Jill Biden: Protecting Kids from Porn Is a Step Toward the Holocaust thumbnail

Jill Biden: Protecting Kids from Porn Is a Step Toward the Holocaust

By Family Research Council

As the nation nears Passover, the Biden administration has unveiled its latest scapegoat: people who want to protect children, especially Christians. In a speech that defied parody, First Lady Jill Biden linked those who oppose books that show minors transgender cartoonish porn to the Nazis.

“Doctor” Jill’s accusations came over the weekend during brief remarks to the so-called Human Rights Campaign (HRC). She was supposed to marry the Democratic Party’s campaign themes of castigating “Christian nationalism” with their all-encompassing campaign message that electing anyone more conservative than AOC poses “a threat to democracy.” In the Biden family’s typically solipsistic fashion, she spent about one-third of her nine-minute-long speech talking about herself. But when she finally served up the rainbow-colored meat, it hit its target: anyone who would try to slow down the Left’s agenda to indoctrinate and trans kids.

“We had to fend off more than 50 anti-gay amendments that Republicans tried to force into the government funding bill,” she said, then plunging unartfully into her evening’s talking points:

“These were extreme measures aimed directly at this community — measures that would have limited health care, eroded protections for same-sex couples, and more. And they served only one purpose: to spread hate and fear.

“History teaches us that democracies don’t disappear overnight. They disappear slowly, subtly, silently.

“A book ban. A court decision. A ‘don’t say gay’ law.

“Before World War II, I’m told, Berlin was the center of LGBTQ culture in Europe.

“One group of people loses their rights. And then another, and another. Until one morning you wake up — and you no longer live in a democracy.”

In her defense, Biden-era America does bear a striking resemblance to the Weimar Republic, both in its openness to sexual licentiousness (which carried over into the highest ranks of its successor Nazi regime) and hyperinflation. Otherwise, it’s a full-out assault on family values and common decency.

The “book ban” simply means removing books that feature cartoonish imagery of fellatio and celebrations of pedophilia from school libraries, or moving them from the children’s section to the adult section of other libraries. That’s “not Kristallnacht,” Bruce Friedman, a concerned citizen, told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” in 2022.

The “Don’t Say Gay” law does not say “Don’t Say Gay.” It merely prohibits teachers from deliberately introducing sexual themes into classroom discussions for children in kindergarten through third grade. That would make most elementary school teachers incipient Nazis, since 62% of primary grade teachers said “students should not learn” about transgenderism in school.

Not content to break Godwin’s Law, Jill Biden tried to blame her political opponents for the deaths of numerous LGBT-identifying Americans. The first lady expressed concern for Nex Benedict, clasping her hands in a mock prayer before pointing the finger at conservatives: “We have faced unspeakable tragedies before: an assassination in San Francisco, a barren field in Wyoming, a nightclub in Orlando.”

The “assassination in San Francisco” refers to Harvey Milk, a San Francisco Democrat who had sex with a 16-year-old runaway named Jack Galen McKinley who later committed suicide. Milk’s supportive biographer remembers Milk had an eye for teenage boys with drug problems — behavior many would call sexual exploitation.

The “barren field in Wyoming” refers to Matthew Shepard, who had been kidnapped and raped during a high school field trip to Morocco a few years before dying a brutal death as a 21-year-old college student. But his murderers, Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, used the “gay panic” defense to avoid the death penalty for a meth-fueled drug robbery gone wrong — and two witnesses confirm that McKinney and Shepard had a sexual relationship. These underreported facts proved so shattering to the Shepard martyrdom thesis that the LGBTQ website The Advocate asked, “What if nearly everything you thought you knew about Matthew Shepard’s murder was wrong?” (It also confirmed the movement’s penchant for stretching the truth, stating, “There are valuable reasons for telling certain stories in a certain way at pivotal times, but that doesn’t mean we have to hold on to them once they’ve outlived their usefulness.”)

The “nightclub in Orlando” — The Pulse — found itself under fire from Omar Mateen, the American-born child of Afghan parents who professed his allegiance to ISIS during the shooting. Mateen was placed on, then removed from, the FBI’s terrorist watchlist by the Obama-Biden administration. President Biden has imported nearly 100,000 more Afghanis to the U.S. since the fall of Kabul, and an unknown number more potential terrorists through our open southern border.

The irony of Jill Biden accusing others of subverting democracy is underlined by the remarks’ location: She spoke at the so-called Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a $46 million LGBTQ pressure group, which opposes laws protecting minors from transgender procedures and has denounced laws regulating drag shows and “allowing misgendering.” HRC’s “Welcoming Schools” program creates gay- and transgender-themed lesson plans for teachers beginning in “pre-K,” such as reading the book, “They, She, He, Easy as ABC.” By third grade, HRC introduces the “Gender Snowperson” exercise to indoctrinate children that there are “differences between gender identity, sexual orientation and sex assigned at birth.”

Most parents, and teachers, want nothing to do with this. More than 10 times as many teachers say transgender lessons in schools “have had a negative impact on their ability to do their job,” according to the Pew Research Center.

majority of Americans (55%) say they find transgenderism immoral, according to a Gallup poll taken last June; 71% of Americans agreed with that “there are two genders, male and female,” according to a June 2023 Rasmussen poll; and 64% of Americans (including 62% of Democrats) support Florida’s Parents Rights in Education bill, which Mrs. Biden smeared as a “Don’t Say Gay” bill.

If somewhere between two-thirds and three-quarters of America do not believe the transgender agenda, who’s waging a “war on democracy”? For that matter, who’s waging a war on logic?

After years of quietly investigating traditional Catholics, prosecuting evangelical sidewalk counselors, and warning of an alleged nexus between Orthodox Christians and the Kremlin, the Biden administration has decided to crank up the anti-Christian, anti-Middle America rhetoric to 11. Americans can be grateful Jill Biden’s speech proved poorly executed. Even the portions intended to endear herself or appeal to the audience fell flat. For instance, after revealing that Joe Biden proposed to her five times, she said: “I’ll never forget what Joe said next. He said, ‘Jill, I promise you, your life will never change.’ Of course, this proved to be wildly untrue.” Thus, Jill Biden verified her husband either breaks his promises or makes inaccurate forecasts about the future.

She closed, “I love you,” reminiscent of the hapless president of the United States, based on then-Governor Jerry Brown and played by the late John Ritter, in the movie “Americathon.” The movie, released in 1979 at the height of the Carter-era malaise, is about an America so broke it must hold a national telethon to keep from going bankrupt.

Jill Biden’s speech proves the Left’s rhetoric has long been morally bankrupt. Yet facing ruin is precisely when some become most dangerous.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

POST ON X:

True https://t.co/A7K3dtbV6m

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 26, 2024

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


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

As Israel Eyes Last Hamas Stronghold, Experts Urge Biden to Support Netanyahu thumbnail

As Israel Eyes Last Hamas Stronghold, Experts Urge Biden to Support Netanyahu

By Family Research Council

Over the weekend, the Biden administration ratcheted up its rhetoric against Israel’s fight against the terrorist group Hamas, as Vice President Kamala Harris declared that there could be “consequences” for Israel if it invades the southernmost Gazan city of Rafah, which remains the last major stronghold of Hamas. Experts and lawmakers say that despite the difficult situation in Rafah, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees are encamped, the U.S. must support Israel’s military efforts to rid Gaza of Hamas in the wake of the terrorist group’s October 7 atrocities.

As opposition to Israel has grown within some segments of the Democratic Party’s voter base, prominent Democrats such as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) have vocalized an increasingly hard-edged position against Israel in recent weeks, with Schumer calling for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to step down on March 14. Secretary of State Antony Blinken continued the drumbeat last week, saying that a failed U.S.-led U.N. resolution calling for a ceasefire tied to the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas was meant to create “a sense of urgency.”

But dissent from within the Democratic ranks on the party’s stance against Israel appears to be growing. On Sunday, Senator John Fetterman (D-Pa.) responded unequivocally to Vice President Harris’s remarks that a Rafah invasion would be a “huge mistake” and that the Biden administration would not rule out consequences against Israel if it moved forward. “Hard disagree,” Fetterman wrote on X. “Israel has the right to prosecute Hamas to surrender or to be eliminated. Hamas owns every innocent death for their cowardice hiding behind Palestinian lives.”

Last Friday, Lela Gilbert, a senior fellow for International Religious Freedom at Family Research Council who spent 10 years living in Israel, joined “Washington Watch” to discuss the current status of Israel’s war against Hamas and the Biden administration’s response to it.

“I think that what we’re looking at is a war during an election year and how our American policy may shift about a little more than usual [due to] trying to satisfy everybody with our decisions,” she observed. “… I think … our American president and his administration [are] try[ing] to get it over with as quickly as possible as we get closer to the election.”

Gilbert further argued that the events of October 7 must be the central issue guiding American policy, despite a legacy media and Democratic Party that wants to move on from it. “[W]e have to remember what happened on October 7th, which was the absolute genocide, the most brutal killing of Israeli women, children, babies. It was unbelievably bad. That’s not in front of people anymore. What’s in front of them now is the continuing efforts of the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] to clean Hamas out of Gaza.”

Reports over the weekend indicated that those efforts are continuing apace, as the IDF said Saturday that it had “killed more than 170 gunmen and captured 800 terror suspects during its ongoing operation against Hamas at Gaza City’s Shifa Hospital.”

What remains to be seen is how a potential invasion of Rafah would unfold. “We have no way to defeat Hamas without getting into Rafah and eliminating the battalions that are left there,” Netanyahu made clear last week. But with 1.4 million Palestinians currently packing the city, with thousands sheltering in refugee camps, it will likely be difficult for Israel to avoid significant casualties during a hypothetical invasion. Because of this, the Biden administration has urged Israel to come up with a “credible” plan to evacuate civilians.

However, tensions between the administration and Israel appeared to escalate even further on Monday as Netanyahu “canceled a planned trip to Washington by his top aides to discuss plans for an offensive” in Rafah due to the U.S.’s failure to block a China and Russia-backed U.N. resolution that “called for a ceasefire without conditioning it on the release of hostages.”

Gilbert, who also serves as a fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, acknowledged the difficulties with a hypothetical invasion of Rafah but also emphasized the danger of Hamas.

“[M]any of the people that are stranded in the cities that are being looked at now are definitely going to be sidelined and sometimes injured and maybe some killed, so we have to be compassionate about that,” she noted. “But on the other hand … I hope that America has the presence of mind to see that there’s no reason to protect Hamas, period. It’s doing nothing for the good people in Gaza, the ordinary citizens. It’s not good for anyone. … I think we should support every effort to clean house in these cities and get rid of as much of Hamas as possible.”

Gilbert concluded, “Israel has to be careful about being blatantly offensive, but I think right now Netanyahu has been down this road before. I trust him to make wise decisions and to do what he can to protect the Israeli people from another Hamas attack.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

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


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

President Trump, the Eight Amendment, And The Gross Miscarriage of Justice thumbnail

President Trump, the Eight Amendment, And The Gross Miscarriage of Justice

By The Geller Report

The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution bans. That amendment says “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Why hasn’t New York Judge Arthur Engoron been sanctioned?

The massive reduction in the unprecedented half a billion dollar judgment against President Trump (the first of that size against an individual) for  a non-existent crime is empirical evidence of how wrong this relentless prosecution Trump is. There are ninety two baseless, invented cases brought by Democrat DAs across the country.  The outrageous is normal.

The reduction was a win but it should not move toward normalizing outrageous bonds in a total warping of the law. It’s still naked tyranny and yet people didn’t seem to care because it was Trump or Giuliani or some other political opponent. So yes,  it’s a win. The whole thing stinks. But it’s a win.

Trump’s 8th Amendment Option

Excessive fines are unconstitutional.

By: Lawrence Kudlow

This is all part of President Biden’s weaponized lawfare attack against Mr. Trump in order to stop him from becoming President again.

The Biden White House has orchestrated a massive lawfare campaign that aims to put Mr. Trump in jail for over 700 years, and take away all his cash, and his businesses.

Let me say iconic businesses, in New York, Florida, Scotland, and elsewhere. Mr. Trump remade the skyline of New York City. He rebuilt the Wolman skating rink, and on and on.

And here comes the New York State attorney general, Letitia James, running a scam that respected constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley calls “selective prosecution” and “mob justice.”

Take a listen to Ms. James running against Mr. Trump in her 2018 election: “No one is above the law, including this illegitimate president, so I look forward to going into the office of the AG every day, suing him, defending your rights, and then going home.”

