Meet the German biologist hauled into court for critiquing ‘gender identity’

Ulrich Kutschera dared to question the ‘pseudo-science’ underpinning LGBTQI+ ideology.

This year marks the centenary of the birth of a man who is largely unknown to the general public, but whose intellectual legacy has a profound influence on our daily life: John Money (1921-2006), the New Zealand-born American psychologist who invented the idea of so-called gender identity.

On July 5, 2017, I gave an interview, published in a Catholic online magazine for German-speakers on a controversial topic at that time: same-sex marriage and the right of these couples to adopt children. I summarized the harsh consequences I had to face as a  result of my public statements, with reference to Money’s bitter legacy.

In the German text, “Ehe für alle? Diese widersinnige Entscheidung überrascht mich nicht” (Marriage for all? This nonsensical decision does not surprise me), I referred to my then-popular book Das Gender-Paradoxon (The Gender-Paradox), wherein I had dedicated many pages to Money and his ideas, including his failed 1965 gender-reassignment (baby-castration) experiment. He used David and Brian Reimer as experimental subjects. These twin brothers, born in 1965, later committed suicide.

Moreover, with reference to John Moneys concept of “affectionate paedophilia” that he explicitly endorsed, i.e., non-violent erotic interactions between boys and adult homosexuals, I discussed possible problems when men that are exclusively attracted to male bodies adopt an under-aged boy, to whom they are not genetically related (step-father relationship, Cinderella-effect, emotional child abuse, mother absence, and so on).

The interview sparked an outcry among German students linked to the LGTB and transgender movements. As a result, a coordinated action against my integrity as a scientist quickly followed, with negative articles in the media and a storm on the internet.

Finally, in December 2017, a public court case was opened against me by the Staatsanwaltschaft Kassel, where I was living. It was based on the absurd charge that I had invented (or “doctored”) biomedical facts and data with the criminal aim of discrediting homosexual couples, which are, according to the popular narrative, equal or superior to, a biological mother and her husband.

After several rounds of public Court hearings in 2019, 2020 and 2021, I was, with the vigorous support of an excellent attorney, acquitted of all charges on March 2 this year. You can imagine how relieved I was.

The Judge of the Landgericht Kassel explained in detail that my statements are protected by my right to free speech, independent of whether or not they are factually true.

Cover Image: Three human beings–two sexes. Original watercolour by  Alfred Kutschera (1928 — 2004), the author’s father.

Because the German tabloid press (Bild-ZeitungDie etc.) continued to claim that I allegedly “distributed false biological facts”, I responded with a 588-page book which was published in October – Strafsache Sexualbiologie. Darwinische Wahrheiten zu Ehe und Kindeswohl vor Gericht (Criminal Case on the Biology of Sexuality: Darwinian Truths on Marriage and Child Wellbeing in Court). 

I first summarize the life and achievements of the hero and the villain of this story: Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and John Money, respectively. I also profile the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski (1855–1921), who may have had paedophile tendencies, but nevertheless was a world-class scientist and the spiritual father of the theory of symbiogenesis.

I then describe the biological basis of bi-parental sexual reproduction, the Darwinian paradox of homosexuality, and the two uses of the word paedophilia. The first is Money’s “affectionate paedophilia” and the second is the mental disorder of  erotic paedophilia, as defined in 1901 by the Austrian Psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing (1840–1902). I document that Krafft-Ebing’s “disorder in sexual preference”, which does great harm to the victim, whether boy or girl, and Money’s notion of non-violent “surplus of parental love”, are distinct biological phenomena, although some overlap may occur.

This so-called “love for girls or boys” (the original meaning of the word paedophilia) exists almost exclusively in men, although Money’s “eroticized surplus of parental love” may also occur in some lesbians. I have several references to the latter.

And then I describe the witch hunt I experienced in court. All of my arguments, which rested on solid scientific publications and monographs, were ignored by the State Prosecutors. I was in the ring against the quasi-religious gender ideology invented by John Money. I discovered that this pseudo-scientific system has become a dogma in mainstream German politics.

Allow me to summarise the basic tenets of John Money’s gender identity ideology. Its core belief is that humans are social constructs with malleable biological features. It may be hard to appreciate how radical this notion is. Ever since Darwin’s masterpiece, On the Origin of Species, appeared in 1859, evolution has been the dominant scientific framework for human behaviour.

Gender ideology places Darwin in the rubbish bin. One hundred and fifty years of science, the science to which I have dedicated my life, have been junked. People fret about backwoods rednecks who believe in “creation science”. This is far worse. Humans are deemed to be social beings without an evolutionary past; men and women are equal members of the same genetically identical clone. (See my earlier article in MercatorNet, “An evolutionary biologist dissects gender theory”.)

Astonishingly, transgender people are the norm and not the exception. Changing one’s biological sex from male to female (or vice-versa) is possible and good for a trans individual. X and Y chromosomes, sex hormones, and primary sex organs (testes, ovaries) are of sub-ordinate importance.

Moreover, homosexuality and heterosexuality are just different ways of making love.  Children don’t need a mother and a father; two homosexuals, gay or lesbian, can do the same job of caring just as effectively. Adoption, IVF or surrogacy are all fine, even though the biological parents have no involvement whatsoever. Children will never ask about their ancestry; they do not need a natural family with sisters, brothers, aunts and uncles, and grandparents.

And significantly, child abuse, be it physical, emotional, or sexual, happens just as often in natural families as in gay and lesbian households. Finally, Money’s affectionate paedophilia, to which I referred in my controversial interview, may be beneficial and helpful for boys in the custody of certain homosexuals, who call themselves “boy-lovers”.

During the court hearings, I refuted all of these irrational claims (as I have documented in the Strafsache book). I also presented as evidence a MercatorNet article, “A toxic combination: pedophiles, baby farms and same-sex marriage”. Even though this related a documented horror story of paedophile abuse from Australia in gory detail, the state prosecutor was again unimpressed.

The prosecutor’s message to me was simple: forget human biology and all of your inconvenient facts. Gender identity ideology frames our post-modernist worldview. Old-fashioned Darwinists (like you) should be punished for distributing false “biologistic” claims about sex and gender — especially with respect to homosexual couples, who are regarded as ideal step-parents and role models for children.

Finally, I want to quote the British philosopher Kathleen Stock, who was forced  to abandon her position at Sussex University as a result of aggressive attacks by transgender activists. “It was a medieval experience,” she wrote.

Dare I say that my German witch hunt was worse, much worse. Sussex University largely supported Stock’s right to free speech. When I was terrorized and attacked by LGBT and transgender activists, neither my former University nor any state agency came to my rescue.

The reason is clear: John Money’s postmodern gender identity ideology dominates public opinion in Germany.

Since the State Prosecutors (Staatsanwaltschaften) are under the thumb of German politicians, notably the Ministry of Justice, I expect that there will be further charges against me. I am confident that truth will prevail. As the victims of LGBT and trans persecution know, the process is the punishment. But I am not disheartened. I shall continue to fight for Darwin (who was the loving father of ten children), the evolutionary sciences, and human biology!

