Democrat Proposes Resolution to Remove the Statue of Liberty

Killing America. And no, this is not the Babylon Bee.

Freshman Dem proposes bill to remove Statue of Liberty in protest of GOP’s ‘bigoted’ immigration law

Rep Maxwell Frost accused GOP of ‘removing the fabric of America’

By Lindsay Kornick · Fox News

Rep. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., was mocked on social media Wednesday for telling Republicans to pass a bill to remove the Statue of Liberty along with their “bigoted” immigration law.

A House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing on immigration discussed H.R.2, the House GOP’s Secure the Border Act, the comprehensive border security and immigration bill passed back in May. The bill would restrict the asylum process for people crossing the border and require resumed construction on the border wall.

The freshman congressman was one of many Democrats who attacked the bill, though he also produced a mock bill to remove the Statue of Liberty for Republicans to also pass.

“My colleagues from the other side of the aisle, let’s be honest with immigrants who deserve better than what you’re offering them. Don’t welcome immigrants if you plan to reject them. If you keep pushing your bigoted H.R. 2 bill, then also pass this bill. I’ve taken the liberty of drafting it for you,” Frost said, holding up the draft. “It removes the Statue of Liberty, our largest symbol that tells people to come here.”

“This is who you are, removing the fabric of America. So, I want to know which Republican, who supports and voted for H.R.2, will introduce this bill,” he continued. “If you’re gonna support H.R.2 and these bigoted measures, the least you can do is not be a d–n liar.”

Frost’s reference to the iconic sculpture was blasted for conflating significant immigration reform with text on the Statue of Liberty.

“This is ridiculous,” The Telegraph contributor Nile Gardiner remarked.

Read more

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: Bombshell Emails: US Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Wife Questioned INTEGRITY OF VOTING MACHINES with Maryland election officials

POST ON X:

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

Beheaded On Oct 7 A 19-Year Old’s Head Put Up For Sale In Gaza: Father Finds ‘Missing Part’ Of Son In a Freezer

‘Give ’em a state!’

Bereaved father: Terrorists tried to sell the head of my son, later found in a freezer in Gaza

David turned the world over to provide his son, IDF fallen soldier Sergeant Adir Tahar, 19, a burial with ‘peace of mind and body’

By: i24NEWS, January 17, 2024:

Israel Defense Forces (IDF) fallen soldier Sergeant Adir Tahar’s father, David, spoke to the Israeli Channel 14 about his 19-year-old son’s death on October 7, during the Hamas-led massacres, saying that the head was decapitated then put up for sale in Gaza.

“They sent a missile and three grenades toward him. From a CT scan I received recently his whole body is full of shrapnel, and unfortunately the body of Adir was also abused after he was killed,” David told Channel 14.

“The terrorists, the barbarians, it’s too little to say for them, they beheaded him and took the head to Gaza. I did everything I could, it wasn’t easy, in the end I got a body without a head. I insisted very much with the army to see the body. They tried to explain to me that I should not see it,” the father confided.

“Half an hour before I buried my child, his body arrived at Mount Herzl [military cemetery], I opened the coffin when I was alone,” he explained, ”I understood exactly what I was burying. He was unrecognizable. I identified him by dog tags and a DNA test and things he had in his pants.”

“When I buried Adir I knew that I was burying my child without an essential part of him. Then the journey began to search for that missing part,” David told Channel 14. “For over two months I I approached everyone I could and asked, at least to get an answer where it is.”

“There’s also a video from Telegram. The Internet was flooded with horror videos. I must say that I saw almost everything, unfortunately I found the video of my son, where you can see that my child is without this essential part of him,” he explained about part of the process of finding answers.

Then David said he received an official answer, describing it as “during the interrogation of two arrested terrorists the Shin Bet managed to realize that one of them tried to sell the head. A soldier’s head for 10 thousand dollars.”

“It’s insanely barbaric,” the soldier’s father added.

“Then an instruction went down to an elite unit, along with armored forces, and they entered the center of Gaza, Palestine Square” inside a freezer, David explained the search operation to Channel 14.

“Inside a duffel bag with tennis balls. Documents of some terrorist, and a soldier’s head. They managed to bring what was left after two and a half months, it was probably abused there as well,” the father confided.

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Insanely barbaric’: Hamas jihadi tried to sell decapitated Israeli’s head for $10,000

Jihad-Statism in Davos

VIDEOS: Jihad in Israel, Jihad on U.S. soil! What America MUST know!

The Palestinian Arabs are ‘open’—but not to compromise

POSTS ON X:

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

Digital Kill Switches: How Tyrannical Governments Stifle Political Dissent

Guest Post by John W. Whitehead

“No president from either party should have the sole power to shut down or take control of the internet or any other of our communication channels during an emergency.”— Senator Rand Paul

What’s to stop the U.S. government from throwing the kill switch and shutting down phone and internet communications in a time of so-called crisis?

After all, it’s happening all over the world.

Communications kill switches have become tyrannical tools of domination and oppression to stifle political dissent, shut down resistance, forestall election losses, reinforce military coups, and keep the populace isolated, disconnected and in the dark, literally and figuratively.

As the Guardian reports, “From Ukraine to Myanmar, government-run internet outages are picking up pace around the world. In 2021, there were 182 shutdowns in 34 countries… Countries across Africa and Asia have turned to shutdowns in a bid to control behaviour, while India, largely in the conflict-ridden region of Jammu and Kashmir, plunged into digital darkness more times than any other last year… Civil unrest in Ethiopia and Kazakhstan has triggered internet shutdowns as governments try to prevent political mobilization and stop news about military suppression from emerging.”

In an internet-connected age, killing the internet is tantamount to bringing everything—communications, commerce, travel, the power grid—to a standstill.

Tyrants and would-be tyrants rely on this cloak of darkness to advance their agendas.

In Myanmar, for example, the internet shutdown came on the day a newly elected government was to have been sworn in. That’s when the military staged a digital coup and seized power. Under cover of a communications blackout that cut off the populace from the outside world and each other, the junta “carried out nightly raids, smashing down doors to drag out high-profile politicians, activists and celebrities.”

These government-imposed communications shutdowns serve to not only isolate, terrorize and control the populace, but also underscore the citizenry’s lack of freedom in the face of the government’s limitless power.

Yet as University of California Irvine law professor David Kaye explains, these kill switches are no longer exclusive to despotic regimes. They have “migrated into a toolbox for governments that actually do have the rule of law.”

This is what digital authoritarianism (also called technocracy) looks like in a technological age.

Digital authoritarianism, as the Center for Strategic and International Studies cautions, involves the use of information technology to surveil, repress, and manipulate the populace, endangering human rights and civil liberties, and co-opting and corrupting the foundational principles of democratic and open societies, “including freedom of movement, the right to speak freely and express political dissent, and the right to personal privacy, online and off.”

For those who insist that it can’t happen here, it can and it has.

In 2005, cell service was disabled in four major New York tunnels, reportedly to avert potential bomb detonations via cell phone.

In 2009, those attending President Obama’s inauguration had their cell signals blocked—again, same rationale.

And in 2011, San Francisco commuters had their cell phone signals shut down, this time, to thwart any possible protests over a police shooting of a homeless man.

With shutdowns becoming harder to detect, who’s to say it’s not still happening?

Although an internet kill switch is broadly understood to be a complete internet shutdown, it can also include a broad range of restrictions such as content blocking, throttling, filtering, complete shutdowns, and cable cutting.

As Global Risk Intel explains:

“Content blocking is a relatively moderate method that blocks access to a list of selected websites or applications. When users access these sites and apps, they receive notifications that the server could not be found or that access was denied by the network administrator. A more subtle method is throttling. Authorities decrease the bandwidth to slow down the speed at which specific websites can be accessed. A slow internet connection discourages users to connect to certain websites and does not arouse immediate suspicion. Users may assume that connection service is slow but may not conclude that this circumstance was authorized by the government. Filtering is another tool to censor targeted content and erases specific messages and terms that the government does not approve of.”