Fox News legal expert Gregg Jarrett says, though, that Mr. Trump could file a petition in federal court regarding the 8th amendment. The Federal court would have to act quickly to issue a stay. But it may be Mr. Trump’s best strategy.

The 8th amendment says: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

And of course the $464 million penalty is supposed to bear some relation to harm done but there was never any harm done, because there were no victims and all the lenders to the Trump business empire made tons of profits.

So I believe as a non-lawyer that Alan Dershowitz and Gregg Jarrett are both correct in advising Mr. Trump to go for an 8th amendment constitutional appeal.

That would be a fitting end to this soviet-style New York sham lawfare battle against Mr. Trump who by the way is leading in all the swing state polls on the way to a potential victory in November despite what the Democratic crazies are trying to do to him.

THE $465 MILLION TRUMP JUDGMENT AND THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT

A clear violation of the Excessive Fines Clause.

By: Techno Fog, March 25

How Donald Trump’s Volcanic Clash With Judge Engoron Unfolded

In light of the record $465 million judgment issued by New York Judge Arthur Engoron against President Trump and the Trump Organization, we present an important question: whether that judgment violates the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment….

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: SCOTUS Confirmed in 2019 that the ‘Excessive Fines Clause’ of the 8th Amendment Applies to States—Ruling Could Nullify Trump Fines?

RELATED VIDEOS:

The New GOP looks to abandon big government spending, promote unified front

Inside the Left’s SHOCKING Plan Turn America Into California

Biden’s Catastrophe – Training, Arming and Globalizing the Taliban

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

U.S. Supreme Court Gives Hamas-Linked CAIR a 9-0 Thumbs-Up thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Gives Hamas-Linked CAIR a 9-0 Thumbs-Up

By Jihad Watch

The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) files many lawsuits, but actually wins comparatively few. So when it does receive a favorable decision, its operatives crow about it loudly. In the latest example, CAIR is calling a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling in its favor a “historic milestone for American Muslims.”

However, a simple reading of the Supreme Court’s decision in Federal Bureau of Investigation et al. v. Fikre, or of any of the many media reports on that decision, show that CAIR is overstating the victory.

See, for example, “Supreme Court Says ‘No Fly List’ Suit Can Proceed Against FBI, for Now”, by Jimmy Hoover, Law.com, March 19, 2024. In essence, the court ruled:

Yonas Fikre, a U.S. citizen from Sudan, can—for now—pursue his claim that the FBI violated his constitutional right to due process when it placed him on the list roughly eight years ago. He says the placement left him stranded abroad for four years and led to his torture in the United Arab Emirates.

The Government had tried to have Mr. Fikre’s case dismissed as moot, since the FBI had already removed Fikre from the No-Fly list, and as a result, there was no more damage to him. However, the Supreme Court did not accept this reasoning. From FBI vs Fikre:

In May 2016, the government notified Mr. Fikre that he had been removed from the No Fly List and sought dismissal of his suit in district court, arguing that its administrative action had rendered the case moot.”

Mootness is defined in Maniar v. Mayorkas, Civil Action 19-3826 (EGS), 36 (D.D.C. Mar. 30, 2023), as

[a] change in factual circumstances[,] . . . such as when the plaintiff receives the relief sought.

Additionally,

the party urging mootness bears a heavy burden.

However, in the present case, according to FBI vs. Fikre:

The government has failed to demonstrate that this case is moot.

Were the rule more forgiving, a defendant [FBI] might suspend its challenged conduct after being sued, win dismissal, and later pick up where it left off; it might even repeat “this cycle” as necessary until it achieves all of its allegedly “unlawful ends.” Already, 568 U. S., at 91. A live case or controversy cannot be so easily disguised, and a federal court’s constitutional authority cannot be so readily manipulated. To show that a case is truly moot, a defendant must prove “‘no reasonable expectation’” remains that it will “return to [its] old ways.”

The government had failed to meet its burden because the declaration did not disclose the conduct that landed Mr. Fikre on the No Fly List and did not ensure that he would not be placed back on the list for engaging in the same or similar conduct in the future.

Again, the court’s ruling means Fikre’s suit against the FBI can continue. But as Justice Gorsuch says in the court’s decision:

This case comes to us in a preliminary posture, framed only by uncontested factual allegations and a terse declaration. As the case unfolds, the complaint’s allegations will be tested rather than taken as true, and different facts may emerge that may call for a different conclusion.

CAIR’s very well-established pattern of overstating the results of court decisions in its favor really should be more widely discussed.

  • When Judge Anthony Trenga ruled in CAIR’s favor, saying that the terror watch list was unconstitutional, CAIR hailed this as the greatest legal decision the history of the country. Indeed, CAIR’s victory was widely reported in the mainstream media. However, when the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded Judge Trenga’s decision, sending the case back with instructions to rule properly, there was little word from CAIR on that.
  • More recently, CAIR was very proud of a favorable ruling in the case A & R Engineering and Testing, Incorporated vs. John Scott, Attorney General of Texas. But CAIR minimized the fact that the judge’s ruling applied to just this one case, and only to the plaintiff, Rasmy Hassouna.
  • In the article “Why a Texas Court Ruling on Israel Boycott Was No Victory for CAIR” by Erielle Davidson, which appeared in The Algemeiner on February 4, 2022, there is this statement: “But CAIR is patently wrong in its legal analysis, rendering the recent victory lap is nothing short of bizarre. While the opinion does deem a fraction of the language in the Texas law unconstitutional, the opinion itself explicitly asserts that most of the language in the Texas statute — including the central element prohibiting economic boycotts of Israel — is constitutional.”

CAIR is, among other things, a public relations firm with itself as its biggest client. As a result, any event which is favorable to the organization and its goals is exaggerated out of all proportion, while incidents that do not fit a favorable narrative are whitewashedhushed up, or simply ignored completely.

Although the FBI is certainly no friend of Jihad Watch, and the terror watch list may be a necessary evil, it does have value. Already, the DHS has stopped at least 160 people on the watch list from entering the U.S.’s porous border. Additionally, Project Veritas has reported that many of the Afghan refugees on the terror watch list are roaming free in the U.S.

As Justice Gorusch wrote in the court’s decision:

The government does not generally disclose the full reasoning for why people are placed on the list, and the Justice Department expressed concerns that allowing cases such as Fikre’s to move forward would needlessly force the government to reveal its sometimes-classified explanations.

Of course, the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations appears to have absolutely no regard for the national security of the United States of America.

AUTHOR

LARRY ESTAVAN

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Great Betrayal: Bidenite Follies at the UN

Full-blown global antisemitism on display as UN votes on Gaza ceasefire, tacitly supported by Biden regime

Kamala Has ‘Studied the Maps’

Gaza, Sudan, and the Media’s Selective Sympathies 

Chicago Politician Stands in Front of PLO, Iraqi Flag, After U.S. Flag Burned

What Percentage of Those Killed by the IDF in Gaza were Civilians? 

Hamas Just Brought to Life These Cartoons About Hiding Behind Babies

Were the Early Christians Nonviolent Solely Because They Didn’t Have State Power?

North Carolina: Migrant on terror watch list fires rifle outside convenience store, attacks sheriff’s deputies

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

The Important Work Of Peter Schweizer thumbnail

The Important Work Of Peter Schweizer

By Neland Nobel

Blood Money: Why The Powerful Turn A Blind Eye While China Kills Americans

Author: Peter Schweizer, published by Harper Collins.

Reading Peter Schweizer’s new book is a disturbing revelation.  It is a very important book, perhaps the most important book for a Conservative American to read right now.  However, it is not a pleasant book to absorb.  It is deeply disturbing on a number of levels.

His general conclusion is that China has its talons buried deep into American politics and culture, and most of us do not know it.  Further, they basically have bought off key leaders in America’s political class, who profit from betraying our country and our liberty.  This is often not a direct bribe as the Biden Family, but the threat of a loss of market in China.

In the early part of the book, he spends a good deal of time setting the table explaining unconventional warfare and the Chinese tradition of Sun Tzu and his modern-day counterparts.  The idea is to defeat your enemy by avoiding actual kinetic combat.

This can be done by dividing and weakening your enemy so they lose both the capacity and will to resist.

There are many very disturbing themes explored in the book.  One of the most important is how American political leaders, of both parties and major business leaders; have been compromised by the vast monetary incentives that flow from gaining access to the Chinese market.

Also, the American assumption, was that the more we traded with China, and the more China was integrated into the world economy, the more China would liberalize and become a nation of laws that respected liberty.  This has proven to be about as successful as when the Trojans accepted the gift of a giant horse filled with Greeks.

Almost all Chinese “corporations” are controlled by the People’s Liberation Army and the CCP.  They look like Western corporations only on the surface.

But the money to be made has been too much for many American leaders.  The “Big Three” are the Biden Family, Gavin Newsome (the Pelosi Family), and GOP leader Mitch McConnell.   However, there are many more.

According to Schweizer, his research team of 17 took over a year and a half to prepare the book and it is filled with important documentation.

As such the book has already had a significant impact in the US, mainly in the House of Representatives’ Impeachment Inquiry into President Joe Biden, and legislation currently pending concerning the Chinese government divestiture of TikTok and its malevolent influence on the youth of America.

Another grim theme is the key involvement in what could be called the “reverse opium war.”  China has never forgotten the role primarily played by Britain and some US individuals (FDR’s grandfather for example) in getting a huge percentage of Chinese citizens hooked on drugs so the country could be more easily exploited.

China is deeply involved in the production and distribution of fentanyl, which is killing more young Americans almost every year about the total we lost in the entirety of the War in Viet Nam.

They sell the components and cooperate with Mexican drug cartels, even to the extent of having more than 2000 Chinese nationals operating the supply chain with Mexico itself.  Shocking stuff.  And of course, Mexican leaders are deeply involved in either participating in the murder of Americans or conveniently looking the other way.

The same can be said for much of our political leadership.

Chinese commercial interests are also the biggest contributors to LQBTQ agitation, and the social media company, Tik Tok, which has done so much to spread this psychological contagion.

If you have felt somebody was playing with your mind, about Covid, about transgenderism, about racism; you would be correct.  It is the Chinese military intention to divide this nation and to weaken both its moral fiber and to confuse our youth.  The Chinese call this “cognitive warfare.”  You are both seeing and feeling this effort.

We have homegrown reasons for our racial divide, our sexual confusion, and our infatuation with drugs.  The Chinese are not to blame for these things. What they seem adept at is making all these things worse.

We have no room for details or documentation for these stunning charges.  You must read the book!

The current battle over TikTok is instructive of how China uses our free system to undermine our free system.  To defeat this will require some finesse because we don’t want to undermine our own liberty while fighting Chinese manipulation of our system.

For example, Rand Paul, for whom we have enormous respect, recently went on Tucker Carlson to oppose steps to make the Chinese government divest its holdings in TikTok. In a recent edition of The Drill Down, Schweizer’s Podcast, he shows where the good Senator is badly informed on the subject (a rarity we would say) and maybe even financially compromised.  Please listen to the show provided below.

The trouble is so many US businessmen have such a huge stake in China, that China can exert influence without directly funding their initiatives.  It will gladly be done by Americans, thereby providing the Chinese with plausible deniability.

TikTok is technically not completely owned by the Chinese, and that makes it look “normal”.  But US investors signed an unusual gag order, not to criticize the company.  They also don’t have voting rights. This is not a normal arrangement in the US where proxy battles and hostile takeovers are regular occurrences.

The question is not so much ownership but rather who has control.  And the party that has control is the Chinese Communist Party and its intelligence agencies.

A US tech billionaire is one of the largest investors, and he happens to fund several conservative efforts in this country, including giving more than $10 million to Rand Paul.

Even Donald Trump has recently wavered on the subject of TikTok, apparently fearing it could be taken over by the leftist Mark Zuckerberg. When President, he used an Executive  Order to force ByteDance to divest itself of TikTok.

This is how insidious our relationship with China has become.  Our own freedom, our own leaders, and our own business people can be turned to support Chinese unconventional warfare against our system and our liberty.

Some progress is being made in understanding this cancerous yet profitable relationship with China.  We will see how the attempt to separate TikTok from Bytedance will progress.  It has passed the House but now faces difficulty in the Senate.

The encouraging thing is that there has been some rare bi-partisan political action, and two major hearings are underway. 

None of this is likely without the important research done by Peter Schweizer.