Kutschera, U. (2021) Strafsache Sexualbiologie. Darwinische Wahrheiten zu Ehe und Kindeswohl vor Gericht. Verlag Tredition, Hamburg. Download an excerpt at


Ulrich Kutschera

Ulrich Kutschera, PhD, is a Professor of Biology at AK Evolutionsbiologie in Freiburg, Germany, and a scientific collaborator at research institutes in Stanford, California (USA). He has a website at <a… More by Ulrich Kutschera

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

Jussie Smollett’s trial proves Black Lives Matter cannot be taken seriously

Racial politics takes precedence in an updated version of ‘my country, right or wrong’.

American actor Jussie Smollett has been found guilty of having staged a racist attack against himself. In 2019, Smollett hired two Nigerian body builders to pose as Trump sympathizers who allegedly attacked him and tied a noose around his neck— a powerful symbol of racist hatred in the United States.

Right-wing media is having a field day with this verdict, as it exposes the fact that claiming to be a victim has become a profitable business. Pundits have been especially hard on US vice-president Kamala Harris, who soon after the incident (but before police investigators disclosed that Smollett had staged the whole episode), tweeted: “[Smollett] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or colour of their skin. We must confront this hate.”

This is unfair, and those who are going hard on Harris are overusing the benefit of hindsight. Harris did rush to judgement, but don’t we all? In fact, at the time, this was the compassionate thing to do for any politician. When the truth was revealed about Smollett’s hoax, Harris tweeted again expressing how frustrated and disappointed she was at Smollett’s foolish act.

Be that as it may, Harris’ approach is vastly different from Black Lives Matter’s position. During Smollett’s trial, Black Lives Matter issued the following statement: “In our commitment to abolition, we can never believe police, especially the Chicago Police Department (CPD) over Jussie Smollett, a Black man who has been courageously present, visible, and vocal in the struggle for Black freedom. While policing at-large is an irredeemable institution, CPD is notorious for its long and deep history of corruption, racism, and brutality.”

This is proof that Black Lives Matter cannot be taken seriously. Yes, racism still exists in the United States and other Western countries. Yes, police brutality is still an issue (although not with the racial disparities that the Left attributes it).

But, like it or not, you need police in any society, for as in Hobbes’ famous phrase, homo homini lupus, man is wolf to man. That is why Black Lives Matter’s claim about police being “an irremediable institution” is preposterous. And even worse, despite the mountain of evidence against Smollett, Black Lives Matter simply refuses to acknowledge the hoax, justice be damned.

At the end of the day, Black Lives Matter is yet another example of gung ho identity politics. Whereas the old Latin jurists liked to proclaim Fiat justitia ruat caelum (“let justice be done though the heavens fall”), groups such as Black Lives Matter prefer to favour an old jingoistic phrase, “my country right or wrong!”, although in their reformulation, it is “my race, right or wrong!”

It would of course be unfair to claim that Black Lives Matter invented the subordination of justice to identity politics in the United States. OJ Simpson’s trial in 1995 was a preview of the madness that was to come in the ensuing decades, with one juror infamously admitting that she voted to acquit Simpson only as payback for previous episodes of racism in the United States. It is quite evident that, very much as that juror, Black Lives Matter does not care about evidence. For them, Jussie Smollett ought to be considered not guilty — not because the evidence against him is weak, but simply because to undo racism, black men ought not to be punished, no matter what crime they commit.

At the time of Simpson’s acquittal, 80 percent of African Americans believed Simpson was innocent. By 2015, about 50 percent believed so, on par with white Americans. There are probably many factors as to why this decrease took place (not least of which is Simpson’s erratic behaviour ever since his acquittal), but whatever the reason, it was an encouraging sign of healing between whites and African Americans in the United States, and a sign that for an increasing number of people of all races, justice is more important than identity politics.

Black Lives Matter seeks to undo that, all in the name of antiracism. Sadly, its leaders don’t realize how counterproductive this is, even for their own goals. Sooner or later, there will be a real racist attack somewhere in the United States. But as in Aesop’s fable, having cried “Wolf!” in the most pathetic way during the Smollett trial, Black Lives Matter will have an extremely hard time persuading the public when the real wolf comes. Black Lives Matter is a joke. We can only hope that a new brand of rational and sensible activists arises and pushes Black Lives Matter’s idiocy aside, in order to truly strive towards the eradication of racism in society.


Gabriel Andrade

Gabriel Andrade is assistant professor of medicine at Ajman University, in the United Arab Emirates. He received a PhD from University of Zulia (Venezuela), in 2008. He worked as Titular Professor at University… More by Gabriel Andrade


George Soros Funnels $4 Million into Extremist Group Looking to Defund Police

Black Lives Matter Activists Tell Students Misogyny, White Supremacy And Capitalism Are To Blame For Their Problems

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

I, Psaki

A remnant of the Obama administration, Jen Psaki has mastered the art of shamelessly dissembling before a largely friendly press corps and has proven relentless in her efforts of omit or distort facts, spin events, highlight the inconsequential and diminish the consequential.

But this soulless android in the service of the Biden administration may have, indirectly through misdirection or incidentally by disinformation, broken all three laws of Robotics:

First Law

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
Jen Psaki Defends Joe Biden Reopening Border Detention Center: ‘This Is Not Kids Being Kept in Cages’

Second Law

A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
WH’s Psaki Defends Inflation — ‘Good Thing’ Because It Means ‘More People Are Buying Goods’

Third Law

A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Resurfaced Tweets Haunt White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki

And on and on…

Kyle Rittenhouse Can Sue Jen Psaki for Defamation

Jen Psaki Falsely Claims Trump Told People to ‘Inject Bleach’

EDITORS NOTE: This column by Colonel Obyezyana on The Peoples Cube is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Hotel USSR: A new book by Oleg Atbashian

I’m happy to report that I’ve just published my second book, Hotel USSR. It’s a story of а young man coming of age in a totalitarian state. He wants to be an artist but he isn’t authorized to buy paints. He wants to see the world but the authorities brand him as politically unreliable. He wants to get married but the system separates him from his bride. He listens to Hotel California and wishes he had their problems: he himself is stuck in a real-life trap that he “can never leave,” and he calls it Hotel USSR. To check out, he must break every rule in the book.

This young man is me and this is my real life story. People have often asked me what growing up in the USSR felt like. This book is my answer. It’s illustrated with my own drawings and paintings, which I did in my twenties before I quit drawing. The reason for quitting is in there as well.

In addition to it being humorous and entertaining, I hope this story can be an eye-opener for younger people who may naively believe in the false promise of socialism. Rather than debating Marxism directly, I demonstrate how it fails in practice and what absurdities ensue when the entire state lives in denial of its failures, forcing people not to trust their own eyes. The book describes socialism as an attempt to regulate human existence in cumbersome ways that defy human nature, leaving no doubt that to build “real socialism that works” is no more possible than to build a house based on an optical illusion.

I hope you enjoy my story and help me to spread the word. Amazon allows a short preview – please rate it and leave a comment:

Art from this book can also be found in Oleg’s Art Gallery. Prints on demand at

Book description on Amazon:

As a child, he was promised abundance and freedom in a communist paradise. In that bright future, he dreams of being an artist. But as he grows up, he discovers that his dream is based on a fraud and that his country is really a dictatorship governed by bullies, liars, and thieves. He and the girl he loves find themselves trapped in a labyrinth of a dysfunctional utopia they call “Hotel USSR,” where every aspect of life is regulated by improbable rules that override human nature. To live their dream, they decide to break the law. This takes him on a series of tragicomical adventures that feel like acts in the theater of the absurd: a worker in Siberian oil fields, an army conscript, an inmate at a forensic psychiatry facility, a visual propaganda artist, a Soviet dissident, and an immigrant to America. And everywhere he goes he draws pictures…


EDITORS NOTE: This column by Red Square on The Peoples Cube is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

2021: The Year Murder Gripped America — 12 Cities Have Broken Annual Homicide Rates

12 major cities hit all-time homicide records, and 2021 is not over yet. These 12 cities all have one thing in common. They are all run by Democrat Party mayors. Many of whom have defunded the policy. In addition, many of our cities have radical Soros funded DA’s, who have enacted radical bail reform laws. This is why criminals are flourishing in cities all across the United States.