How often do most people, experiencing server errors and slow internet speeds, chalk it up to poor service? Who would suspect the government of being behind server errors and slow internet speeds?

Then again, this is the same government that has subjected us to all manner of encroachments on our freedoms (lockdowns, mandates, restrictions, contact tracing programs, heightened surveillance, censorship, overcriminalization, shadow banning, etc.) in order to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, preserve the integrity of elections, and combat disinformation.

These tactics have become the tools of domination and oppression in an internet-dependent age.

It really doesn’t matter what the justifications are for such lockdowns. No matter the rationale, the end result is the same: an expansion of government power in direct proportion to the government’s oppression of the citizenry.

According to Global Risk Intel, there are many motives behind such restrictions:

“For instance, the kill switch serves to censor content and constrain the spread of news. This particularly concerns news reports that cover police brutality, human rights abuses, or educational information. Governments may also utilize the kill switch to prevent government-critical protestors from communicating through message applications like WhatsApp, Facebook, or Twitter and organizing mass demonstrations. Therefore, internet restrictions can provide a way of regulating the flow of information and hindering dissent. Governments reason that internet limitations help stop the spread of fake news and strengthen national security and public safety in times of unrest.”

In this age of manufactured crises, emergency powers and technofascism, the government already has the know-how, the technology and the authority.

Now all it needs is the “right” crisis to flip the kill switch.

This particular kill switch can be traced back to the Communications Act of 1934. Signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Act empowers the president to suspend wireless radio and phone services “if he deems it necessary in the interest of national security or defense” during a time of “war or a threat of war, or a state of public peril or disaster or other national emergency, or in order to preserve the neutrality of the United States.”

In the event of a national crisis, the president has a veritable arsenal of emergency powers that override the Constitution and can be activated at a moment’s notice. These range from imposing martial law and suspending habeas corpus to shutting down all forms of communications, restricting travel and implementing a communications kill switch.

That national emergency can take any form, can be manipulated for any purpose and can be used to justify any end goal—all on the say so of the president.

The seeds of this ongoing madness were sown several decades ago when George W. Bush stealthily issued two presidential directives that granted the president the power to unilaterally declare a national emergency, which is loosely defined as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions.

Comprising the country’s Continuity of Government (COG) plan, these directives (National Security Presidential Directive 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20), which do not need congressional approval, provide a skeletal outline of the actions the president will take in the event of a “national emergency.”

Just what sort of actions the president will take once he declares a national emergency can barely be discerned from the barebones directives. However, one thing is clear: in the event of a perceived national emergency, the COG directives give unchecked executive, legislative and judicial power to the president.

The country would then be subjected to martial law by default, and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights would be suspended.

The internet kill switch is just one piece of the government’s blueprint for locking down the nation and instituting martial law.

There may be many more secret powers that presidents may institute in times of so-called crisis without oversight from Congress, the courts, or the public. These powers do not expire at the end of a president’s term. They remain on the books, just waiting to be used or abused by the next political demagogue.

Given the government’s penchant for weaponizing one national crisis after another in order to expand its powers and justify all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security, it’s only a matter of time before this particular emergency power to shut down the internet is activated.

Then again, an all-out communications blackout is just a more extreme version of the technocensorship that we’ve already been experiencing at the hands of the government and its corporate allies.

Packaged as an effort to control the spread of speculative or false information in the name of national security, restricting access to social media has become a popular means of internet censorship.

In fact, these tactics are at the heart of several critical cases before the U.S. Supreme Court over who gets to control, regulate or remove what content is shared on the internet: the individual, corporate censors or the police state.

Nothing good can come from techno-censorship.

As Glenn Greenwald writes for The Intercept:

“The glaring fallacy that always lies at the heart of pro-censorship sentiments is the gullible, delusional belief that censorship powers will be deployed only to suppress views one dislikes, but never one’s own views… Facebook is not some benevolent, kind, compassionate parent or a subversive, radical actor who is going to police our discourse in order to protect the weak and marginalized or serve as a noble check on mischief by the powerful. They are almost always going to do exactly the opposite: protect the powerful from those who seek to undermine elite institutions and reject their orthodoxies. Tech giants, like all corporations, are required by law to have one overriding objective: maximizing shareholder value. They are always going to use their power to appease those they perceive wield the greatest political and economic power.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, these censors are laying the groundwork to preempt any “dangerous” ideas that might challenge the power elite’s stranglehold over our lives.

Whatever powers you allow the government and its corporate operatives to claim now, whatever the reason might be, will at some point in the future be abused and used against you by tyrants of your own making.

By the time you add AI technologies, social credit systems, and wall-to-wall surveillance into the mix, you don’t even have to be a critic of the government to get snared in the web of digital censorship.

Eventually, as George Orwell predicted, telling the truth will become a revolutionary act.

©2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved.

VIDEOS: Jihad in Israel, Jihad on U.S. soil! What America MUST know!

The system is called Islam, terrorists are invading the streets of America, Israel is under attack by, again, Islam — and so to is America.

These interviews detail the enemy within and what America needs to know and understand. And, what America needs to do to stand for #Freedom and #Liberty in a crazy 2024.

WATCH:

Tom Trento on Wendy Bell Radio – Jihad in Israel, Jihad on U.S. soil! What America MUST know!

Clare Lopez identifies the enemy, what occurred with the Hamas rally in Washington, D.C., and how serious it became… yet, not one was arrested! YET… they were so destructive, then nearly tore down the reinforced fencing around the Whitehouse where Secret Service were dressed in riot gear to repel anyone who was successful! Again, NO ONE WAS ARRESTED!

JIHAD JAMBOREE Took Over D.C.! Clare M. Lopez Reports

Jeff Sanow — Christianity vs. Islam: Christ’s message — Love and Peace. Mohammed’s message — Kill Them…!

©2024. Defend The Border. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Interview with National Security Expert Clare M. Lopez on DISSENT Television

POST ON X:

Double Standard of Justice Could ‘Crumble the Entire System’: Former FBI Agent

If the election is a choice between democracy and chaos (as Joe Biden insists), then the president isn’t making a very compelling case. The man who claims his biggest competition is “sowing lawlessness and disorder” didn’t have to look very far to find it at his own gates. And yet, unlike 1,100 Americans caught up in the Justice Department’s January 6 crackdown, this mob faced no consequences.

The crowds attempting to break down the White House fence on Saturday — tens of thousands deep, according to the modest estimates — “lit flares, graffitied public property, and threw ‘bloody baby dolls’” into Biden’s lawn. The demonstrators were threatening enough to draw out the Secret Service in riot gear. Capitol Police Chief Pamela Smith told reporters later that while the right to peacefully protest “is one of the cornerstones of our democracy,” “violence, destructive behavior, and criminal activities are not tolerated.”

Or are they? According to Smith herself, “there were instances of illegal and destructive behavior in Lafayette Park, including items being thrown at our officers,” yet no arrests (apart from one possibly unrelated incident near 14th Street) have been reported. It’s an astounding contrast to how even peaceful January 6 participants were treated. Just this month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that protestors from that day didn’t need to act “disorderly” or “disruptive” to be found guilty of “disorderly conduct.”

“It is well-established that whether conduct qualifies as disorderly depends on the surrounding circumstances,” the judges wrote. “Courts consistently observe that ‘whether a given act provokes a breach of the peace depends upon the accompanying circumstances,’ making it ‘essential that the setting be considered.’” Surely an attempted breach of the White House fence qualifies as a disturbance of that peace?

If the court believes that “even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly”— language they used to convict the most docile of marchers — then what of people yelling “Break it down!” as they dislodge the White House barriers? What of a crowd so menacing that the president’s home had to be partially evacuated? “In determining whether an act is disorderly,” the judges said, “the act cannot be divorced from the circumstances in which it takes place.” Unless, apparently, the people responsible are allies of the Left.

