JULY 4TH TREASON: Gaggle of 11 Republicans Join Biden To Gut the Second Amendment

“Biden’s America is becoming a mirror image of Trudeau’s Canada when it comes to gun control.” ― Dr. Richard M. Swier, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)

“To conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens.” ― Adolf Hitler


Frank Gaffney in a podcast titled The Senate GOP’s “White Flag” initiative stated,

A gaggle of Republican Senators have just agreed with Democratic counterparts that the something they are prepared to do in response to recent mass shootings is adopt a national ‘Red Flag’ law. As a result, in the name of preventing deplorable, but random, acts of “gun violence,” every American could be one anonymous denunciation away from having their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms eliminated.

This legislation is scheduled to be passed by July 4th, 2022. If it does then American independence is lost. 

Listen to Gaffney’s statement.

Royal A. Brown III, an expert on Florida’s Red Flag law, wrote this about Republican senators joining in the efforts by Biden and Democrats to pass a national Red Flag law,

Sens. Rick Scott (R-FL), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Pat Toomey (R-PA), and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) attended the initial discussions that started on Thursday. As governor of Florida, Scott implemented red flag laws and raised the age to own a rifle to 21 after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

On June 12th, 2022 U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Cory Booker (D- N.J.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) issued the following statement:

Today, we are announcing a commonsense, bipartisan proposal to protect America’s children, keep our schools safe, and reduce the threat of violence across our country. Families are scared, and it is our duty to come together and get something done that will help restore their sense of safety and security in their communities. Our plan increases needed mental health resources, improves school safety and support for students, and helps ensure dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as mentally ill can’t purchase weapons. Most importantly, our plan saves lives while also protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans. We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense proposal into law.

Royal A. Brown III also warns let’s also not forget the following facts:

  • The ex parte Risk Protection Order (RPO) is issued without notice to the respondent and can occur 24 x 7. This is a violation of the 4th Amendment.
  • The “hearing” at which the respondent is present does not take place until 2 weeks after the seizure (this is not Due Process under the 5th and 14th amendments).
  • This process does not recognize the principle of law that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
  • The rules of evidence do not involve “beyond reasonable doubt” but rather “reasonable suspicion” that the respondent may be a threat.
  • Florida’s law calls for the respondent to be immediately entered into the state and federal criminal data bases (even though the RPO is supposedly a civil and not a criminal process, e.g. no crime has been committed). There is no provisions to remove the respondent found innocent from these lists.
  • An RPO can be issued up to a year after reporting a person as a threat.
  • If a respondent is found to be not a threat there are no provisions for prompt return of his/her firearms, ammo, permit nor that this property be returned in the same condition as when seized.
  • Since June 2018 when this law went into effect in Floirda of the over 5,000 RPOs issued, approximately 13% or 650 of those accused respondents have been found not to be a threat at the after the fact hearing – this is far too many and demonstrates 3 possibilities – the accusers lied and/or the law enforcement sending the petition to Judges did not conduct a through investigation and/or the Judges rubber stamp these petitions. Not one of the false accusers have been charged with the 3rd degree misdemeanor called for in the law.
  • This law also facilitates the muting of 1st Amendment law of freedom of speech as people become fearful of stating anything that could be misconstrued as a threat.
  • Furthermore, this law can easily be misused as a weapon against political opponents.

Add to this the fact that Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) warned that Federal Firearms Licenses are being denied at a rate of 500%,

“Federal Firearms Licensees are being denied renewals or their licenses are being taken away at a rate of about 500% greater since Biden was in office [than in] previous years,” Clyde said during a Second Amendment Caucus press conference.

“So it is definitely obvious that the Biden administration is targeting Federal Firearms Licensees because they are the link between manufacturers and people being able to access their Second Amendment rights,” he said.

Clyde, a federal firearms licensee who owns a store in his Athens district called “Clyde Armory,” said that “the motto of my company is we enable individual participation in the preservation of liberty” by giving people access to guns.

Here is Brad Polumbo reacting to 4 gun control tweets that’ll make you’re brain hurt.

The Bottom Line

In America there are approximated 102.5 legal firearms for every 100 citizens. These owners of firearms have an estimated 1 trillion+ rounds of ammunition.

I took an oath as a young Army officer when I was commissioned a 2nd Lieutenant in 1967 to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That oath doesn’t expire until I do. I and millions of others have taken that same oath. We the people will abide by it.

Jeff Cooper in 1997 book Art of the Rifle wrote,

The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.

We fully agree. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy or girl with a gun.

On Monday, July 4th, 2022 Americans will be celebrating Independence Day. If this Red Flag law passes the U.S. Senate it may be the last day of our independence and/or the first day of the second American Revolution.

Gird your loins. A war is coming to America.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sen. John Cornyn Gets Heckled By Texas GOP Amid Gun Control Negotiations

ANOTHER RINO CAVES: Cornyn Joins Democrats in Crushing Second Amendment Rights

Trudeau says guns are not to be used for self-defense in Canada

RELATED VIDEO: The Bipartisan D.C. Gun Grab Is Coming | The Charlie Kirk Show

More Alarming Inflation Data Undercut the Progressive ‘Greedflation’ Narrative

Companies haven’t jacked up prices to even fully match the increase in their costs, let alone exceed them.


Another day, another disturbing price inflation metric.

The federal government just released the latest Producer Price Index (PPI), an index that tracks the prices of a basket of the typical inputs businesses rely on, like energy, warehousing, etc. It finds that prices rose 0.8% from April to May, and a whopping 10.8% from May 2021 to May 2022. The PPI is the Federal Reserve’s preferred metric of price inflation, and this latest update keeps it near a 40-year high.

To see just how extreme this trend continues to be, just check out this graph from Fox Business:

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE GRAPH

Of course, this latest update comes just one day after another alarming inflation update. Released Monday, the latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) showed an 8.6% year-over-year increase in consumer prices. That metric imperfectly measures prices for a basket of consumer goods a typical US household might buy, and it too remains near 40-year highs.

What’s the significance?

Well, these updates offer more proof that rising prices are hurting American families, eroding paychecks, and bursting budgets. But we already knew that.

The really interesting insight here comes from comparing the producer price data to the consumer price data. Contrasting the two undercuts the progressive “greedflation” narrative that argues rising prices are in large part due to corporate greed.

“Inflation first rose because of other factors, like Covid and economic stimulus bills,” the New York Times writes in an article explaining what “greedflation” advocates believe. “But companies raised prices more than necessary to net higher profits. They knew they could get away with it because consumers no longer had a benchmark for what prices should be. And they did not face enough competition to keep prices down.”

Or, as Senator Elizabeth Warren argues, “profiteering” and “price-gouging” have driven higher prices because “they [can] get away with it because our markets lack competition.”

But this narrative has never made any sense. For one thing, corporations are no more “greedy,” aka profit-seeking, than they were 5 years ago or 10 years ago, when inflation wasn’t surging. What’s more, some sectors have seen much bigger price hikes than others. Are companies in some industries just less greedy than in other sectors?

“Greedflation” conspiracy theorists cite market concentration, i.e. monopoly power, as why companies can supposedly be what’s driving this. But, as MIT economist David Autor notes, market concentration hasn’t meaningfully shifted in the last two years… while inflation most certainly has!

That’s why a survey of top economists found that the vast majority reject the “greedflation” narrative out of hand.

What’s this have to do with PPI, CPI, and other inflation metrics?

The new data set put the nail in the coffin for the “greedflation” narrative.

Why?

Well, if companies were truly being greedy and just jacking up prices to make money, we would expect them to be hiking prices for consumers at a rate higher than their own production costs are going up. But these data sets actually reveal the opposite: consumer prices rose 8.6% while producer prices rose 10.8%—suggesting that, roughly estimating, companies haven’t jacked up prices to even fully match the increase in their costs, let alone exceed them.

Where’s the evidence of this rampant special surge in “greed” we keep hearing about?

It’s nowhere to be seen, of course, because the “greedflation” narrative was always a political talking point simply meant to deflect blame away from the federal government and onto Big Business, a popular boogeyman.

WATCH: Brad reacts to 4 gun control tweets that’ll make ur brain hurt (reaction)

AUTHOR

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

RELATED ARTICLE: 19 Nuggets of Wisdom from the Best Economics Writer You’ve Never Heard Of

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

Republican Mayra Flores Wins South Texas District Democrats Carried By 13 Points In 2020

Republican Mayra Flores, a first-time candidate for elected office, won the special election in Texas’ 34th District to complete the term of former Democratic Rep. Filemon Vela, who resigned in March.

With more than 70% of votes counted, Flores held 51% support, and Democrat Dan Sanchez garnered 43.5%. Despite the presence of two other candidates on the ballot, one Democrat and one Republican, Flores was able to avoid a run-off. Several elections analysts called the race shortly after 10 pm Eastern Time.

The special election was spurred on by Vela’s resignation on March 31. The five-term moderate had announced in March 2021 that he would not seek re-election in 2022, and left the lower chamber on March 31 to take a job at the Washington, DC-based corporate law firm Akin Gump.

Vela won re-election by 13.6% in 2020, and Joe Biden won the district by four points.

Flores, who received endorsements from House GOP Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, won the primary on March 1 to run in November’s general election against Democratic Rep. Vicente Gonzalez. Gonzalez will attempt to switch districts from the 15th, which was redistricted into a toss-up seat. That new 34th District will lean 17 points towards the Democrats, according to FiveThirtyEight.

Elected Democrats and party strategists have repeatedly expressed concern that Hispanic and Latino voters are swinging towards the Republican Party. Biden’s approval rating with Hispanic and Latino voters sits in the mid-20s, several recent polls have shown, the worst of any ethnic group. The 34th District is 85% Hispanic, the U.S. Census found in 2020, one of the most Hispanic congressional seats in the country.

The Republican National Committee and GOP members of Congress have expanded outreach in Hispanic and Latino communities. House Republicans announced the Hispanic Leadership Trust in May, and co-chairman and Texas Rep. Tony Gonzalez campaigned for Flores. The RNC opened several Hispanic outreach centers in South Texas in 2021.

AUTHOR

MICHAEL GINSBERG

Congressional reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: Special Election Could Give GOP A Chance To Prove Gains With Hispanics

RELATED TWEET:

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

DESANTIS TARGETS WOKE UNIVERSITIES: Replacing indoctrination with education

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (ChurchMilitant.com) – Leaked documents suggest Florida’s governor is taking aim at indoctrination and liberal bias present in the state’s universities.

A recently publicized 70-page proposal drafted by lawmakers at the behest of Gov. Ron DeSantis shows faculty hiring at universities could become the responsibility of a board of trustees, many of whom are DeSantis allies or appointees.

The bill, obtained earlier this week by Seeking Rents, intends to take away substantial amounts of power and independence from public universities and colleges.

During a press conference June 5, DeSantis harpooned the current state of education: “We believe that when parents send their kids to school, it’s for education, not for indoctrination.”

According to the proposal, Florida’s Board of Governors, which currently oversees universities in the state, along with the Board of Education would have much more influence on the way these public schools are operated.

The Board of Governors would have the ability to veto budgets, investigate university presidents and even fire employees. Fourteen of the 17 members on this board are directly appointed by DeSantis. In addition, all seven members of the Board of Education are appointed by DeSantis.

The board of trustees at state universities also typically supports DeSantis. These boards are generally set to have 13 members, six of whom are appointed by DeSantis and five of whom are picked by the Florida Board of Governors.

If the bill as written becomes law, the trustees and DeSantis would have much more power in the way state education systems are operated.

Cutting Funding

The DeSantis-backed measure vows to cut some state funding for universities and colleges that do not follow state laws or regulations.

For example, the governor encouraged universities to send out voluntary “intellectual surveys” in April of this year. These surveys ask a series of questions to employees and students to help gauge the political bias or temperature present in Florida’s higher education system.

While these surveys are currently voluntary, the leaked legislation would make fundraising cuts to institutions that refuse to send out the surveys.

Banning Racial Politics

The bill would also effectively ban any teaching related to “identity politics, such as critical race theory,” or that “defines American history as contrary to the creation of a new nation based on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence.”

College and university curricula would be required to “promote the philosophical underpinnings of Western civilization and include studies of this nation’s historical documents, such as the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments and the Federalist Papers.”

Limiting Teacher Tenure

DeSantis’ fight against colleges and universities began back in April when he signed a bill that limits tenure in Florida’s education system. The bill, SB7044, requires “each tenured state university faculty member to undergo a comprehensive post-tenure review every five years.”

This review includes examination of tenured employees’ “accomplishments and productivity; assigned duties in research, teaching and service; performance metrics, evaluations and ratings; and recognition and compensation considerations, as well as improvement plans and consequences for underperformance.”

AUTHOR

Paul Aubert

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

Patriotism is more than sitting at home and scrolling through social media – Video

This episode of Shout Out Patriots shows that our team is more than just talking heads in front of a camera and a microphone.

First, Shout Out Patriot co-host, Pastor Jason Binder, talks about his Rally for Righteousness event. Then Ryan Mauro of the Afghan Liberty Project gives a heartbreaking update on his efforts to save Christians trying to survive Islamic extremism in Afghanistan.

We’re on the streets, in communities, and even taking our faith to far-distance countries.

Patriots know the Bible is right: “Rescue the weak and needy; Save them from the hand of the wicked.” Ps. 82:4

©Shout Out Patriots. All rights reserved.