‘It’s just crazy’: 12 major cities hit all-time homicide records

By Stand for America, December 11, 2021

It’s official: 2021 is the year of record-blasting murder rates. At least a dozen of America’s largest cities have shattered annual homicide records this year—and 2021 isn’t even over yet.


By the way, all 12 of these cities are run by DemocratsLiberals spent the past year and a half letting criminals off the hook and demonizing brave law enforcement officers while pushing to defund them. Their anti-police, crime-encouraging actions directly coincided with a 45% jump in the rate of police officer retirements across the country. Now, violence is exploding in our communities. Chicago takes the cake for the highest number of killings in 2021 at 739 (and counting). In Philadelphia, more people (521, to be exact) have been murdered this year than in America’s two largest cities.

One New York police officer said, “It’s worse than a war zone around here.” This frightening fact should be enough to convince Democrats to abandon their soft-on-crime strategies and stop the violence. All Americans deserve leaders who protect them. 

→ Read more: ‘It’s just crazy’: 12 major cities hit all-time homicide records (ABC News)

→ Read more: NYPD data shows explosion of hate crimes in New York City, over 50% target Jews and Asians (Daily Wire)

A $1.9 Trillion Disgrace 😔

Remember when the Democrats passed a $1.9 trillion COVID “stimulus” bill, only about five percent of which went toward combating COVID? Nine months later, it’s clear: This costly move has done nothing but damage our economy and cripple American families. 

In a report from earlier this week, the Manhattan Institute’s Brian Riedl explains how: 

  • It added $1.9 trillion to our already massive national debt. In interest payments alone, the government will be paying$60 billion every year for the foreseeable future.
  • It exacerbated skyrocketing inflation—by pouring loads of cash into an economy already crumbling under a supply chain crisisPrices rose an astounding 6.8% in November.
  • It sent anti-recovery unemployment checks to workers as businesses tried to boom back from lockdowns. Now, workers are getting back to work much slower than expected.
  • It funneled cash to states that didn’t need it (see California) and banned them from using the money to refund taxpayers.

This stimulus scheme was the most expensive bill passed in five decades. Now, Dems are trying to beat their personal record by pushing to pass another $1.75 trillion socialist nightmare before Christmas. How many times do we need to say that this would be horrible for America?

→ Read more: The worst spending bill in decades? (National Review)

→ Read more: Biden’s proposals spark phase 2 of supply chain crisis (The Hill)


LAPD Warns People Not to Visit Due to Out of Control Crime

California would-be victim manages to get robbers’ gun, uses it against them shooting one dead

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.

January 6th – The Report!

A new report from House Republicans put a spotlight on the cruel treatment of the January 6th prisoners who are still awaiting trial, none of whom have been charged with insurrection.  The report cites, among other things, detention without court dates or bail, no family visits, and intentional abuse by prison guards.  C-SPAN  Gateway Pundit

Before detailing the abuses further, first, a little perspective.  The charges against these prisoners are things like trespass, assault on a police officer, and obstruction of official proceedings.  None of this amounts to insurrection, despite the Democrats’ robotic and ubiquitous incantations of the term.  Prosecutors haven’t charged insurrection because they know they can’t make a case for it.

When I was a criminal defense attorney, a charge like trespass for first offenders would have been handled completely differently.  There would have been a chance of first offender treatment whereby, if certain conditions were met, the charge would be dropped and the record expunged.  If not first offender treatment, the defendant would have been granted release on their own recognizance or small bond, probably pled guilty, and been sentenced to probation and a fine.  To keep a first offender in jail on a minor charge for almost a year without a finding of guilt or even a court date would have been unthinkable.  The way the January 6th cases are being handled is crazy, and the only reason is politics.

Back to the abuses:  A congressional delegation toured the facility where the prisoners still awaiting trial are being held and talked to them.  The delegation heard stories of broken toilets, prison guards mocking prisoners as members of a cult and telling them to denounce Trump, not being fed properly, not being allowed religious services, being denied medical treatment or even haircuts, not getting their mail on a regular basis, being confined to their cells most of the day, and not being allowed to talk to their attorneys.

This is America?  No, this is more like the Star Chamber of Merry Olde England, where the King used criminal process to control his political enemies.  [Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases by Thomas J. Gardner, Terry M. Anderson, p. 175].   Constitutional rights and due process were thrown out the window.  What is happening to the January 6th prisoners is starting to look like indefinite detention, which is a big constitutional no-no.  Why don’t we just cut to the chase and put them on the rack until they denounce Trump and admit they conspired with him to overthrow the U.S. government?

The Democrats want to paint these prisoners as insurrectionists, committed revolutionaries who conspired to take down the whole system.  Stupid wahoos who didn’t know what their goal was or how to achieve it, but were just upset, is more like it.  Anybody like me who has tried to organize anything will tell you the grassroots political Right is completely incapable of pulling together anything as complicated as overthrowing a government.  Heck, we organizers have a hard enough time getting people to write to Congress on important issues.   Don’t tell me this was a planned insurrection.  I don’t believe you.  Twelve years of trying to herd cats on the political Right tells me otherwise.

So how about a little justice for the January 6th prisoners whose cases have not yet been resolved?  Why not let them see their families?  Why not grant them bail?  Why not give them court dates and get on with it?  If there’s an insurrection here, it’s by the Democrats who have turned this whole thing into a big circus to persecute their political enemies, and who are stomping all over these prisoners and the Constitution in the process.

Visit The Daily Skirmish

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

Biden Fiddles While Iran Keeps Building Its Bomb

The story of the Bidenites’ insufficient response to Iran’s continued march toward enriching uranium to the weapons-grade level of 90% purity is here: “Biden fiddles around while Iran builds a bomb and hegemony,” by Mitchell Bard, Israel Hayom, December 2, 2021:

According to The New York Times, American officials have warned Israel that repeated attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities are counterproductive; meanwhile, the Biden administration has twiddled its thumbs as Iran advances closer to the nuclear threshold. Reports now indicate Iran could produce enough fissile fuel in a month to build a weapon, and the Iranians have repeatedly said they will not discuss a stronger agreement that as a candidate, US President Joe Biden said he would negotiate. Nevertheless, he has not been dissuaded from appeasing the mullahs in the hope they will return to the old deal they never complied with.

It is of course intolerable for the Bidenites to warn Israel away from doing what it must to slow down Iran’s nuclear progress; there is no reason to believe that these attacks have been, as the Americans claim, “counterproductive”: they have done exactly what they were supposed to do, to set back Iran’s nuclear program, and the Israel’s leaders believe these attacks have delayed Iran’s progress by as much as a year. It is Israel, not the U.S., that is Iran’s main target, and the Jewish state has a right to defend itself as it sees fit, even if that makes Iran less amenable to negotiations in Vienna. While Iran delayed a return to those negotiations by five months, all that while working on enriching uranium, the Bidenites continued to appease Iran, hoping to lure it back to the talks in Vienna. When Iran did return to negotiations, it made maximalist demands, insisting that all sanctions should be lifted before the talks would resume. Even Secretary Blinken said on Dec. 2 that the Iranians were not “serious” about negotiations, and again warned that “other options” would have to be considered.