What we’re witnessing is a double standard in the way lawlessness and violence are treated in this country, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins argued. And it’s at the highest levels, Jonathan Gilliam, a former FBI agent and Navy SEAL, agreed. “… [L]ook at how it’s treated in the media,” he urged on Tuesday’s “Washington Watch.” “[L]ook at the fact that they’re, in some cases, not arresting people,” Gilliam urged. “Are they not being allowed to arrest people?” he wondered.

D.C., as a city, Gilliam observed, is “a far-leftist community.” “And the best example is this biased law enforcement atmosphere.” He pointed to the frustration of conservatives who “get together because of the breakdown of government and because government’s not doing their job well.” Those people are “looked at, in some cases, as terrorist[s] just for saying those things,” he pointed out. “But yet you can go join up with a group that has been considered a terrorist organization [like Hamas] that took responsibility for killing over a thousand people and slaughtering babies in Israel, and you’re going to be treated as though you have every right to be out there when even the things that they’re talking about have nothing to do with this nation.”

Of course, as Perkins pointed out, this isn’t necessarily a reflection on the “rank-and-file men and women who serve.” It starts at the top. “And it’s not just that they’re a mayor or a governor, which is the case in Illinois, but they’re also, prosecutors, they’re chiefs of police, or they’re high-ranking officials in the police department.” They’re bringing their activism to work, Gilliam warned, and then they “stack the ranks” with radicals like them. Ultimately, “what ends up happening is that first off, you have a breakdown in policy, then you have a changing of the laws where law enforcement can’t even do their job.”

But, he pointed out, “here’s where they get us [in] the long term, and where they do affect the rank and file. [It wasn’t that] long ago, especially in the federal government, they started changing how they recruit, who they recruit, the way the commercials are aimed. And so the people that you have now in the rank and file are a mix of good Americans who want to serve their country and then activists who serve an ideology. And that’s the scary part…”

We’re seeing the same thing in the military, Perkins said. “It’s very similar to this. At a certain point when you hit a tipping point, then you have widespread lawlessness, which then leads to tyranny.”

And it happens “very quickly,” Gilliam emphasized. “I mean, the build-up has been very slow. But … people have to realize that the individuals that showed up against that fence are American citizens, and they’re interspersed with some professional activists. … These aren’t minorities that came over the border and all of the sudden became activists. Some of them may be, but you’re looking at people right there that are Americans who grew up in a neighborhood [here], in a home [here]. And on the other side of that fence, you have people making policy that are allowing these people to do these things and get away with it.”

Meanwhile, men and women with no ill intent walked into the Capitol on January 6 and were arrested for trespassing. “But here you have people trying to scale the fences, injuring police officers, and it’s crickets,” Perkins pointed out.

We’re in a perilous situation as a nation, Gilliam wanted people to know. This will eventually get to a point “in which it will crumble the entire system of justice.” “I think we’re very close to that now, where … justice just becomes blind as it has with Trump. I think it’ll be that way for all of us.”

“And that’s something,” Perkins insisted, “that we need to be praying about, and voting about, and standing for.”

If the election is a choice between democracy and chaos (as Joe Biden insists), then the president isn’t making a very compelling case. The man who claims his biggest competition is “sowing lawlessness and disorder” didn’t have to look very far to find it at his own gates. And yet, unlike 1,100 Americans caught up in the Justice Department’s January 6 crackdown, this mob faced no consequences.

The crowds attempting to break down the White House fence on Saturday — tens of thousands deep, according to the modest estimates — “lit flares, graffitied public property, and threw ‘bloody baby dolls’” into Biden’s lawn. The demonstrators were threatening enough to draw out the Secret Service in riot gear. Capitol Police Chief Pamela Smith told reporters later that while the right to peacefully protest “is one of the cornerstones of our democracy,” “violence, destructive behavior, and criminal activities are not tolerated.”

Or are they? According to Smith herself, “there were instances of illegal and destructive behavior in Lafayette Park, including items being thrown at our officers,” yet no arrests (apart from one possibly unrelated incident near 14th Street) have been reported. It’s an astounding contrast to how even peaceful January 6 participants were treated. Just this month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that protestors from that day didn’t need to act “disorderly” or “disruptive” to be found guilty of “disorderly conduct.”

“It is well-established that whether conduct qualifies as disorderly depends on the surrounding circumstances,” the judges wrote. “Courts consistently observe that ‘whether a given act provokes a breach of the peace depends upon the accompanying circumstances,’ making it ‘essential that the setting be considered.’” Surely an attempted breach of the White House fence qualifies as a disturbance of that peace?

If the court believes that “even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly”— language they used to convict the most docile of marchers — then what of people yelling “Break it down!” as they dislodge the White House barriers? What of a crowd so menacing that the president’s home had to be partially evacuated? “In determining whether an act is disorderly,” the judges said, “the act cannot be divorced from the circumstances in which it takes place.” Unless, apparently, the people responsible are allies of the Left.

What we’re witnessing is a double standard in the way lawlessness and violence are treated in this country, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins argued. And it’s at the highest levels, Jonathan Gilliam, a former FBI agent and Navy SEAL, agreed. “… [L]ook at how it’s treated in the media,” he urged on Tuesday’s “Washington Watch.” “[L]ook at the fact that they’re, in some cases, not arresting people,” Gilliam urged. “Are they not being allowed to arrest people?” he wondered.

D.C., as a city, Gilliam observed, is “a far-leftist community.” “And the best example is this biased law enforcement atmosphere.” He pointed to the frustration of conservatives who “get together because of the breakdown of government and because government’s not doing their job well.” Those people are “looked at, in some cases, as terrorist[s] just for saying those things,” he pointed out. “But yet you can go join up with a group that has been considered a terrorist organization [like Hamas] that took responsibility for killing over a thousand people and slaughtering babies in Israel, and you’re going to be treated as though you have every right to be out there when even the things that they’re talking about have nothing to do with this nation.”

Of course, as Perkins pointed out, this isn’t necessarily a reflection on the “rank-and-file men and women who serve.” It starts at the top. “And it’s not just that they’re a mayor or a governor, which is the case in Illinois, but they’re also, prosecutors, they’re chiefs of police, or they’re high-ranking officials in the police department.” They’re bringing their activism to work, Gilliam warned, and then they “stack the ranks” with radicals like them. Ultimately, “what ends up happening is that first off, you have a breakdown in policy, then you have a changing of the laws where law enforcement can’t even do their job.”

But, he pointed out, “here’s where they get us [in] the long term, and where they do affect the rank and file. [It wasn’t that] long ago, especially in the federal government, they started changing how they recruit, who they recruit, the way the commercials are aimed. And so the people that you have now in the rank and file are a mix of good Americans who want to serve their country and then activists who serve an ideology. And that’s the scary part…”

We’re seeing the same thing in the military, Perkins said. “It’s very similar to this. At a certain point when you hit a tipping point, then you have widespread lawlessness, which then leads to tyranny.”

And it happens “very quickly,” Gilliam emphasized. “I mean, the build-up has been very slow. But … people have to realize that the individuals that showed up against that fence are American citizens, and they’re interspersed with some professional activists. … These aren’t minorities that came over the border and all of the sudden became activists. Some of them may be, but you’re looking at people right there that are Americans who grew up in a neighborhood [here], in a home [here]. And on the other side of that fence, you have people making policy that are allowing these people to do these things and get away with it.”

Meanwhile, men and women with no ill intent walked into the Capitol on January 6 and were arrested for trespassing. “But here you have people trying to scale the fences, injuring police officers, and it’s crickets,” Perkins pointed out.

We’re in a perilous situation as a nation, Gilliam wanted people to know. This will eventually get to a point “in which it will crumble the entire system of justice.” “I think we’re very close to that now, where … justice just becomes blind as it has with Trump. I think it’ll be that way for all of us.”

