered with European Jews as they were suffering under the Nazis.

Most Crucifixion paintings depict Jesus on the Cross, dying or dead. Not Rubens’ The Elevation of the Cross, painted between 1610 and 1611. It witnesses to something not simply representational but also powerfully evangelical.

Sin is about to murder God, but that’s not an easy thing to do. One imagines that the nailing and erecting of the crosses of Dismas and Gestas, the good and bad thieves (depicted in the right panel of the triptych), was a routine thing for Roman soldiers. It’s not personal; it’s just business. But this is not the case with the preacher from Nazareth, “King of the Jews.”

Eight muscular men strain as if the weight of the Cross and the Man is greater than any of them has ever encountered. Perhaps one of them is thinking: Surely this is heavier than anything my ancestors lifted when they built the aqueducts of Rome! . . .How I wish I were back home!

During his stay in Rome, Rubens visited the Sistine Chapel and saw Michelangelo’s ceiling paintings, Raphael’s tapestries, and frescoes by Perugino, Botticelli, Ghirlandaio, and others, nearly all of which showed the pre-Reformation dynamism and color so characteristic of the High Renaissance: human bodies in action.

Of course, Protestants believe in the Crucifixion and the Resurrection no less than do Catholics, but depictions in the late 16th and early 17th centuries had become somewhat static. The body of Christ on the Cross is always shown as stripped down. But other figures in the scenes by Protestant painters (such as there were) tend to be clothed to such an extent that we might call them shrouded. And a painting such as The Elevation of the Cross could never have been placed in a 17th-century Protestant church. For all I know, it wouldn’t be acceptable today – not so much for the triptych’s central panels as for the left side panel in which we see witnesses to the Crucifixion.

Here are our Blessed Mother with the Apostle John comforting her. Below them are six remarkable people: two children and four women, one of whom, a blonde with decorative braids, has been nursing her blonde child, who has pulled away suddenly from the mother’s bare breast as the mother leans back, transfixed by the Cross rising towards its apex. A much older woman – with the other, older child clinging to her – is also reacting to the effort of the elevation. But she leans slightly forward, her hand raised as if she might be instructing the Romans on how to do the job. More likely, she’s about to weep.

The other women, both dark-haired – likely the two Marys – seem already to be mourning. One – to my mind Mary Magdalene – is prayerful. The other Mary, who looks straight at us, may be the wife of Cleopas, the brother of Joseph, the earthly father of Jesus. According to art historian Ulrich Heinen, the four women represent “the stages of repentance: fearfulness, contrition, hope, and charity toward the Savior.”

Christ, the man, is accepting the death He was born to achieve. For Rubens, this is the moment in which He asks the Father to forgive his tormentors and killers.

So, we ask ourselves: How weighty are our sins? How backbreakingly heavy are the sins of the world? And how does evil cooperate in our redemption? For the soldiers, this is an end. For us, it’s Creation transformed and reborn.

You may also enjoy:

James Patrick Reid’s Art, Sacred and Profane

Fr. Robert P. Imbelli’s Tintoretto’s Enlightenment

COLUMN BY

Brad Miner

Brad Miner is senior editor of The Catholic Thing, senior fellow of the Faith & Reason Institute, and a board member of Aid to the Church In Need USA. He is a former Literary Editor of National Review. His most recent book, Sons of St. Patrick, written with George J. Marlin, is now on sale. His The Compleat Gentleman is now available in a third, revised edition from Regnery Gateway and is also available in an Audible audio edition (read by Bob Souer).

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Copyright 2021 The Catholic Thing. All Rights Reserved. Site designed by Hyperdo Media. Developed by Fiat Insight

The United States Needs to Adopt Poland’s Immigration Policy [Watch]

My family immigrated from Eastern Europe to America. My grandfather was a doctor and was conscripted by the Czar to be a medial officer in his army. When the Bolshevik Revolution occurred 0n November 6 and 7, 1917 my grandfather escaped Russia with his wife, my father, a horse and a cow.

Why?

Answer: Because the Bolsheviks were executing all Czarist officers.

My grandfather went to Canada, then entered the United States. My father served during WWII in the Army Air Corps. I too served my country in the Army.

I am pro-legal immigration. I am against illegal immigration.

Here’s how Poland deals with immigration and protecting their borders.

I think Poland has it right. Protect the Polish citizens from those who would do them harm.

This is true for every sovereign nation, including the United States. It is the solemn duty of the leadership of every nation state to protect its borders and thereby protect its citizens.