Unfortunately, former President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign failed (maybe four more years would have made a difference, but that was unlikely given the lack of international cooperation). Now, following precedents set by presidents Obama and Trump, Biden is allowing Iran and its proxies to attack US forces and allies with impunity.

The Iranians In mid-October attacked U.S. forces stationed at the Tanf base in Syria with a drone strike; the Americans did not retaliate for what some claim was Iran’s response to a previous Israeli attack on an Iranian base in Syria. The Bidenites did not respond to that attack by Iran for fear of derailing the talks which they have been so intent on resuming.

Iran has no incentive to change its policies given the display of US weakness highlighted by the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan that emboldened jihadis everywhere (and the mullahs in Iran) by demonstrating their commitment to their faith is stronger than America’s loyalty to its allies.

The withdrawal from Afghanistan and that country’s takeover by the Taliban marked the American defeat in its longest war. To make matters worse, the “chaotic withdrawal” from the country led to tens of thousands of Afghans who had worked with the Americans being left stranded in the country; even some American citizens, four months after the American withdrawal, are still in Afghanistan trying to get out. The whole spectacle did not inspire confidence among America’s Middle East allies, who are also well aware that the Administration wants to cut back its forces in the Middle East and to pivot toward Asia, to counter the looming threat, economic and military, of China.

Consider a few other responses to Iranian aggression:

Biden withdrew support for Saudi Arabia’s attempt to stop Iranian-backed Houthi forces from overrunning the country. Subsequently, the Houthis stormed the US Embassy in Yemen and are now threatening a strategic, oil-rich city near the Saudi border.

The Bidenites were more concerned about the Saudi role in creating a “humanitarian crisis” in Yemen than they were about the Houthi threat – the Houthis, of course, were just as responsible as the Saudis for that “humanitarian crisis” – and the devastating effects of Yemen’s seven-year civil war on its people. After the Bidenites had scolded the Saudis, the Houthis expressed their “gratitude” by storming the American Embassy and, heartened by Washington’s public dressing-down of Riyadh, the Houthis are now laying siege to the city of Marib.

Biden wants to transfer weapons to the Lebanese army despite Israeli warnings that they will end up in the hands of Hezbollah and strengthen Iran’s control over Lebanon.

The Israelis know that in the past Hezbollah has been able to seize weapons from the Lebanese Army’s arsenal; why should the situation be any different now? If anything, Hezbollah is much stronger than before, and the Lebanese Army weaker. Hezbollah is not to be dissuaded by the West or Gulf Arabs giving more arms to the Lebanese Army, which have been, and can again be taken by Hezbollah. Only a popular uprising by the economically devastated population of Lebanon, demanding that Hezbollah voluntarily disarm and cease to act as Iran’s viceroy in the country, has a chance of succeeding in ending Hezbollah’s rule.

Biden has not responded to numerous provocations at sea, including Iranian forces nearing US naval vessels, seizing allies’ ships and attacking Israeli-owned vessels.

There have been several incidents where Iranian small craft have harassed, in groups, American ships in the Persian Gulf. The Iranian navy has seized the ships of our allies, including one tanker belonging to the UK. Others have been taken, too, such as the Liberian-flagged Gulf Sky, and taken back to Iran. The Americans could have destroyed one or more of the small craft harassing their ships; it would have been a salutary warning to the Iranians. But so far the Bidenites have refrained from any such response. One assumes this was prompted by the eagerness of Washington to make sure Iran would return to the nuclear negotiations in Vienna.

Biden has allowed Iranian-backed attacks on US bases in Syria and Iraq to go unpunished.

The latest attacks on the American military stationed at the Tanf Base in Syria, and the attacks by Iranian-backed militias on American soldiers in northern Iraq, were both allowed to pass without a military response. In fact, only twice since becoming President has Biden ordered very modest strikes on Iranian-backed Iraqi militias. And while the negotiations have renewed in Vienna, he is unlikely anything that Iran might seize upon as a “provocation” leading it to once again walk away from those negotiations.

The only good news is that Biden has not eased sanctions. In addition to maintaining Trump’s sanctions, he did impose a few others, notably on individuals and companies involved in the production of drones (ironic given his criticism of Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign and its failure), which was apparently his idea of a tough response to the Iranian attack on our base in Syria. Still, as talks resume in Vienna, the Iranians made clear they will not return to the old deal and will not do anything without sanctions relief. Fears remain that Biden so desperately wants an agreement that he will relent.

These fears were enhanced by reports of a supposed interim deal floated by Robert Malley, one of the people who helped put the world in the dangerous position it is now in by promoting the original Iran deal. Under this crazy idea, the United States would release billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets, which, like the payoff to get the original deal, will give Iran more funds for its nefarious activities. In exchange, Iran would only be expected to suspend, not reverse, the enrichment activities that have brought it closer to the purity needed for a bomb. Not surprisingly, Israel opposed this idea.

Fortunately, the Iranians have not accepted Malley’s proposal, but are insisting on a complete lifting of the sanctions – and not just the unfreezing of Iranian assets – before they will return to any deal on their uranium enrichment program. And that has proved to be, even for the Bidenites, impossible to accept.



Iran: Morality police officer assaults woman with uncovered hair, other women prevent the woman’s arrest

UK: Muslim migrant husband accused of murdering his wife for ‘cultural reasons’

Cyprus: Muslim migrant tries to set fire to mosque, Erdogan cries ‘Islamophobia,’ vows retaliation

Arizona State University: Homeless man damages Qur’an and other material, Hamas-linked CAIR claims hate crime

France: Muslims attack Catholic procession, ‘This is the land of Allah,’ ‘On the Qur’an I will cut your throat’

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

WATCH: Fauci / NIAID Signed Private And Confidential Vaccine Agreement Weeks Before We Even Knew About The Pandemic

Glen Beck: NIH Made Deal With Moderna To Share Profits For Vaccine Before Pandemic; Tucker: “Why Is This Not Front Page Everywhere?”

By Joe Mcdermott, Published Reporter, On Dec 10, 2021

DALLAS, TX – Glenn Beck, a conservative political commentator and radio host appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show Wednesday night, where he discussed National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) claim of partial ownership of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine last year, and alleged that the reason for this was due to the federal organization having worked with the pharmaceutical giant to develop the vaccine before the pandemic even started.

NIH Director Francis Collins had stated during an interview in May 2020 that “We do have some particular stake in the intellectual property” in terms of the basic scientific technology that they said was licensed out and incorporated into Moderna’s vaccine.

However, Beck alleged during his appearance on Tucker Carlson that the U.S. government began their partnership with Moderna in 2015 specifically to research and develop mRNA coronavirus vaccines, well before COVID-19 existed.



De Blasio Vaxx Mandate Will Prevent a Massive Number of People, Especially Minorities, from Working

WHO: No Deaths Reported as a Result of Omicron Variant to Date

World’s first vaccine murder case against Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla filed in India’s high court.

Dan Bongino reveals why the COVID goalpost keeps moving

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.