“And that’s something,” Perkins insisted, “that we need to be praying about, and voting about, and standing for.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘The Lost Boys’: Documentary Looks at Impact of Transgenderism on Young Men

A new documentary is exposing the horrors that the transgender movement wreaks upon men, as well as the social and medical-industrial conditions that have led to those horrors. The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network released “The Lost Boys: Searching for Manhood” this week, featuring interviews with numerous men in both the U.S. and the U.K. who have undergone gender transition procedures, in addition to leading psychologists in the field of gender dysphoria.

The documentary examines the key common factors that lead young men to question their biological sex and seek gender transitions — namely, pornography, grooming, and the latent cultural detritus of feminism. It also explores how the medical industry promotes transgenderism, and how the young men wounded by transgenderism seek recovery and healing.

Some young men begin to question their biological sex during puberty, according to the documentary. One of the chief reasons behind this is the socially prevalent claim that men are inherently dangerous or toxic. “I think the messaging these boys have heard throughout their childhoods about ‘toxic masculinity’ has instilled a sense of shame, shame about being male,” explained clinical psychotherapist Dr. Joe Burgo. “And when puberty hits, that shame is deeply intensified because they don’t know how to process this sexual drive that they’ve got, which is often — I wouldn’t say ‘violent,’ but forceful. It’s fueled also by pornography that’s online.”

Pornography seemed to be a key factor for the young men interviewed in “The Lost Boys.” A man named Brian explained that he discovered pornography at a very young age and quickly became addicted, progressing from gay porn to transgender to what he called “this bizarre subgenre of pornography called sissy hypnosis porn.” Brian said, “I was able to sort of keep a lid on it while I was going to college. When I graduated college, that’s when I spiraled out of control.”

Another young man, Ritchie, explained that he became heavily involved in online forums, where he was groomed by older men in transgender chat rooms. He said he went to these websites seeking answers and advice from men who he presumed had transitioned genders. Most of those men turned out to be homosexual, not transgender, and convinced Ritchie to self-manufacture and distribute child pornography. Other men told Ritchie how freeing and liberating it was to transition and encouraged him to start. “The way I see it specifically in the actual sense of grooming is, say, a trans-identified boy has assignations online with older men who encourage him to dress up in female clothing and they give him lots of praise,” Burgo commented. “They’re predatory men, there’s no other word for them. There’s a whole predatory group of men out there who are exploiting the insecurities and the shame of these young men.”

Ritchie also explained that he was told by older men online that his testosterone made him “toxic.” He said he was told that “testosterone is poison.” Another young man interviewed, Torren, also talked of the influence that social media and online chat rooms had on him. “I keep hearing the messages, from media, reddit and Instagram being big things, and you see all of these people transitioning and they just seem happy. You see them on social media, they seem like they’re just saying like it solved all their problems,” he said. “I think I knew that it was too good to be true, but I struggled with it.”

Graham Linehan, an Irish comedy writer who was largely blackballed for speaking out against the transgender agenda, stated, “There is obviously a problem with young men.” He explained, “Part of the problem is that they are — the things they naturally find funny, the things they naturally find interesting, the things they naturally find sexy have all been problematized — they’re being made to feel like there’s something wrong with all these things, these very natural things they’re feeling.” Linehan added, “On top of that, you have an increasingly censorious kind of atmosphere where they really can’t say what they want to say.”

Burgo agreed, saying, “Pretty much all the messaging they’ve been given — during grade school and growing up, in media, from their families, from their teachers, everywhere — is that men, traditional men are really bad and that men need to be more like women.” He further noted, “I mean, if you look at the American Psychological Association’s guidelines for working with men and boys, they basically pathologize traditional masculinity. These boys grow up feeling like being a man is awful.”

Dr. Az Hakeem, who is billed as the U.K.’s top gender expert, explained that another key factor is mental health conditions that pro-transgenderism medical professionals often overlook. He stated that all of the male patients he has worked with over the past 23 years have been on the autism spectrum. “The thing about the autistic mind is it’s very ‘black and white,’ it loves categories, it loves rules,” Hazeem said. “And what I was hearing from my male patients were, ‘Well, to be male you have to be like this, this, this, and this. I’m not like this, therefore I’m other, I’m non-male, therefore I must be female.’” Burgo explained that young men on the autism spectrum tend to be “very dissociated from and uncomfortable with their bodies and the sensory world, they don’t like touch. And the emergence of sexuality and all the sensations it’s provoked is deeply disturbing and often dissociative.”

Yet medical professionals don’t seek to help autistic young men uncomfortable in their bodies find ways to fit in and accept themselves as they are: they rush to promote gender transition procedures without even diagnosing any other condition. Ritchie described how he was put on a regimen of hormone drugs, approved by Britain’s National Health Service (NHS), and began seeing a “gender therapist.” He said, “The first question I got asked by the NHS psychiatrist was, ‘Do you want genital reassignment surgery?’ And that was my very first psychiatric session at the NHS and I was like, ‘I don’t think so. I think I want therapy to be honest…’”

But his doctor kept asking Ritchie if he wanted surgery. “It was just all the time, constant, constant, constant, ‘Do you want surgery? Do you want surgery? Do you want surgery?” he said. Ritchie responded that he wanted to know what the risks are and wanted to give the procedure careful thought, afraid that he might regret it. He even brought his mother with him to the doctor, and she expressed concern over how the estrogen drugs he was taking were reacting with his antidepressants and how surgery might affect that. Ritchie said the doctor “did his best to shut my mother down and make her believe that if she said anything else [against surgery] it would drive us to suicide.”

A young Norwegian man, Alexander, explained that psychotherapy in Norway is rare, and very serious conditions must be met before an individual may be assigned a therapist. So Alexander “exaggerated” and pretended to be suicidal in order to get an appointment with a therapist who would prescribe him estrogen drugs. After beginning his hormone battery, Alexander talked to his therapist only three times before being given a letter of recommendation for genital surgery. “How can you come to a conclusion that this kind of surgery, life-changing surgery, is the best choice for the patient after talking to the patient three times?” he asked.

All of the young men interviewed talked about the effects estrogen had on them, particularly noting a “brain fog” resulting from the drug. “I never really felt suicidal or anything until I took estrogen. It didn’t make my life any better — in fact, it made my life worse, because I started to feel really depressed,” Brian explained. Estrogen decreases testosterone, and as testosterone decreases in men, they become depressed, lethargic, and unmotivated. As estrogen increases in men, it worsens those issues, impairs memory and attention span, and clouds reasoning and judgement. Both Ritchie and Alexander explained that they likely would have decided against surgery if they hadn’t been placed on estrogen.

“Medical professionals really led me astray with this,” Brian said. “Some people are now messed up for life — I’ll never be able to have kids, my rugged masculinity is never gonna come back. It’s all patient-led, it’s patient-led. ‘I wanna do hormones and I wanna have this surgery.’” He explained, “A good therapist, I think, would have said, ‘Well, maybe you’re transgender, who knows? But let’s get sober for a while and then let’s revisit this topic.’ But that’s not what happened.” Hakeem added, “Parents have bought into it, they’re being fed all this propaganda, like if you don’t let your child do this they’ll kill themselves. There’s no evidence to suggest that’s true.”

By the documentary’s end, everyone agreed that men cannot become women — that the chief claim of transgenderism is a lie. “Gender ideology does not believe that there’s biological sex, it believes that ‘felt gender’ has replaced biological sex, it believes that there are a hundred genders. And I think it’s nonsense. There’s biological sex. You’re male, you’re female, and a very tiny proportion of the people are intersex,” Hakeem explained. Burgo said, “I do not believe that anyone is born in the wrong body nor do I believe that anyone has an innate ‘gender identity’ that might be out of alignment with their sexed body. We are lying to children, I think we need to stop lying to children.”