Why not one Muslim?

Perhaps my experience will help you to understand why not one Muslim.

While I was stationed in Germany from 1970 to 1974 there were two events that taught me all I needed to know about the Red/Green Alliance. Some may not see the connection between Islamist and Communist  ideologies, a.k.a. Red/Green Alliance. I saw it in practice first hand.

I was stationed in Germany when the The Red Army Faction (RAF), Rote Armee Fraktion, or the Baader–Meinhof Group or Baader–Meinhof Gang, was founded in 1970. The Red Army Faction was a West German far-left militant organization. Though many guerrilla groupings formed in West Germany in the 1970s, the RAF was the most influential and had the most staying-power.

I was also there when Black September, a Palestinian militant organization also founded in 1970, attacked the Olympic Village in Munich, Germany on September 5th, 1972. Black September killed 11 unarmed Israeli athletes and one German police officer in the attack and subsequent failed escape.

What did the militant Communist Red Army Faction and the Palestinian militant organization Black September have in common? Both were trained by members of the Palestine Liberation Organization which was founded in 1964 with the purpose of the “liberation of Palestine” through armed struggle.

Bottom line

Communists and Islamists continue on marching hand in hand to do evil in the world.

This is why the United States must only allow immigrants and refugees to come here only if they add to our culture and embrace our values and morals.

All legal immigrants when they are sworn in as citizens take the same oath that I did, that is to protect and defend our Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Illegal aliens, refugees and those given amnesty take no such oath.

It’s critical that anyone coming to America be thoroughly vetted for reasons of national security and health security. There can be no exceptions.

Our politicians can learn a lot from Poland.

CLICK HERE: For more insightful columns on immigration.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Environmental Impact Study Must Precede ‘Build Back Better’

Holding Politicians Accountable for The Border Crisis

Compulsory Schooling Laws Under Scrutiny in Michigan Following Deadly Tragedy

The history of compulsory schooling laws says a lot about their true purpose.


In the wake of the devastating school shooting in Oxford, Michigan this week that claimed the lives of four teenagers and injured seven others, state board of education member Tom McMillin called for an end to Michigan’s compulsory schooling laws.

“Repeal compulsory schooling laws,” McMillin announced in a Facebook post on Thursday. “State needs to stop dictating terms of education of our kids,” he wrote.

The Associated Press reports that details have emerged indicating that the teen shooter’s parents—who on Friday were charged with involuntary manslaughter—met with school officials a few hours before the massacre, but the student remained at school.

“Should there have been different decisions made?” said Oakland County prosecutor Karen McDonald when asked about keeping the teen in school. “Probably they will come to that conclusion.”

McMillin, a Certified Public Accountant and former Michigan state representative who lives just 10 minutes away from Oxford, has long been in favor of eliminating compulsory schooling laws, but this week’s tragedy prompted him to come out publicly against the statutes for the first time.

“Oxford highlights that the mental health of kids often needs to be the total focus,” McMillin told me in an interview about his social media post. “School meetings with a troubled child, parents, and administrators need to not end with ‘we have to treat the child like all others.’ Parents should be able to get their kid out for a week, a month, a year. And open all kinds of alternative options of which parents can avail themselves,” he explained.

Compulsory schooling, or compulsory attendance, statutes date back to the 19th century, when Massachusetts enacted the first law of this kind in 1852. Horace Mann, then president of the Massachusetts state board of education who is considered to be the architect of the American public school system, was captivated by the Prussian model of education that hinged upon compulsion and standardization. Mann imported that model to the US, where widespread anti-immigrant sentiment in places such as Massachusetts made it easier to pass compulsory schooling laws.

In the first half of the 1800s, immigrants flocked to American cities seeking a better life and fleeing famine and oppression abroad. In 1847, for example, 37,000 Irish immigrants arrived in Boston, which at the time had a population of just over 100,000 people.[i] These Irish, mostly Catholic immigrants challenged the dominant Anglo-Saxon Protestant mores at the time, and were seen as threats to the social order. “Those now pouring in upon us, in masses of thousands upon thousands, are wholly of another kind in morals and intellect,” lamented the Massachusetts state legislature in 1848.[ii]

This xenophobia helped to spur the introduction of compulsory schooling laws, something that advocates of universal government schooling had been pushing for. In 1851, the editor of The Massachusetts Teacher, William Swan, articulated the widespread contempt for the state’s Irish Catholic immigrants. He wrote:

“In too many instances the parents are unfit guardians of their own children…Nothing can operate effectually here but stringent legislation, thoroughly carried out by an efficient police; the children must be gathered up and forced into school, and those who resist or impede this plan, whether parents or priests, must be held accountable and punished.”