As citizens, you need to understand the commercial relationship with China comes with their attempt to use unconventional warfare and cognitive confusion against us.  This is not the normal behavior of a trading partner.

How do we square this with the principles of free trade and the ability of our businesses to invest abroad?  How do we protect free speech while allowing our enemy to speak directly to our youth? Unlike FaceBook where “friends” can see conversations, TikTok was designed to be free of parental supervision and its algorithm is considered classified by the Chinese government.

In China, children’s time on the platform is strictly limited, and it mostly about history, culture, and engineering.  In America, the product has no limitation on time and is often dominated by unhinged blue hairs screaming about their psychological issues.  Why is the product so different in China than it is here in America?

It’s all part of unconventional warfare. The sooner the nation understands what China is trying to do to us, the better off we will all be.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Legacy Media Misses Another Culture Moment thumbnail

Legacy Media Misses Another Culture Moment

By Bruce Bialosky

This one was easy for them to grab as it was on Bill Maher’s February 16th show (Real Time). Maybe the Legacy Media is no longer glued to whatever Mr. Maher says. Recently he has made comments which might induce graduates of “prestigious” journalism schools to light their hair on fire. This vignette was of major significance but not worthy of their mention. Leave it to the right-of-center media “heathens” to grab it for what it was – a true moment.

Maher had two guests as he typically does for his panel. One was Van Jones, who is a darling of the Left with his charming demeanor. The other was the ultimate villain of the Left (other than the Orange Man), Ann Coulter. Ann is edgy, but she doesn’t do it in a cavalier manner. She states what she thinks, and it is always well-researched. She was in the proverbial lion’s den where Maher’s live audience undoubtedly saw her as the devil incarnate. She didn’t flinch.

The hatred toward Ann is something that I witnessed firsthand. She did deep research into information from the vaults in Russia as Communism fell. Lo and behold, she discovered that quintessential “bogeyman” Senator Joe McCarthy was actually correct about many of the people he accused of being Communist shills. I mentioned that at a small breakfast I attended 20 years ago with Senator Susan Collins (R-ME). She promptly shut me down for even invoking Ann’s name. Damn the facts if they come from Coulter.

Maher began discussion about the disgusting violence during the Kansas City Super Bowl parade. He said, “as of this time we don’t know who the shooters are.” Ann immediately jumped in and said, “We have some idea. If it were a white male shooter we would know.” Van Jones smirks at this and then Maher says again we don’t know. Ann then states, “That is how we know it was not a white male.” Maher replies, “Do you think they are repressing that reporting?”

Ann then goes on to state two major instances where the nature of the shooter was not mentioned. Knowing Ann, if she were in front of her computer, she would have listed a dozen incidents just as a teaser for a column. Maher then interjects and says as of Friday night February 16th we don’t know and then makes a snarky comment. He says to Ann, “You know, you have special powers.”

No Mr. Maher. Unlike you, Ann has just been paying attention. And twelve hours later Ann was proved absolutely correct. It was underage black kids who broke existing gun laws to get access to the guns that caused this deplorable incident. And then later in the week a couple of adult blacks were identified.

Why is this such a major event and why was I so charged by it?
I have been tracking this issue for years. A white guy will immediately be branded as a “white supremacist” or now the added “MAGA” white supremacist. I cannot tell you how many times I have been reading about gun related events and turned to the Beautiful Wife and asked if she had read about this event and/or seen any info on the shooter. BW says she hasn’t seen any info on the culprit. It turns out days later or even longer it is one of a protected class who did the shooting – and that could mean a woman, black, gay, trans or Muslim. It has happened so often that if not readily shown, I say to her “Well, we know it ain’t a white guy.”

The question then becomes why neither an intelligent guy like Maher nor Mr. Jones were aware of this dark hole in the government’s and press’ reports. Willful ignorance? The fact that this is especially common is so bewildering because of the perverse interest in the shooters’ identities and motives. For example, news organizations were for ages chasing a motive for the Las Vegas shooter (you know, the guy who broke a couple windows in a hotel tower and shot at hundreds of people) and were baffled that they could not report one.

That perverse interest in a shooter and their motive amazingly dies when it is not a white male. Why would anyone want to protect the source of a mass shooting because of their gender, race, or religion? How can we stem the source of mass shootings if we are unwilling to challenge anyone other than white males? The harm this does to our society is incalculable. We are a society that repeats over and over and over we must have equal justice under the law and then we have our national press carping about mass shootings and gun laws but ignoring the sources of mayhem if it is a favored group.

Ms. Coulter and I are not the only ones to have noticed this trend. When flushing out the idea for this column and discussing this problem, people’s eyes light up and they state they had seen the same thing.

Ann is the first to bring it onto the national stage. We should all be told what the facts are regardless of where they lead us. We know the national press has this perverse attitude toward supposed “white privilege.” This is one domain where this perversion should not enter the equation.

*****

This article was published by Flash Report and is reproduced with permission from the author.

Image Credit: YouTube screenshot Bill Maher show

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Immigration Overtakes Inflation As Top Voter Concern In 2024: POLL thumbnail

Immigration Overtakes Inflation As Top Voter Concern In 2024: POLL

By The Daily Caller

Immigration has overtaken inflation as the top concern for voters in 2024’s elections, according to a survey released on Monday by The Harris Poll for Harvard University’s Center for American Political Studies (CAPS).

Former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election, along with Republican candidates nationwide, have sought to make illegal immigration and the United States’ international border with Mexico a top political issue, owing to the high number of illegal crossings by foreign nationals during President Joe Biden’s term. The Harvard CAPS-Harris poll showed a 36% plurality of respondents ranked immigration as the top issue facing the country, beating inflation and cost-of-living issues, which 33% reported as being the top issue.

“When people ask themselves the Reagan question: ‘Are you better off than you were four years ago?’, the answer increasingly is no,” said Mark Penn, co-director of the poll for Harris, according to Cision PR Newswire. “The sizable number of independent voters who are still undecided will determine this election, and they continue to be personally concerned about the border crisis and their grocery store prices.”

Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll for March 2024 by Daily Caller News Foundation on Scribd

Among respondents, 53% of Republicans and a 37% plurality of independent voters ranked immigration as the top issue, while a 26% plurality of Democrats ranked inflation as their top issue. Immigration was also identified as the top issue by pluralities of white voters (39%) and Hispanic voters (41%) as well as suburban voters (40%).

Additionally, 57% of respondents believed that Biden inadequately addressed immigration during his State of the Union address to Congress on March 7. A 46% plurality also indicated that Biden’s biggest failure while in office was that he “[c]reated an open borders policy and a historic flood of immigrants,” with that rating being 21% higher than his perceived failures on inflation.

The survey was conducted between March 20 and March 21 among 2,111 registered voters across the United States, with the margin of error being 3 percentage points.

The Biden and Trump presidential campaigns did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

AUTHOR

ARJUN SINGH

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: GOP Reps Demand Transparency Over Thousands Of Migrant Children Reportedly Lost By Biden Admin

U.S. Experiencing Massive Border Breach From Canada By Illegal Aliens From 66 Different Countries [Videos]

Congress Passes Funding Package, Leaves for Recess and Fails to Secure Border

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


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

The Triumph Of The Blood Libel thumbnail

The Triumph Of The Blood Libel

By Center For Security Policy

According to Canada’s La Presse, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a vampire, and he is poised to suck the life out of the Palestinians in Rafah, Hamas’s final outpost in southern Gaza. The publication that was once a paper of record in Canada ran a political cartoon on March 20 portraying Netanyahu as a vampire, with a huge hooked nose, pointy ears and claws for fingers, dressed in Dracula’s overcoat while standing on the deck of a pirate ship.

The caption, written in blood-dripping red letters, read: “Nosfenyahou: En Route Vers Rafah.” Nosferatu, the Romanian word for vampire, was the title of a proto-Nazi German silent horror film from 1922 chock-full of anti-Semitic poison. The film, which became something of a cult flick, featured a vampire with a long Jewish nose. He arrived at an idyllic German town with a box full of plague-carrying rats that he released on the innocent villagers as he plotted to suck his realtor’s blood.

La Presse’s cartoon didn’t leave any room for imagination. It wasn’t making a political or military argument against Israel’s planned ground operation in Rafah. Its goal wasn’t to persuade anyone of anything.

The Netanyahu-the-vampire cartoon asserted simply that Netanyahu is a Jewish bloodsucker and, more broadly, the Jewish state—and Jews worldwide—must be vigorously opposed by all right-thinking people who don’t want Jewish vampires to kill them.

As the paper no doubt anticipated, the cartoon provoked an outcry from Canadian Jews and some politicians. And after a few hours, the newspaper took it off its website and apologized. Anyone who thinks that means that the good guys won misses the point of the move. The Jewish outcry and pile-on by politicians and media coverage proved the point. Jews are evil and control everything, even what a private paper can publish. Like Nosferatu in its day, the cartoon will become a piece of folklore, additional proof that the Jews are the enemy of humanity.

In other words, the cartoon was a blood libel.

We’re seeing lots and lots of it these days. And so, it is worth recalling what a blood libel is.

In its original form, of course, the libel was specifically about blood. About 1,000 years ago, Christians in England began accusing Jews of performing ritual murders of Christian children to use their blood to bake Passover matzahs.

The accusation was inherently insane. Jewish law prohibits murder. It prohibits cannibalism. It prohibits child sacrifice. It prohibits eating food with blood. But none of that mattered. Like the cartoon in La Presse, the blood libel didn’t seek to persuade anyone. It presumed that its target audiences already hated Jews or had a latent tendency to hate Jews, which the blood libel aimed to unleash. The purpose of the blood libel was to scapegoat the Jews and to incite target audiences from London to Damascus to act on that hatred. Over the millennium, hundreds of thousands of Jews were massacred in Europe and the Islamic world in response to blood libels.

Since the original blood libel, other ones have appeared. Whether Jews are accused of spreading plague, poisoning wells, controlling the banking system, the media, corrupting young people or spearheading a world Communist revolution, the common denominators in all of the accusations are the same.

Read more.

Originally published by JNS

AUTHOR

Caroline Glick

Caroline B. Glick is a Senior Fellow with the Center for Security Policy. She is a senior columnist at Israel Hayom and the author of The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East, (Crown Forum, 2014). From 1994 to 1996, she served as a core member of Israel’s negotiating team with the Palestine Liberation Organization.

RELATED ARTICLE: U.N. Called to Respond to Sharia Violence against Women

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

DOJ Creates New Federal ‘Red Flag’ Center To Seize Firearms From Law-Abiding Americans [But Not Illegals] thumbnail

DOJ Creates New Federal ‘Red Flag’ Center To Seize Firearms From Law-Abiding Americans [But Not Illegals]

By The Geller Report

Apparently the Democrat regime’s gun control mania only applies to law abiding American citizens but not illegals. An Obama judge U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman recently ruled illegals can carry guns.

This all goes back to the relentless war on our first amendment – free speech. Once you criminalize speech (under the Orwellian ‘hate speech), all of our other rights come crashing down, like dominoes.

What the hell is this evil?
A Federal Red Flag center;
We did not authorize this.
Announced, of course, just hours after the omnibus passes. https://t.co/IkuK0aTeV8

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) March 23, 2024

DOJ’s Sinister Scheme: Seizing Guns from Law-Abiding Citizens!

President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) made a significant announcement on Saturday with the launch of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center, catching some congressional Republicans off guard. Attorney General Merrick Garland emphasized in a press release that the new center aims to equip law enforcement officials and other stakeholders with resources to prevent individuals deemed dangerous from accessing firearms. ERPOs, commonly known as “red flag” laws, enable authorities to confiscate guns from individuals deemed to pose a threat to themselves or others, with provisions to prevent them from purchasing or possessing firearms for the duration of the order.

Garland framed the establishment of the center as a proactive measure in leveraging the tools provided by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to address gun violence. The DOJ’s initiative underscores the administration’s commitment to utilizing all available means to enhance public safety and prevent potential tragedies involving firearms.

The newly launched National ERPO Resource Center includes a website offering a plethora of resources and guidance for stakeholders involved in implementing red flag laws. It provides training and technical assistance to various professionals, including law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, and mental health professionals, involved in executing laws aimed at curbing access to firearms for individuals deemed risky.

Additionally, the center’s website features a comprehensive state-by-state guide on red flag laws across the country, offering specific information on each state’s ERPO legislation. Currently, 21 states and the District of Columbia have enacted red flag laws, reflecting a growing trend in adopting measures to address concerns related to gun violence and mental health.