Ritchie said he started a recovery group for young men who have gone through gender transition procedures. “We’ve all opted for something we call ‘recovery’ rather than ‘detransition,’” he explained. “Because there was no transition, I never went to female, and I’m not going back to male. I never left.” Alexander said, “I’m at peace that I’m a man, that I cannot change that, and I think of it as a biological reality. In Norway we don’t have a word for ‘detransitioner.’ We have a word that can be loosely translated to ‘a regretter.’” Torren stated that he has accepted who he is, saying, “I … realized that all these steps that I was taking to try to somehow ‘be my true self’ were actually taking me away from my true self, were actually taking me away from who I was.”

The Lost Boys” is currently available for free on YouTube.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Christian Teachers Reinstated as Lawsuit over Transgender Policy Continues

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Inflation Under Biden Hiked The Massive National Debt In A New Way In 2023, Experts Say

Interest rate hikes to combat sky-high inflation under President Joe Biden have led the Federal Reserve to run over a hundred billion dollar deficit, adding to the national debt, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Federal Reserve in past years has operated a net surplus, remitting those excess earnings to the Treasury to pay off the national debt, according to a press release from the Fed. In 2023, following an inflation-driven increase to the federal funds rate, the interest rate that the central bank has to pay to commercial banks that are holding excess cash overnight, the Fed began losing money, which the Treasury has to issue debt to pay, according to experts who spoke to the DCNF.

“The Fed’s losses do contribute to the deficit,” George Selgin, director emeritus of the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the Cato Institute, told the DCNF. “Normally, the Fed saves the government money by sending most of the interest it earns on its securities back to the U.S. Treasury. But because the Fed now pays interest on banks’ reserves, when the rate it pays goes up, its remittances to the Treasury go down, and lately the rate it pays has risen so much that this past year alone it owed banks more than $100 billion more than it earned. Until it makes up for this loss and also for losses from the previous few years, which could take a long time, it won’t be sending anything to the Treasury.”

The Fed was able to remit around $79 billion to the Treasury in 2022 before having to take out $16.6 billion in debt by the end of the year as rising interest rates took hold, later losing $114.3 billion in 2023, according to the Fed press release. The Treasury received $109 billion, $86 billion, $54.9 billion and $62.1 billion from the Fed in 2021, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

The rates that the Federal Reserve pays on the overnight reserve balances held by commercial banks have risen in accordance with hikes in the federal funds rate, which the Fed has put in a range of 5.25% and 5.50%, the highest rate in 22 years, in response to high inflation that peaked at 9.1% in June 2022 under Biden. Inflation has since moderated to 3.4% as of December — still not at the Fed’s 2% target, but enough to prompt a median of Fed governors to predict three rate cuts before the end of 2024.

“The Fed’s rate hikes are supposed to counter inflation by raising the cost of borrowing, which is supposed in turn to cause people to borrow and spend less,” Selgin told the DCNF. “But the same hikes add to the government’s deficit, by reducing the Fed’s Treasury remittances, but mainly by raising the interest the Treasury has to pay on its shorter-term obligations. So unless the government cuts spending, the rate hikes can fail to counter inflation, and might even aggravate it, and the public bears the double burden of higher rates and high, if not higher inflation.”

Many economists point to high-spending policies for a portion of the inflation that has plagued Americans under Biden. Biden signed the American Rescue Plan in March 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022, authorizing $1.9 trillion and $750 billion in new spending, respectively.

The U.S. national debt exceeded $34 trillion for the first time in the country’s history on Dec. 29, 2023, with around $27 trillion being held by the public and the other more than $7 trillion being intergovernmentally held. For Fiscal Year 2023, the federal government ran a budget deficit of around $2 trillion when the president’s failed student loan forgiveness plan is properly accounted for, compared to $1 trillion in the previous fiscal year.

“The reason it has losses is that the Fed printed money to buy federal debt,” Richard Stern, director of the Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget at the Heritage Foundation, told the DCNF. “Then, when it stopped printing money to buy more debt, new federal deficits fell onto the private money markets. This triggered crowding out and the ensuing interest rate surges we’ve seen. Then the interest rate spike reduced the market value of the existing debt that the Fed is holding — that’s what the losses are.”

Net interest payments on the national debt have also increased rapidly as rates have risen, with any new Treasury debt issued having to be at a much higher interest rate, costing more to maintain and hold. In the first quarter of 2021, when Biden first took office, interest payments totaled around $535 billion, which has grown to more than $980 billion as of the third quarter of 2023, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

“I’d say that the losses are indicative of the inflationary money printing used to cover Biden’s spending and just one more example of where the government is using inflation and interest rate manipulation to cheat bondholders and steal from hard-working Americans,” Stern told the DCNF.

The White House did not respond to a request to comment from the DCNF.

AUTHOR

WILL KESSLER

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dem Demands On Automakers Could Backfire On Their Own Climate Agenda And Americans’ Wallets, Experts Say

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


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

How Biden’s Policies Triggered a 7,300% Increase in Illegal Immigration from Venezuela, Endangering U.S. Security

Washington, D.C. — A new report by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) examines the direct links between Biden administration policies and the astounding 7,300 percent spike in illegal immigration from Venezuela. In FY 2020, the last full year before President Biden took office, 4,520 Venezuelan nationals were encountered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at America’s borders. By FY 2023, the number of such encounters had ballooned to 334,914. Venezuelans are now the second most commonly encountered nationality at the border, trailing only Mexican nationals.

The rocket-fueled surge of illegal aliens from Venezuela is not due to significantly worsening conditions in that country. Rather, Biden administration policies that virtually assure that all Venezuelan illegal aliens arriving in the U.S. will be released and allowed stay have driven the growth of illegal immigration from that nation, the report concludes. Moreover, a large percentage of Venezuelan illegal immigrants had already been safely settled in other countries for years.

The breathtaking increase in illegal immigration from Venezuela also poses serious national security concerns for the United States. Venezuela’s Marxist dictator, Nicolas Maduro, maintains close relationships with some of America’s most implacable enemies and adversaries, including Iran, Russia and China. Venezuela’s government is known to issue travel documents to individuals linked to terrorism and has been accused of allowing terrorists to operate with relative impunity.

In recent years, the Maduro regime has strengthened its ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s most notorious state sponsor of terrorism, which has made overt terror threats against the United States. These are not idle threats, as recent attacks on Americans by the Yemen-based Houthis, an Iranian proxy group, clearly demonstrate.

“The surge in Venezuelan illegal immigration since January 20, 2021 represents a case study in how the ‘pull factors’ of the Biden administration’s disastrous immigration policies have led to the largest and most sustained wave of illegal immigration in American history,” noted Dan Stein, president of FAIR. “Venezuela has been an economic and political basket case for a quarter of a century. What has changed over the past three years are the policies of this country that have sent a clear message to people all around the world that illegal immigration will not only be tolerated, but rewarded.

“Aside from the crippling costs and social disruption caused by unprecedented illegal immigration that we see playing out in New York City and other cities around the country, our open borders also constitute a grave national security threat. The dramatic growth of illegal immigration from Venezuela is a prime example. In an increasingly dangerous world, in which the threats of terror attacks have never been higher in the estimation of FBI Director Christopher Wray, the Biden administration is playing Russian Roulette with the security of the American people,” concluded Stein.

Among the key findings of the report:

  • Venezuelans are now the second most encountered nationality of illegal aliens at the border.
  • More than half a million Venezuelan illegal aliens have been encountered since January 2021.
  • The number of Venezuelan nationals encountered increased 77 percent between Fiscal Years 2022-2023. Since FY 2020, the increase in Venezuelan illegal immigration has been 7,309 percent.
  • Executive Branch policies – especially parole, Temporary Protected Status and the mass release of migrants into the U.S.- have driven the dramatic increase in Venezuelan illegal immigration.
  • The Biden administration’s parole program allows Venezuelans and dual nationals of Venezuela to enter the U.S., even with an expired passport, with little or no vetting.
  • Venezuela’s government has supplied genuine Venezuelan travel documents to non-Venezuelans, including potential national security threats from countries like Iran. This is especially concerning given Venezuela’s ties to state sponsors of terrorism.