An Open Letter to America

Dear America,

The Left are doing everything they can to dismantle the institution of law enforcement nationwide and do away with police.

This is not because the Left is against police. The Left is against the rule of law. And I’ll tell you as has been amply demonstrated, without the rule of law and your police to enforce it, no-one’s life is worth a plugged nickel.

The communists trying to grab the power and rule over you are not against police in principle. They have a police force to replace the abolished one.

The mobs are the new police. They are the beginnings of a new enforcement establishment for the new tyrannical country they are attempting to replace. If we were to give that new country a name, the most honest one is The Tyranny. The mobs are the police of The Tyranny.

The police of The Tyranny aren’t out there to enforce the rule of law – as the police of a free country do. The mobs have no interest in protecting our fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property. Their job is to enforce the rule of the communist tyranny over you. If you oppose The Tyranny, you are a criminal in their eyes.

I don’t care if you believe me or not. If the insanity of their takeover continues, they will prove my point to you with force and fury.

Given a chance politically, those mobs will become the official revolutionary police force with uniforms, weapons, and everything they need to enforce the rule of The Tyranny. What you see now – organized mobs – is simply the form they can get away with at the present time.

God bless America and give us the strength we need to preserve our country and our liberty, not only for our generation but for all our posterity, as our forefathers before us bestowed it to us.

EDITORS NOTE: This column by the Karl Marx Treatment Center originally appeared on The Peoples Cube and is republished with permission. Contributors to The Peoples Cube blog are former citizens of the Soviet Union. ©All rights reserved.

In his dystopian novel 1984 George Orwell wrote, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face – for ever.”

GoFundMe & Facebook Finally Reversed Policies

In November, we covered the outrageous discrimination GoFundMe and Facebook (1.00) conducted against Kyle Rittenhouse. Both companies decided to be judge, juror, and jailer – refusing to let those who thought Rittenhouse deserved his time in court raise money or promote their points of view, respectively. As we wrote, Rittenhouse “was treated as a racist who wanted to murder – two narratives which we now know are not true.”

We are pleased to report that both companies have reversed their policies. GoFundMe announced that fundraisers for Rittenhouse may resume, and Facebook lifted its ban on searches and support for Rittenhouse. But we do not congratulate them, or offer even a single cheer for belatedly getting things almost entirely wrong.

The fact is that GoFundMe allows fundraisers for all sorts of people who are accused of heinous crimes. Fox Business reports:

But at the time that GoFundMe shut down all Rittenhouse defense funds in August of last year, they allowed countless fundraisers for the defense of other individuals accused of violent crimes. One of them was a defense fund for Marc Wilson, who claims he was acting in self-defense when he shot and killed a 17-year-old girl in a purported road rage incident.

Wilson’s GoFundMe page is on hold while the company reviews the fundraiser, but even this shows their bias. They removed fundraisers for Rittenhouse because – to quote the new announcement – “GoFundMe’s Terms of Service prohibit raising money for the legal defense of an alleged violent crime.” Yet Wilson’s remains, as does the fundraiser launched by Jacob Blake’s mother…even though Blake was accused of sexual assault and other crimes when the fundraiser was launched.

As for the Planned Parenthood (1.25) page on Facebook, well – America’s largest abortion provider, which kills hundreds of babies each year, it has over 980,000 Facebook followers. Many abortions definitely violate the extremist and violence-oriented bans which Facebook has implemented, but don’t take our word for it – see a former abortionist’s 2015 testimony to Congress. And let’s not forget that Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenics supporter and a racist, and that the abortion industry as a whole kills black babies more than those of any racial group.

From Jacob Blake to Kyle Rittenhouse to Planned Parenthood, Facebook and GoFundMe have shown their true colors. Their recent decisions cannot hide their selective enforcement policies, which – amazingly – seem to support only one side of our nation’s critical debates. Shame on them.

Now that you know more, what are you waiting for? Use your voice to let GoFundMe and Facebook know that this kind of behavior is unacceptable!

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden’s Bad Moon A-Rising

LYRICS to Bad Moon Rising by John C. Fogerty, Creedence Clearwater Revival.

I see the bad moon a-rising
I see trouble on the way
I see earthquakes and lightnin’
I see bad times today

While listening to CCR’s “Bad Moon Rising” on the radio and I was struck by what is happening today in America under the current administration.

John Fogerty reportedly wrote “Bad Moon Rising” after watching the film “Devil and Daniel Webster.” Fogerty claimed his song was about, “the apocalypse that was going to be visited upon us.”

The Devil and Daniel Webster” is a short story by American writer Stephen Vincent Benét.  Benét tells the story of a New Hampshire farmer who sells his soul to the devil and is later defended by Daniel Webster, a “fictional version” of the noted 19th-century American statesman, lawyer and orator.

Have politicians of both political parties, bureaucrats at every level, teachers, professors, judges, pastors, priests, bishops, cardinals, and even our youth sold their collectivist souls to the devil? And has this lead to a bad moon a-rising?

Is there a Bad Moon Rising today in America?

QUESTION: Is America, and our Constitutional Republican form of government, under assault in a culture war like none we have ever seen?

More and more Americans are yelling a resounding “yes” to this question.

Greg Reese in his article “This is How We Win” wrote:

In dictatorships, obedience comes from a basic fear of the dictator.

But with totalitarianism, people are hypnotized into obedience.

[ … ]

[T]otalitarianism always starts with a mass formation inside the population. A mass formation requires 4 conditions for it to take root.

1) The masses must feel alone and isolated and

2) Their lives must feel pointless and meaningless.

3) The masses then must experience constant free-floating anxiety and;

4) They must experience free-floating frustration and aggression.

Think Covid-19 and the never ending government mandates.

Larry P. Arnn, the President of Hillsdale College, in a column titled “The Way Out” wrote:

To establish despotism in a nation like ours, you might begin, if you were smart, by building a bureaucracy of great complexity that commands a large percentage of the resources of the nation. You might give it rule-making powers, distributed across many agencies and centers inside the cabinet departments of government, as well as in 20 or more “independent” agencies—meaning independent of elected officials, and thus independent of the people. [Emphasis added]

Today we are seeing the growth of “bureaucratic rule” thereby replacing the rule of law enacted by and for we the people with government mandates.

We now have a president who has allowed “rule by the bureaucrats” rather than him representing the welfare of we the people. The president has shifted power from us to them.

Departments like DHS, DOE, OSHA, HHS, DOJ, FBI, IRS and others taking more and more control of we the people via mandates, rules and regulations.

America is no longer a nation of law, we are now a nation of bureaucratic edicts sent down to do one thing and one thing only, control everything that we think, say and do!

Today, bureaucrats make the rules. We the people must obey or be punished.

In his dystopian novel 1984 George Orwell explained it this way,

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face – for ever.”

What is The Way Out?

ANSWER: A Second American Revolution.

In my column “An American Revolution Version 2.0” I wrote:

Today in America we are clearly seeing abuses and usurpations. The goal is absolute despotism.

When we the people see these truths to be self-evident, that our despotic government does not hold that all men as created equal. When our government takes away our inalienable rights, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is time to take action.

We the people must either alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government. 

I, and many others, see a bad moon a-rising. It is called by many names such as Communism, Marxism, Despotism, Socialism, etc. The goals of each of these tyrannical ideologies are the same goals – complete and utter control of you and me. Without control the tyrant falls, as they always do.