You REALLY Want Federal Gun Control Intervention? Well, Here’s an Idea for You…

Word is that the Senate has the necessary votes for federal gun control legislation designed to, among other things, pressure states into instituting “red flag” laws. These measures are controversial because they involve suspending a person’s rights (i.e., seizing his weapons) without due process. Wherever you stand on them and federal firearms laws in principle, however, a simple fact is under-emphasized in this debate: Laws mean little if not enforced.

What’s more, they’re actually instruments of evil if only enforced to the degree where good people will comply.

Here’s another fact: Corresponding to the general unwillingness among left-wing district attorneys to punish criminals (who aren’t also political opponents), these officials, though claiming firearms are a plague, aren’t punishing most gun crimes. Odd, huh?

An archetypical example is Philadelphia D.A. Larry Krasner. His office withdrew or dismissed 65 percent of gun charges last year, up from 17 percent in 2015. This, along with his characteristic reluctance to hold miscreants to account, explains why the “City of Brotherly Love” had 559 murders in 2021 — an all time record. And, again, his misfeasance reflects that of left-wing prosecutors nationwide.

Thus, if there must be federal gun-oriented intervention (which I’m against), it’s obvious what it should be:

Make localities’ and/or states’ receipt of federal funds contingent upon their adequate enforcement of violent-crime laws — in particular, gun laws.

There you have it. Are you listening, Mitch McConnell?

Unlike what’s currently being proposed, this measure actually would make a difference. It’s not radical within the context of today’s governmental norms, either. After all, the current “bipartisan” gun bill provides “incentives” for states to implement red-flag laws; even more to the point, the Biden administration is apparently threatening to withhold school lunch money from districts that don’t effect the pseudo-elites’ MUSS (Made-up Sexual Status, aka “transgender”) agenda. Of course, using federal-funding retention as cudgel with which to impose Washington’s will has long been status quo.

I’ll reiterate that I don’t believe in such strong-arm tactics; in fact, the central government is meant to be a mere agent of the states and should get precious little tax money. But if the feds are going to call the tune with their pay-the-piper power, what better cause than compelling feckless localities to enforce the laws that really matter and save lives?

Earlier this month, more than 170 “big city mayors” met in Reno, Nevada, to kvetch about how they “fear sweeping gun limits are out of reach,” as The New York Times put it.

What misdirection.

What deflection.

What nerve.

What phonies.

Crime isn’t skyrocketing nationwide because firearm laws have changed (they haven’t), but because the law-enforcers have changed.

Enforcement of local laws makes far more sense than any one-size-fits-all policy, too, as crime is not an evenly distributed phenomenon. Consider that more than half of 2016’s murders occurred in just certain parts of two percent of our land’s counties, and 68 percent of the homicides were committed in only small pockets of five percent of the counties.

Oh, these would be exclusively, or almost all, Democrat areas.

In contrast and on average, “73 percent of counties in any given year had zero murders from 1977 to 2000,” reported Fox News in 2017. (These would generally be GOP areas.)

In other words, we don’t have a “gun problem.”

We have a Democrat population/governance problem.

What’s so disgusting about enacting more laws but not strictly enforcing those on the books, especially the important ones, is that only good people are affected. They tend to follow laws even when enforcement is lax and punishment for violation is minimal; miscreants won’t without the threat of Draconian measures.

So ponder the vicious circle here:

  • You don’t enforce just laws.
  • Crime consequently proliferates.
  • There’s then a drumbeat for more laws, which take away good people’s freedom but also won’t be enforced on evildoers.
  • Crime then rises further leading to a call for even more laws, and, well….

You get the idea. Wash, rinse, repeat — and soon few freedoms remain. Of course, were you conspiracy minded (perish the thought), you might fancy this the whole point of this seemingly pointless exercise.

As for you politicians, federal and otherwise, focus on enforcing existing laws or forever hold your peace. ’Cause with the way your pet criminals are running wild, a good citizen certainly has to hold his piece.

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

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

FINANCIAL CRISIS: Dow Plunges Another 1,000 Points After Friday’s Bloodbath

On Friday, the stock market tanked 800 POINTS.

Today 900 points.

The media may ignore this catastrophe but wiping out the lifesavings of average Americans, impoverishing Americans won’t wash. Americans who haven’t been paying attention will become ….. activated and operative.

Inflation Hits 40 Year High

The average NASDAQ stock is down 60%.

The average stock on the S&P is down 30%.

The S&P 500 started the week in bear-market territory, while global stocks tumbled and bond yields jumped as fears over inflation rattled investors around the world. If the loss holds to the market’s close, the broad index would fall into a bear market for the first time since 2020.

Biden’s White House hosted several ‘defund the police’ subversives over the past year, visitor logs show

And crime skyrocketed. Murder skyrocketed. Democrats hate you.

Biden’s White House hosted several ‘defund the police’ activists over the past year, visitor logs show

Biden aides have repeatedly met with anti-police activists

By Cameron Cawthorne , Joe Schoffstall | Fox News June 13, 2022:

Despite maintaining public distance from the “defund the police” movement, President Biden’s administration has quietly maintained relationships with some of the driving forces behind the far-left movement, White House visitor logs reviewed by Fox News Digital show.

Several defund the police activists have visited the Biden White House and met with top aides over the last year, White House visitor logs show.

While Biden has largely espoused pro-police rhetoric during his time in office, he has tapped left-wingers in sync with the defund movement to key positions in his administration.

In late May, he signed a sweeping police reform executive order that drew mixed reactions from police groups.

And throughout it all, anti-police activists appear to have had a direct line to the White House.

Rashad Robinson, president of left-wing racial justice group Color of Change, visited the White House last summer for what appeared to be a meeting with Cedric Richmond, a top Biden adviser who recently departed as the director of public engagement.
Both Democratic lawmakers and members of the media have pushed the movement to defund police.

Both Democratic lawmakers and members of the media have pushed the movement to defund police.

Color of Change has been among the most active groups advocating to defund the police. In 2021, they were at the forefront of the unsuccessful push to “dismantle” and replace the Minneapolis Police Department, an effort that was fueled by $500,000 from George Soros’ Open Society Policy Center.

BIDEN EXECUTIVE ORDER DEFUNDS THE POLICE BY ANOTHER NAME

“We know that policing doesn’t keep us safe, communities do,” reads a Color of Change petition calling on supporters to demand their local officials start the defunding process. “Policing doesn’t lead to thriving communities, investment does.”

“We must begin to envision the society that functions for ALL of us and we must begin by divesting from and dismantling the systems that unjustly harm Black people,” the petition says.

Robinson has also celebrated the birthday of convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur by calling for progressive groups to get “bolder” and “louder” in their demands for police abolition and their “plans for revolution.”

Shakur, a hero among anti-police activist groups, is a former Black Liberation Army leader who was the mastermind behind several armed robberies in Connecticut and New York. In 1981, the Brinks robbery resulted in the slayings of an armed guard and two police officers.

Shakur was convicted for the 1973 murder of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster but later escaped prison and was granted asylum in Cuba by the late Fidel Castro. Shakur, whose married name is Joanne Chesimard, is on the FBI’s most wanted terrorist list and carries a $1 million reward for information that could lead to her apprehension.

Robinson is also on the board of the Marguerite Casey Foundation, a Seattle-based left-wing grantmaking group, which he joined alongside Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams. After they both became governors of the foundation, the board unanimously voted to expand its anti-police efforts.

The Marguerite Casey Foundation, meanwhile, also has a member who has visited the White House, according to its visitor logs.

Carmen Rojas, the President and CEO of the Marguerite Casey Foundation and a vocal supporter of defunding the police, visited the White House in December 2021 and appeared to meet with Nia Page, a Special Assistant to Richmond before his departure last month to join the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

“We must be unwavering in our commitment to freedom,” Rojas tweeted in April 2021. “The best way to realize it is to defund the police and support abolition. Period.”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

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

Hamas-linked CAIR enraged after San Jose city council rejects mayor’s Qatar trip over Sharia misogyny

Hamas-linked CAIR is demanding that the San Jose City Council now submit to its “education” about Islam, which would be on the order of “Don’t believe your lying eyes, believe our smooth deceptions.” They’re enraged here again that people they thought were reliably Leftist — city council members in a far-Left city in a far-Left state — would be so “Islamophobic” as to notice Sharia misogyny. The Leftist-Islamic alliance is once again showing signs of strain.

The ferociously antisemitic Billoo has called upon Muslims to oppose “even the polite Zionist.”

CAIR-SFBA Says Islamophobia from San Jose City Council Members ‘Unacceptable,’ Calls for Meeting to Offer Education on Islam

by Ismail Allison, Hamas-linked CAIR, June 10, 2022:

(SANTA CLARA, CA, 6/10/2022) – The San Francisco Bay Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-SFBA) today condemned Islamophobic rhetoric by San Jose City Council members related to Mayor Sam Liccardo’s planned trip to Qatar. CAIR-SFBA also called for a meeting with City Council members to offer education on Islam.

Mayor Liccardo’s plans to travel to the Qatari capital of Doha were rejected by the City Council through a 8-3 vote over alleged human rights concerns. The mayor was reportedly invited by authorities in Doha to attend Qatar Foundation’s Environment and Energy Research Institute from 11-13 June to learn about the institute’s water conservation efforts.

Some council members reportedly cited Islam’s legal code, the shariah, in their arguments against the mayor’s trip. One council member reportedly said she would be scared to go to Qatar as a woman. The mayor reportedly said there were elements of Islamic law in Qatar’s legal system indicating the state is unjust.

The city council has previously approved visits to Israel as well as Saudi Arabia, despite human rights allegations from numerous organizations.

In a statement, CAIR-SFBA Executive Director Zahra Billoo said:

“The Islamophobic rhetoric employed by San Jose officials is completely unacceptable. The arguments used against the Mayor’s trip to Qatar contain some of the oldest anti-Muslim tropes in the book, and the fact that the city council claimed to be concerned over human rights abuses while approving visits to serial human rights abusers Israel and Saudi Arabia is deeply hypocritical. 

“We call on city council members and Mayor Liccardo to meet with representatives of our organization and the Muslim community for dialogue and education on Islam and to correct some of the misunderstandings apparent from this incident.”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s handlers to open ‘Palestinian’ consulate in Jerusalem, undermining recognition of city as Israel’s capital

Pakistan: High Court upholds death sentence of Christian brothers accused of ‘blasphemy’

‘Palestinian’ Islamic scholar says Muslims must ‘declare jihad’ against Hindus and ‘eradicate’ them

Oman: Two activists jailed for ‘blasphemy’ over ‘trumped-up charges’

Indonesia: Muslim legislator enraged over ‘insulting’ non-halal cuisine, demands restaurant be closed

Black South Africans Denounce UN Report On Israel and the Palestinians

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

There Ain’t No Such Thing as a Cost-Plus Lunch! Who’s really to blame for rising prices?

Why are restaurants adding “inflation fees” to their checks?


A group of friends had just finished a meal at Romano’s Macaroni Grill in Honolulu when one of them noticed something odd about the check. As a local television news station reported in April, a “Temporary Inflation Fee” of $2.00  was nestled inconspicuously between the $4.50 Flavored Tea and the $14.00 Spinach & Artichoke Dip.

The restaurant chain’s website explained that the charge was added to “partially offset… operational cost increases” due to unusual economic conditions including “global supply chain shortages and ever-growing pressure from inflation.” The statement said, “we believe these burdens will eventually pass,” which is why they resorted to a temporary surcharge instead of simply raising the listed prices. An alternative explanation is that surcharges that show up on the check but not the menu are a sneaky way to try to raise prices without losing customers.

The Wall Street Journal recently cited this incident as part of a general trend:

“Lightspeed, a global developer of point-of-sale software, said fee revenue nearly doubled from April 2021 to April 2022, based on a sample of 6,000 U.S. restaurants that use its platform. The number of restaurants adding service fees increased by 36.4% over the same period.”

The Journal cited industry analysts who basically agreed with Romano’s, explaining that:

“…this wave of surcharges is mostly being driven by restaurants trying to cope with the impact of rising inflation and a tight labor market on their bottom lines.” (…)

“​​Inflation and the pandemic posed particular challenges for the restaurant industry. The average price of supplies for a restaurant operator increased by 17.5% since last year, according to NPD Group. By comparison, consumer spending at restaurants rose 5% during that time.

The increase in surcharges is a way for businesses to recoup at least some of those costs, said David Portalatin, a food-industry adviser with the group.”

In media coverage of today’s rising prices in general, this has become a prevailing narrative: “businesses are passing their rising costs onto consumers.”

While superficially plausible, this gets the economics of prices the wrong way round.

The explanation refers to “cost-plus pricing,” which is the business practice of setting prices by starting with your costs and then adding a markup.

Of course, nothing in economics says that a business owner cannot use this method to decide on a price to quote. Surely, some do exactly that. But it is only a heuristic and it is not what fundamentally drives price changes.

Just as “there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch” (TANSTAAFL), there ain’t no such thing as a cost-plus lunch.

To explain price increases as resulting from “passing costs on to the customer” is to implicitly embrace a “cost of production” theory of value and prices, which, in a nutshell, maintains that costs determine prices.

Of course, costs are prices, too. A business’s “costs” are the prices it pays for factors of production (land, labor, and capital goods). So, in a bigger nutshell, this theory posits that “factor prices determine product prices.”