The full report can be found here.

To download the PDF of this report, click here

For the executive summary of this report, click here

RELATED ARTICLES:

The national security implications of Biden’s open border are transformative for America

Testimony From Former Immigration Official Lays Out Point By Point How Biden Policies Ushered In Border Crisis

‘Why Are You Laughing?’: GOP Rep Spars With Immigration Witness Over Whether Fraudulent Migrant Families Cross Border

Feds Tell Texas to Stop Securing the Border, Wrongly Blame Them for Migrant Deaths

RELATED VIDEO: The People Want Action: The Big Issues Republicans Should Be Focusing on to Win Over New Voters

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

MSNBC and CNN REFUSE to Air Trump’s Victory Speech in Iowa

Press protections must be revoked and removed from left-wing propaganda outlets.

They’ve destroyed the Republic.

Maddow’s Meltdown When Trump Won the Iowa Caucuses Exposed Media’s Path Forward

KAREN TOWNSEND

Something happened when Trump won the Iowa caucuses Monday night and the time came for him to deliver a victory speech. MSNBC and other media outlets decided to not air the speech.

It is not breaking news that MSNBC is anti-Trump. It is unusual for a progressive activist who plays a political show host on MSNBC to level with the audience about its political bias. Maddow explained that Trump won in Iowa and he was beginning to speak. She went on to say MSNBC and other news outlets have stopped airing his speeches live because they don’t air “untrue things.”

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: I just have to get to business just for a second. At this point in the evening the projected winner of the Iowa caucuses has just started giving his victory speech. We will keep an eye on that as it happens, we will let you know if there is any news made in that speech, anything noteworthy, something substantive and important.

The reason why I am saying this is, of course, there is a reason that we and other news organizations have generally stopped giving an unfiltered, live platform to remarks by former President Trump. It’s not out of spite, it is not a decision that we relish, it is a decision that we regularly revisit and, honestly, earnestly, it is not an easy decision. But there is a cost to us, as a news organization, of knowingly broadcasting untrue things. And that is a fundamental truth of our business and who we are. So his remarks, tonight, will not air here live. We will monitor them and let you know about any news that he makes.

This is ridiculous, of course, because they air Joe Biden all the time. Biden is a serial liar. But, he’s one of them so it’s not a big deal. What about partisan hacks like Rep. Adam Schiff who told lie after lie on cable news networks about his alleged information on the hoax of Russia, Russia, Russia against Trump. What about the sham impeachment against Trump that MSNBC and other networks carried with bated breath?

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: BLOW-OUT: Trump STORMS To Historic Victory in Iowa

POSTS ON X:

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

“Diversity is a Strength” is Just Something Stupid People Say

What has so often struck me, and irked me, about the embrace of “diversity” dogma is how profoundly unintellectual it is. A wiseguy might say it’s really a simple IQ test, though a wise guy understands it’s a soul and sagacity test. To wit:

To the extent that a person accepts as imperative diversity, DEI, CRT, wokeness in general — or whatever the latest shiny anti-Truth thing is — he is a vacuous know-nothing, not just unqualified, but dangerously ignorant.

Two recent examples are disgraced ex-Harvard president Claudine Gay and Johns Hopkins Hospital’s chief diversity officer Sherita Hill Golden, now infamous for disseminating a “privilege hit list.” Affirmative-action hires both, each one is the kind of woman about whom ex-radio giant and now podcaster Michael Savage would say, “In my day, the highest she would’ve gone is owning a brassiere store on Queens Blvd. — and after 19 years, she’d have had two brassiere stores.”

What’s simultaneously so laughable and so sad about all such people, supposedly the crème de la crème of the intelligentsia (I call them pseudo-elites), is that they will obediently disgorge the latest word-salad-replete, cock-and-bull academic theory like part of a hive mind. But that’s the problem with elevating empty vessels on identity bases: You get no creativity, just craven conformity.

This is what political theorist Hannah Arendt called “the banality of evil.” If, however, you merely seek conduits through which to push an agenda no virtuous, thinking person would push, such people are precisely who you recruit.

For they’ll accept Diversity™ — they’ll even worship the DEIty — no questions asked. They won’t wonder why diversity should be considered desirable, a good, without proof; they won’t demand data. They’ll just repeat, mindlessly, “Our strength lies in our diversity!” because they’ve heard it so much. Repetition imprints most effectively with soft heads.

This brings something to mind, too: an old Twilight Zone episode that wonderfully places diversity calls in perspective. Titled “Eye of the Beholder” (1959), it features a demagogic leader who repetitively issues his own slogans. A clip follows (note: It is a spoiler of sorts), and pay attention to the segment beginning at 0:27 and, in particular, the several seconds starting at 1:10.

“Conformity!” the tyrant yells. “Conformity!” Analyzing the above superficially, some will say it actually supports the diversity agenda, as the demagogue inveighs against “differences”; conformity is the opposite of diversity, after all. And Twilight Zone creator Rod Serling, a WWII vet, was greatly influenced by his experiences and often wove warnings about Hitler-like seducers into his work (his commentary was not infallible, either, mind you). But the point is this:

The pig-faced demagogue’s “Conformity!” and our lipstick-on-a-pig “Diversity!” are both slogans uttered mindlessly, without understanding or nuance.

In reality, both diversity and conformity are necessary and good — in certain situations.

We absolutely, for example, want conformity to the truth that one mustn’t commit murder, rape or theft; to the imperative of having nice manners; to the virtue of honesty; and many other goods. As for diversity, it’s an inescapable reality, with people being taller and shorter, stronger and weaker, smarter and duller. It also can be a good: That people have varied gifts is why we’ve had Einstein, Pasteur, Aristotle, da Vinci, Aquinas, Watson and Crick, and history’s other geniuses. We have diversity in products and services and invention and innovation because man has diversity in talent and inclination.

But our diversity agenda is like pig-face’s conformity demands. It’s divorced from the only thing that informs as to when diversity or conformity is desirable: Truth. When this happens, an agenda, which should be meant to serve the good, becomes the “good” — aka a false god.

The result, then, is confusion, people thinking that the diversity of children claiming they’re the opposite sex is good and the conformity of marrying only the opposite sex is bad, that the diversity of foul language in art is liberation but the conformity of a common language in life is oppression, or that the diversity of different group-performance outcomes is bad but conformity to social engineering meant to eliminate them is good.

Sloganeering can be done with anything. “War!” “Peace!” “Hope!” “Change!” “Forward!” “Progress!” “Equality!” Be careful, however, anytime something becomes a mantra. It may mean that when promoting the given idea, reason would fail so repetition is the fallback.

Also realize that everyone wants a type of conformity. Our pseudo-elites, for instance, want us to conform to their diversity machinations — or suffer persecution. And our reaction must be something that, within the context of our now left-wing status quo, would be a real example of diversity: the complete destruction of their agenda and replacement of it with sanity.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe or Gettr or log on to SelwynDuke.com

©2024. Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Tucker Carlson examines the Diversity dialectic

CNN ‘journalists’ rail against ‘Zionist entity,’ scream ‘F**k Israel’

CNN Journalists Rail Against ‘Zionist Entity’ in Anti-Israel Social Media Posts

by Charles Hilu, Washington Free Beacon, January 11, 2024:

Journalists at CNN have slammed Israel in social media posts, with one calling out the “Zionist entity” online, according to a report from a media watchdog.

“Your precious ‘Israel’ … was injecting women of Ethiopian origin with the long-acting contraceptive (sterilizing them),” CNN producer Mohammed Abdelbary said in 2021 in a now-deleted X post. “You supporting the Zionist entity is the greatest insult to Black and Ethiopian culture one could make.”

Abdelbary joined CNN in 2021 and became a producer for its show Connect the World with Becky Anderson, according to pro-Israel watchdog HonestReporting, which revealed the 2021 X post.

