Are lockdowns one of the most catastrophic policy errors of the century?

In many countries, there has been a systematic and mandatory paralysis of schooling, work, leisure, and mobility.


When respected scientific experts sitting on prestigious governmental advisory committees warned citizens early last year that the only way to protect themselves against Covid-19 was to shut down their businesses and stay at home until public health officials deemed it safe to come out again, most complied, even at great personal and economic cost.

The result has been one of the most far-reaching and unprecedented social experiments of modern times: the systematic and mandatory paralysis of a large swathe of normal social activity, including schooling, work, leisure, and mobility. If this giant experiment had been run on a one-off basis for a few weeks, the impact might have been moderate; but as it morphed into “rolling” lockdowns, the cure became far worse than the disease.

China got the ball rolling, by imposing a dramatic lockdown upon its citizens in January 2020. A host of Western governments soon followed suit, and lockdowns were imposed in relatively quick succession in Italy, France, Spain, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Greece, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and large parts of North America.

A “lockdown” could be technically defined as one or more non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) which heavily restrict the movements and activities of the general population in order to contain the spread of an infectious disease. Voluntary reductions in socialising are not considered as lockdown measures; involuntary, police-enforced restrictions such as stay-at-home orders, travel restrictions, partial or complete border closures, and mandatory school and business closures, are.

The use of these sorts of highly intrusive population-wide measures to mitigate a pandemic represent a revolutionary break with conventional wisdom and best practice surrounding infectious disease control.

Prior to 2020, national and international public health authorities generally accepted that infectious diseases should be mitigated through relatively non-intrusive measures like improved hand hygiene, the development of more effective medical treatments and vaccines, and isolation of specific individuals or groups known to have been exposed to an infectious disease.

For example, the report on “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” issued by the World Health Organisation in 2019 did not endorse the general efficacy of border closures as tools of disease control, nor did it contemplate the possibility of confining healthy populations to their homes.

So much for the prevailing philosophies of disease control. What of prevailing practices of disease control? To my knowledge, neither mandatory school and business closures, nor stay-at-home orders, have ever been employed in a systematic and centrally coordinated way to mitigate disease – that is, until January 2020. Therefore, centrally coordinated lockdowns of the sort that we have seen in 2020 must be considered as unorthodox, untested, and highly experimental interventions.

The question is, what have been the fruits of this giant public policy experiment? Have lockdowns actually been vindicated by their net benefits?

In order to adequately address this question, we must be clear on one thing: the appropriate benchmark for assessing the merits of lockdown policies is not just their capacity to reduce Covid infections or deaths, but their capacity to advance the overall health and well-being of affected populations.

For example, even if we eliminated Covid from the face of the earth, that would hardly be desirable if it drove a large section of the population into poverty and increased overall excess mortality.

Nobody in their right mind would deny that Covid-19 illnesses and deaths are a serious harm that we should mitigate in any reasonable way we can. Nonetheless, given the massive collateral damages that severe and prolonged lockdowns are known to inflict on society, they should never be undertaken in the absence of a careful cost-benefit analysis.

Yet to this day, I have not seen reports of any serious or sustained effort by pro-lockdown governments to show that the enormous harms of lockdown are justified by their likely net benefits. The fact that lockdowns have been employed without this sort of justification in hand is reason enough to consider them as reckless, inhumane and morally abhorrent.

The predictable harms of lockdowns, which will have to be carefully documented and tallied over the coming months and years, are extensive.

They include the worst global recession, according to World Bank analysts, since World War II, and dramatic increases in poverty and unemployment (currently at 25% in Ireland, including recipients of Covid payments according to the Central Office of Statistics), which are known to bring in their train declines in mental and physical health. This is also resulting in reduced public funding for healthcare due to a depressed economy; and an increase in social inequality, as day labourers and contract workers are uniquely vulnerable to the economic shock of lockdowns.

We’ve also seen an unprecedented transfer of wealth from small and medium businesses to multinational companies like Amazon, Netflix, and Google (given that small and medium traders are hit much harder by lockdowns than online traders).

Other tragic consequences of lockdown include spikes in loneliness, depression, and domestic abuse as people are deprived of social outlets beyond their homes. A generation of children are being set back in their education and life prospects by prolonged school closures (according to UNESCO, the impact of school closures “is particularly severe for the most vulnerable and marginalized (children)”.

A spike in untreated illnesses in expected, including cancer and heart disease, due to the cancellation of routine medical services and the generalised fear and panic generated by lockdowns. The WHO reported this month that the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic was “stark” and “profound” with “50 per cent of governments (having) cancer services partially or completely disrupted because of the pandemic.” One study in The Lancet Oncology journal estimates an increase of 8-9% in breast cancer deaths up to 5 years after diagnosis due to reductions or suspensions in cancer services.