But this is the exact opposite of how an economy actually works. As Murray Rothbard wrote in his economics treatise Power and Market, “Prices, however, are never determined by costs of production, but rather the reverse is true.” In other words, it is anticipated product prices that determine factor prices: prices that determine costs, not the other way around.

This insight was one of the great discoveries that resulted from the “Marginal Revolution” of economics in the 1860s and 70s. This was a literal “revolution” in the sense that it showed the old economic paradigm to be upside-down and then turned it right-side-up.

Before the Marginal Revolution, the “classical economists” largely subscribed to Adam Smith’s cost-of-production theory of value or David Ricardo’s labor theory of value. The latter, like the former, derived the value of products from the value of factors: specifically the factor of labor. (Incidentally, Karl Marx largely based his exploitation and class war theories on Ricardo’s labor theory of value.)

For example, classical economists might have traced the high value of a bottle of fine wine to the high real estate value of the vineyard and/or the amount of labor that went into producing the wine.

But the Marginal Revolutionaries—William Stanley Jevons, Leon Walras, and Carl Menger—upended that paradigm. They and their followers (especially the Austrian school of economics, founded by Menger) explained that the value of a good is based on its “marginal utility,” which is the usefulness for want-satisfaction of an additional unit of a good. And what’s useful about a factor of production is that it can help produce useful products.

For example, the utility of a wine vineyard is that it can yield wine grapes. The same goes for the utility of a vineyard worker’s labor. And the utility of wine grapes is their contribution toward producing enjoyable wine.

So Austrian economists do the opposite of what the classical economists did. Austrians trace the real estate price of the vineyard and the wages of the vineyard worker to the anticipated value of the wine at the end of the production line.

The insights of the Marginal Revolution made it clear that prices determine costs (product prices determine factor prices), not the other way around, and that ultimately consumer preferences determine all prices.

(Note: Alfred Marshall tried to reconcile the classical cost-of-production theory with marginal utility theory in a “neoclassical synthesis” that has influenced mainstream economics to this day. See here for Murray Rothbard’s Austrian critique of that attempt.)

So the “cost passing” explanation of rising prices is a retrogression to a long-overthrown economic paradigm: the economic equivalent of forgetting the heliocentric Copernican Revolution of astronomy and explaining planetary movements using the archaic geocentric model of Ptolemy. Just as the sun does not revolve around the earth, consumer prices do not revolve around producer costs: quite the opposite.

Many on the political left blame corporations for “price gouging” in order to fatten their profits. But blaming rising prices on profit-seeking is like blaming a plane crash on gravity.

Gravity is always pulling down on planes. To explain a plane crash, you have to explain what happened to the factors that had previously counteracted that downward pull. Why did gravity yank the plane down to earth when it did and not before?

Similarly, businesses are always seeking profit and are always ready to raise prices if that is what will maximize profits. To explain precipitous price hikes, you have to explain what happened to the factors that had previously put a lid on that upward price pressure. Why did profit-seeking propel prices skyward recently and not in 2019?

This question is also tricky for those (including some on the political right) who blame rising prices on rising costs. If businesses can preserve profits by raising prices now that their costs are higher, why wouldn’t they have increased profits by raising prices before when their costs were lower?

A business’s customers don’t care about that business’s costs. They care about value. Based on the value they expect from a product, there is a limited price range they’d be willing to pay for any given amount of it. That translates into the market demand for the product: the quantity of a good that would be bought at any given price point. The value of, and demand for, a product does not fluctuate with its production costs.

Even businesses don’t (or at least shouldn’t) really care about past costs when it comes to pricing. Past costs are sunk. Whatever was spent to produce it, at any given moment a business has a given inventory. Its best interest is to price that inventory so as to maximize revenue given current demand. Based on that definite demand, raising prices past a certain point will result in less revenue, regardless of past costs. If the most revenue they can hope for is less than their past expenditure, that’s just the way things turned out. They can learn from that error and from those losses by spending less and/or differently in the future. But they cannot change the past or defy the economic reality of the present.

As economist Jonathan Newman told FEE in an interview:

“There is no change in costs that directly affects the revenue-maximizing price. If the prevailing market price is one that maximizes revenue for the firm, then it is impossible for the firm to ‘pass on’ costs to the consumer by increasing prices, because this would result in less revenue.”

Newman reminds us that, “factors of production are valued because they help us make consumer goods, not the other way around. What consumers are willing to pay for consumption goods determines what entrepreneurs are willing to pay for land, labor, and capital goods.” He offers an extreme example to make this point:

“Suppose that tomorrow the government decides to tax the sale of ink for ballpoint pens at $1 billion per mL. Would pen makers be able to carry on as usual and pass this increased cost on to consumers? Would consumers be willing to pay $1,000,000,000.25 for a pen? Of course not. Anticipated consumer demand is a limit on what producers will pay for inputs. More expensive inputs does not mean consumers are ready to pay a higher price for outputs.”

So if “cost passing” isn’t what’s driving up prices, what is? Newman points to monetary expansion by central banks, especially the Federal Reserve:

“I suspect that many firms will be able to get away with increased prices because of this. Even if their stated intention is to ‘pass on’ or share costs with their customers, the increased demand from the trillions of dollars that have been injected into the economy over the past couple years is what really makes their price increases both necessary and feasible.”

It is important to note that monetary price inflation is also not “passed on” from suppliers to customers, as “inflation surcharges” might lead you to believe. Again, the reality is the reverse of that. Extra money enables customers to bid up the prices charged by their suppliers, who in turn use the extra money to bid up the prices charged by their suppliers, and so on. That is how new money raises prices across the board (although, unevenly) as it circulates through the economy.

Another contributing factor to rising prices, at least in many specific industries, is today’s supply chain crisis. To an extent, Romano’s and industry analysts are right to blame rising restaurant prices on supply constraints. But they are wrong to characterize it as a matter of “passing on” or “recouping” costs. Rather, it is a matter of greater scarcity translating into a higher marginal utility of certain goods and thus higher prices.

For example, a major factor in today’s high food prices is undoubtedly the war in Ukraine. Both Ukraine and Russia were major exporters of grain. But, owing to Russia’s blockade of Ukraine and the West’s sanctions on Russia, grain exports from both countries have been throttled.

As a result, food processors have less grain to produce foodstuffs like, for example, macaroni. And as a result of that, restaurants have less macaroni to produce macaroni dishes. And when there’s less of something, its price tends to go up. That is probably one of the reasons why the Honolulu diners at Romano’s Macaroni Grill discussed above paid $11.00 for “Signature Mac & Cheese Bites.”

This phenomenon is not “passing on costs.” It is the rippling repercussions of economic destruction and impoverishment. The word “passing” implies that consumers are impoverished while producers are not. But that is not the case. Diminished production and greater scarcity impoverish everyone involved.

It is also confusing to call that “inflation,” although both academia and the media tend to lump all price increases together under that term. For any given increase in prices, part of it may be caused by monetary expansion, and another might be due to supply constraints. Personally, I think it would be clearer to call only the former, and not the latter, “inflation.” Price increases due to an increasing abundance of money should be distinguished from price increases due to a declining abundance of goods and services, although the former very frequently causes the latter (especially by creating economic bubbles and crashes).

Especially since the advent of the Covid crisis in 2020, we have suffered plenty of both. Central banks have been driving up prices with money printing sprees undertaken to finance government spending sprees. Governments have also been driving up prices by sabotaging supply chains through lockdowns, business shutdowns, wars, trade restrictions, and other policies of mass economic destruction.

As prices continue to rise and living standards continue to drop, it is important to understand how it is happening, why it is happening, and who is truly to blame.

AUTHOR
Dan Sanchez

Dan Sanchez is the Director of Content at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and the editor-in chief of FEE.org.

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

Cuba’s Role in the Vietnam War

EDITORS NOTE: Cuba and North Vietnam established diplomatic relations in 1960, and Castro visited Vietnam three times. His 1973 wartime visit can be read about here. He even apparently said in 1973 that ‘for Vietnam, Cuba is willing to donate blood’.


VIDEO: Cuban President Fidel Castro’s visit to Hanoi, Vietnam.

Cuba’s bloody dictator Fidel Castro visited North Vietnam and sent three torturers to extract information from the 585 pilots and other POWs.

One of the torturers, Fernando Vecino Alegret, assassinated a Navy pilot, Earl Cobeil. He sent thousands of soldiers of the Giron Brigade to repair the Ho Chi Ming Trail and kill American soldiers and some Cuban soldiers attacked Saigon at the end of the war. Communist pilots flew Migs to shoot American pilots. Castro took 17 American pilots from Hanoi to Villa Marista in Cuba, the G2 headquarters in Havana, to experiment with the worst tortures ever done including cutting off their noses and ears and giving electric shocks to these brave Americans in Mazorra Hospital for the insane. These 17 pilots could never be released since they were very disfigured. They were murdered in Havana. These crimes against humanity by the communist Cuban regime have been committed with complete impunity.

Why has America tolerated so much abuse from the mass-murdering Cuban regime for over 62 years? Why did the Defense Department cover-up these crimes and Cuba’s involvement in this war for so many years? Why did the State Department give a visa to the murderer Vecino Alegret when he was a General and Minister of Education to come to speak at Harvard and MIT in 1979?

Since the Biden administration is soon going to reverse all of President Trump’s strong sanctions on the Cuban regime, it is important to know the role Cuba played in the Vietnam War, including the torturing, and killing of American pilots in Hanoi and Havana. The Biden administration is going to return to the failed policy of the Obama administration, which consisted on giving Cuba unilateral concessions in return for nothing, except more repression of the Cuban population and increased cooperation with China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

Some articles and at least one book have been written on this subject. On March 22, 2016, Judicial Watch sued the government seeking information on the 17 pilots killed in Havana. On April 9, 1995, Juan O. Tamayo wrote an article in Spanish titled “Torturadores Cubanos en Vietnam” that was published by the website El Veraz.com. and by the Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald on August 22, 1995.  On February 10, 2015, John Lowery wrote an article in the Accuracy in Media website explaining the terrible role of communist Cuba in the killing and torturing of Americans during the Vietnam War in Hanoi and Havana.  On May 18, 2016, Elmer Davis wrote an article titled “Cuba’s Vietnam War Involvement” that was published by the website bwcentral.org. On January 15, 2021, Dr. Pedro Roig wrote an article titled “No Limits to Cruelty” that was published in the website Cuban Studies Institute. An extensive article published by the website of Amigo Pais Guaracabuya titled “Cuban War Crimes Against American POWs During the Vietnam War.” The book, Honor Bound: The History of American Prisoners of War in Southeast Asia, 1961-1973, was written in 1999 by Stuart Rochester and Frederick Kiley.

Cuba sent three torturers to Hanoi. The cruelest and most vicious was Fernando Vecino Alegret, known as “Fidel,” who later became a brigadier general and Minister of Higher Education.

Vecino was born on June 24, 1938, in Banes, Holguín. He studied in Banes until the age of 14 and then transferred to Colegio Champagnat of the Marist Brothers in Camagüey where his grandparents lived. Vecino finished “segundo año de bachillerato” (second year of high school). This writer was in the fourth grade and his brother Jorge in sixth grade in the same school during this time. The following year Vecino transferred to Colegio Dolores of the Jesuit order in Santiago de Cuba as an intern. He finished the last year of high school in Holguín.

In 1954, Vecino began with other students to protest the government of Fulgencio Batista and was beaten by the police. He joined the 26 of July Movement led by Fidel Castro and his parents, fearing for his safety, sent him to study in the United States. Vecino began to study chemical engineering at the University of Alabama and traveled to several cities in America. He withdrew from the university and went to Mexico to be trained as a soldier to invade Cuba with Pedro Miret Prieto. Later, he traveled to Miami where he met Haydée Santamaría, who wrote a letter on his behalf to Fidel Castro and one to Vilma Espín, the future wife of dictator Raúl Castro.

On June 23. 1958, Vecino joined Fidel Castro in the Sierra Maestra Mountains in Cuba’s province of Oriente. He fought in the revolution against Batista under the command of Juan Almeida Bosque. Vecino was promoted to captain and participated in the capture of Santiago de Cuba, where Raúl Castro shot several men without a trial and began to implant a terror regime in a nation that never had the death penalty, not even for murderers.

After the establishment of the dictatorship of Fidel Castro in January 1959, Vecino worked in the Agrarian reform in several municipalities in Oriente. He was recalled to Havana and attended the University of Havana to study engineering and served as a leader of the Union of Young Communists. Vecino studied in the Soviet Union military technology and strategic weapons. In 1965 he oversaw a unit of missiles FKR. In 1966, he became director of a Military Institute in the former Colegio Belén. Vecino’s official military biography hides the year and one month he spent in Hanoi, along with Eduardo Morejón Estévez and Luis Pérez Jaén, severely torturing American pilots prisoners of war from 1967 to 1968. A Congressional investigation indicated that Morejón served as military attaché of the Cuban embassy in Hanoi during that time and Pérez was identified by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 1979 according to Juan O. Tamayo

Shamefully, Fernando Vecino Alegret tortured for many days Earl Cobeil, a Navy F-105 Pilot at the Zoo prison, until he became catatonic and died. This assassin later was sent to Angola in late 1975. In 1976, he was named brigadier general and Minister of Higher Education, where he served for almost 30 years. The murderer Vecino was invited to speak to Harvard and MIT in 1979 during President Jimmy Carter’s last year in office. Shamefully, the torturer of many American pilots in Hanoi and the murderer of Navy pilot Earl Cobeil, instead of being arrested, indicted, given a trial, convicted, and send to the electric chair or life in prison, was given a visa by the State Department.