The Abu Dhabi-based producer has contributed to the network’s coverage of Israel’s war on Hamas and has the lead byline on an October article focused on the plight of pregnant women in Gaza. That article said of Israel’s blockade of Gaza, following Hamas’s Oct. 7 terror attacks, that “human rights organizations have condemned the move as ‘collective punishment’ and ‘a war crime.’”

Abdelbary has made anti-Israel posts on social media as far back as 2014, when he said “f**k Israel” and that he hopes the country gets “crushed by the Palestinians.”

Another journalist named by HonestReporting is British cameraman Richard Harlow, who has claimed on social media that Israel is committing war crimes, including harvesting the organs of dead Palestinians.

“People are still talking about decapitated babies but no one’s talking about the Palestinian babies that HAVE been murdered BY the Israelis,” he reportedly wrote in one post. Harlow said on social media recently that he has been tasked with editing footage from a local Gazan correspondent for CNN, the watchdog said….

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS calls on Muslims to carry out jihad massacres of ‘Jews, Christians, or their allies on the streets of America’

What About The October 7 Pro-Hamas Insurrectionists?

PURE EVIL: Pro-Hamas Protesters March On NYC Cancer Hospital, Scream “Shame on You!” at Patients and Staff at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Pediatric Hospital

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

ISIS calls on Muslims to carry out jihad massacres of ‘Jews, Christians, or their allies on the streets of America’

As well as Europe and the world. Expect the overwhelming majority of peaceful Muslims to rise up and stop these hijackers of the Religion of Peace any day now.

Pro-ISIS Posters Incite Attacks On New York City: ‘Go Get Them, Oh Monotheist

MEMRI, January 11, 2024:

The following report is now a complimentary offering from MEMRI’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor (JTTM). For JTTM subscription information, click here.

On January 11, 2024, a pro-Islamic State (ISIS) media outlet released two posters inciting attacks in New York City.The posters came as part of a global attack campaign called, “And Kill Them Wherever You Find Them,” announced on January 4 by the ISIS spokesman. In an audio message uploaded online, he declared support for the Muslims of Gaza and urged ISIS operatives and supporters to launch attacks globally, including lone wolf attacks, in the West.

“Identify The Target, Trust In Allah, And Execute”

Titled “And Kill Them Wherever You Find Them,” the first poster depicts an armed man, three bullets, and a sketch of a building. A stamp on the poster reads: “NEW YORK N.Y. JUN16 7-PM 1937.” Adjacent to the stamp, an entry ticket reads: “AROUND THE WORLD.”

Text on the poster also encourages potential attackers: “Identify the target, trust in Allah, and execute [the attack],” it reads.

“Go Get Them, Oh Monotheist”

The second poster depicts the New York City skyline in flames, and an armed man brandishing a weapon alongside text inciting an attack, which reads: “Go get them, oh monotheist.”

The poster also features an excerpt from the spokesman’s January 4 audio address, which calls on ISIS operatives and supporters to avenge Muslims by carrying out attacks on “Jews, Christians, or their allies on the streets and roads of America, Europe, and the world.”

The text reads: “Lions of Islam: Chase your prey whether Jews, Christians, or their allies, on the streets and roads of America, Europe, and the world. Break into their homes, kill them and steal their peace of mind by any means you can lay hands on. Understand that you are the arm of the Islamic State hitting in the unbelievers’ homelands, and are avenging the Muslims in Palestine, Iraq, Syria, and other Muslim countries. Solidify your plans and diversify the attacks: detonate explosives, burn them with grenades and fiery agents, shoot them with bullets, cut their throats with sharp knives, and run them over with vehicles. A sincere person will not lack the means to draw blood from the hearts of the Jews, the Christians, and their allies, and thus ease the suffering in the hearts of the believers.”

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

South African politician who sang ‘Kill the Boer’ says Hamas ‘did nothing wrong’ in Oct. 7 jihad massacres

An Egyptian Highlights What Most Palestinians, and Other Arabs, Refuse to Recognize

Montreal: Muslim accused of beating daughter, threatening to kill her and rape corpse for refusing arranged marriage

Iran-backed Houthis stage mock invasion of Israeli ‘settlement,’ resembling October 7 massacre

Canada: Liberal and NDP MPs head to Jordan and Judea and Samaria to meet Palestinians, ‘progressive Israeli groups’

An Egyptian On Lebanese Television Tells — Amazingly — The Truth

CNN ‘journalists’ rail against ‘Zionist entity,’ scream ‘F**k Israel’

Florida: Hotel cancels Muslim conference over support for Hamas, Muslim leaders decry ‘anti-Muslim tropes’

Turkish professor claims that ‘multiple sclerosis is a punishment from Allah’

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

Nonpartisan Get Out the Vote Initiative in Westchester County’s Jewish Community Ahead of 2024 New York Elections

NEW YORK, NY /PRNewswire — Teach New York State (NYS), a division of Teach Coalition, today announced a new and unprecedented nonpartisan ‘Get Out the Vote’ initiative focused on the upcoming elections in Westchester County. Teach Coalition advocates for equitable funding and resources for all nonpublic schools including Jewish day schools and yeshivas.

The Jewish community of Westchester County is mobilizing to counter a wave of anti-Jewish hate incidents and other antisemitic threats and rhetoric in New York in the aftermath of the 10/7 attacks in Israel. Teach Coalition is responding to and providing support for the parents of children in Jewish schools who are concerned about security threats to their children, their educational institutions, and their houses of worship.

As a part of this campaign, Teach Coalition will open a voter site at 1297 North Avenue in New Rochelle, offering residents voter-registration support, absentee-ballot assistance, as well as community outreach to engage current and newly registered voters. The voter site will open in early February. In the following weeks, Teach Coalition will open other field offices for nonpartisan voter mobilization across southern and central Westchester County.

Teach Coalition is preparing to spend up to $1.6 million on voter-registration and voter-turnout operations and has already raised over $1 million to fund the initiative. Teach Coalition has set a goal of registering thousands of new minority voters.

This initiative builds on prior successful ‘Get Out the Vote’ campaigns organized by Teach Coalition across multiple states and communities. This includes the recent New Jersey election which saw the Jewish community voting in higher numbers than district averages across the state. In Florida, the Jewish community more than doubled average citywide voter turnout in the 2023 Miami Beach and North Miami Beach mayoral elections following Teach Florida’s efforts.

“Now more than ever, it is essential that our communities come out and vote,” said Dan Mitzner, Director of Government Affairs for Teach Coalition. “We are excited to leverage our expertise in voter engagement to work with the Westchester community at this time. This is a first of its kind effort, and we are confident Jewish communities across the county will do their part to vote and make a difference.”

Synagogues, Jewish day schools and Jewish institutions throughout Westchester representing the broad Jewish community have signed on in support of this effort, encouraging their communities to mobilize and vote. The full list of partner organizations is in formation and can be found below.

“These elections hold critical implications for our Jewish communal institutions and especially for our schools,” said Rabbi Dani Rockoff, Principal of Westchester Day School. “Right now, it is our responsibility to show up and vote in large numbers in this election. We are grateful for the efforts of Teach NYS to mobilize our communities around this.”

Teach Coalition is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization and does not support any political party or candidate.

The New York State Primary Election is set for June 25, 2024; Federal Congressional primary election dates are yet to be determined. The New York State General Election is November 5, 2024. For more information, head to: https://teachcoalition.org/votenys/

Schools

Kinneret
SAR Academy and High School
The Leffell School
Westchester Day School
Westchester Hebrew High School
Westchester Torah Academy

Synagogues

Anshei Shalom
Congregation B’nei Yisrael
Hebrew Institute of
White Plains
Riverdale Jewish Center
Young Israel
New Rochelle
Young Israel
Scarsdale
White Plains

Organizations

UJA-Federation of New York
Westchester Jewish Council

About Teach Coalition

Teach Coalition, a project of the Orthodox Union, is a nonpartisan, multi-state, grassroots movement devoted to advocating for equitable funding for nonpublic schools. Teach Coalition works to make nonpublic schools better, safer and more affordable. Teach Coalition advocates on behalf of approximately 90% of Jewish day school and yeshivah students nationwide and counts more than 90,000 dedicated volunteers, activists and subscribers among its supporters.