It requires the people to rise up and fight for what is right.

The Declaration of Independence commands us:

“[W]henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

As John Fogerty wrote:

Hope you got your things together
Hope you are quite prepared to die
Looks like we’re in for nasty weather
One eye is taken for an eye

George Washington  wrote:

“Our cruel and unrelenting Enemy leaves us no choice but a brave resistance, or the most abject submission; this is all we can expect – We have therefore to resolve to conquer or die…”

Give me liberty or give me death.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.


America turning into a Third World country

This is How We Win


We The People

Creedence Clearwater Revival – Bad Moon Rising (Official Lyric Video)

The Way Out

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at a Hillsdale College reception in Overland Park, Kansas, on November 18, 2021.

Here are two questions pertinent to our times: (1) How would you reduce the greatest free republic in history to despotism in a short time? and (2) How would you stop that from happening? The answer to the first question has been provided in these last two disastrous years. The answer to the second has begun to emerge in recent months. Both are worthy of study.

Reducing a Great Republic to Despotism

To establish despotism in a nation like ours, you might begin, if you were smart, by building a bureaucracy of great complexity that commands a large percentage of the resources of the nation. You might give it rule-making powers, distributed across many agencies and centers inside the cabinet departments of government, as well as in 20 or more “independent” agencies—meaning independent of elected officials, and thus independent of the people.

This much has been done. It would require a doctoral thesis to list all the ways that rules are made in our federal government today, which would make for boring reading. The truth is that very few people not directly involved know how all this works. Although civics education is practically banned in America, most people still know what the Congress is and how its members are elected. But how many know how the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) came to be, under what authority it operates, and who is its head? Here is a clue: it is not Anthony Fauci.

Admittedly, this new kind of bureaucratic government would take—has taken—decades to erect, especially in the face of the resistance of the Constitution of the United States, which its very existence violates. But once it has been erected, things can happen very fast.

What, for example, if a new virus proliferates around the world? There have been procedures for dealing with such viruses for a long time. They begin with isolating the sick and protecting the vulnerable. But suddenly we have new procedures that attempt to isolate everybody. This is commanded by the CDC, an element of this bureaucratic structure, and by a maze of federal and state authorities, all of which see the benefit to themselves in getting involved. The result is that large sections of our economy were closed for months at a time, and citizens placed under the equivalent of house arrest. This has not happened before. The cost of it, and not just in monetary terms, is beyond calculation.

To set up a despotism capable of pulling this off you would need the media’s help. Those controlling the media today are trained in the same universities that invented the bureaucratic state, the same universities the senior bureaucrats attended. The media would need to be willing to suppress, for example, the fact that 50,000 doctors, scientists, and medical researchers signed the Great Barrington Declaration. That document reminds people that you cannot suppress a widely disseminated contagious virus through shutdowns and mass isolation, and that if you try, you will work immeasurable destruction of new kinds—unemployment, bankruptcy, depression, suicide, multiplying public debt, broken supply chains, and increases of other serious health problems. Some of the signatories to this Declaration come from the most distinguished universities in the world, but never mind: their views do not fit the narrative propagated by the powerful. They have been effectively cancelled, ignored by the media and suppressed by Big Tech.

You would need some help from business, too. As far as influence is concerned, “business” is dominated by large institutions—those comprising big business—whose leaders are also educated in the same universities that conceived bureaucratic government and trained the bureaucrats and media heads. This provides a ground of agreement between big business and the bureaucratic state. Anyway, agree or not, businesses are vulnerable to regulation, and to mitigate the risk of regulatory harm they play the game: they send lobbyists to Washington, make political contributions, hire armies of lawyers. If you are big enough to play the game, there are plenty of advantages to be won. If you are not big enough to play the game—well, in that case you are on your own.

Amidst the unprecedented lockdowns, imagine there comes an election, a time for the people to say if they approve of the new way of governing and of this vast, unprecedented intrusion into their lives. Then let us say that in several states the election rules and practices are altered by their executive branches—the people in charge of enforcing the law—on their own, without approval by their legislatures. Say this brazen violation of the separation of powers takes place in the name of the pandemic. One does not need to know what percentage of votes in the final tally were affected to see that this is fishy. No sensible person would place control of the election process in one party—any party—or in one branch—any branch—of the government, alone. In some crucial states, that was done.

Finally, to sustain this new kind of government, you would need to work on education. You might build a system of centralized influence, if not control, over every classroom in the land. You might require certification of the teachers with a bias toward the schools of education that train them in the approved way. These schools, poor but obedient cousins of the elite universities, are always up on the latest methods of “delivery” of instruction (we do not call it teaching anymore). These new methods do not require much actual knowledge, which can be supplied from above.

As far as content, you might set up a system of textbook adoption that guarantees to publishers a massive and captive market but requires them to submit proposed books to committees of “experts,” subject of course to political pressures. You might build a standard approved curriculum on the assumption that everything changes—even history, even principles. You might use this curriculum to lay the ground for holding everything old, everything previously thought high and noble, in contempt.

Doing this, incidentally, deprives the student of the motive to learn anything out of fashion today. It is a preparation not for a life of knowing and thinking, but for a life of compliance and conformity.

This is by no means an exhaustive account of what it would take to build a thoroughgoing tyranny—for further instruction, read Book Five of Aristotle’s Politics or George Orwell’s 1984. But it gives an idea of a mighty system, a system that seems unassailable, a system combining the powers of government and commerce, of education and communication. Money and power in such a system would accrue to the same hands. The people who benefit from the system would be the ruling class. Others would be frustrated. And such a system would tend to get worse, because the exercise of unchecked power does not bring out the best in people.

Any elaborate system of government must have a justification, and the justification of this one cannot simply be that those in the ruling class are entitled on the basis of their superiority. That argument went away with the divine right of kings. No, for the current ruling class, the justification is science. The claim of bureaucratic rule is a claim of expertise—of technical or scientific knowledge about everything. Listen to Fauci on Face the Nation, dismissing his critics in Congress as backward reactionaries. When those critics disagree with him, Fauci said recently, “They’re really criticizing science because I represent science. That’s dangerous.”

The problem with this kind of thinking was pointed out by a young Winston Churchill in a letter to the writer H.G. Wells in 1901. Churchill wrote:

Nothing would be more fatal than for the government of states to get into the hands of the experts. Expert knowledge is limited knowledge: and the unlimited ignorance of the plain man who knows only what hurts is a safer guide, than any vigorous direction of a specialised character. Why should you assume that all except doctors, engineers, etc. are drones or worse? . . . If the Ruler is to be an expert in anything he should be an expert in everything; and that is plainly impossible.

Churchill goes on to argue that practical judgment is the capacity necessary to making decisions. And practical judgment, he writes in many places, is something that everyone is capable of to varying degrees. Everyone, then, is equipped to guide his own life in the things that concern mainly himself.

Another thing about the experts is that they are not really engaged in the search for truth. Instead, the powerful among them suppress the obvious fact that there is wide disagreement among the experts. There always is.

God save us from falling completely into the hands of experts. But God has given us the wherewithal to save ourselves from that. So let us move to the second question posed above.

How to Defeat a Rising Despotism

In answering the second question, I will tell two stories that are suggestive.