Where was the Department of Defense that should have been aware of what Vecino did in North Vietnam? How about President Carter?

Dr. Roig explained that Fidel Castro visited Hanoi in 1973 during the Vietnam War to demonstrate public support to North Vietnam. For several years, Cuban communist military officers were involved in secret operations in that war. The most terrible one was the torturing of American POWs. Dr. Roig wrote that from July 1967 to August 1968, Cuban Captain Fernando Vecino Alegret “tortured American POWs in a savage interrogation known as the Cuban Program to crush the prisoners into total submission.”

In April 1999, the story of the torturing of American POWs in Vietnam by Cuban communist officers was described in the book Honor Bound: American Prisoners of War in Southeast Asia, 1961-1973.

This immensely detailed 592-page book was written by Stuart I. Rochester and Frederick Kiley.  Drawing from memoirs, interviews, classified documents, and other sources, the historians provided the most sweeping view of American POWs since the return of the prisoners in 1973.

Amazon describes this book as follows: “Honor Bound, a collaborative effort researched and written over the course of more than a decade by historian Stuart Rochester and Air Force Academy professor and POW specialist Frederick Kiley, combines rigorous scholarly analysis with a moving narrative to record in unprecedented detail the triumphs and tragedies of the several hundred servicemen (and civilians) who fought their own special war in North and South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia between 1961 and 1973.”

“The authors address a gamut of subjects from the physical ordeal of torture and deprivation that required clarification of the Code of Conduct to the sometimes more onerous psychological challenges of indoctrination, adjustments to new routines and relationships, and mere coping and passing time under the most monotonous, inhospitable conditions. The volume weaves a winding trail through scores of prison camps, from large concrete compounds in the North to isolated jungle stockades in the South to mountain caves in Laos, while tracing political developments in Hanoi and Washington and the evolution of the “psywar” that placed the prisoners at the center of the conflict even as they were removed from the battlefield. From courageous resistance and ingenious methods of organization and communication to failed escapes and questionable conduct — “warts and all”— Honor Bound examines in depth the longest and perhaps most remarkable prisoner-of-war captivity in U.S. history.”

Dr. Roig pointed out that on November 4, 1999, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, then Chairman of the House Subcommittee on International Economy and Trade, held a congressional hearing during which several American POW officers discussed in great detailed the brutal tortures inflicted upon them by Cuban communist torturers in Vietnam. The total submissive behavior set by the Cuban communist psychopaths included the making of tape-recorded statements to be published by the Communist propaganda media.

In his book Faith of my Father the late Senator John McCain, a pilot POW in Hanoi, wrote: “In the Zoo, mass torture was a routine practice.  For a time, the camp personnel at the Zoo included an English-speaking Cuban, called “Fidel” who delighted in breaking Americans, even when the task required him to torture his victims to death.”

Dr. Roig wrote the following: “On September 9, 1999, the Miami Herald offered the testimony of Air Force Colonel Ed Hubbard a POW in Vietnam who identified the leader of the Cuban interrogation team that tortured him: That’s the guy, Hubbard said, visibly shaken, as he held a picture of Cuban General Fernando Vecino Alegret.  “Fidel” was described by several POWs as being over six feet tall, young, muscular, with full command of English with American slangs and personal knowledge of many cities in the Southeastern United States from Miami to the Carolinas.  “Fidel has been identified by some of the POWs in the “Cuban Program” as Fernando Vecino Alegret.  Fernando Vecino Alegret lived in the United States for extensive periods of time, including Miami, and studied at the University of Alabama, until he joined the Castro’s guerrillas in 1958.  Today he is a retired brigadier general of the Cuban FAR.”

Air Force F-105 Pilot Lieutenant Colonel Earl G. Cobeil was assassinated at the age of 33 in November,1967. This is the worst case of torture ever recorded by debriefers in the “Cuban Program.” This picture was courtesy of his widow, Mrs. Cobeil.

The sight of Cobeil walking back from the torture chamber was a horrible scene. The pilot could barely walk. He shuffled slowly and painfully. His clothes were torn to shreds.  He was bleeding everywhere, terribly swollen, dirty, black, and purple from head to toes.  His head was down, and he made no attempt to look at anyone.  He had been through much more than the daily beatings.  His body was ripped and torn. Silvers of bamboo were embedded in the bloodied shins and there were what appeared to be tread marks from hose across his chest, back, and legs. He reportedly died of these injuries on or about November 5, 1970. His remains were identified and returned to the United States on March 6, 1974.

For his extraordinary courage and fortitude in the face of savage torturing, Coronel Earl Glenn Cobeil received the President Air Force Cross Award (posthumously) for Extraordinary Heroism in Captivity.  He is buried at the Arlington National Cemetery.

Juan O. Tamayo wrote that Fernando Vecino Alegret as well as Eduardo Morejón Estévez and Luis Pérez Jaén, who both served as military attachés in the Cuban embassy in Hanoi, implemented the Cuba Program. Two groups of 10 men were chosen to show North Vietnamese new inhumane techniques to torture American pilots severely and force them in complete submission to get military intelligence and use them for propaganda. The North Vietnamese regularly beat and torture all prisoners of war (POWs) and kept them isolated in individual cells up to two or more years. But the three Cuban torturers sent by the mass-murderer Cuban dictator Fidel Castro wanted to show the Vietnamese new and more successful methods of torture. The leader Vecino was called “Fidel” and the other two “Chico” and “García” by the POWs pilots.

An article published by the website of Amigo Pais Guaracabuya titled “Cuban War Crimes Against American POWs During the Vietnam War” said that “in 1977-78, Morejón Estévez served under diplomatic cover as a brigadier general at the United Nations in New York and no attempt was made to either arrest or expel him.”

Another article written in Spanish by Pablo Alfonso in el Nuevo Herald stated that Morejón was a former Coronel of the Counter Military Intelligence in Cuba. Morejón was born in Camagüey, Cuba in 1941 and graduated from Colegio Champagnat of the Marist Brothers in 1960. After his graduation, he went to Havana and became an officer in the Army. Morejón fought against the anti-communist guerrillas who were fighting for the freedom of Cuba in the Escambray Mountains. Morejón then went to the Soviet Union to receive additional military training. He speaks English well. Morejón’s parents sent him to study in the United States in March 1958, according to immigration records. Alfonso explained that Morejón is a high executive of the regime corporation Artex S.A.

My brother Jorge was in the fourth year of bachillerato (high school) and this writer was in the second year of bachillerato when Morejón was in the third year of bachillerato at Colegio Champagnat of the Marist Brothers in Camagüey. Many of our friends from Colegio Champagnat fought at the Bay of Pigs while the traitor Morejón became a communist army officer and a torturer of American POWs pilots in Hanoi.

The Cuban Program was evaluated by two of the Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office’s (DPMO) analysts

The extensive article published by the website Amigo Pais Guaracabuya titled “Cuban War Crimes Against American POWs During the Vietnam War” explained how the Cuban Program was evaluated by Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office’s (DPMO) chief analysts Robert Destatte and Chuck Towbridge. It said that in an email to Commander Chip Beck, an intelligence officer who at the time was working at DPMO, Destatte said he had concluded that the Cuban Program was nothing more than a program “to provide instruction in basic English to North Vietnamese Army personnel working with American prisoners.” According to Destatte, “it was an English language program that had gone awry.” It was incredibly stupid and incorrect evaluation!

However, the Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office’s (DPMO) later did document the atrocities committed by the three Cuban torturers in Hanoi. And as explained earlier, on November 4, 1999, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, then Chairman of the House Subcommittee on International Economy and Trade, held a congressional hearing during which several American POW officers discussed in great detailed the brutal tortures inflicted upon them by Cuban communist torturers in Vietnam.

The article published by the website Amigo Pais Guaracabuya explained the following: “According to a February 1971 State Department cable, a former aide to Fidel Castro offered …to ransom POWs in North Viet Nam through the Castro Government. The cable concluded: Propose doing nothing further unless advised. Evidently no advice was forthcoming, and there is no evidence of any other agency investigating this matter… As part of their propaganda program, Dr. Fernando Barral, a Spanish-born psychologist, interviewed Navy Lt. Commander John Sidney McCain Jr. (Later a Republican Senator from Arizona who has died since) for an article published in Cuba’s communist newspaper Granma on January 24, 1970. Barral was a card-carrying communist international residing in Cuba and traveling on a Cuban passport.”

Cubans on the Ho Chi Minh Trail

The article published by the website Amigo Pais Guaracabuya stated the following: “The Cubans were heavily involved in the Vietnam War. Cuba had a very large contingent of combat engineers, the Giron Brigade, that was responsible for maintaining a large section of the Ho Chi Minh Trail; the supply line running from North Vietnam through Laos and Cambodia to South Vietnam. The contingent was so large that Cuba had to establish a consulate in the jungle. Many American personnel serving in both Vietnam and Laos were either captured or killed along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, and in all likelihood, many by the Cubans. One National Security Agency SigNet report states that 18 American POWs are being detained at the Phom Thong Camp… in Laos, and “…are being closely guarded by Soviet and Cuban personnel with Vietnamese soldiers outside the camp.”

Cubans and other POWs

The article published by the website of Amigo Pais Guaracabuya pointed out the following: “According to CIA documents Cuban communist party committee members, Cuban journalists Raúl Valdés Vivó and Marta Rojas Rodríguez, visited liberated areas of South Vietnam where they interrogated U.S. prisoners of war being held by the Viet Cong. Many of the American POWs held in the South Viet Nam, were in fact under the command-control of the North Vietnamese’s Enemy Proselytizing Bureau, but temporarily farmed-out to Viet Cong. Rojas told of her interviewing American POWs in South Viet Nam at the Bertram Russel mock war crimes tribunal in Denmark in 1967.  Photographs of some of the POWs, and related articles, appeared in Cuban and various other communist media. American POWs Charles Crafts, Smith, McClure, Schumann, and Cook were among those interviewed and photographed by Rojas and Vivó. This leads one to ask, why hasn’t DOD pursued questioning Cubans about the fate of American POWs?”

“One POW camp holding many Americans was located about 100 km from the Chinese border between Monkai and Laokai, (an area where Cuban engineers were constructing military installations after 1975). According to an intelligence source, one day the camp just disappeared, guards and all. The disappearance of American POWs near the Cuban facilities at Monkai and Laokai wasn’t an isolated incident. American POWs also disappeared in the vicinity of two other Cuban installations. One American POW camp, located at Work Site 5 (Cong Truong 5) just north of the DMZ, was adjacent to a Cuban field hospital that Fidel Castro visited in 1972. None of the POWs held in that camp were ever released, including black American aviator Lt. Clemmie McKinney. McKinney was shot down in April 1972, approximately the same time as Castro’s visit. McKinney’s remains were returned on August 14, 1985. The Vietnamese claim that McKinney died in November 1972; however, “A CILHI (U.S. Army Central Identification Laboratory, Hawaii) forensic anthropologist states his opinion as to time of death as not earlier than 1975 and probably several years later.”

“Another Cuban installation was near Ba Vi, where numerous sightings of white buffalos [i.e., American POWs] were made by South Vietnamese undergoing reeducation in the North. According to one of the recently returned Vietnamese 34-A commandos, he saw 60 American POWs at the Thanh Tri Prison complex in 1969. Also in the same prison complex were approximately 100 French and Moroccan POWs captured in the early 1950s. Later the French and Moroccans were transferred to the Ba Vi Prison complex near the Cuban facility. There were a small number of American POWs held for a while in a section of the Thanh Tri Prison complex, appropriately dubbed Skid row. However, they numbered about 20, not 60, and none had been held with French and/or Moroccan POWs.”

Other Cuban military involvement

The article published by the website Amigo Pais Guaracabuya indicated the following: “Several reports said that Cubans were piloting MIGs in aerial combat with American pilots over North Vietnam. One American advisor flying in an H-34 used a M-79 grenade launcher to shoot down a Cuban flying a biplane in Northern Laos. This was the same kind of plane used in the attack against Lima Site 85–the top-secret base in Laos providing guidance for American planes in the bombing of North Vietnam.”

“The involvement with American POWs was just a part of Cuba’s long history of commitment to assist the Vietnamese communists, and just another chapter in their role as communist internationals on behalf of the Soviet Union. The Cubans first showed up in Vietnam not too many years after they consolidated power on their own island in the early 1960s. Soon after, the Cubans soon began operating en masse alongside their Vietnamese brethren. They even accompanied the North Vietnamese through the gates of the South Vietnamese Presidential Palace in Saigon on April 29, 1975.  However, the Cuban’s assistance to the North Vietnamese continued well beyond 1975.”

Dr. Roig ended his article by writing the following: “The factual story of the excruciating pain inflicted by Cuban officers in Vietnam against American POWs is a gruesome testimony of the terrible punishment suffer by Cuban political prisoners in Castro’s chambers of torture. Throughout over 60 years of dogmatic intolerance thousands of Cuban freedom’s fighters faced this criminal system where there are no limits to cruelty.”

Both John Lowery and Elmer Davis wrote similar accounts on the little-known role of the bloody mass-murdering Cuban regime in the Vietnam War. They explained the following: “There is a great need to account the American servicemen captured in the Vietnam War and imprisoned in Cuban-operated POW camps. Of utmost importance is an accounting of the 17 American airmen captured in North Vietnam and then taken to Cuba for medical experiments in torture techniques.”