Republican lawmakers, however, expressed surprise and concern over the DOJ’s move to establish a federal resource center for red flag laws. Some, like Representative Thomas Massie and Senator Mike Lee, voiced opposition to the initiative, questioning its authorization and raising concerns about potential overreach by the federal government in matters traditionally regulated by states.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why Red Flag Laws Failed Miserably in the Case of ‘J4TH Mass Murderer’ Robert ‘Bobby’ Crimo, III

Obama Appointed Judge Rules Illegals Can Carry Guns

RELATED VIDEO: Why Red Flag Laws are a Violation of the 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments

POST ON X:

On the New York ERPO form, just the fact that someone recently purchased a firearm could be considered a “red flag”https://t.co/W2h7DpxHVi pic.twitter.com/CyjqBHUl5o

— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) March 23, 2024

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

Khamenei: U.S. is ‘left with no option but to withdraw from the region’ in changed ‘world order’ after Oct. 7 thumbnail

Khamenei: U.S. is ‘left with no option but to withdraw from the region’ in changed ‘world order’ after Oct. 7

By Jihad Watch

Many factors have combined recently to magnify the strength of Iran and its proxies — from Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal that only benefited Iran to the Islamic Republic’s current alliances with China and Russia, as well as its continuing to be underestimated and misunderstood by the West.  The Iranian regime has been emboldened for years. The West’s tendency to ignore or discount this has given Iran an opportunity to become a key player in the global order, while America under Biden declines. As the Ayatollah Khamenei put it in a recent statement:

The United States’ long-standing ambition to dominate the region has been undermined by the resilience of the Axis of Resistance. The United States is now left with no option but to withdraw from the region.

A recent article in the Jerusalem Post discusses how the Middle East, and global politics, has changed since October 7. “Iran’s Khamanei [sic] using Gaza war as step to change world order,” by Seth J. Frantzman, Jerusalem Post, March 24, 2024:

Iran’s Supreme Leader believes the US is in decline in its influence in the Middle East. According to a statement last week, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei claimed that the current war against Israel, which Iran launched using proxies in the wake of the October 7 Hamas attack, has “disrupted” the US goals in the region.

The October 7 attack can be read as a turning point in the world order, in which Iran, Russia, Turkey, China, and others see the attack as a major shift that is taking place and seek to exploit it to achieve their goals.

Both the current weak administration governing America and the October 7 attacks have greatly contributed to a “turning point” in the world order.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Quds Force Commander Esmail Qaani has also threatened that “that the resistance front has yet to exhibit the maximum of its capabilities in terms of military and deterrent power”. Qaani’s reference to the “resistance” includes Hamas, jihadists in  “Gaza, the West Bank, Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and other places.” Embedded in Qaani’s threat is that the West has seen nothing yet.

Khamenei believes that the US has lost all influence in the region, and that it “is now left with no option but to withdraw” altogether. With Joe Biden in the White House, Khamenei isn’t far off regarding America’s loss of influence. And as for withdrawing from the region, America isn’t adequately standing up for Israel nor even against its own enemies, so it has a weak presence.

The rising world powers increasingly appear to be Russia, China, and even possibly Iran — that is, America’s foremost enemies. Recently, Russia and China managed to broker a safe passage deal with the highly underestimated and Iran-supported Houthis, who now have the Red Sea under siege and have expanded their activities to begin interfering with ships that are heading to the Cape of Good Hope at Africa’s Southern tip. Biden’s Red Sea Coalition continues to struggle ineffectively against the Houthis, as the Yemen-based group has an adverse impact upon Western economic stability. Recently, Hamas and Houthi top dogs met to discuss “expanding their confrontations” with Israel.

Iran has also become a formidable presence within the powerful BRICS alliance (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), and its influence is growing. According to NASDAQ, discussions about the potential impact of a new BRICS currency are now going on, “with experts debating” this new currency’s “potential to challenge” the dominance of the American dollar. Should this happen, America’s decline would accelerate, since economic clout defines global influence and power. The American dollar is the world’s principal reserve currency for global trade. Simply put: its purchasing power is so influential that when when the American dollar appreciates, other world currencies depreciate. China is now trying to lessen global reliance on the American dollar, which would also be a major victory for Iran. Last year, China was Iran’s main trade partner. According to an Islamic Republic of Iran Customs Administration report in May, Iran’s trade with BRICS member states between March 21, 2022 and Feb. 19, 2023 was worth $34.98 billion USD, “which excludes crude oil exports.”

Iran’s growth has been rapid in BRICS. Last August, Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi discussed Iran’s future membership in BRICS. A similar meeting took place in November; it included dignitaries from Iran and Russia, who discussed Iran’s “active role” in BRICS. Less than two months later, at the turn of the new year, Iran officially joined the China-led BRICS economic organization.

Whether or not America and the West have accepted the fact, America (deemed the “Great Satan” by Iran) and Israel (the “Little Satan”) are currently in a limited war with Iran, which is now likely in possession of nuclear bombs, and which has powerful friends.

The Jerusalem Post states that “the war in Gaza was the first shot by Iran and other countries in a major war for the future of the world order.” One can also see the increase in popularity of the pro-Hamas lobby, which is operating without restraint in America, Canada and other Western nations.

While enemies of America, Canada, Europe and Britain advance politically and economically, America and the West continue to decline under the irresponsible and weak leadership of globalist regimes, while being simultaneously invaded by multitudes of migrants, due to reckless open-door immigration polices. The globalist regimes has never indicated that they care about the fact that most of the migrants do not hold Western values.

Khamenei is correct in stating that “the United States’ long-standing ambition to dominate the region has been undermined by the resilience of the Axis of Resistance.” But whether America under Biden will fully abandon Israel and leave the region altogether, as Khamenei predicts, is another question. As stated earlier, America, in fact, is already increasingly useless to Israel as it issues threats against its traditional ally, while virtually exonerating Hamas’ use of human shields and Egypt’s blocking of Gazan refugees (except those refugees whom Egypt could bribe). The tight relationship between the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the United Nations, not to mention the China-brokered rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia, are no less sobering as indicators of the nature of the new world order that has begun emerging since October 7.

AUTHOR

CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden and Jake Sullivan Free With Advice to Israel: Don’t Invade Rafah

Netanyahu cancels advisers’ visit to DC after Biden regime allows UN ceasefire resolution to pass

The Egregious Kamala Harris Joins the Chorus of Disapproval Over Israel’s Plan to Enter Rafah

DEI Top Dogs Warn Intelligence Agencies Not to Use Terms Such as ‘Jihadist’

Putin Blames Everyone Except Islam for Islamic Terrorist Attack

State Department Official Claims IDF ‘Sexually Abuses Palestinian Women’ — Hamas Begs To Differ

Hamas and Al Jazeera admit that claims of IDF raping women in Gaza hospital were false

AOC accuses Israel of crossing ‘the threshold of intent’ of genocide

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

U.S. Experiencing Massive Border Breach From Canada By Illegal Aliens From 66 Different Countries [Videos] thumbnail

U.S. Experiencing Massive Border Breach From Canada By Illegal Aliens From 66 Different Countries [Videos]

By Vlad Tepes Blog

1. So at this point, the USA, Russia and the Islamic State, wherever that is, agree that the attack was from the Islamic State.

This doesn’t negate anything from the previous statement on it. Jihadis have been for hire as mercs since Mohammad. In fact Mohammad him self’s initial band of Caravan robbers where mercenaries in as much as paid thugs are, who also work to a political end. This links to body cam footage of the attack from one of the killers. Lots of ‘inshalah’ and ‘Allahu akbar’ all around.

2. Perhaps one of the most physically dangerous components of the communist revolution that has happened across the West, is this particular example of dialectical enforcement.

2a: BREAKING: Biden Regime Launches Federal Gun-Grab Operation to “Keep Firearms Out of the Hands” of People Who “Pose a Threat to Others”

The Biden Regime on Saturday morning continued its attack on the Second Amendment and launched a federal gun-grab operation to keep firearms out the hands of people who “pose a threat to themselves and others.”

“The Justice Department launched the National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center (the Center) which will provide training and technical assistance to law enforcement officials, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, clinicians, victim service and social service providers, community organizations, and behavioral health professionals responsible for implementing laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat to themselves or others.: – the DOJ announced on Saturday.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland said the ERPO program will work with partners across the country to use “every tool” to ‘protect communities from gun violence.’

“The launch of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center will provide our partners across the country with valuable resources to keep firearms out of the hands of individuals who pose a threat to themselves or others,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “The establishment of the Center is the latest example of the Justice Department’s work to use every tool provided by the landmark Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to protect communities from gun violence.”

2b: Illinois judge rules illegal migrants can carry guns

(NewsNation) — A federal judge in Illinois earlier this month ruled that a Mexican man who was living in the U.S. illegally had a constitutional right to own a firearm for self-defense.

In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman dismissed charges against Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, who was arrested in 2020 for violating a federal law that prohibits undocumented immigrants from possessing guns.

“Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020,” the Northern District of Illinois judge wrote in her ruling.

3. The USA seems much more motivated to stop the illegal border crossings … from Canada

4. Remember Kathy Griffin? The self described comedian who did the thing with the severed Trump head? She appears to be reaping what she has sown.

5. Anyone know about this attack on a Catholic Church by the Islamic State? I didn’t

Deadly ISIS Attack on Church in Turkey

Thank you all for checking out this site. Some interesting materials in the works. A Canadian veteran was debanked and more. I hope to be able to publish them soon.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with videos posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Could Joe Biden Deliver A MAGA Tidal Wave 8 Years In The Making? thumbnail

Could Joe Biden Deliver A MAGA Tidal Wave 8 Years In The Making?

By The Daily Caller

Republicans have a not-so-secret weapon going into the 2024 election for the first time of the Trump era: a presidential nominee running circles around his opponent in the polls.

At the top of March, Trump posted his largest lead over Biden to date in either a New York Time/Siena or New York Times/CBS poll. He continues to trounce Biden in hypothetical matchups across most swing states. The 81-year-old president battles a low approval rating and growing concerns about his age.

All signs point to a major opportunity for Republicans, and GOP strategists told the Daily Caller the road could lead to a long-anticipated red wave in November.

“I think that’s absolutely true that his low job approval is helping the Republicans, it’s no question about it. And in fact, more than that, his low job approval is causing Americans to look back on the Trump presidency with some nostalgia,” a longtime GOP adviser in Kentucky and veteran of numerous campaigns, Scott Jennings, told the Daily Caller.

Though Jennings said Republicans are certainly benefitting from Biden’s low approval rating, he added that he thought it was too early to confidently predict a red wave.

“But the conditions are right. I guess it’s the difference between a tornado watch and a tornado warning. Tornado warning means a tornado has been spotted,” Jennings said. “A tornado watch is the conditions are right. And I think the conditions are right. So I’d say that’d put us in watch territory.”

Mark R. Weaver, a GOP strategist, told the Daily Caller that the 2024 election contains several parallels to the 1980 election, when former President Ronald Reagan won a staggering 44 states.

“History tells us that Jimmy Carter was in the White House. He had been elected, promising a different kind of presidency, after Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. But he was so inept at the job that Americans were very frustrated with his administration,” Weaver explained. “Inflation was high. Food prices were high. Gas Pump prices were high and actually rationed. They were American hostages being held in the Middle East and we couldn’t get them back. We were not respected around the world.”

Weaver added that Reagan asked voters ahead of the election if they were better off today than they were four years ago — a line, he added, that could help Trump propel himself over the finish line.

“So there’s some parallels here. I always like to say Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan is once in every three or four generation quality candidate,” Weaver continued. “So Donald Trump has far more weaknesses than Ronald Reagan did. Having said that, Joe Biden’s a lot like Jimmy Carter, because people are frustrated with how inept his administration is, and they are ready for a change and in this case, the change would be back to the future.”

“Trump will use that line and he’ll be referring to a time when he was president. And that could produce a red wave,” he concluded.

Republicans have been anticipating a red wave for the last eight years, but have instead been the victims of mirages. In 2016, though Trump beat out former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for the presidency, and Republicans clinched both a Senate and House majority, the party lost seats in both chambers.

Even with the majority, the makeup of congress wasn’t particularly favorable to Trump. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell endorsed Trump after he secured the nomination in 2016, but is definitionally establishment. In fact, McConnell at the time said he didn’t believe Trump would change the GOP, but that Republicans would change Trump.