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Nancy Pearcey on The Toxic War On Masculinity

There is a war on men that is affecting their development, behaviors, and priorities. They are being taught that their inherent nature does not fit within a biblical ethic.

Nancy Pearcey, professor, and author of “The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes”, joins host Joseph Backholm to discuss the cultural shift in the definition of masculinity.

Nancy and Joseph dive into when this shift happened, tracing it back to one main event in history: the Industrial Revolution. With men no longer working alongside their wives and children and instead competing with other men for work, a mindset shift happened that would eventually lead to the term “toxic masculinity”.

Listen now to learn more about what influenced this change!

Nancy Pearcey on The Toxic War On Masculinity pt.2

In this second installment, host Joseph Backholm welcomes back Nancy Pearcey, professor, and author of “The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes” to discuss further the current war on men and masculinity. Joseph and Nancy spend time debunking the many myths of evangelical relationships spread by the media and even religious circles at times.

They discuss the shocking findings on which group of women reported the highest satisfaction in their marriage and the impact that nominal Christianity has had on the definition of masculinity. What does it mean to be a good man vs. a real man?

And how does God’s cultural mandate affect how we define masculinity?

COMMENTATORS

Joseph Backholm

Nancy Pearcey

Resource:

The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes by Nancy Pearcey

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nikki Haley Waffles on Transgenderism

Circuit Court Allows Alabama to Enforce Law Protecting Minors from Gender Transitions

Nations Must Provide ‘an Uninterrupted Supply of’ Trans Hormones and Surgeries: WHO Guidelines Drafter

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand podcast is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

GOP Experts Warn Candidates to Stop Treating Abortion ‘Like a Hot Stove’ They Won’t Touch

Nobody likes a wimp — and on the issue of abortion, the Republican Party has plenty of them. After the Dobbs ruling put the issue back in legislators’ hands, a shocking number of GOP candidates spent the 2022 and 2023 elections cowering in the collective corner, hoping voters would take their silence as confirmation that they had a reasonable position on life (despite the Democrats’ 24/7 ads to the contrary). Now, staring down a high-stakes November where this issue has the potential to upend all of the GOP’s momentum, more voices are urging the party to get off the sidelines and fight.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) was the latest to demand more guts from candidates. “You need to tell voters your position [on abortion],” argued the head of the House’s Republican fundraising arm. The idea that conservatives can continue letting the Democrats mischaracterize their positions is a losing recipe for 2024, he insisted. It’s time to stop being scared and start getting aggressive, Hudson urged.

“[Our candidates] need to articulate their position to the voters,” he pointed out, “because [right now] the voters think the Republican position is like, ‘We’ll throw you in jail if you get an abortion.’” And unfortunately, that lie has become the perceived reality in the face of very little GOP pushback. “We could have done a better job handling [abortion] last cycle,” Hudson lamented, “where the Democrats spent hundreds of millions of dollars on that topic, and we pretty much just treated it like a hot stove and didn’t touch it.”

And this year, Joe Biden’s party is betting even more money on the topic — an unsurprising move for leaders with nothing to run on but three years of catastrophe. Already, one of the Left’s super-PACs has pledged an eye-popping $200 million on television, social media, radio, and mail advertisements focused on the GOP’s supposedly “radical” position on life.

“Another Donald Trump presidency would mean disaster for Americans who value their rights,” the founder of America Bridge 21st Century said. “We know exactly how to beat Donald Trump. We’ve done it before, and our paid media strategy is a big part of how we’re going to do it again.”

What Democrats are careful not to say — and what Republicans should begin to — is their actual position on abortion. That, strategists say, is where conservatives have a powerful edge. “Republicans don’t have a policy problem,” Hudson insisted. “We have a branding problem,” Hudson said. “We need to point out that the Democrat position is abortion for any reason, up until the moment of birth, paid for by taxpayers. That’s extreme.”

Family Research Council Vice President Brent Keilen agreed that the GOP’s silence created “a huge messaging disadvantage.” “Attempting to avoid this conversation — a conversation that was and is on many voters’ minds — allowed the opposition to completely set the terms of the debate,” he told The Washington Stand. “Candidates should make sure to do two things: first, let the voters know where you stand; second, draw a contrast with what the radical abortion lobby is actively pushing for.”

Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel has been beating that drum since Dobbs. “We shouldn’t be silent,” she insisted late last year. “Listen, we’re proud to be a party that stands for the unborn. And I think coming out of Roe, after 50 years of … people not having to navigate this issue, it’s really important that we define ourselves before the Democrats do. Let’s talk about pregnancy [care] centers. Let’s talk about getting rid of cumbersome regulation to adoption. But let’s also put the Democrats on the defense because they stand for late-term abortion. They stand for gender-selection abortion.”

“I will work alongside every single candidate,” McDaniel vowed, “but Democrats have nothing to run on except for abortion, and they spent $350 million on it in 2022. They are going to use the same playbook in 2024, and our candidates need to get up to speed and be able to go on TV and articulate where we stand — because when we do, we win.”

If they need motivation, check out the polling data. “The first step in addressing the public perceptions of Republicans’ stance on abortion restrictions is to get a handle on the basics,” urged Amanda Iovino, polling director for Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin’s 2021 campaign. “Americans generally favor some limits on abortion. As an October 2022 WPA Intelligence poll found, by a two-to-one margin, voters see no restrictions on abortion as ‘more extreme’ than limiting it with exceptions for rape, incest, and the mother’s life.”

In a country as divided as ours, that’s as close to a statistical slam-dunk as you can get. Another August 2022 survey from the same group discovered that “62 percent of likely voters support limiting abortion to 15 weeks or earlier, similar to the European standard.” This is the line of public consensus that Republicans like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have been urging the GOP to draw — with surprising pushback from fellow pro-lifers.

“If we can’t muster the courage, post-Dobbs, to tell the country that we’re against late-term abortion, then we’ve lost our way,” he’s argued. That doesn’t mean, Graham has said, that states can’t be more restrictive. If Arkansas or Louisiana want to outlaw abortion entirely, they can. But there also needs to be a clear, nationwide boundary, Graham argued, so that children in extreme places like California, Illinois, or Maryland have a fighting chance. So “at 15 weeks, we draw the line as a nation. [That’s a] minimum federal standard.”

It’s also a strong public preference, Iovino pointed out. But for Republicans to seize on this support, they have to also realize the mountain of misconceptions they’ll have to climb — the tragic result of months of Republican silence on the issue. “The same poll found that 44 percent of Americans mistakenly thought the Supreme Court has outlawed abortion nationwide, and half of those voters think Republicans also want to ban contraceptives. This misinformation makes it easier for Democrats to foster distrust towards Republicans.”

Americans witnessed that first-hand in Virginia and Ohio, where radical abortion won on the ballots by popular vote — stunning states that had made positive pro-life strides. “Heading into the 2024 cycle, the Republican Party must craft clear, effective messaging to counter misinformation and rebuild trust,” Iovino warned. “… The lessons for the GOP from Virginia and Ohio are clear: prioritize policies that support women and directly confront trust issues and misinformation.”

One of the first things a candidate learns, FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter pointed out to TWS, “is to not allow your opponent to define you on an issue.” “Issues don’t just go away because a campaign refuses to engage,” he warned. “In fact, if Republicans don’t engage, a vacuum emerges, one that pro-abortion forces are happy to fill. They want the issue to be about removing someone’s rights when in reality what we’re really talking about is protecting unborn lives. Chairman Hudson’s advice is solid — candidates need to tell the voters where they stand.”

The stakes are too high not to.

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Poll Reveals Most Young Voters Want Limits on Abortion

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.