The communist Cubans had facilities, including a POW camp and field hospitals extremely near the DMZ, just inside North Vietnam. Meanwhile, Cuban torturer interrogators severely abused American captured pilots in Hanoi at a prison known as the Zoo. We know of these operations thanks to Juan O. Tamayo, John Lowery, Elmer Davis, Dr. Pedro Roig, the book by Stuart I. Rochester and Frederick Kiley, and reports of POWs who managed to survive and be repatriated during Operation Homecoming in 1973.

 After spending 2,221 days as a POW in Hanoi, Major Jack Bomar, a Zoo prisoner survivor, was released during Operation Homecoming on March 4, 1973.

Bomar was later promoted to colonel. Jack Bomar retired from the Air Force on March 1, 1974 and died on May 21, 2009.

Air Force Lt. Colonel POW Earl G. Cobeil was assassinated by Fernando Vecino Alegret.

Elmer Davis wrote that after his release Major Jack Bomar, a Zoo survivor, described the brutal beating of Air Force Lt. Colonel Earl G. Cobeil, by Cuban officer Fernando Vecino Alegret, known by the POWs as “Fidel.” Regarding Captain Cobeil, Bomar related that “He was completely catatonic. His body was ripped and torn everywhere…Hell cuffs appeared almost to have severed his wrists…Slivers of bamboo were imbedded in his bloodied shins, he was bleeding from everywhere, terribly swollen, a dirty yellowish black and purple [countenance] from head to toe.” To force Cobeil to talk “Fidel smashed a fist into the man’s face, driving him against the wall. Then he was brought to the center of the room and made to get down onto his knees. Screaming in rage, Fidel took a length of rubber hose from a guard and lashed it as hard as he could into the man’s face. The prisoner did not react; he did not cry out or even blink an eye. Again, and again, a dozen times, “Fidel” smashed the man’s face with the hose.”

Because of his grotesque physical condition, Captain Cobeil was not repatriated. Instead, he was listed as “died in captivity,” and his remains were returned in 1974 (Miami Herald, August 22, 1999 and Benge, Michael D. “The Cuban Torture Program, Testimony before the House International Relations Committee, Chaired by Benjamin A. Gilman, November 4, 1999.)

Major James Kasler flew 91 combat missions on a F-101 when his aircraft was hit and forced to eject on August 8, 1966. He was captured and spent 2,401 days in captivity.

For more than a month in 1967, Kasler was the target of nearly continuous daily torture. He received his third Air Force Cross medal for resisting torture inflicted on him over a two-month period during the summer of 1968 to coerce his cooperation with visiting anti-war delegations and propaganda film makers.

Major Kasler described his worst treatment:

“My worst session of torture began in late June 1968. The Vietnamese were attempting to force me to meet a delegation and appear before TV cameras on the occasion of the supposed 3,000th American airplane shot down over North Vietnam. I couldn’t say the things they were trying to force me to say. I was tortured for six weeks. I went through the ropes and irons ten times. I was denied sleep for five days and during three of these was beaten every hour on the hour with a fan belt. During the entire period I was on a starvation diet. I was very sick during this period. I had contracted osteomyelitis in early 1967 and had a massive bone infection in my right leg. They would wrap my leg before each torture session so I wouldn’t get pus or blood all over the floor of the interrogation room. During this time, they beat my face to a pulp. I couldn’t get my teeth apart for five days. My ear drum was ruptured, one of my ribs broken and the pin in my right leg was broken loose and driven up into my hip.”

At one point, during the fall of 1967, Kasler’s guards took his clothes and his mosquito net. For three days, they denied him food and water and beat him on his back and buttocks with a truck fan belt, every hour on the hour, 6 a.m. until 10 or 11 p.m. His torturer asked if he surrendered. Kasler finally said yes.

The torturer Fernando Vecino Alegret, nicknamed “Fidel” by the POWs, returned to Kasler’s cell the next day and demanded that he surrender. Kasler refused and the beatings resumed and continued for another two days.

 

Kasler suffered a fractured rib, a ruptured eardrum, and broken teeth. He was left with the skin hanging off his rear end down to the floor. His face was so swollen, and it hung like a bag. His eyes were almost shut. Kasler’s mangled and infected leg, which tormented him throughout his captivity and for years afterwards, swelled to the point he feared it would explode. Major Kasler was severely tortured by Vecino Alegret but somehow managed to survive horrendous Cuban criminal’s tortures.

 

Major Kasler was released on March 4, 1973 and treated in a hospital. He resumed his Air Force career and was promoted to colonel. He retired in 1975. Colonel Kasler died on April 24, 2014 in West Palm Beach, Florida and was buried with full military honors at Crown Hill Cemetery.

 

Seventeen U.S. pilots were taken to Havana and all severely tortured and assassinated  

Elmer Davis explained that there is less information regarding the 17 captured pilots taken to Cuba for “experimentation in torture techniques.” They were held in Havana’s Villa Marista, a secret Cuban prison run by Castro’s G-2 Intelligence service. A few were held in the Mazorra (Psychiatric) Hospital and served as human guinea pigs in the development of improved methods of extracting information through “torture and drugs to induce American prisoners to cooperate.”

After being shot down in April of 1972, U.S. Navy F-4 pilot, Lt. Clemmie McKinney, an African American, was imprisoned near the Cuban compound called Work Site Five. His capture occurred while then-Cuban mass-murderer dictator Fidel Castro was visiting the nearby Cuban field hospital. Although listed as killed in the crash by DOD, his photograph standing with Castro, was later published in a classified CIA document.

 

Navy F-4 pilot, Lt. Clemmie McKinney, was severely tortured and assassinated in Havana.

More than 13 years later, on August 14, 1985, the North Vietnamese returned Lt. McKinney’s remains, reporting that he had died in November 1972. However, a U.S, Army forensic anthropologist established the “time of death as not earlier than 1975 and probably several years later.” The report speculated that he had been a guest at Havana’s Villa Marista prison. His remains were returned to Vietnam for repatriation. (United States paid large amounts of money for the remains—delivered in stacks of green dollars to Hanoi aboard an AF C-141 from Travis AFB, California.)

Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Defense and filed for records of the American pilots who were assassinated in Havana on March 22, 2016. The Judicial Watch lawsuit was filed after the Defense Department refused to comply with a June 1, 2015 FOIA request seeking access to the following: “Any and all records depicting the names, service branch, ranks, Military Occupational Specialty, and dates and locations of capture of all American servicemen believed to have been held captive by Cuban government or military forces on the island of Cuba since 1960. Responding to the lawsuit, the Department of Defense initially claimed to have no responsive records.”

As explained earlier on February 10, 2015, John Lowery wrote an article in the Accuracy in Media website explaining the role of communist Cuba in the killing and torturing of Americans in Hanoi and Havana during the Vietnam War. Judicial Watch wrote “In 1999, during testimony before Congress, Mike Benge, former prisoner of war (POW) and POW historian stated: I have also uncovered evidence of the possibility that American POWs from the Vietnam War have been held in Los Maristas, a secret Cuban prison run by Castro’s G-2 intelligence service.”

“The fact that we had to sue the Obama administration to get simple answers as to whether Cuba held and tortured American POWs strongly suggests that a cover-up is underway,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “The Obama administration admires Castro’s Cuba so much that even the fate of the regimes victims, even American POWs, is of little concern. I have a feeling that President Obama won’t be raising this issue with the Cuban regime this week.”

Barack and Michelle Obama and their family visited Cuba and did the wave at a baseball game while sitting next to the bloody dictator Raúl Castro. Earlier, Castro answered a question by an American reporter and lied while standing next to Obama and said there were no political prisoners in jail in the island. Castro said if someone gives him the names of political prisoners in jail, he will set them free immediately. Obama had the list of political prisoners and kept quiet.

Captain Wayne Smith graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1965.

Captain Wayne Smith flew 69 missions over Hanoi and 21 over Laos. At age 24, on his 90th mission over Hanoi, his F-4D aircraft was hit by a missile and he ejected.

Captain Smith and I at a Naples, Florida conference where we both spoke on April 24, 2021. He published a book of poems written in the cells of Hanoi called Voices from the Dark.

Captain Smith was captured and severely tortured during several weeks and then kept in solitary confinement for two years. After the two terrible years in isolation, he was moved to the Hanoi Hilton prison. Captain Smith learned four languages and many other subjects from other POWs. Since he had studied German at the Air Force Academy, Captain Smith taught German to other POWs. All the POWs were released during Operation Homecoming on March 4, 1973.

In April 2021, John Di Lemme interviewed Wayne Smith, now age 77, for the Conservative Business Journal television podcast.  It was very inspiring to hear this brave American patriot describing his five years and two months of brutal imprisonment and how his faith in God sustained him during those horrible years. Captain Smith explained that of the approximately 1,400 American pilots who were shot down during the Vietnam War, only 591 survived and today less than 200 hundred are still alive.

Unfortunately, many American pilots and other servicemen held in the Cuban POWs camp near Work Site Five (Cong Truong Five), along with those in two other Cuban run camps, were never acknowledged, nor accounted for, and the prisoners simply disappeared. Our honor code of “Duty, Honor, Country” and our national policy of “No man left behind” are more than meaningless slogans.

Raúl Valdés Vivó visited Hanoi as a journalist, but this was only a cover. He was a DGI (Cuban Intelligence) officer and a high-ranking Cuban Communist Party member. He wrote a book, El gran secreto: cubanos en el Camino Ho Chi Minh, that was published in Havana in 1990 (The Great Secret Cuban on the Ho Chi Minh Trail).

Raúl Valdés Vivó explained that Cuba was supplying several thousand soldiers to build, maintain and guard a sizeable portion of the Ho Chi Minh Trail, and providing a large amount of other technical and material assistance. Cubans also killed Americans who were near the Ho Chi Minh Trail. He also said in his book that Cubans were with the North Vietnamese communists in 1975 when they took over Saigon, “although a modest presence.” These statements are especially important since historians have yet to admit the extent of the involvement of Cuba in the Vietnam War.

Raúl Valdés Vivó was Cuba’s envoy to the South Vietnamese region during the Vietnam War. He lived for some time areas of that country. Valdés Vivó was the Cuban Communist Party representative to the Indo-Chinese Communist Party from 1965 to 1974. Later, he became the Cuban envoy to Laos and Ethiopia. He wrote several other books.

Before the Biden administration begins its appeasement policy with the bloody Cuban regime, their murderous leadership must account for the American POWs including Earl Cobeil, who was murdered in Hanoi, and the 17 pilots taken to Havana who were severely tortured and so terrible disfigured that they could not be set free and were killed. Other POWs in Cuban camps during the Vietnam War simple disappeared

Retired Brigadier General Fernando Vecino Alegret, who murdered Earl Cobeil in Hanoi and severely tortured many American pilots in Hanoi, needs to be indicted by a U.S. court as well as Eduardo Morejón Estévez and Luis Pérez Jaén, who served as military attachés in the Cuban embassy in Hanoi. The rest of the Cuban communist murderers need to be identified and indicted. The civilized world, patriotic Americans, and specially our veterans demand it.

Bay of Pigs veterans fought, and some died and were wounded in the Vietnam War

It must be pointed out that many Cuban Americans fought in the Vietnam War in the different branches of the Armed Forces as soldiers and officers. Some were injured and died. My friends former Mayor of the City of Hialeah Julio Martinez served as a sergeant in the Vietnam War, the Vice President of the Cuban Patriotic Council Eduardo Macaya, Past Commander of Veteran Post 10212 Rafael Morales, and Bill Peraza fought in the Vietnam War.

Some of my Bay of Pigs veteran friends fought in Vietnam, including Colonel Johnny López de la Cruz, my cousin Colonel José Raúl “Yayo” de Varona was wounded, Colonel Manuel Granado Díaz was shot several times in the chest, Colonel Juan Armando Montes, Colonel Matías Farías, Major Modesto Castañer, Captain Amado Gayol Tabares, Captain Máximo Cruz González, Pilot Eduardo Sánchez Cadenas, and Captain Hugo Suerio who was severely wounded in combat.

Hugo Suerio was the commander of the Second Battalion of the Assault Brigade 2506. He fought bravely at Playa Larga in the Bay of Pigs. Hugo Suerio was severely wounded in Vietnam.

Green Beret Captain Celso Pérez Rodríguez died in combat on June 4, 1967.

José M. Fajardo Montano contracted Agent Orange and died in Miami. He is the father of singer Gloria Estefan.

Captain Félix Sosa Camejo died in combat on February 13, 1968.

Captain Irenaido F. Padrón died on May 6, 1965 in Vietnam.

Also wounded were Captain José Dorta García and Captain Segundo Martínez Granja.

Army Colonel Johnny López de la Cruz

Air Force Colonel Matías Farías

Army Colonel Manuel A. Granado Día

Army Colonel Juan Armando Montes

Army Colonel Néstor Pino Marina

My cousin Army Colonel José Raúl “Yayo” de Varona González

The colonels who fought in Vietnam were the following: Johnny López de la Cruz, Matías Farías, Reinaldo García Martínez, Manuel Granado Díaz, Juan A. Montes, Néstor Pino Marina, José Raúl “Yayo” de Varona, and Orlando Rodríguez.