On the House side,  Speaker Paul Ryan said he would vote for Trump in 2016, but added that “it’s no secret that he and I have our differences.”

In addition to skeptical leadership, Trump entered the 2016 election as an insurgent force within the Republican Party, lacking much of the institutional control he has now. In 2024, his campaign is increasingly influential over the RNC, and he plays a kingmaker role in GOP primaries.

In 2018, with Trump in office, Republicans ceded ground to Democrats, who won a House majority. And in 2020, Biden led Trump in the polls as election day inched closer, eventually defeating him for the White House. Meanwhile, Democrats retained control of the House and gained several seats to win a 50-50 split in the Senate.

Two years into Biden’s presidency, Republicans believed they would finally get their red wave, but in many ways fell short. Though they won back the House, another underperformance resulted in Democrats holding the Senate by a 51-49 margin.

“The vaunted red wave never hit the shore in midterm elections,” a Washington Post headline read.

“The red wave that wasn’t: 5 takeaways from a disappointing night for the GOP,” a Politico headline said.

“GOP Pollster: Republicans Failed to Secure Red Wave in 2022 Midterms for Four Key Reasons,” the National Review wrote.

But now, down-ballot candidates across the country, particularly those with a “MAGA” agenda and endorsed by Trump, are predicting a red wave and crediting Biden for the help.

“President Trump is going to win the White House and Republicans are going to take back the Senate Majority. Joe Biden and Ruben Gallego’s policies have crushed hardworking Arizonans with crippling inflation: high prices at the gas pump, grocery store, and even when buying a home,” Republican Arizona Senate candidate Kari Lake, a long-time Trump supporter, told the Daily Caller in a statement.

Republican Texas state Rep. Steve Toth, also endorsed by Trump, told the Daily Caller that a red wave has already begun to take Texas and he pointed to Biden’s handling of the economy and the southern border as reasons why.

“But when things get bad, not only do [Republicans] turn out, but it awakens the independents that are right leaning but yet haven’t decided what they want to be when they grow up. And I think we’re all feeling the effects right now of a really crappy economy and open borders in a tremendous way. It’s straining the economy. It’s straining the workforce. It’s straining everything. I mean we’re really coming apart at the seams right now. I think people feel it,” Toth told the Daily Caller.

Both Lake and Toth have been endorsed by Trump and have similar priorities to the former president. Both politicians told the Daily Caller that Republicans should prioritize building a border wall, which did not get done during Trump’s first term.

The signature legislative accomplishment of Trump’s first term was the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a law that was championed by Reaganite Republicans and perfectly in-line with longstanding beliefs in the party. Analysts at the time wrote that the prioritization of tax cuts over immigration may have been pushed by Congressional leadership.

“That means the president is going to have to decide, very soon, how he wants the fall policy debate to play out. Does he want Congress to spend the next few months battling over the budget and funding a border wall? Or does he want lawmakers to try to pass a tax cut? If he does not develop and sell a coherent policy choice to Congress when it returns to Washington in a couple of weeks, it is likely that the congressional GOP leadership will choose for him,” Tax Policy Center’s Howard Gleckman wrote in 2017.

“In some ways, it may already have. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), whose relationship with Trump has turned icy, has made no secret that he wants to clear the legislative decks to make room for a tax bill.”

“My first action as a Republican Senator would be to introduce legislation that: 1. Secures the border by finishing the wall 2. Baby bonuses for parents and extending the child tax credit 3. Extending President Trump’s tax cuts. President Trump and Senate Republicans will get America back on track,” Lake added.

Republican Texas state Rep. candidate David Covey, also endorsed by Trump, told the Daily Caller in a statement that his priority on securing the nation’s southern border helped him secure the support of the former president.

“My opponent, House Speaker Dade Phelan, was the only Republican in the Texas Legislature not to vote for SB4. His lack of leadership on border security is one of the many reasons why former President Donald Trump endorsed me in the race for Texas House District 21. Securing the border and protecting Texas families is my number one priority,” Covey told the Daily Caller.

Texas’ State Bill four [SB4] would allow local police to arrest migrants who cross into the state illegally. The law has been the subject of a lengthy legal battle. The Supreme Court recently made the decision to allow the local police to move forward with arresting migrants who cross into the state illegally.

Immigration is at the top of Americans’ priorities heading into the 2024 election while “government” and “economy in general” take second and third place, according to a February Gallup poll. And while Americans keep immigration and economy at the top of their concerns, a majority disapprove of how the president has handled those very issues.

Sixty-nine percent of Americans disapprove of how Biden has handled immigration while 68 percent disapprove of how the president has addressed inflation, a December Monmouth University poll shows.

“The Biden administration keeps touting their infrastructure investments and a host of positive economic indicators,” Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute, previously said in a press release coupled with the poll. “Those data points may be factual, but most Americans are still smarting from higher prices caused by post-pandemic inflation. This seems to be what’s driving public opinion. There is political danger in pushing a message that basically tells people their take on their own situation is wrong.”

In addition to Biden’s low polling, the former president’s team is confident that is “America First” messaging will help propel Trump to victory in November.

“Americans are suffering from the failed policies of Crooked Joe Biden, and congressional Democrats are stifling Republicans’ attempts to deliver relief through legislation like the Lower Energy Costs Act and Secure the Border Act. Voters are ready for a change, and President Trump’s America First message will bring a rising tide that will lift all boats this November,” Trump campaign spokeswoman Danielle Alvarez told the Daily Caller.

Despite optimism from some on the right and from the former president’s supporters, some continue to hold their breath.

“With respect to the campaign for president, if the election were held tomorrow morning, Mr. Trump would probably win. Please keep in mind that, as we have noted before, the race will be very close (likely decided by fewer than 500,000 votes spread across seven States and, if you like specificity, about 40 counties in those seven States),” Mike McKenna, a former Trump advisor and longtime Republican operative, wrote in a memo provided to the Daily Caller.

“The race will also be volatile. So, it is entirely possible that a month from now or six months from now, Mr. Biden may have the upper hand,” McKenna added.

AUTHOR

REAGAN REESE

White House correspondent. Follow Reagan on Twitter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Sees No Polling Boost Whatsoever From State Of The Union

‘They Are Miles Ahead’: Despite ‘Election Integrity’ Hype, GOP Could Be Walking Into 2024 Legal Buzzsaw

POST ON X:

TRUMP: “They can’t win an election because of the borders, because of energy prices, inflation, because of Afghanistan..So, what they do is election interference.” pic.twitter.com/IDznwONiJx

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) March 25, 2024

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

SCOTUS Confirmed in 2019 that the ‘Excessive Fines Clause’ of the 8th Amendment Applies to States—Ruling Could Nullify Trump Fines? thumbnail

SCOTUS Confirmed in 2019 that the ‘Excessive Fines Clause’ of the 8th Amendment Applies to States—Ruling Could Nullify Trump Fines?

By Dr. Rich Swier

On February 26, 2024 Arjun Singh from the  reported,

Former President Donald Trump has appealed a verdict by the New York Supreme Court that found him guilty of civil fraud and fined hundreds of millions of dollars.

Trump, the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, was ordered to pay the State of New York approximately $355 million on Feb. 16, a figure that was revised to $454 million, according to Democratic Attorney General Letitia James of New York, whose office sued Trump in the case. On Monday, Trump filed a notice of appeal with the New York Supreme Court’s Appellate Division, seeking to overturn the verdict.

On March 25, 2024 Katelynn Richardson from  reported,

An appeals court agreed Monday to reduce Trump’s civil fraud case bond while he appeals the ruling.

If Trump is able to put up the $175 million bond within 10 days, the court agreed to block collection of the judgement, according to the Associated Press. Trump initially faced a Monday deadline to pay the $454 million bond to cover the judgement issued by Judge Arthur Engoron.

In a February 20, 2019  National Constitution Center column titled “Supreme Court confirms Excessive Fines Clause applies to states” Scott Bomboy reported,

In a unanimous ruling on Tuesday, the Supreme Court overturned an Indiana Supreme Court decision that said that part of federal Constitution’s Eighth Amendment didn’t apply to the states.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the main opinion for the Court in Timbs v. Indiana, which was argued last November.

Link: Read The Decision

“The Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the States under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause,” Ginsburg said. Justice Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch agreed with the main ruling, but they said the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause was the controlling factor in the case.

Tyson Timbs filed the lawsuit after he was convicted in a controlled substance and theft case. The state of Indiana wanted to seize Timbs’ Land Rover under its civil forfeiture laws, arguing it was used to commit a crime. But the Land Rover was valued at $42,000, much more than the $10,000 fine allowed under his drug conviction.

Timbs’ attorneys argued Indiana’s actions violated the Excessive Fines Clause in the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment. After Timbs won his first legal battle, the Indiana Supreme Court said  the Excessive Fines Clause didn’t apply to individual states when they acted. Timbs’ appeal to the United States Supreme Court was only about the incorporation of the Excessive Fines Clause at the state level, and not its application to civil forfeiture cases.

“The historical and logical case for concluding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Excessive Fines Clause is indeed overwhelming,” Ginsburg said. She also didn’t agree with Indiana’s argument that the nature of the case as a civil forfeiture mattered. “The Excessive Fines Clause is thus incorporated regardless of whether application of the Clause to civil in rem forfeitures is itself fundamental or deeply rooted,” she concluded.

Justice Gorsuch believed the question really involved a different part of the 14th Amendment. “As an original matter, I acknowledge, the appropriate vehicle for incorporation may well be the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, rather than, as this Court has long assumed, the Due Process Clause,” he said. Justice Thomas had similar thoughts. “I would hold that the right to be free from excessive fines is one of the ‘privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States’ protected by the Fourteenth Amendment,” he wrote.

Does this SCOTUS decision allow President Donald J. Trump to appeal the $175 million bond to the Supreme Court?

We shall see what happens if he does.

©2024. All rights reserved.

WATCH: Hostage Families Raise Awareness at Jerusalem Purim Parade as Oct. 7th survivors harassed by UK airport staff thumbnail

WATCH: Hostage Families Raise Awareness at Jerusalem Purim Parade as Oct. 7th survivors harassed by UK airport staff

By NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

Although Purim is a holiday associated with joy, this year, the occasion was shrouded in solemnity as 134 Israeli hostages are still held in Gaza.

Before the war, Jerusalem planned to have its first Purim parade in 42 years.

After October 7th, parade planners decided to go ahead with the event, but to give special emphasis to hostage families raising awareness about Israeli captives.

WATCH: Hostage Families Raise Awareness at Jerusalem Purim Parade

Report: Oct. 7th survivors harassed by UK airport staff

“This is another shocking incident where UK government employees target Jews and discriminate against them because they oppose Israel’s actions in defending itself in Gaza,” says local Jewish leader

Two Israeli brothers who survived the Oct. 7th Nova Festival massacre were reportedly harassed by staff at a British airport, who told the men they needed additional screening to ensure they wouldn’t “do what they’re doing in Gaza” in the UK.

Border Force officers immediately began harassing the men after they produced Israeli passports upon landing in Manchester Airport, according to a letter about the incident from the watchdog group Jewish Representative Council of Greater Manchester and Region (JRCGM).

The pair explained to the officers that they had traveled to the UK to speak about their personal story of survival during the massacre, and had been invited by a non-profit organization raising money for October 7th survivors.

They were then detained and questioned, with their entry to the UK delayed by more than two hours.

When asked why they were subject to such strict screening, the officers replied that they “had to make sure that you are not going to do what you are doing in Gaza over here.”

In a video which captured part of the incident, the officers are seen speaking in an “aggressive, unnecessary and demeaning tone” towards the Israelis, the JRCGM wrote.

Officers can be heard scolding the brothers, telling them to “keep quiet, look at me, are you clear with that? We are the bosses, not you” in the clip.

“This is another shocking incident where UK government employees target Jews and discriminate against them because they oppose Israel’s actions in defending itself in Gaza,” said North West Friends of Israel co-chair Raphi Bloom in a media statement.

“In this case it was a border control officer and last week it was nurses at one of Manchester’s largest hospital. Jews are increasingly scared to identify themselves in public places.

“The UK government has promised to act on extremism and Jew hate but so far these are empty words. These civil servants needs to be sacked and the police investigate them for antisemitism immediately.”

Home Secretary James Cleverly posted on his X account that the incident would be investigated.

REPORT: Female hostage was kept as domestic slave

Nineteen-year-old Liri Albag cleaned houses and subsisted on food scraps.