The first took place in the small town of Jonesville, Michigan, five miles north of Hillsdale College. In our state, as in most places where the lockdowns were enforced, businesses were crippled or destroyed en masse. Restaurants were chief among them. One of our local restaurants is a 30-year-old diner called Spanglers Family Restaurant. Mitch Spangler is the proprietor. The business was founded by his late father, and Mitch was purchasing the business from his mother. The payments to his mother depended upon the revenues of the business, and his mother’s retirement depended upon the payments. The life’s work of two generations was at stake. Mitch was also helping to support a daughter in college.

This is not to mention the more than 20 employees whose livelihoods are dependent on Spanglers. “Our employees are moms who have kids,” Spangler told the local paper. “One of our employees is pregnant; another is a 19-year-old kid. This is his first job, and he just bought a car.” Our leaders in Washington treat it as a small thing when trillions are being thrown about. To the Spanglers and people like them, their relatively small revenue streams are everything.

Mr. Spangler was not prepared to surrender all this. When a second lockdown was ordered by Michigan’s governor a year ago last month, he kept his restaurant open. He put a sign on the door and posted on Facebook to make clear, among other things, that he was acting out of necessity for the sake of his business and the livelihoods of all those dependent on it; that precautions would be taken, including the installation of an electrostatic fogger that would disinfect the air; that he understood the thinking of those who would choose to stay away from his restaurant, but that he hoped they would understand his own thinking. “If you cannot support us, we understand,” he wrote, “but please allow us to have the freedom to do what we have to do.”

The wheels of bureaucracy began to grind. Spanglers was visited repeatedly by the health department, by the licensing authorities, and even by the agriculture department (one wonders what they had to do with it). Spangler was fined and threatened with forcible closure. But he persevered, never backing down, and his busines did well. On a typical weekend, not only locals but supporters from the neighboring states of Indiana and Ohio lined up outside to show their support.

Mitch Spangler is our kind of fellow, and the College gave him some help organizing his legal representation. We did not wish to be in the newspaper about this because we were facing our own pressures, and we too were determined to resist them. But Spangler was no good at keeping a secret: he wore a Hillsdale College t-shirt on FOX News and thanked us for our help. And when he had a little ceremony in his parking lot in the spring to thank his staff and his customers, I was honored to say a few words.

This may not seem on its face a big story, but it is a most important story. It is important because it is a story about the nature of human beings and of citizens and of our rights. The nature of a thing is the essence of a thing. One aspect of the nature of a human being is that he must eat to live. In condemnation of slavery, Abraham Lincoln loved to say that every man was created with a head, hands, and mouth, the implication being that the head should guide the hands in the feeding of the mouth. Because we are made to live this way, we are also determined to live this way. The alternative is dependence, which does not make us happy.

It should not therefore be surprising that, if you try to destroy the business of a man whose family has spent over 30 years building it, he will resist. Trying to strongarm people like Mitch Spangler is not a good idea. There are millions of them, and they have always made up the core of this greatest of free republics.

The second story is more famous, but it too is about nature—indeed, about that word’s most basic meaning. The word nature, as I said, refers to a thing’s essence, but it comes from the Latin word for birth. Our nature begins with how we are born and how we grow. Just as we are attached by nature to the way we get our livings, so we are attached by nature to our parents, and still more to our children. And this second story, set in Loudoun County, Virginia, is about parents and children.

In schools throughout Virginia, including in Loudoun County, children are being subjected to critical race theory (CRT). This involves lecturing children, especially those belonging to the non-preferred races, about the “structural evils” of which they are told they are part. Being taught alongside CRT is a distorted view of the history of our country, which true enough has its warts, but which surely has its glories as well—including glories about equal rights regardless of race. Between fighting the armies of the English monarch, the Confederacy, the Nazis, the communists, and Islamic terrorists, something nearing a million Americans have died for the cause of equal rights. These Americans have come in all colors.

Amidst statewide controversy over the teaching of CRT, the Loudoun County School Board also adopted a broad policy of recognizing “transgender” students in preference to their “biological sex” (excuse the redundancy). Even before this, boys were permitted to use girls’ bathrooms, in one of which there was an assault and rape of a female student by a “gender-fluid boy.” The boy in question was then allowed to attend another school in Loudoun County, where he assaulted another girl. This first girl’s parents were understandably outraged and, at the risk of being called narrow-minded, went so far as to complain to the school board.

Groups of parents who had already been protesting CRT and policies promoting transgenderism joined in the complaint. There was no violence at the school board meetings with one exception: law enforcement was summoned, and the outraged father of the assaulted and raped girl was bloodied and dragged out of one meeting. It is true, however, that voices were raised.

The National School Board Administration called upon the Biden administration to investigate these protesting parents as potential perpetrators of “domestic terrorism or hate crimes.” Remember, these parents were citizens attending a meeting of an elected body to tell their representatives what they think. The rights of petition and assembly are protected in the First Amendment. Except for certain preferred groups, these rights today appear to have been repealed.

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland intervened, instructing the FBI to investigate these parents and others around the country. The FBI’s Counterterrorism Division has reportedly deployed tools and resources normally reserved for terrorist threats against parents who are angry at school boards for what is occurring in their children’s schools. All this provoked massive support, across Virginia and around the nation, for the parents of Loudoun County.

This support is not surprising. By nature, parents love their children and feel responsibility for them. Citizens, especially one hopes American citizens, feel entitled to state their grievances. The Declaration of Independence itself contains a list of grievances against the King. The Biden administration reacted to these protests just as King George III reacted against the American colonists in the years leading up to the American Revolution: he called in law enforcement. And the people of Virginia reacted in a way reminiscent of the American colonists: they defeated the candidate for governor who took the position that parents should have nothing to do with their children’s education.

What do these two stories—one of them taking place in Hillsdale County, Michigan, a deep red county, and the other in Loudoun County, Virginia, which is deeply blue—have in common? In both stories we see reactions against violations of our rights, rights that we have by nature as human beings.

The story about Mitch Spangler is about our right to work and to store up the product of our labor so that we and our families can eat and thrive. The American Founders put this in terms of our natural right to property. The story about the parents of Loudoun County is about the natural right of mothers and fathers to raise their children. To interfere with these rights is to interfere with the nature of the human being.

These facts about nature were well known during the American Revolution, the very Revolution that is besmirched by the members of our ruling class today, just as it was besmirched by the ruling class at the time of the Revolution. It was the interference with the colonists’ natural rights by that former ruling class that led to the American Revolution. These recent stories from Michigan and Virginia show that we Americans do not seem to like that interference any better today.

In addition to the right to make a living and the right to raise our children, we have the right to participate in our government, even if we are not experts, and the right to look to the heavens and not to our ruling class for guidance. We have these rights because we—every single one of us—were born with them sewn by God into our nature, and we cannot find our earthly fulfillment without them.

If we put these facts together as a people, we will have recovered the understanding that produced the American Revolution. We will stop these current predations upon our rights. We will bring this overwhelming government back where it belongs, under the control of the people.

The signs of such a movement are emerging. Pray they are enough.



Larry P. Arnn is the twelfth president of Hillsdale College. He received his B.A. from Arkansas State University and his M.A. and Ph.D. in government from the Claremont Graduate School. From 1977 to 1980, he also studied at the London School of Economics and at Worcester College, Oxford University, where he served as director of research for Martin Gilbert, the official biographer of Winston Churchill. From 1985 until his appointment as president of Hillsdale College in 2000, he was president of the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy. From October 2020 to January 2021, he served as co-chair of the President’s Advisory 1776 Commission. He is the author of several books, including The Founders’ Key: The Divine and Natural Connection Between the Declaration and the Constitution and Churchill’s Trial: Winston Churchill and the Salvation of Free Government.