The lieutenant colonels were the following: Luis C. Bárcenas, Esteban Beruvides, Evelio Borrego Carballo, Rodolfo Díaz Hernández, Erik Fernández del Valle, Ramón J. Ferrer Mena, Mario J. de Lamar, Reinaldo Lazo, Juan R. López, Humberto S. Olivera, Francisco Padrón Hernández, Demetrio J. Pérez Rodríguez, Félix Pérez Tamayo, José S. Pérez Álvarez, Luis O. Rodríguez Martínez, Raúl de la Torre, and Raúl Vázquez Martín.

The majors were the following: José E. Alonso Lamar, Luis E. Martínez Castro, Modesto L. Castañer, Alfonso Cereceda, Florencio de Peña Flores, Benjamín Garay Saavedra, Óscar Martínez Roig, and Héctor E. de Varona.

The captains were the following: Bernardo J. Bosh Rodríguez, Conrado Caballero Acosta, Máximo L. Cruz González, Rolando P. Cuervo Galano, Juan L. de Sosa Chabau, Lomberto Díaz Pérez, Eduardo J. Fernández Uriarte, Federico García Geli, Amado Gayol Tabares, José A. González Castro, José Dearing González, Rafael A. Grenier Martínez, Eulogio R. Lavandeira, Roberto Macía Vinet, Cándido Molinet Pérez, Manuel J. Pérez Márquez, Reynold Prendes Paz, José Rojas, Arturo M. Sánchez González, Julio C. Soto Camacho, Raúl E. Taboada Reguera, Tomás Vázquez Casanova, and José L. Vivanco Pardo.

Eduardo Sánchez Cadenas was a helicopter pilot who rescued many wounded and Félix Rodríguez Mendigutía served in the CIA during the Vietnam War.

Conclusion

President Lyndon B. Johnson was partially responsible for the needless deaths 58,159 Americans in the Armed Forces including 1,400 pilots who died and tens of thousands wounded in the Vietnam War. The horrible rules of engagement set by the Johnson administration prevented American pilots from destroying the Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAM) being brought by Soviet Union ships to the port of Haiphong in North Vietnam for fear of expanding war. If the Johnson administration wanted total victory, Haiphong, and any other ports where military equipment, especially SAMs and anti-aircraft weapons, were being sent to North Vietnam had to be destroyed. In war America needs to fight to win or not begin one. Limited wars, such as the one in Korea and Vietnam, should not be fought. There is “No Substitute to Victory” as General Douglas MacArthur said regarding the Korean War.

United States lost 205 aircraft shot by North Vietnamese surface-to-air missiles. During the Vietnam war, the Soviet Union delivered 95 S-75 systems and 7,658 missiles to the North Vietnamese. In total, the U.S lost 3,374 aircrafts in combat during the war; in both North and South Vietnam. According to the North Vietnamese, 31% were shot down by S-75 missiles (1,046 aircraft, or 6 missiles per one kill); by anti-aircraft guns; and 9% by MiG fighters. The S-75 missile system significantly improved the effectiveness of North Vietnamese anti-aircraft artillery, which used data from S-75 radar stations.

During the Vietnam War, President Johnson continued to trade with the Soviet Union materials he called non-strategic but, were utilized in the war directly or indirectly. It was shameful that while American soldiers, sailors, and pilots were dying and being injured, President Johnson kept selling materials to the Soviet Union that were killing these brave Americans. America could have won the Vietnam War, but the treasonous rules of engagement prevented it. This was dereliction of duty and treason!

It has always astounded me how much abuse America has endured since 1959 by the diabolical Cuban regime, including Fidel Castro playing an important role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. If the American public would have been made aware of all the enormous crimes made by communist Cuba against America and its allies, Americans would have demanded an immediate regime change in the island. But the corrupt mainstream media and the communists in America, especially the Democrats in Congress and the White House, over the years were successful in keeping the public ignorant of the tremendous damage done by the Cuban regime to America and its allies.

How many Americans are aware that Cuba was deeply involved in the Vietnam War? How many know that the Cuban bloody regime had an engineering battalion called the Girón Brigade killing American soldiers and maintaining Route Nine, a major enemy supply line into South Vietnam? How many are aware the Cuban communist pilots flew Migs shooting at American pilots? How many are aware 17 American pilots were taken to Havana and so badly tortured and so terrible disfigured released they could never be released and were assassinated? I suspect that very few know what the bloody and mass-murdering Cuban communist regime did to America during the Vietnam War.

It is now time that Cuba’s role in the Vietnam War and all the atrocities and despicable human rights violations are well known by Americans and the world.

Make America Florida: The Case for DeSantis

Many people I know have left California for what they consider greener—I mean redder—pastures: red states free of most of the lunacy in the “woke” Golden State.

Some moved to Texas, some to Idaho, but most have fled to Florida, leaving us stay-at-homes green with envy.

Why Florida—with its notorious humidity, alligators, snakes, humungous mosquitos, and yearly hurricanes? In a word: DeSantis.

Facing off against the radical, America-hating Left, DeSantis fought and won two major battles recently: protecting students in third grade and younger from the Dems’ cherished “choose your gender” narrative, and poking woke Disney in its progressive eye. I’ll wager Walt would approve.

Speaking about these triumphs, Charles Lipson has this to say: “What his legislative victories demonstrate is that DeSantis is willing to fight hard against formidable opposition on high-profile issues, including cultural issues. That is exactly what Republican voters want today.”

Governor DeSantis has continuously put the liberty, interests, and wellbeing of Floridians first, for which he endures perpetual barbs and ridicule from the Pravda media’s coterie of presstitutes. Imagine—he took a stand for sanity in the schools, by outlawing gender “fluidity” indoctrination of children in kindergarten through third grade. How dare he!

And as of September 2020, he refused to allow mask mandates! Does he think he’s smarter than the CDC? Let’s hope so!

MAF: MAKE AMERICA FLORIDA!

Well, I have a suggestion. Instead of millions of us envying Floridians and dreaming of moving there, which may be out of reach for many people, why not bring Florida to us? That is, why not turn Florida’s Governor DeSantis into President DeSantis? Then instead of his fighting tirelessly for Floridians only, he’d be fighting for all of us—and we could stay home! We wouldn’t have to deal with the alligators, mosquitoes, hurricanes and Floridian traffic jams.

Though there is one issue that Ron needs to revisit: a Convention of the States. This is a globalist ploy to throw out the Constitution on the pretext of giving power back to the states. Trouble is, many people don’t read the fine print: Congress would be in charge. And it’s an “anything goes” rodeo, as the one and only precedent proves: Our Founders simply chucked the Articles of Confederation they were supposed to amend,and started over. That’s aone-off that worked because they were liberty-minded and utterly brilliant. The exquisite Constitution they bequeathed to usain’t broke, so don’t “fix” it. We have an amendment process that has been used many times that can do the job just fine when we need new amendments.

The late great Justice Scalia warned: “I certainly would not want a constitutional convention.  Whoa!  Who knows what would come out of it?”

For excellent analyses regarding the dangers of the Convention of the States, I recommend this article by Publius Huldah, and this 30-minute video by Bill Still—very worth watching to the end.The John Birch Society has also been sounding the alarm on the ConCon con for decades.

Back to Trump.

We know his record was outstanding from 2017 through 2019. But let’s review his record from 2020 to the present.

TRUMP’S “MAGA” ENDORSEMENTS

Now in his role as Republican Party kingmaker, Trump is on the campaign trail endorsing candidates for Congress. Unfortunately, as investigative journalist Kelleigh Nelson pointed out in a recent article, Trump has endorsed several Republican quislings, including media personality Dr. Oz, who just so happens to be a Turkish Muslim who apparently voted in Turkey’s election in 2018, and supports the Leftist agenda on many counts. Unbelievably, Trump has also endorsed Greg Pence, Judas Pence’s brother.

In case you’ve forgotten, Trump let it fall to VP Mike Pence to save the Republic by refusing to certify the questionable voting results in the swing states, and allowing Senator Cruz’s proposal for a 10-day emergency audit of the disputed states’ results.  Pence infamously went on to certify the theft of our election instead. And let’s not forget that prior to this act of betrayal, Pence assembled the Coronavirus Task Force that brought us the deadly duo of FauxChi and Birx.

Why on earth would Trump do him the favor of endorsing his brother—who’s likely to be another subversive RINO?

THE COVID VACCINE FIASCO

And how about Trump’s refusal to admit Operation Warp Speed was a colossal blunder? Does he still not know thousands of people have died or been disabled by Big Pharma’s experimental injections? Many of us have been patiently waiting for him to discover the truth and shout it from the rooftops, warning people not to get any more jabs. Still waiting…

TRUMP’S REPORT CARD

Let’s revisit President Trump’s tenure in office. As a teacher, I’m used to giving grades, so here goes: 2017…A+; 2018…A++; 2019…A+++; 2020…F.

After three glorious years of Trumpian success after success—the economic miracle Obama said could never happen, major tax relief, historically low unemployment, energy independence, the engine of prosperity roaring again—Covid descended upon us.

The country reeled, having suddenly lost its navigator and Commander-in-Chief. The Dems/Deep State and assorted members of the globalist cabal had found their Kryptonite at last.

If you recall, Trump’s first response was to say Covid was a hoax. By now many of us know his instinct was right. But that pronouncement no doubt provoked outrage and hysteria among his advisors. I can imagine Ivanka pleading with Daddy to take care of people—after all, how could he say it was a hoax when people were dying?

Of course he knew the Wuhan flu and the deaths were real—yet it was being played out as a psyop. And as far as the deaths were concerned, he did all he could to help us from the start.

When Trump learned HCQ was effective, he rushed to get a huge supply for us. When Governor Cuomo was in the midst of murdering elderly New Yorkers, POTUS sent him a huge hospital ship to rescue the nursing home patients. And when he was assured the vaccine would stop the pandemic in its tracks and prevent Americans from dying, he got on board with Operation Warp Speed.

His failure? He forgot the two words he’d made so famous in his years on The Apprentice: “You’re fired!” That’s what he needed to tell Dr. Fraudster, Madame La Scarf, and a few other strategically-placed traitors bent on destroying America, as it became clear the Fauchian “cure” was far worse than the disease.

THE COLOR REVOLUTION

Since Trump failed so badly in 2020 when it counted the most, since he stood by and let our businesses and churches close, since he threw money at people to compensate them for disastrous governmental policies that he did nothing concrete to try to stop—i.e. socialism—and since he essentially stood by passively through a Color Revolution on our soil whose goal was throwing him out of office though he’d clearly won the election in a landslide so definitive that the Dems had to up their cheating antics in real time—even dragging extra boxes of phony Biden ballots out from under tables— how can he be trusted as our Commander-in-Chief again? He abandoned the ship. He left us to flounder. And I haven’t heard him apologize or admit this epic failure, let alone reassure us he wouldn’t make the same mistakes again.

On January 6th in D.C., President Trump announced to the crowd of his supporters: “We will never give up—we will never concede! You don’t concede when there’s theft.”

Yet fifteen days later, he stepped down. What is that if not conceding? And what transpired in the interim between these two events?

If you read Dr. Scott Atlas’ book A Plague Upon Our House, you’ll see the subversion and ineptitude behind the scenes in the Trump White House. Patrick Byrne also wrote a tragic firsthand account about it.

On the one hand, several brave patriots who understood the stakes and knew what needed to be done came to the President with urgent advice, among them: brilliant attorney Sidney Powell, General Michael Flynn, Patrick Byrne, and later, Mike Lindell.

On the other hand, we find a nest of subversive quislings such as Mark Meadows and Pat Cipolline, smiling RINOS, and clueless family members of Trump’s inner circle. Whom do you think he listened to?

In The Deep Rig, Patrick Byrne notes there were rumors Melania was pleading with Trump to step down, as she feared for his safety, and that she and another family member—my guess is Barron—had been threatened also. Of course there’d be threats! The Dems and Deep Staters were playing full out. But you don’t cave to such threats when you’re the President of the United States.

And shamefully, First Daughter Ivanka and her husband Jared were reportedly already urging Trump to concede by November 12th to “save face”! Adding insult to injury, on June 10, 2022, Ivanka told the January 6th Show Trial persecutors, I mean prosecutors, that she never believed the election was stolen. At least Don Jr. and Eric wanted their father to fight the theft of our nation. Whom did Trump listen to? What matters more, saving face or saving the nation?

A FEW MORE EXAMPLES

Many rejoiced when POTUS brought in powerhouse patriot Steve Bannon as a special advisor. But Jared evidently didn’t like the competition from an actual seasoned expert, so Bannon was ousted. Whom did Trump listen to?

Early on, Trump was poised to place the valiant Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the helm of a commission on vaccine safety. Imagine the effect that stellar appointment would have produced regarding the premature rollout of the experimental Covid shots! But sadly, Bobby’s appointment was quickly derailedas Big Pharma rushed in. Trump’s advisors apparently managed to convince him to place two Pharma lobbyists in top positions: Scott Gottlieb (Pfizer) as head of FDA, and Alex Azar (Eli Lilly) as head of HHS.

Whom did Trump listen to?

WHAT PRICE LOYALTY?

Late in the summer of 2021, I heard a talk by a Silicon Valley entrepreneur who had been invited to a luxurious golf weekend at one of Trump’s resorts. He got to chat with the former President, and hobnob with the members of Trump’s inner circle who were also there that weekend. To my shock and dismay, Mark Meadows was among the guests—one of the key men who enabled the take down of our Republic by sequestering Trump during the tumultuous countdown to the 2021 Inauguration, while keeping patriots Sidney Powell and General Flynn at bay.