At least one Israeli hostage was kept as a domestic slave rather than being thrown immediately into a Hamas tunnel in the Gaza Strip on October 7, the Daily Mail reported Monday.

Nineteen-year-old Liri Albag was forcibly taken from her kibbutz, Nahal Oz, when some 3,000 terrorists invaded some two dozen agricultural villages, towns, and a dance rave, brutally murdered 1,200 and kidnapped 253 people, sparking the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.

Her family has not seen or heard from her since, they told the British daily in an interview.

They did reveal for the first time that some of the 86 Israeli hostages who were released in November in exchange for a week-long ceasefire and over 240 Palestinian security prisoners had told them that they had seen and talked to her.

They told the Albags that Liri had been forced to clean toilets for a family and cook food that she was forbidden to eat. She subsisted on scraps, and was permitted to take her first shower only after 37 days.

She was not alone, at least for the first few days. The family had also held four other teens from the kibbutz – Naama Levy, Daniela Gilboa, Karina Ariev and Agam Berger.

The family received confirmation from the army, Albag’s mother, Shira, said, as soldiers had found the room in which they had been imprisoned. They found traces of blood in the room and identified the young women through their DNA.

The IDF released a photo of the room to the Daily Mail, and Shira’s reaction had first been a positive one.

“At first when I saw it, I was happy because she was in a child’s room,” Shira said. “There were kids’ clothes in the cupboard and it gave me a little relief that she wasn’t in a scary place.”

“But then,” she continued, “I understood that she is with a family – they kidnapped her, not Hamas. It’s the equivalent of me keeping someone else’s children locked in my house.”

Over a thousand civilians followed the Hamas fighters into Israel on October 7 in a second wave of murdering, kidnapping and pillaging the border communities.

The released women saw Albag only after she had been transferred to their location, and if her conditions were bad in the civilian home, they only got worse under direct Hamas control.

“She was in a tunnel at that time, 40 meters under the ground, with no air, sunlight, a lot of humidity, no toilet, no water,” Shira noted. “She was drinking salt water from the sea and not much food. That was 112 days ago. From then, we have heard nothing.”

The interview took place on the holiday of Purim, which celebrates the miraculous rescue some 2,000 years ago of the Jewish people from a Persian vizier who had wanted to eradicate the nation from the half of the world that his king controlled.

Almog’s sister, Shay, said that history was trying to repeat itself.

“It is the same today,” she said. “Hamas wanted to kill us all on October 7.”

The family is hoping against hope that the latest hostage negotiations will bear fruit and they will be able to greet Liri at home in their personal, post- Purim miracle.

RELATED ARTICLE: A U.S.—UN Betrayal of Israel

EDITORS NOTE: These Newsrael columns are republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Charlie and the Social Justice Factory: Is Harvard right to teach chocolate is racist? thumbnail

Charlie and the Social Justice Factory: Is Harvard right to teach chocolate is racist?

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

If you’re white and you buy your children chocolate eggs to eat this Easter, aren’t you training them to become infant white supremacists? This question is so incredibly stupid that it could only be posed by someone with a PhD.

Sad to say, even chocolate has now been tarred with the brush of “white supremacism” – at least according to the Harvard African and African-American Studies (AAAS) module E119, “Chocolate, Culture and the Politics of Food”. This subject at Harvard Extension School, a continuing education division at the University, now appears to have been discontinued. But its legacy lives on in high-school lesson plans.

Looking up the course’s content online, it would appear to be entirely free of any known nutrients, intellectually speaking. Particularly notable is the warning to students with chocolate allergies that the course does involve eating chocolate, especially in “Unit 4: Eating Chocolate”.

As useful as a chocolate teapot

How can chocolate be racist? You would have to ask Carla D. Martin, PhD, the designer of the course in question, founder of the Fine Cacao and Chocolate Institute, which bills itself as “a scholar-led research organisation that seeks to reduce information asymmetry in the cacao and chocolate value chain.” What does this actually mean? Having spent some time looking through their extensive website, I’m none the wiser.

I suppose this is why I never managed to get into Harvard.

A “social anthropologist with interdisciplinary interests that include history, agronomy, ethnomusicology, linguistics” and saying silly things about chocolate, which she does at length on her Bittersweet Notes blog, Martin is an academic specialising in the vital field of chocolate politics. Operating both as an “open enrolment class” for info-hungry members of the general public, and as a module for full-time students, her E119 course would set scholars back between $1,250 and $2,200 in course fees.

That’s an awful lot of chocolate coins to spend. Nonetheless, Martin says, the module proved highly popular, as “the course does not involve any traditional written papers or exams”, and instead allowed students to pass simply by turning up, taking part in quizzes, talking about chocolate with “a phenomenal team of graduate student teaching fellows … [with] expertise in Haitian Vodou, the American prison system [hopefully not actual convicted criminals?], the history of Islam, and medieval European food culture” and then producing blog posts and a “multimedia presentation”, involving things like drawing posters or imaginary new anti-racist advertising campaigns for chocolate bars.

For a certificate from Harvard.

Chocolate fountains of knowledge

What, precisely, would you be getting for your money? Well, if you head over to a special website, Chocolate Class, you can find numerous blog posts and multimedia presentations from Professor Martin’s students.

One essay, “European Appropriation of Chocolate“, condemns “Christopher Columbus, the founder of chocolate”. The Aztecs used cacao beans in their religious ceremonies and white men appropriated this ancient foodstuff for their own nefarious colonial ends. It is “only those with power who get to write history” and this fact applied to chocolate as much as to everything else.

Another student organised a chocolate-tasting for fellow students and asked them to criticise brands upon weird identitarian lines, as shown by his or her valuable account, “Exploring Cultural Appropriation Through a Chocolate Tasting”, which features sentences like the following: “When prompted to comment on the fact that the Spicy Mayans [brand of] chocolates were not, in fact, made by Mayans, a chorus of ‘UGH!’ ensued.” How could they have been made by the Mayans? Their civilisation has been extinct for centuries. It’s like complaining Arctic Roll isn’t made by actual Eskimos.

Another blog post, “Misogynoir and Cocoa Throughout History”, uses the ultra-obscure 1976 comment of a random magazine editor that the black supermodel Iman resembled “a white woman dipped in chocolate” to condemn white Western capitalism wholesale on the grounds that “This association of a person with an edible object further solidifies the idea that black people are false commodities.” Meaning what, exactly? Another post, “The Consumption of Black Bodies as Chocolate“, explains:

“When we look at the history of chocolate production, we are looking at a history of African slave labor. Between 10 and 15 million slaves were stolen from Africa and brought to work in various farms and plantations that manufactured cacao … and sugar … [This] has led to the fetishization and fantasy of black bodies as representing the products that they create … In a sense, the black body has been so ‘delicious’ for whiteness to consume that it has become a deeply embedded aspect of our culture, because its consumption has been associated with the sweetness of sugar and chocolate and not the bitter truth of slave labor … Look at … the hyper-policing, monitoring, and brutalization of black youth by police. These are all current manifestations of the notion that black bodies are meant to be owned, controlled, exploited, and consumed, just like the association between chocolate and blackness … Black people are not made of chocolate, but chocolate is made of black people, in the sense that it has been historically created through their oppression and forced labor.”

According to the student, there is a tradition in Belgium of selling severed chocolate hands, which represent the right hands of Congolese slaves chopped off by their Belgian colonial overlords in the late 1800s. Horrific, if true … but it isn’t. The Belgians did chop off black slaves’ hands, but the link with the cookies is an urban myth. They actually nod back to a legend about the founding of Antwerp.

Chocolate spread of discord

Possibly the most interesting item on the website is a lesson plan for high school students. This aims to help children “to understand race and racism through the lens of chocolate”.

But how?

There is a disease called “colourblind racism”, which seeks to treat people of all skin-colours just the same, but this is wrong. People are not all the same, white people are all evil, and black and brown people are all brilliant, without any single exceptions, not even Idi Amin or Emperor Bokassa. Thank God, therefore, that Carla D. Martin discovered “how chocolate can be used as a salient pedagogical tool for constructing anti-racist knowledge not only at the university level, but for all learners, especially those who are white and middle-class.”

The best way to do this, apparently, is to make children spend THREE WHOLE DAYS watching racially “offensive” clips from one of the film versions of Roald Dahl’s classic kids’ novel Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, before asking them, “Who Is Willy, Really? The Racist Origins of the Chocolate Factory”.

Slaves to their own appetites

Willy is really just an avatar of Nazi death-camp doctor Josef Mengele: “he also performed unethical experiments on them at his own leisure, such as turning them into blueberries. This treatment reflects the real violent ways that enslaved Black and Brown people have been treated by Europeans and the United States in the production of chocolate both historically and even in many ways in today’s world.”

Even worse is the way Herr Wonka transported his Oompa-slaves across to his English factory/death-camp in the first place. According to Dahl’s original account, the imperialist fiend “shipped them over here, every man, woman, and child in the Oompa-Loompa tribe. It was easy. I smuggled them over in large packing cases with holes in them, and they all got here safely.” Supposedly, this reflected the way real black slaves were once transported across to America during the days of the Middle Passage. Granted, this stuff may seem unlikely to the likes of you or me – but it must be true. After all, it’s being taught at Harvard, the world’s most prestigious university.

Do you think teachers waste their time delivering pathetic nonsense like this in China? Possibly not, but, the Harvard-born lesson plans reassure readers, once the children have learned to condemn Willy Wonka as a neo-Nazi, they will go out and begin “creating a community action project to address an issue of racial inequality in their community in partnership with a local chocolate shop/producer”, thereby remaking their society into one every bit as Communistic in its nature as President Xi’s own currently is.

And, to reinforce the learning experience further, obedient kids who have absorbed the correct lessons will be tossed a few chocolate buttons as a small reward (but only “ethically-sourced” ones – i.e., not manufactured by Ooompa Loompas in a sweatshop).

Isn’t that how we used to train dogs?

Happy Easter, Comrades!


What is your favourite chocolate? Should you feel guilty when eating it? Tell us in the comments box below.  


AUTHOR

STEVEN TUCKER

Steven Tucker is a UK-based writer with over ten books to his name. His next, Hitler’s & Stalin’s Misuse of Science, comparing the woke pseudoscience of today to the totalitarian pseudoscience of the past, will be published in summer 2023.

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

Elon Musk Ignites Birth Control Conversation On X thumbnail

Elon Musk Ignites Birth Control Conversation On X

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

Fat and sick: that’s what Elon Musk, the billionaire founder of Tesla and SpaceX, says birth control will make you.

The X owner has made waves over the past few weeks with his comments on his social media platform concerning the harms of hormonal birth control.

It all started on January 30, when conservative commentator Ashley St. Clair tweeted:

“Doctors hardly, if ever, advise women that it may be their birth control making them depressed or even suicidal, despite documented risk of both on the pill. Instead, doctors prescribe an anti-depressant and tell them this pharmaceutical cocktail will solve their problems.”

Her tweet captured the attention of Musk, who replied:

“Wow, I just searched medical research papers and it turns out that birth control meds triple the risk of suicide!! I never heard that before you posted.”

Of course, Natural Womanhood has been reporting on hormonal birth control’s ability to increase a user’s risk for depression and suicide for the better part of a decade; 2016, after all, is the year a landmark Danish study found a significant correlation between women who had been prescribed hormonal birth control and were later prescribed an antidepressant.

While many still downplay the risk of depression with hormonal birth control use, the fact remains that we’ve had astonishingly good evidence of the brain-altering effects of hormonal birth control for many years now. But St. Clair’s viral tweet seemed to cause something of a revelation for Musk, who, on February 16, made his own tweet about the dangers of hormonal contraceptives:

“Hormonal birth control makes you fat, doubles risk of depression & triples risk of suicide. This is the clear scientific consensus, but very few people seem to know it.”

Musk’s tweet has since gone viral, with thousands of comments from others weighing in with their own negative experiences on birth control, including many additional harms Musk missed, including cervical cancerpseudotumor cerebri, and the way it alters women’s attraction to men.

Hormonal birth control makes you fat, doubles risk of depression & triples risk of suicide.

This is the clear scientific consensus, but very few people seem to know it.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 16, 2024

Right on cue, however, mainstream media sources have been quick to call Musk’s comments “misleading,” “divisive,” and have even warned that women “shouldn’t look to Musk’s tweet as a source of credible information because there’s a lot he got wrong.