EDITORS NOTE: This Imprimis Digest is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

BIDENOMICS: Inflation Rate Approaches 40 YEAR HIGH, Biggest Price Jump Since Early 1980s

Joe Biden is a failed POTUS. The worst POTUS of our lifetime. And we are only one year into this nightmare administration.

BIDENOMICS: Inflation Rate Approaches 40 YEAR HIGH, Biggest Price Jump Since Early 1980s

By, December 9, 2021

A new report from financial outlet Bloomberg is shedding more light on the country’s economic recovery, with data showing inflation approaching the highest level in nearly 4 decades.

“Already-hot inflation is forecast to climb even further when November data comes out on Friday, to 6.8%. That would be the highest rate since Ronald Reagan was president in the early 1980s — and in the lifetimes of most Americans,” writes the website.

“Higher prices helped deliver a banner year for U.S. business, which is posting its fattest profit margins since the 1950s. But for Joe Biden’s administration and the Federal Reserve -– who didn’t see it coming — the sudden return of inflation, largely dormant for decades before 2021, is looking increasingly traumatic,” adds the author.

“The question for me isn’t whether inflation will slow,” said an industry insider at Jefferies. “The question is, are we going back to 2? Are we going back to 3? What’s the medium-term destination? And that’s, I think, going to be determined by the labor market.”



Trump: Biden Might Take US to Point of No Return

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.

Red States See Gains As Census Shifts House Seats

Rest assured ol’ Joe and the party of slavery will bring hordes of migrants to these communities to stral the vote.

Red states see gains as census shifts House seats

Political power shifted slightly from blue to red states Monday as the Census Bureau announced how seats in the U.S. House will be divvied up for the next decade, giving Texas two more seats and Florida one seat, while California and New York each lost a seat.

By: Washington Examiner,  December 9, 2021:

Also gaining seats were Colorado, Montana, North Carolina and Oregon, while Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia ceded seats.

Overall, the bureau tallied 331,449,281 people in the country on April 1, 2020, or Census Day. That was up 22.7 million, or 7.4%, from a decade ago, but it was the second-slowest growth in history, ahead of only the Great Depression decade of the 1930s.

All but three states showed population growth from 2010 to 2020, but those in the Northeast and Upper Midwest generally grew slower than in the South and West, continuing a decades long shift of people and power.

“The 2020 census results show Americans are fleeing many liberal states with excessive government mandates for other states that value freedom and individual liberty,” said Rep. James Comer, a Kentucky Republican who serves as the ranking member on the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

The changes are smaller than analysts predicted, with gains or losses in 13 states. That is the fewest since the current method of apportionment began in 1941, said acting Census Director Ron S. Jarmin.

Earlier projections had Texas gaining three seats and Florida gaining two seats. New York was projected to lose two seats. In each case, those numbers were overshot.

Read the rest……..

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.

Hamas-linked CAIR’s consistent antisemitism gets a pass from the establishment media

Once again, the establishment media shows its true colors. CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case — so named by the Justice Department. CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements about how Islamic law should be imposed in the U.S. (Ahmad denies this, but the original reporter stands by her story.) CAIR chapters frequently distribute pamphlets telling Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement. CAIR has opposed virtually every anti-terror measure that has been proposed or implemented and has been declared a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates. CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush in 2017 called for the overthrow of the U.S. government. CAIR’s national outreach manager is an open supporter of Hamas.

CAIR’s Antisemitism Fails to Draw Media Scrutiny

by Steven Emerson, Algemeiner, December 8, 2021:

As war raged in Gaza last May, and Hamas terrorists fired rockets toward Israeli civilians, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reported about the Biden administration’s position. Some Muslim advocacy groups, she noted, were boycotting a traditional White House event marking the end of Ramadan “to protest the White House’s support for Israel.”

After Mitchell’s set up, viewers then saw Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), saying President Biden was “the only leader in the world that we believe that can stop this” fighting.

Awad was quoted in Politico two days earlier, calling on Biden “to stand on the side of the victims and not the victimizer.”

But neither story mentioned Awad and his organization’s deep connections to a Hamas support network in the United States, let alone his 1994 public pronouncement that he “used to support the PLO,” but switched to “support of the Hamas movement.”

This information has been in the public domain for years. It’s the kind of detail an audience might want to know, but rarely receives.

In fact, Politico needed only to look at its own archives. A 2009 story, for example, reported on the FBI’s decision to cut “formal contacts” with CAIR until it determined “whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and Hamas.”

And this ongoing failure by the media to fully inform readers and viewers about CAIR’s history is a key reason why it is considered a legitimate Muslim advocacy organization. In addition, Awad and other CAIR officials have amassed a lengthy record of antisemitic rhetoric that draws no mention.

Until now.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) will spotlight CAIR’s bigoted statements in a forthcoming book.

Awad is a soft-spoken man and careful not to use blatantly antisemitic language. But his consistent message in 27 years as CAIR’s only executive director meets the definition of antisemitism accepted by the US State Department in 2016. Criticizing the Israeli government or its policies is not antisemitic. But insinuations that American Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the United States are. So are “demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews, or the power of Jews as a collective” and “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination.”

Awad is guilty of all these things, and CAIR and its leaders cross these lines repeatedly. They falsely smear Israel as an apartheid state, call for a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea,” thus wiping Israel off the map, and have called the Jewish state and its supporters “Zionazis.” Other officials equate Israel to ISIS and the Taliban.

Last month, Awad made clear he does not believe Israel should exist, when he called its most populous city, Tel Aviv, “occupied” and prayed “it will be free later.”

As the IPT book will show, such bigotry has been echoed by CAIR representatives throughout the country. But the message begins with Awad, one of CAIR’s original founders.

“Look at their names,” Awad said during a 1998 speech at Georgetown University, insinuating that Jews in the Clinton administration were “pushing the United States to go to war on behalf of a third party.”

A decade later, Awad said that US policy toward Israel comes “at the expense of American interests.” In 2014, as ISIS established a caliphate and Hamas terrorism instigated war in Gaza, Awad called Israel “the biggest threat to world peace and security.”

To understand why CAIR, which touts itself as “a grassroots civil rights and advocacy group,” spends so much of its time and resources opposing the world’s only Jewish state, you have to understand why the organization was created.

“In 1987,” prosecutors wrote in advance of the Hamas-financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, “the governing body of the International Muslim Brotherhood decided to focus its mission on the Palestinian issue, and directed that Palestine Committees be formed in countries throughout the world. In the United States, the Palestine Committee was comprised of active Muslim Brotherhood members of Palestinian origin.”…


ADL Head Slams Muslim Group CAIR for Its Antisemitism

Australia: Muslima sells her daughter for $15,000 for marriage, new husband slits his wife’s throat

France: Two-thirds of Muslim students believe Islam is above the laws of the Republic

Scotland: Muslim teen in fight at school pulls possibly real gun and screams ‘Allahu akbar, I will bomb you’

Hungary’s Orban: EU is funding Soros orgs and punishing members who refuse migrants

At ‘cultural event,’ Palestinian NGO uses Swiss money to deny Israel’s right to exist

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