And Rand Paul was there—after having stabbed Trump in the back on January 6th by publicly stating members of Congress couldn’t overturn an election. Sorry, Rand–the election had already been overturned. That’s what the Dems and their co-conspirators accomplished—much of it in plain sight. The members of the Joint Session of Congress had the ability and the duty to object to the certification of the fraud!

And yet six months later, Trump continued to surround himself with these men who had betrayed him personally, and much, much worse—betrayed our Republic.

Trump is famous for valuing loyalty, but I think he misunderstands it in the context of the fight for our Republic.

Worst of all, he was, in the end, loyal to his old friend Rudy Giuliani—though Rudy was clearly out of his depth and not going to win Trump’s lawsuits on election fraud, whereas Sidney Powell and team very likely would have. And it would have been simple: a re-vote in the few places where the most cheating occurred. Then, if Biden still won, so be it. But the far likelier outcome would have been Trump winning. The stolen election would have been overturned, the Soros-style Color Revolution overruled, and we’d still have our Republic and the President we actually elected.

I fear Trump also misunderstood his Oath of Office. What happened to “America First”? He was under a sacred obligation as our Commander-in-Chief to put his country first—not his friends and family.

To his credit, during his time in office Trump courageously stood up to China, fought the globalists, the Dems, and our “fake news” propagandizing media in brilliant ways. But in the clinch, though he’d won the election, he packed his bags and moved back to Mar-a-lago.

Here’s a quote from Martin Luther during the greatest battle of his life, as he faced branding as a heretic and excommunication by the all-powerful Vatican he had so boldly challenged: Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.

WELCOME TO THE USSA

How high were the stakes? Take a look around you.

Soaring gas prices. Unemployment skyrocketing. Food shortages on the horizon. Looming possibility of WWIII. Double-digit inflation. Illegal aliens pouring in through our southern border in huge numbers. Crime increasing. Production of needed energy decreasing. Etc.

Perhaps worst of all, the moment the Usurper-in-Chief mounted the steps to the White House, we lost our Republic. We want to believe we’re still in America because we’re still in our homes, we can still go to Starbucks, Lucky’s, and Costco. But, except for Shanghai, people can still shop in Communist China too.

Whether we call our new system Socialism, Communism, Technocracy or something else, we’re in the painful downward trajectory toward tyranny—even totalitarianism.

Though we should never forget Trump’s stellar accomplishments during the first three years of his administration, this is his final legacy.

PASSING OF THE TORCH?

Now it’s entirely possible that had Trump fought as he ought to have when the Cabal stole his election victory, they would have had him assassinated. That would have been a huge tragedy for the nation, but his legacy would have been untarnished. The MAGA movement would have continued strong, and our martyred President would have earned his place on Mount Rushmore. But it’s even likelier that the Dems/Elites/Davos Cabal would have feared to make a martyr out of our beloved President, and he would have triumphed, making America the greatest nation it’s been in many decades by pursuing his America First agenda for four more glorious years.

We’ll never know.

What we do know, is that when push came to shove in 2020, DeSantis defied the ruinous recommendations of the CDC and Coronavirus Task Force and Dr. Faustus. By contrast, President Trump, the one with the power to intervene to preserve the great gains he’d fostered for our businesses, workers and families, stood on the sidelines, letting little Tony dictate to the nation. It pains me to say it, but that is not leadership.

The best thing kingmaker Trump can do now for America is to hand the torch over to Ron DeSantis.

I will be forever grateful to Trump for his inspirational first three years in office. He reminded us of what America had been and showed us the road back to our former greatness. I loved him for giving me back my country and making me a proud American again. I love him still. But I’ll vote for DeSantis.

And if DeSantis doesn’t run for President in 2024?

I may just write him in!

© 2022 Cherie Zaslawsky – All Rights Reserved

Two Kinds of Hedonism

David Carlin: Contemporary hedonism is moral liberalism, which holds that we may do as we wish, provided we do no harm to others.


In the world of ancient moral philosophy, there were two very different schools of hedonism.  They agreed on the fundamental principle of hedonism, namely, that feelings of pleasure are the only intrinsically good things in the world and feelings of pain the only intrinsically bad things.

All other things that we call good (wealth, health, freedom, good looks, power, fame, etc.) are good in an instrumental way only; that is, they are good insofar as they lead to pleasure.  And all other things that we call bad (poverty, illness, slavery, vice, ugliness, weakness, obscurity, etc.) are bad in an instrumental way only; that is, they are bad insofar as they lead to pain.

It follows from this that moral goodness, then, is not truly good; it is good only to the degree it leads to pleasure.  And moral badness is not truly bad; it is bad only to the degree that it leads to pain.

But the two schools disagreed on what counted as pleasure and pain.

One school (the Cyrenaics) held that bodily pleasures (e.g., the pleasures of food, drink, and sex) are better than mental pleasures (e.g., the pleasures of studying geometry or reading The Iliad) because they are, at least for the moment, more pleasant.

The other school (the Epicureans) reversed this, holding that mental pleasures are better than bodily pleasures because they are less mixed with pain and are (or at least can be) more long-lasting.  The Epicurean would concede that a good meal and a few cups of wine are more immediately pleasurable than a good book; but the pleasures of wine and a good meal are brief and are often followed by indigestion or a hangover, whereas the pleasure that comes from reading Homer is long lasting and gives us neither indigestion nor a hangover.

Another difference between the two schools was that the Cyrenaics recognized three possible mental states, pleasure, pain, and a neutral state of neither pleasure nor pain; whereas the Epicureans recognized only two mental states, pleasure and pain.

As for the neutral state, the Epicureans counted that as pleasure; everything, then, that was not painful was counted as pleasure.  And the greatest of all pleasures was peace of mind, which, unlike the pleasures of food and drink and sex, could last for years on end with no painful side effects.

If you were a Cyrenaic you might, if you were lucky, accumulate a great number of short-term pleasures during your life; but it would be difficult for you to live a life that was pleasant in an overall way, for the average person experiences an immense number of pains, both big and small, in the course of a lifetime.

One Cyrenaic professor in Alexandria, seeing that for the average person bodily pains outnumber bodily pleasures, concluded that most people would be better off if they had never been born, and those who have been unlucky enough to get born would be better off dead.  (When a rash of suicides resulted from his teaching, the authorities in Alexandria fired him.  The poor man didn’t have tenure.)

The Epicurean way of life was not so much a pleasure-seeking life as a pain-avoiding life.  In time, it became the predominant form of philosophical hedonism, as philosophers recognized that a life of wine, women (or boys: this was the ancient world, remember), and song was impractical in the long run; while it was quite possible, though perhaps not easy, to live a life that was predominantly free of worry, fear, and anxiety.

Well, I think something like that ancient transition from a positive hedonism that pursues pleasure to a negative hedonism that avoids pain has happened, or is currently happening, in the modern world.  The early form of modern hedonism was utilitarianism, which sought the “greatest happiness of the greatest number.”  The contemporary form of hedonism is moral liberalism, which holds that we may do as we wish, provided we do no harm to others.

It turns out, unfortunately for people unlucky enough to live under the rule of utilitarian social planners, that these planners (even planners of some talent like Lenin and Mao) are not awfully good at making arrangements for the happiness of hundreds of millions of people.  In fact, quite the opposite. And so a certain skepticism has developed as to the possibility of social planners (that is, government officials) re-arranging society so that the average person can lead a happy life.

I don’t say that belief in this possibility has totally disappeared.  Far from it.  In our midst in the United States there are still people (they call themselves progressives: they might better be called latter-day Leninists) who believe it is possible that a good and wise government (that is, a government staffed with people like themselves) can make people happy.

But there are other modern hedonists (the negative kind) who, doubting the possibility of planning social happiness, have concluded that the best we can do is diminish suffering, which can be done in two ways: first, by not causing it; second, by relieving it when we run across it.

This attitude bears a superficial resemblance to Christian morality – with the unfortunate result that unwary Christians often make the great mistake of thinking that this quite secular (even atheistic) attitude is identical with Christian ethics.  Thus, we often find sincere Catholics endorsing homosexuality and abortion, since refusing to endorse them leads to pain for many homosexual persons and pregnant young women.

This kind of hedonism, this anti-pain kind, leads to what is (I think) the predominant theory of morality in America today, the theory that says, “We are free to do whatever we wish provided we cause no evident pain to others.”  The trouble with this theory is not a small one: sooner or later, it will cause the moral disintegration of American society.

And this disintegration, we can see, is already well advanced.

You may also enjoy:

+James V. Schall, S.J.’s On Pleasures

Michael Pakaluk’s The Pursuit of Happiness

AUTHOR

David Carlin

David Carlin is a retired professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America and, most recently, Three Sexual Revolutions: Catholic, Protestant, Atheist.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nearly naked activist shouting pro-abortion chants disrupts Mass in Michigan

Arizona high school club asked students how they knew they were straight

VIDEO: Harvard Student Condemns Anti-Americanism

We received a video, below, done by Julie Hartman a Harvard student. In her short remarks she condemns anti-Americanism. Watch:

On her website Julie states, “I’m Julie Hartman, an open-minded student at Harvard College. I am 22 years old.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Kamala Harris’ Ties to Marxism

Kamela Harris was born on October 20, 1964. Harris became Vice President on January 20, 2021, alongside President Joe Biden. She previously served as Attorney General of California from 2011 to 2017 and as a U.S. Senator representing California from 2017 to 2021.

The corrupt mainstream media began to lie about the ideology of Kamala Harris

As soon as the cognitive impaired Joe Biden announced that he offered Senator Kamala Harris from California to be his running mate, the corrupt socialist mainstream media began saying the lie that she was a centrist and a moderate. The voice of the globalist of the New World Order Council on Foreign Relations, the New Yok Times, said that Senator Harris is a “pragmatic moderate.” Other socialist journalists are spinning that Kamela Harris and Joe Biden as “two moderates” who share “center-left politics.” Due to the increasing mental impairment of Joe Biden, he is likely not be able to finish his term in office. Thus, it is particularly important to examine the ideology, record, and statements made by Harris when she served in the Senate.

On August 12, 2020, Joshua Lawson wrote an article titled “No, Kamala Harris Isn’t a moderate-She’s a Radical Threat to America” that was published by the Federalist. Lawson explained that anyone who examines objectively Senator Harris’ voting record in the Senate, as well as the policies she has proposed, realizes that Harris is the most progressive of any senator. And that her radical socialist ideology is the same as the communist Senator Bernie Sanders, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and her communist and radical Islamist Squad that are in control of the Marxist Democratic Party.

Lawson pointed out that according to the examination by Voteview, “Kamela Harris holds a voting record farther left than 97% of Democrats in the 116th Senate, and more liberal than 99% of the Senate as a whole.” “Of current members of the U.S. Senate, Harris ranks more liberal than Senator Bernie Sanders while placing as the Democrat with the most liberal voting record in the chamber aside from Senator Elizabeth Warren,” wrote Lawson.

Let us look closely to the record of Kamala Harris. She said that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers are like members of the Ku Klux Klan and wants to abolish this important law-enforcement agency that protects America. Like the rest of the Democrats, she advocates open borders and wants to make America a sanctuary nation. Harris said that illegal immigrants in the United States are not criminals, and all should be legalized and be given free health care. Harris endorsed communist Senator Sanders Medicare for All proposal that would abolish all private health care plans than more than 180 million Americans want to keep. Socialized medicine has been a complete disaster wherever has been implemented. Health care will be rationed, and the government will pick your doctor and hospital. Additionally, it would cost trillions and will motivate tens of millions to illegally enter America.

During her first appearance with Biden, Harris said that America was a racist nation that systematically has oppressed Blacks. She praised the communists and anarchists of Black Lives Matter (BLM) who lead, together with Antifa, a communist insurrection in America. How could Harris lie about the history of America and praise BLM communists and anarchists who have and continue looting, burning, killing, and injuring police officers and innocent Americans while vandalizing and destroying churches, synagogues, and historical monuments and statues? BLM is part of the cancel culture like the Chinese Cultural Revolution under the bloody dictator Mao.

BLM wants to erase our glorious American history and culture. BLM wants to abolish all police departments and prisons in the nation and implant communism in America and the world. BLM is pushing a curriculum that is being adopted by the New York Public Schools and many other school districts across the nation to graduate Marxist students to join this Bolshevik organization.

Kamala Harris was a co-sponsor of the insane Green New Deal that costs $94.3 trillion in the first 10 years and is pushed by the communist Sanders, AOL, and other communists in the Democratic Party. Like Joe Biden, Harris wants to repeal the 2017 Republican tax cuts that helped create the best economy in the history of America before the Chinese pandemic hurt the American economy and killed tens of thousands.

During Harris’ failed campaign to win the nomination, where she received less than 2% of the votes, she said she would sign an executive order banning all “assault weapons” as well as “high-capacity magazines” if Congress refuses to act. As a district attorney in 2004, Harris supported legislation that would require “microstamping” technology for all firearms. Harris does not support the Second Amendment.

Kamela Harris stated that she will stop with an executive order both fracking and offshore drilling as President Joe Biden did on his first day in office. This brought massive unemployment to Americans who work in the energy sector and America no longer remained energy independent. Harris’ insane Climate plan says that America needs to be “100 percent carbon-neutral electricity” by 2030 and that “all new buses, heavy-duty vehicles, and vehicle fleets will be zero-emission.” Like the Green New Deal, she co-sponsored, Harris called for “all new buildings” to be “carbon-neutral.” The cost will be in the trillions. Harris is in favor of abortion and infanticide. Clearly, Harris is anti-Catholic and anti-religion.