While I agreed in my own comments to Our Sunday Visitor that Musk’s tweets needed contextualizing (as did other fertility awareness advocates and experts like FACT’s Dr. Marguerite Duane, and Anna Halpine, CEO of FEMM), there’s no doubt given the significant amount of data we have concerning the risks and side effects of hormonal birth control that the gist of Musk’s tweets–namely, that these drugs carry significant risks to the health and well-being of girls and women everywhere–are painfully, obviously true.

In fact, in our own comments on Musk’s tweets, Natural Womanhood pointed out that hormonal birth control use also has an association with the development of certain autoimmune disorders, such as Crohn’sMultiple Sclerosis (MS), and Lupus, and why, exactly, the Pill might cause some women to gain weight. As part of a group that published a comprehensive petition to the FDA on the harms of hormonal birth control, Natural Womanhood has long been at the forefront of informing as many women as possible about the sinister realities of these so-called “empowering” drugs and devices.

As more women share their stories about the negative realities of hormonal birth control, the facade around the drug’s safety continues to crumble. While women have been gaslighted for generations that the Pill’s negative effects are “in their head” or that “the Pill doesn’t do that,” Musk’s tweet (and the huge response to it) proves otherwise.

Now imagine if we could just get Elon’s attention on the benefits of fertility awareness as a healthy, effective alternative to hormonal birth control–and all the important reasons why women need to ovulate and have periods, which birth control suppresses.

This article has been republished from Natural Womanhood with permission. Want more of Natural Womanhood’s take on birth control in the news? Be sure to follow them on X @naturwomanhood

AUTHOR

GRACE EMILY STARK

Grace Emily Stark, M.A., is the Editor-in-Chief and Public Relations manager at Natural Womanhood. Grace holds a M.A. in Bioethics & Health Policy from Loyola University Chicago and a B.S. in Healthcare Management & Policy from Georgetown University. She is an alumna of both the Paul Ramsey Institute Fellowship and the Robert Novak Journalism Fellowship, and together with her husband, is a certified Sympto-Thermal Method Teaching Couple for the Couple to Couple League. When she isn’t writing or cleaning up after her four small children, Grace loves to relax by baking and hosting barbecues with her husband.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The pro-family power couple and their out-of-the-box approach to population decline

A life worth living: one family embraces four children with Down syndrome

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

Biden’s Top Intel Agency Prohibits Terms Such as ‘Jihadist’ and ‘Radical Islamists’ As Jihadist Terrorists Pour Across the Border in Biden’s Invasion thumbnail

Biden’s Top Intel Agency Prohibits Terms Such as ‘Jihadist’ and ‘Radical Islamists’ As Jihadist Terrorists Pour Across the Border in Biden’s Invasion

By The Geller Report

Sharia as US policy. Under Islamic law, it is prohibited to criticize or insult Islam.

A jihad terror attack is coming.

The  Biden regime’s concern is not the protection and the defense of the American people, it’s protecting  the most brutal ideology on the face of the earth.

Kurt Schlichter writes,

“It happened in Israel, and it happened in Moscow, and it’s going to happen here in America – again, and exponentially worse. The jihadis’ merciless war against the West – the Muslim fanatics are not so finicky as we are about our distinctions between the Jewish state, Russia, and us, the Great Satan – did not end when the regime media started covering other things. We may have fled Afghanistan and Libya and largely pulled out of Iraq, but that war is still going on. It’s going to go on until we decisively win it. But unfortunately, our ruling class refuses to decisively win it. In fact, our ruling class actively undermines attempts to win it. And it refuses to prepare for what’s coming.

Our ruling class refuses to acknowledge this and refuses to act. Instead, it actively subverts attempts to stop the jihad. It won’t shut our border. It opposes Israel’s plan to go in to the last infestation of Hamas and blow up its tunnel complexes. It won’t work effectively with the Russians to fight jihadis even though we share that enemy despite our other conflicts…… 

Read more.

Top intel agency’s DEI newsletter states that terms such as ‘Jihadist’ and ‘Radical Islamists’ must be avoided

By Spencer Lindquist • Mar 21, 2024, DailyWire.com:

The below story is the second part of a series on the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s DEI newsletter, “The Dive.” You can read part one, “Biden’s Top Intelligence Agency Says Crossdressing Makes Man ‘Better Intelligence Officer,’ Internal Docs Show,” here.

An internal newsletter sent by diversity, equity, and inclusion officials in the Biden administration’s top intelligence agency warns personnel not to use “problematic phrases” when discussing Islamic terrorism and foreign adversaries such as China, an internal document obtained by The Daily Wire reveals.

The unclassified newsletter from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, called “The Dive” and exclusively obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by The Daily Wire, argues in its cover story that the intelligence community needs to focus on “changing terminology related to counterterrorism,” because “words matter.”

“This article is about one of our goals: disentangling Islam from words and phrases used to discuss terrorism and extremist violence,” writes the author of the article, whose name was redacted from the document released to The Daily Wire. The article declares that it’s trying to remove “certain phrases to identify international terrorism threats that are hurtful to Muslim-Americans.”

“Some of the problematic phrases include, but are not limited to: ‘Salafi-Jihadist,’ ‘Jihadist,’ ‘Islamic-Extremist,’ ‘Sunni/Shia-Extremism,’ and ‘Radical Islamists.’”

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

U.S. Experiencing Massive Border Breach From Canada By Illegal Aliens From 66 Different Countries [Videos]

Hezb’allah Terrorist Captured at Texas Border Planned to Bomb New York City

Border Patrol Has Nabbed More Watch listed Terrorists In Last Four Months Than In Previous Years Combined

Release the October 7th Video

There Are Now Tens of Millions of Muslim Migrants in Europe, and the EU Commissioner Wants More

POST ON X:

Gallant in the US: Israel has no moral right to stop the war in Gaza pic.twitter.com/2UAMCHqKLs

— Mossad Commentary (@MOSSADil) March 25, 2024

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

Migration Is Invasion thumbnail

Migration Is Invasion

By Adam Ellwanger

As the situation at the Texas/Mexico border continues to deteriorate, the premise of federalism is being tested in ways not seen in more than a century. The Biden Administration has openly refused any real effort to slow illegal entries, while as many as 13 million foreigners have crossed illegally since his inauguration. It took Texas longer than it should have to grasp that they were actually working to facilitate illegal entries. Eventually, though, Governor Greg Abbott recognized that the Lone Star State would have to act alone against Biden’s open border policy. After he implemented aggressive actions to stop the flow, the feds went to extraordinary measures to ensure that the border would remain open, cutting razor wire placed along the Rio Grande and doggedly fighting Abbott’s policies in federal court.

A major escalation occurred when the governor formally declared the situation an “invasion.” Predictably, Democrats howled at the use of a term with such rhetorical force. But if “invasion” is a faithful characterization of what is happening, then we have an obligation to call it that. And if there is an invasion at the southern border, then it must be stopped by all means—whether by federal intervention or in defiance of it.

What exactly constitutes an “invasion”? What are the characteristics that have defined invasions throughout human history? I propose that there are five. The first is that an invasion is something that the inhabitants of the nation being invaded never requested or invited. Second, invading forces are comprised predominantly of military-aged men. Third, invaders are primarily motivated by self-interest. Fourth, invaders carry the insignia of their home nations with them. And, finally, an invasion must pose a genuine threat to the existing social order of the place being invaded. With these criteria in mind, let’s examine the situation at our southern border.

Who Invited You?

The first characteristic of an invasion is that the people being invaded didn’t ask for the invaders to come. The influx of Europeans to the Americas in the sixteenth century serves as a prime example. Not all of the Europeans who made the trek across the Atlantic saw conquest as the purpose of their journey. The Puritans, for example, meant only to create a habitable environment for a life of religious observance apart from the repressive order they left in England. The Spanish conquistadors, on the other hand, set out to conquer and subdue the peoples they encountered in the Americas. But regardless of their intentions, neither the Puritans nor the conquistadors were invited by the indigenous tribes of those lands.

In the same way, there has been no formal invitation for the people of Central and South America to pass through our southern border illegally. America does, in fact, invite immigrantsbut it requires that they apply to do so. Advocates of unlimited immigration may argue that the United States has invited the millions who are crossing illegally. Only 40 years ago, we rewarded illegal immigrants with a mass amnesty and citizenship. Today, we allow illegal immigrants to attend our public schools (often at “in-state” tuition rates reserved for citizens); we give them driver’s licenses, welfare, and medical care. Are these benefits not an invitation? Nothese are incentives, which are not the same thing.

These incentives are often extended by individual states in defiance of federal law. Chicago, New York City, and other “sanctuary cities” have declared that they will not enforce federal immigration law (though they claim it’s only to protect the illegal immigrants who have already arrived). It’s plain that these cities never intended their policy to be taken as an invitation: simply look at their outrage and complaints after states like Florida and Texas began sending them illegal immigrants.

If there’s no invitation, you’ve got an invasion.

Where Are the Women and Children?

Anyone who views photographs of the many caravans moving into Eagle Pass will immediately see that the vast majority are men—almost exclusively men between the ages of 18 and 50. Whatever women and children there are, they are outnumbered by military-aged males. This disproportionality shows that the many requests for asylum are disingenuous. When the Trump Administration began screening to determine that family groups arriving were indeed family, we learned that women and children are often used as props by unrelated men who might otherwise be rejected for asylum. The overrepresentation of men suggests these people are not refugees. If they were fleeing from war, wouldn’t the military-aged men be at home fighting? Wouldn’t the caravans be comprised mostly of women and children?

Of course, the men are (probably) not planning a military assault on Dallas or Tampa, but planned military operations are not a prerequisite for a mass migration of people to be considered an invasion. If people migrate in sufficient numbers, they may not need to attack in order to conquer the region in question. At a certain point, there are too many individuals to deport: the nation being invaded has no choice but to (attempt to) integrate the newcomers.

With or without military activity, all historical invasions have consisted overwhelmingly of men in the initial stage. Indisputably, this is what is unfolding at America’s southern border.

What Are They After?

Today’s illegal immigrants undertake a treacherous journey—and they don’t do it because they want to help American citizens. They cross the desert because they believe it will benefit them personally. We constantly hear that they are “in search of a better life.” This refrain quietly concedes that the immigrants are seeking economic advantages. They may not get rich. But they will, in all likelihood, attain a level of wealth (and various social benefits) that would have been all but impossible in their countries of origin.

Regardless of their nationality, the people in the caravans are united by one characteristic: like all invading forces, they’re motivated by self-interest.

Which Flag Do They Fly?

Just as warships or fighter jets are marked with the insignia of the nation to which they belong, all invading forces bring with them the signifiers of their home. In past eras with high immigration, newcomers to the United States willingly gave up the language of their former homes. Germans, Italians, and Poles often fully transitioned to speaking English within a generation.

In contrast, the immigrants flooding over our southern border often resist assimilation—and are encouraged to do so. There are people who have been in the United States illegally for decades who still know almost no English. These people often live a life apart from the nation at large, congregating in particular neighborhoods in our major cities. But their attempts to hold onto their language and the norms of the homes they left are not the only indications they are invaders.

Who can ignore the fact that the people leading the caravans carry the flags of their homeland? Flags from Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico, and El Salvador are all on display in media images of the new arrivals. This affinity remains once they are in the United States. When the U.S. soccer team plays Mexico in California, it amounts to a home game for the Mexican team. Given a choice between the nation they left and the nation they chose instead, many “Mexican-Americans” choose to cheer for Mexico rather than America. Drive around a city with a high immigrant population like Houston, Los Angeles, or Orlando and you will see a surprising number of cars with stickers that pay homage to the home they abandoned: Mexican flags, geographical outlines of central American nations, and the like.

This resistance to assimilation—a resistance that is indulged and enabled by both public and private institutions—is a key sign that the people arriving illegally are invaders. For many, the aim isn’t to become Americans: it is to exploit the opportunities that America affords, and then to send the money earned to their families who still live back in their (true) home.

A New America?

All invasions change the way of life in the region they invade. The European invasion of the Americas completely transformed the Western hemisphere. A century after England renounced its claim to India, the signs of its invasion are still seen throughout Indian society.

The idea of the “melting pot”—an American metaphor for cultural assimilation in which the many peoples who come here become one—is now seen as a form of cultural chauvinism. Since the nineties, the dominant metaphor has been the “salad bowl,” where all the different peoples who inhabit the United States retain their various identities despite living in close geographical proximity to one another. The people who insist that “diversity is our strength” are often the same ones who assure us that mass immigration will have no discernible effect on American society.