One year later, Massachusetts passed the country’s first compulsory schooling statute which mandated school attendance under a legal threat of force. Soon, other states followed suit, with Mississippi the final holdout, passing its compulsory schooling law in 1918.

Prior to the passage of compulsory schooling laws, education was broadly defined and diversely offered. In the 17th century, early American colonies passed compulsory education laws that mandated cities and towns provide schools and teachers for those parents that wanted them, but parents were not compelled to send their children to these schools. Indeed, many of them did not. Homeschooling, apprenticeship programs for teens, and a wide assortment of public, private, and charity schools for the poor were ubiquitous in the country’s early years. Literacy rates reflected the success of these varied educational options, with historians estimating that three-quarters of the US population, including slaves, was literate at the time compulsory schooling laws began to emerge.[iii]

Eliminating compulsory schooling laws would remove the state’s authority and influence over education. Parents would be put back in charge of their children’s learning, choosing between a panoply of options supported by a bustling free market in education. New learning models would sprout, as entrepreneurs and educators rise to meet parent demand, free from the fetters of government oversight. Cities and towns could still be required to provide education services to parents that want them, just as they were prior to the passage of compulsory schooling laws, but parental choice would be paramount.

“Repealing compulsory schooling laws would enable complete and total parental education freedom to do whatever their child needs, without one glance back at truancy officers or any state statute,” said Michigan’s McMillin. “It would ‘allow’ parents to focus on exactly what their child needs, including mental health,” he added.

An xenophobic remnant of the 19th century, compulsory schooling statutes obstruct education innovation and hamper choice. More education officials should follow McMillin’s lead in calling for an end to these restrictive laws.

COLUMN BY

Kerry McDonald

Kerry McDonald is a Senior Education Fellow at FEE and author of Unschooled: Raising Curious, Well-Educated Children Outside the Conventional Classroom (Chicago Review Press, 2019). She is also an adjunct scholar at The Cato Institute and a regular Forbes contributor. Kerry has a B.A. in economics from Bowdoin College and an M.Ed. in education policy from Harvard University. She lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts with her husband and four children. You can sign up for her weekly newsletter on parenting and education here.

REFERENCES:

[i] David B. Tyack, The One Best System: A History of American Urban Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974), 30.

[ii] Paul E. Peterson, Saving Schools: From Horace Mann to Virtual Learning (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2010), 26.

[iii] Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, “The Origins of Mass Public Education,” History of Education: Major Themes, Volume II: Education in Its Social Context, ed. Roy Lowe (London: RoutledgeFlamer, 2000), 78.

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

Dispelling 3 Common Myths About Abortion

As many of you know I am not a supporter of abortion.

As SCOTUS is about to make some very possible major changes, even the removal of Roe vs. Wade, I thought this article would be good reading for all of you as the subject may come up as we enter the next few months leading up to the ruling in July, 2022.

The MSM will be ramping up their opposition to any changes as these months go by, screaming to any that will listen falsehoods and major lies on the subject. They will want to load the court with liberal judges.

Abortion has become the newest genocide, in particular to the black population, whose ethnicity has seen the most murders of their fetuses.

They must be educated, especially in the fact that Planned Parenthood and its founder, wanted abortion to destroy and decimate the black population. This could end up being one of President Trumps best achievements if the judges he appointed to the Supreme Court vote correctly.

Please read and enjoy. Feel free to share.

Dispelling 3 Common Myths About Abortion

By Melanie Israel  for The Daily Signal:

With the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case before the Supreme Court and the ongoing litigation over the Texas heartbeat law, the issue of abortion looms large in our national discourse.

Too often, pro-abortion actors make claims that are simply not true, and those claims are repeated without challenge in the media. Therefore, it’s vital that the American public be made aware of facts that challenge the pro-abortion narrative.

Here’s the truth you need to know about three core claims of abortion activists:

Myth 1: Abortions Are Safer Than Childbirth

Abortion activists claim that abortions are safer than childbirth. But that’s the exact inverse of reality—and for a number of reasons.

First, this framing of the debate denies the humanity of the unborn child from the outset. Because every fetus is a human possessing fundamental dignity, their health and safety must also be taken into consideration.