On August 13, 2020, Doug Mainwaring wrote an article called “U.S. Bishop Warns Faithful to Awaken to anti-Catholic Kamela Harris” that was published in the LifeSite website.  Mainwaring wrote that Texas Bishop Joseph Stirckland sent out a tweet saying “Catholics take note…. reminds me of another candidate calling us ‘the deplorables’…. we need to be awake to this…. Kamala’s anti-Catholic assault previews her potential administration.” The bishop mentioned an article published in the Federalist titled “Kamala Harris’s Anti-Catholic Assault Previews What Would Happen in Her Administration.”  “Joe Biden has just picked as his running mate Senator Kamala Harris, a woman who believes Catholicism is an extreme set of views that should disqualify someone from public office,” wrote Paulina Enck. Harris “demonstrated shocking anti-Catholic bigotry in the confirmation hearings of Judge Brian Buescher,” said Enck. Kamela Harris mentioned his membership in the “all-male society” the Knights of Columbus and its stances against abortion and same sex “marriage” as grounds for rejecting Buescher for a federal district court in Nebraska.

Mainwaring said that at that time the Editorial Board of the Wall Street Journal wrote that “Ms. Harris’s embrace of religious intolerance is especially significant because in two years she could be the next U.S. President.  What does it say about today’s Democrats that no one in the party of Al Smith and JFK sees fit to rebuke her?” Since the announcement of Harris as Biden’s running mate, pro-life leaders have sounded the alarm about her extreme position on abortion. Mainwaring explained that Harris twice “blocked Senate vote to protect babies born alive during abortion; Unveiled a plan to prevent pro-life states from passing pro-life laws; and voted to force taxpayers to pay for abortions.”

Mainwaring stated the following: “A vote for Biden/Harris is a vote for child abuse (cross-sex puberty blockers, mutilation surgery), mandatory Drag Queen Story Hour and ‘transgender’ speech rules, and abortion, wrote Houston Baptist University theology professor Robert A.J. Gagnon in a Facebook post.  In short, an all-out assault on the youngest in our society and the marginalization and persecution of parents and other adults who come to their defense. Don’t be foolish. It is not just anti-Catholic bigotry. She believes that no one should be allowed to be appointed to the court or any administrative government post who ever belonged to a religious institution, organization, club, school, or denomination that views abortion, homosexual practice, or transgenderism as sin. How can any Christian vote for such a person or even fail to cast an effective vote to stop her election?”

Like all Democrats who ran for President, Harris is in favor of slave reparations. This is very hypocritical considering that one of her ancestors in Jamaica, the Irishman Hamilton Brown, owned over 200 slaves in 1817. He was one of the biggest planters in Jamaica and there is a town named after him. Brown’s Tow.

On May 11, 2020, The New Americanist website published an article titled “Major General Higginbotham on Kamala Harris’ Background.” Many other websites have reproduced Major General Higginbotham’s editorial from the Combat Veterans for Congress Political Action Committee that was posted in these websites with permission from the author. CVFC PAC supports the election of U.S. military combat veterans to the Senate and House of Representatives.

Geoffrey Higginbotham served in the Marine Corps for 33 years. He fought in the Vietnam War and Desert Storm. During his last assignment he was on the staff of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Major General Higginbotham wrote about the hidden background of Kamala Harris. The editorial explained that Kamala Harris’ father, Donald Jasper Harris (born on August 23, 1938) is a Jamaican American economist, who was a Marxist professor in the Economics Department at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.

Kamela Harris’ mother Gopalan Shyamala (December 7, 1938 – February 11, 2009) was born in India and became a biomedical scientist. Higginbotham said that both parents of Harris were active in communist Afro-American Association of Berkeley, California where Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were the heroes of this organization. Donald Warden founded and was the leader of this group. In 1964, after learning Arabic and studying Islam, Warden changed his name to Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour.

Who is Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour?

Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour was born in Texas and earned a bachelor’s degree from Howard University and a law degree from the University of California Berkeley School of Law.

In the mid-1970s, al-Mansour met and became a friend and adviser to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Tatal, who at that time was studying business administration at Menlo College in California. In 1977, the Saudi Prince introduced al-Mansour to the king of Saudi Arabia and became his attorney. Al-Mansour represented the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries in a lawsuit that had been filed against it. Prince Alwaleed graduated in 1979 and returned to Saudi Arabia. Later al-Mansour helped Alwaleed invest money in Africa. Mansour has written numerous books, including The Destruction of Western Civilization as Seen Through Islam and Will the West Rule Forever?

Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Radical Islam by Frank de Varona

I wrote in my book, Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Radical Islam (2016), that a poor Barack Obama quit his job as a community organizer in Chicago and was accepted at Harvard Law School in 1988. How did Barack Obama raise the money to attend such an expensive university? Racist and America hater Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour, the lawyer of the royal family of Saudi Arabia, raised money for Obama.

Al-Mansour hates the United States, Israel, and white people. In recent years, he has accused the United States of plotting a “genocide” designed “to remove 15 million black people, considered disposable, of no relevance, value or benefit to the American society.” He has told African Americans the following: “Whatever you do to white people, they deserve it, God wants you to do it and that’s when you cut out the nose, cut out the ears, take flesh out of their body, and don’t worry because God wants you to do it.”

More than likely al-Mansour first met Obama when he was studying at Columbia University in the early 1980s when Mansour was a guest lecturer. Al-Mansour enlisted the help of Percy Sutton, a prominent African American politician from New York and Malcolm X’s lawyer. Sutton wrote several letters to his friends at Harvard Law School requesting the acceptance of this promising former community organizer to this university. We now understand why President Obama made a most shameful bow to the King of Saudi Arabia in London in 2009 since probably Saudi´s money financed his education at Harvard.

Major General Higginbotham explained that al-Mansour mentored two young Afro-American Association members, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. Both radicals created the Maoist-inspired Black Panther Party, which gained strong support from Communist China. The Black Panther Party became a model for the creation of the communist Black Lives Matter Marxist.

It is incredible that the parents of Kamala Harris would participate in a racist and communist association founded and led by al-Mansour and the communists Black Panther Party leaders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. But another well-known Democrat, Hillary Clinton, also had strong ties to these communists.

Trump’s America Under Siege by Frank de Varona

I explained in my book, Trump’s America Under Siege, (2018), how Hillary Clinton, when she was a student at Yale University Law School, organized pro-Black Panthers demonstrations when eight Black Panthers, including Bobby Seale, were put to trial for murder in New Haven, Connecticut.

Hillary Clinton wrote in her book, Living History, in 2004 that she continued helping and supporting the Black Panthers Party when in the summer of 1971 she became a law clerk at the Oakland, California law firm of Treuhaft, Walker, and Burstein. Robert Treuhaft was not only a member of the Communist Party USA but the lawyer for the party. Treuhaft told a reporter of the San Francisco Examiner, “That was the time we were representing the Black Panthers, and she (Hillary Clinton) worked on that case.” It is astounding that Hillary Clinton worked for a law firm led by the lawyer of the Communist Party USA who defended and represented the Black Panthers Party!

The Rapid Career in Politics of Kamala Harris

General Higginbotham continued discussing Kamela Harris and said that following her graduation from college, she returned to California and became the lover of Willie Brown, the 60- year-old married socialist Speaker of the California Assembly. Brown was elected as Mayor of San Francisco and helped Kamela Harris’ political rise in California politics. Harris became San Francisco District Attorney, California’s Attorney General, and later a U.S. Senator.

General Higginbotham wrote that Willie Brown is a well-known long-time Communist sympathizer who was elected to public office with substantial help from the Communist Party USA. He added that Willie Brown is regarded as one of the Chinese Communist Party’s best friends in the San Francisco Bay Area.

General Higginbotham said that Harris mentored a San Francisco radical Maoist activist, Lateefah Simon, who was a member of the STORM Revolutionary Communist Movement. Simon has always been close friends with the founder of Black Lives Matter, Marxist and domestic terrorist Alicia Garza, as well as the communist STORM leader Van Jones. Harris has always supported the communist members of Black Lives Matter. General Higginbotham pointed out that Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff, works for the law firm DLA Piper. This firm has worked for nearly 30 years helping corporations to invest in Communist China.

Karine Jean-Pierre was born on August 13, 1974.

When Kamela Harris was elected to the Senate, she appointed a pro-communist Senate Chief of Staff, Karine Jean-Pierre. Jean-Pierre was just appointed White House Press Secretary. While Jean-Pierre was working for the socialist NBC News and MSNBC television stations, she called Fox News, Republicans, and President Trump racists. Anyone who disagreed with her extreme radical views was called a racist. Jean-Pierre repeatedly lied about President Trump Russian collusion and called him derogatory names. She is a self-proclaimed lesbian who lives with her partner, CNN journalist Suzanne Malveaux.

General Higginbotham said that Karine Jean-Pierre was active with the New York-based Haiti Support Network. The organization worked closely with the pro-Communist China/Communist North Korea Workers World Party and supported Jean Bertrand Aristide, the Communist former president of Haiti and his extreme radical Lavalas movement.

Like other Marxists, such as Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders, Harris as an elected official to political office, is not subject to the security clearance process. If the FBI would have done a background investigation on Kamala Harris, she would have never passed, because of her many close ties with Marxists, communists, Maoists, and Communist China.

On March 12, 2019, Trevor Loudon wrote an article titled “Kamala Harris’s Socialist Ties” that was published by Epoch Times. Loudon wrote that when Senator Kamala Harris spoke to reporters after announcing her candidacy for President of the United States at Howard University, her alma mater, on January 21, 2019, in Washington, D.C., she said she was “not a Democratic Socialist. “Well, then, what kind of socialist are you?” asked Loudon.

Loudon explained that Harris has been surrounded by socialists and communists her entire life, starting with her Marxist father. He wrote Kamala Harris and her sister are the children of two 1960’s Berkeley radicals, Shyamala Gopalan, a cancer researcher from the state of Tamil Nadu in southern India, and Donald J. Harris, an economist from Jamaica.

Harris’ parents were very active during the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War protests, often taking baby Kamala to protests in a stroller. The parents separated after Donald Harris took a professorship at the University of Madison–Wisconsin. Gopalan filed for divorce in 1971 and won custody of her two daughters in 1973. In 1972, Donald Harris left the University of Madison–Wisconsin to begin teaching economics at Stanford University.

Loudon pointed out that radical students at Stanford began demanding to be taught Marxism.   Donald Harris started to teach Marxist economics. Donald Harris wrote papers such as, “The Black Ghetto as Colony: A Theoretical Critique” ‎(1972) and “Capitalist Exploitation and Black Labor: Some Conceptual Issues” (1978). It was no secret that Donald Harris was a Marxist,

General Geoffrey B. Higginbotham said that President Biden is suffering from early dementia and will continue to decline mentally. He believes that Biden will never be able to finish his four-year term of office. General Higginbotham wrote that “Since Biden was elected, the socialists, Marxists, and communist who control Kamala Harris, are planning to enact provisions of the 25th Amendment, in order to remove Joe Biden from office, so Harris can become the first Communist President of the United States.”

I disagree with General Higginbotham when he said that Harris can become the first Communist President of the United States. Barack Obama was the first Marxist President elected in 2008 and reelected in 2012.

Conclusion

General Higginbotham ended his article by stating that Kamala Harris is a very serious threat to the national security and to the very survival of the U.S. Constitutional Republic. The General said that Harris has been a fellow traveler of Marxists, communists, Maoists, socialists, progressives, and Chinese communists for over 35 years. He added that President Trump had much more background information on Kamala Harris than he discussed in his article and that is why Trump accused Kamala Harris of being a Communist subverter.

Incredible are also the communist connections to the communists of the Afro American Association of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. It is no surprise that the Democratic Party has become a pro-Marxist, pro-China, pro-Islamic radical, pro-infanticide, anti-Israel, anti-Judeo-Christian values party.

President Trump said in a letter that if the Biden-Harris ticket won the White House and with the help of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer the following will happen: “They are going all-out to sell the American people their Big Government Socialist laundry list of break-the-bank costly Left wing ideas. These include universal income, free national healthcare for all, open borders for all immigrants, support for sanctuary cities, dangerous abortion policies, massive government programs with incalculable costs, and a Big Government tax the rich agenda that will deliver a giant blow to our nation’s economy. Shockingly they also want to censor, muzzle, and shut down conservatives voices, defund our nation’s police departments, lower the voting age to 16, pack the Supreme Court, and abolish the Electoral College—one of the basic principles of our Republic. And on top of that, they will use the funds of their Leftist Radical billionaires allies like George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, and Tom Steyer to rig the November elections—from calling all ballots to be cast by mail, to same day registration, to requiring no ID to vote.”

The President added in his letter: “They will lead our nation in the same destructive path as Barack Obama by decimating our nation’s military while weakening our position in the world by letting Russia, Iran, and China all have their way. Joe Biden supported the terrible nuclear accord that would have allowed Iran to build a nuclear bomb, and for 40 years he has supported trade deals with China that have destroyed American jobs—just the opposite of my America First Agenda that wants to bring critical jobs back home to America.”

President Trump was correct almost 100% in predicting the radical socialist agenda and the damage of the Biden-Harris ticket to the economy and national security of America.

©Frank de Varona. All rights reserved.