How many more Central Americans—many of whom will not be readily assimilated—can we add to the bowl before it becomes a different sort of salad? A million? Ten million? Twenty? None of the proponents of unfettered immigration will even entertain the idea that there might be a tipping point, but there are signs that we are quickly approaching it. The recent arrival of relatively insignificant numbers of illegal immigrants in New York City and Chicago have been enough to spark housing crises, budgetary strain, and a rash of public violence that is (somehow) worse than the already-demoralizing norm.

Many who cross illegally leave their home nations because they are poor. Even when working illegally in the U.S., many still fall below the poverty line, so they are often dependent on the welfare state. In these situations, housing, food, health care, and court costs are all paid by the state, which is to say “taxpayers.”

Whether or not illegal immigrants intend to change America, they are. How much life in the nation will change depends on how long citizens tolerate the crisis. But the American way of life is already being transformed, and this shows that it amounts to an invasion.

Where There’s a Will, There’s a Way

It’s true that invasion is a strong word. But by any historically-informed perspective, it is the right word. Shying away from it amounts to a refusal to acknowledge the gravity of the problem. In the face of a world-historical tide of illegal migration, any term other than invasion is just a strategy that allows one to look away from the humanitarian catastrophe happening at the border and along the way. It’s a failure of courage—a feigned blindness that deliberately ignores the onerous ramifications that the crisis has for our own citizens and the safety of those who attempt the dangerous journey to America.

If we have any prospects of thwarting the invasion—indeed, if we are even to discover the will to do so—we and our leaders need to find the strength to admit it is happening.

*****

This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Illegal Migration Is Invasion thumbnail

Illegal Migration Is Invasion

By Adam Ellwanger

As the situation at the Texas/Mexico border continues to deteriorate, the premise of federalism is being tested in ways not seen in more than a century. The Biden Administration has openly refused any real effort to slow illegal entries, while as many as 13 million foreigners have crossed illegally since his inauguration. It took Texas longer than it should have to grasp that they were actually working to facilitate illegal entries. Eventually, though, Governor Greg Abbott recognized that the Lone Star State would have to act alone against Biden’s open border policy. After he implemented aggressive actions to stop the flow, the feds went to extraordinary measures to ensure that the border would remain open, cutting razor wire placed along the Rio Grande and doggedly fighting Abbott’s policies in federal court.

A major escalation occurred when the governor formally declared the situation an “invasion.” Predictably, Democrats howled at the use of a term with such rhetorical force. But if “invasion” is a faithful characterization of what is happening, then we have an obligation to call it that. And if there is an invasion at the southern border, then it must be stopped by all means—whether by federal intervention or in defiance of it.

What exactly constitutes an “invasion”? What are the characteristics that have defined invasions throughout human history? I propose that there are five. The first is that an invasion is something that the inhabitants of the nation being invaded never requested or invited. Second, invading forces are comprised predominantly of military-aged men. Third, invaders are primarily motivated by self-interest. Fourth, invaders carry the insignia of their home nations with them. And, finally, an invasion must pose a genuine threat to the existing social order of the place being invaded. With these criteria in mind, let’s examine the situation at our southern border.

Who Invited You?

The first characteristic of an invasion is that the people being invaded didn’t ask for the invaders to come. The influx of Europeans to the Americas in the sixteenth century serves as a prime example. Not all of the Europeans who made the trek across the Atlantic saw conquest as the purpose of their journey. The Puritans, for example, meant only to create a habitable environment for a life of religious observance apart from the repressive order they left in England. The Spanish conquistadors, on the other hand, set out to conquer and subdue the peoples they encountered in the Americas. But regardless of their intentions, neither the Puritans nor the conquistadors were invited by the indigenous tribes of those lands.

In the same way, there has been no formal invitation for the people of Central and South America to pass through our southern border illegally. America does, in fact, invite immigrantsbut it requires that they apply to do so. Advocates of unlimited immigration may argue that the United States has invited the millions who are crossing illegally. Only 40 years ago, we rewarded illegal immigrants with a mass amnesty and citizenship. Today, we allow illegal immigrants to attend our public schools (often at “in-state” tuition rates reserved for citizens); we give them driver’s licenses, welfare, and medical care. Are these benefits not an invitation? Nothese are incentives, which are not the same thing.

These incentives are often extended by individual states in defiance of federal law. Chicago, New York City, and other “sanctuary cities” have declared that they will not enforce federal immigration law (though they claim it’s only to protect the illegal immigrants who have already arrived). It’s plain that these cities never intended their policy to be taken as an invitation: simply look at their outrage and complaints after states like Florida and Texas began sending them illegal immigrants.

If there’s no invitation, you’ve got an invasion.

Where Are the Women and Children?

Anyone who views photographs of the many caravans moving into Eagle Pass will immediately see that the vast majority are men—almost exclusively men between the ages of 18 and 50. Whatever women and children there are, they are outnumbered by military-aged males. This disproportionality shows that the many requests for asylum are disingenuous. When the Trump Administration began screening to determine that family groups arriving were indeed family, we learned that women and children are often used as props by unrelated men who might otherwise be rejected for asylum. The overrepresentation of men suggests these people are not refugees. If they were fleeing from war, wouldn’t the military-aged men be at home fighting? Wouldn’t the caravans be comprised mostly of women and children?

Of course, the men are (probably) not planning a military assault on Dallas or Tampa, but planned military operations are not a prerequisite for a mass migration of people to be considered an invasion. If people migrate in sufficient numbers, they may not need to attack in order to conquer the region in question. At a certain point, there are too many individuals to deport: the nation being invaded has no choice but to (attempt to) integrate the newcomers.

With or without military activity, all historical invasions have consisted overwhelmingly of men in the initial stage. Indisputably, this is what is unfolding at America’s southern border.

What Are They After?

Today’s illegal immigrants undertake a treacherous journey—and they don’t do it because they want to help American citizens. They cross the desert because they believe it will benefit them personally. We constantly hear that they are “in search of a better life.” This refrain quietly concedes that the immigrants are seeking economic advantages. They may not get rich. But they will, in all likelihood, attain a level of wealth (and various social benefits) that would have been all but impossible in their countries of origin.

Regardless of their nationality, the people in the caravans are united by one characteristic: like all invading forces, they’re motivated by self-interest.

Which Flag Do They Fly?

Just as warships or fighter jets are marked with the insignia of the nation to which they belong, all invading forces bring with them the signifiers of their home. In past eras with high immigration, newcomers to the United States willingly gave up the language of their former homes. Germans, Italians, and Poles often fully transitioned to speaking English within a generation.

In contrast, the immigrants flooding over our southern border often resist assimilation—and are encouraged to do so. There are people who have been in the United States illegally for decades who still know almost no English. These people often live a life apart from the nation at large, congregating in particular neighborhoods in our major cities. But their attempts to hold onto their language and the norms of the homes they left are not the only indications they are invaders.

Who can ignore the fact that the people leading the caravans carry the flags of their homeland? Flags from Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico, and El Salvador are all on display in media images of the new arrivals. This affinity remains once they are in the United States. When the U.S. soccer team plays Mexico in California, it amounts to a home game for the Mexican team. Given a choice between the nation they left and the nation they chose instead, many “Mexican-Americans” choose to cheer for Mexico rather than America. Drive around a city with a high immigrant population like Houston, Los Angeles, or Orlando and you will see a surprising number of cars with stickers that pay homage to the home they abandoned: Mexican flags, geographical outlines of central American nations, and the like.

This resistance to assimilation—a resistance that is indulged and enabled by both public and private institutions—is a key sign that the people arriving illegally are invaders. For many, the aim isn’t to become Americans: it is to exploit the opportunities that America affords, and then to send the money earned to their families who still live back in their (true) home.

A New America?

All invasions change the way of life in the region they invade. The European invasion of the Americas completely transformed the Western hemisphere. A century after England renounced its claim to India, the signs of its invasion are still seen throughout Indian society.

The idea of the “melting pot”—an American metaphor for cultural assimilation in which the many peoples who come here become one—is now seen as a form of cultural chauvinism. Since the nineties, the dominant metaphor has been the “salad bowl,” where all the different peoples who inhabit the United States retain their various identities despite living in close geographical proximity to one another. The people who insist that “diversity is our strength” are often the same ones who assure us that mass immigration will have no discernible effect on American society.

How many more Central Americans—many of whom will not be readily assimilated—can we add to the bowl before it becomes a different sort of salad? A million? Ten million? Twenty? None of the proponents of unfettered immigration will even entertain the idea that there might be a tipping point, but there are signs that we are quickly approaching it. The recent arrival of relatively insignificant numbers of illegal immigrants in New York City and Chicago have been enough to spark housing crises, budgetary strain, and a rash of public violence that is (somehow) worse than the already-demoralizing norm.

Many who cross illegally leave their home nations because they are poor. Even when working illegally in the U.S., many still fall below the poverty line, so they are often dependent on the welfare state. In these situations, housing, food, health care, and court costs are all paid by the state, which is to say “taxpayers.”

Whether or not illegal immigrants intend to change America, they are. How much life in the nation will change depends on how long citizens tolerate the crisis. But the American way of life is already being transformed, and this shows that it amounts to an invasion.

Where There’s a Will, There’s a Way

It’s true that invasion is a strong word. But by any historically-informed perspective, it is the right word. Shying away from it amounts to a refusal to acknowledge the gravity of the problem. In the face of a world-historical tide of illegal migration, any term other than invasion is just a strategy that allows one to look away from the humanitarian catastrophe happening at the border and along the way. It’s a failure of courage—a feigned blindness that deliberately ignores the onerous ramifications that the crisis has for our own citizens and the safety of those who attempt the dangerous journey to America.

If we have any prospects of thwarting the invasion—indeed, if we are even to discover the will to do so—we and our leaders need to find the strength to admit it is happening.

*****

This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Polls Show Who Republicans Want As Trump’s VP Running Mate thumbnail

Polls Show Who Republicans Want As Trump’s VP Running Mate

By Casey Harper

Republican voters have suggestions for former President Donald Trump when he considers his running mate for vice president.

The Center Square Voter’s Voice poll released this week asked voters this question: “Who should Donald Trump choose as his vice presidential candidate?”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis narrowly edged out the other potential candidates. DeSantis was once seen as a serious threat to Trump for the presidential nomination, but after Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate was raided by the FBI, Trump’s poll numbers soared. DeSantis was left behind in the polling and never recovered.

Now, according to the survey, 18% of Republicans want DeSantis to be Trump’s vice presidential running mate.

In a close second place is former Ambassador and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who received 17% support from Republicans as Trump’s vice president.

Haley was the last Republican contender to drop out of the primary. She was able to win nearly 100 delegates, and put up a fight in states like Vermont and South Carolina. But, ultimately, she dropped out after Trump roundly defeated her on Super Tuesday.

Kate Guenther | The Center Square

Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy and South Carolina Gov. Tim Scott are tied for third place with 15% support among Republicans.

Notably, Democratic former Congressman Tulsi Gabbard received 7% support, the only Democrat to get that kind of backing from Republicans.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem received 6% support among Republicans to be Trump’s running mate. Many analysts have said Trump should pick a female vice president to persuade Haley supporters and suburban women to support the ticket.

Trump has not said who he is leaning toward most for his vice president, however the New York Post recently reported that Trump has ruled out Ramaswamy, but that Ramaswamy would be considered for a cabinet position.

Trump is not expected to pick former Vice President Mike Pence since their relationship has soured in recent years.

Pence told Martha MacCallum on Fox News last week that he would not endorse Trump for president.

Pence, who was unable to pick up steam in his own presidential primary bid, said there are “profound differences between me and President Trump on a range of issues.”

There is little indication that President Joe Biden will drop Vice President Kamala Harris as his running mate.

The vice presidential pick for Trump in particular could be key to shifting what is a close race.

The Center Square poll shows Trump beating Biden 46%-45% with likely voters in a head-to-head faceoff. With such a close margin, Trump’s pick for VP could make or break the race.

Notably, if third-party independent candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West, and Jill Stein stay in the race, Trump’s lead grows to 3 points.

The Center Square Voters’ Voice poll was conducted in conjunction with Noble Predictive Insights in March, querying 2,510 respondents roughly split between both parties along with 340 true independents. The margin of error for likely voters is +/- 2.1%.

*****

This article was published by the Center Square and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.