No procedure that destroys life can be considered safe. By definition, abortion is always fatal for at least one party involved; namely, the unborn child. Therefore, by definition, abortion is never “safe.”

Second, besides the fact that abortions necessarily involve the killing of unborn children, abortion is not necessarily the safer option for women.

After getting an abortion, women have approximately an 80% higher risk of experiencing mental health issues, including suicidal tendencies and substance abuse.

According to Dr. Ingrid Skop, an obstetrician-gynecologist, potentially fatal complications from abortions include “vaginal or intra-abdominal hemorrhage … infection … incomplete removal of the remains of the aborted baby, damage to the cervix, uterus, or other pelvic or abdominal organs … anesthetic reactions or overdoses, amniotic fluid, septic, or thrombotic embolisms, cardiac, or cardiovascular events.”

Such complications hardly render abortion safe for women.

Third, the assumption that abortion is the safer option for women ultimately rests on incomplete data.

The federal government as well as 22 states do not require abortion providers to report critical data on post-abortion complications. This inevitably skews abortion activists’ numbers, especially when a state like California, one of the states that doesn’t require abortion providers to report data, is estimated to have over a quarter of all abortions performed in the U.S.

Likewise, according to data collected in  2019, there were no states that required doctors, coroners, or emergency rooms that don’t provide abortions to report abortion-related deaths. So, if a woman goes to an emergency room with abortion-related complications and dies, the hospital is not required to report it as an abortion-related death. That skews abortion-related mortality rates.

Therefore, abortions aren’t safe for unborn children, and they aren’t always safe for women.

Myth 2: Abortion Is a Woman’s Only Practical Option

Studies show that most abortions are chosen for reasons related to factors such as finances or personal relationships.

According to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, 74% of abortions are chosen out of a fear that the baby would interfere with education or work, or that the baby would make it difficult to take care of dependents.

An overlapping 73% claimed they could not afford a child, and nearly 50% had relationship issues or did not want to become a single mother.

Even among third-trimester abortions, as reported by Dr. James Studnicki, “most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses.”

It’s clear from these numbers that medical emergencies do not motivate most abortions.

Watch: Abortion Advocates Take Abortion Pills And Scream ‘Abortion’ At Protest Outside Supreme Court.

In contrast, the pro-life movement stresses providing the resources women need to give birth and raise their children.

Pregnancy resource centers help pregnant women and their families navigate challenges such as the pregnancy itself, financial management and needs, threats to job security, unsupportive partners and family members, and more.

According to one study, in 2019, pregnancy centers performed ultrasounds for 486,213 mothers-to-be free of charge and provided mothers and families with material resources such as diapers, baby clothes, and the like.

In total, they provided $266,764,916 worth of services, and 9 out of 10 people working at pregnancy resource centers do so on a voluntary basis.

Despite activists’ claims, abortion doesn’t solve any of those problems. By reducing “care” for women to the elimination of the unborn life, the mother is not helped.

Myth 3: Most Americans Support Abortion

The claim that most Americans support abortion is misleading when checked against data from a 2021 Knights of Columbus/Marist Poll.

Despite a slight majority (53%) of Americans identifying as “pro-choice,” 55% of pro-choice individuals are in favor of abortion restrictions.

According to the poll, 76% Americans support significant restrictions on abortion, with 70% of Americans in favor of restricting abortions after the first trimester—which would bring U.S. law in alignment with the rest of the world, including 47 out of 50 European countries.

Likewise, when asked if they support abortion based on a diagnosis of Down syndrome, 70% of participants opposed such an abortion. Additionally, 58% opposed taxpayer money going to abortions.

Ultimately, these numbers reflect a nation that wants to do more to protect unborn children and is not remotely aligned with the abortion lobby’s position of abortion on demand, for any reason, through all nine months of pregnancy.

Sadly, that hasn’t kept Democrats from calling for the elimination of the Hyde Amendment, which would clear the way for taxpayer-funded abortions.

Conclusion

The facts indicate that abortions are not safe for unborn children and carry significant risks for the mothers who receive them.

Most abortions are not done for cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Lastly, most Americans do not support radically permissive abortion policies. In fact, most Americans support policies that further protect unborn children than what is currently permitted under Roe v. Wade, which allows for elective abortion through all nine months of pregnancy.

We are being presented with the greatest opportunity of our lifetime to turn the tide for life. We must tell the truth about abortion and not allow pro-abortion arguments to rule the day unopposed.

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.