On top of these obvious harms, we should not underestimate the impact of lockdown policies on civil rights and the rule of law. Legislators across Europe and North America have empowered the police to interrogate citizens just because they step into their cars, pay a visit to a friend or relative, or take a walk on the beach.

This level of State interference with basic civil liberties puts in jeopardy something very precious about the Western way of life: the idea that law-abiding citizens are free and responsible for their own actions, and not prisoners or wards of State.

Lockdowns are morally questionable on civil liberty grounds alone. But even if one believes it is legitimate to imprison citizens in their homes and strip them of a livelihood for the greater good, lockdowns remain a dangerous social experiment which should never be attempted in the absence of a compelling case that they do more good than harm.

Any government that does not provide a transparent and rigorous assessment of the likely costs and benefits of lockdowns before implementing them is guilty of gross negligence, and must answer to its citizens for its reckless and misguided interventions.

This article has been republished from Gript, with the permission of the author.

COLUMN BY

David Thunder

David Thunder is the Ramón y Cajal Researcher at the Institute for Culture & Society, (Religion & Civil Society Project) Biblioteca de Humanidades, University of Navarra, Spain. His publications… More by David Thunder

RELATED ARTICLE: How should we argue about what matters most?

RELATED TWEET:

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

Antifa Drives Andy Ngo Into Exile – Mainstream Press Silent

If there is anyone in America who should NOT be silenced, or ignored, it is Andy Ngo. This soft spoken, level-headed, and courageous journalist has tirelessly exposed both the relentless violence of Antifa as well as the appalling negligence of civic authorities to crack down on the violence.

For his trouble, Ngo has been maligned by Rolling Stone as a “right-wing troll,” and by Vox as a “far right sympathizer.” Yielding to the same organized intimidation that prevents city councils from prosecuting Antifa violence, Ngo has been thrown off Pay Pal and Instagram. In Ngo’s home city of Portland, the landmark independent bookstore, Powells, has announced they will not stock his forthcoming book. And now, Ngo, a gay immigrant born in Vietnam, has been driven out of his adopted nation.

Ngo has already been a victim of political violence, in a June 29, 2019 attack by an Antifa mob that the leftist press somehow spun as something he brought upon himself. Their reasoning seemed to rest on the assumption that because Ngo was “biased against Antifa,” he had it coming. But Ngo’s videos speak for themselves.

Throughout the summer and fall of 2020, visitors to Ngo’s Twitter feed were treated to irrefutable evidence of the violence convulsing the nation, violence that was dismissed by the press as “mostly peaceful.” This violence is ongoing, and in nearly every case, Antifa has been the main instigator. And again and again and again and again, Ngo not only posted videos of the violence, but mug shots of the few perpetrators that would be arrested. And in nearly every case, they were immediately bailed out and charges were dropped.

No wonder Andy Ngo had to flee for his life. As he explained earlier this week on Sky News, Ngo, now in London, said “For a number of months now, there’s just been increasing threats of violence against me, promises by Antifa extremists to kill me. And all of those threats were reported to authorities, and even when I provided names of some of the suspects, nothing was done.”

Nothing was done. This is how people doing genuine investigative work are treated in America today. Ignored by the mainstream media, demonized by the more extreme leftist media, and left to fend for themselves by the authorities.

There is a pattern to this, because Antifa violence never had to spiral out of control in 2020 and engulf half the major cities in America. It was tolerated and even encouraged. And in many cases, the city councils that could have done something about it were too intimidated by Antifa mobs following them to their homes and threatening them.

When ridiculous corporate stooges like ABC Nightly “News” anchor David Muir gravely warn their gullible audiences about the threat from the “right wing,” they know what they’re doing. They’re willfully ignoring a trained army on the Left that has been extremely useful.

Andy Ngo is an American hero. We can only hope his work will continue, and that he will stay safe.

EDITORS NOTE: This Winston84 Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Wikipedia Co-founder SLAMS site’s far-left bias, its ‘neutrality long gone,’ ‘it’s is a joke’

Wikipedia is a far-left propaganda resource and has been for years. We have long known, and railed to no avail. Wikipedia is a joke and no one with a measure of integrity and/or scholarship goes near it.

Wikipedia is but one cog in an immense propaganda machine inundating the body politic with lies and disinformation – like all totalitarianism regimes.

  • He said: ‘The days of Wikipedia’s robust commitment to neutrality are long gone’
  • Sanger said he is now working on a new ‘Encyclosphere’ project but said he has hope Wikipedia could be ‘fixed’
  • His own Wikipedia page documents a long history of criticism against the site he co-founded 

Co-founder says Wikipedia’s neutrality ‘long gone,’ cites leftist bias

“And then when the rest of the media and tech became insanely far left, Wikipedia naturally went along with the trend,” he tweeted.

By: Dave Boyer – Washington Examiner, February 21, 2021:

The Fox analysis cited the two main pages for “Socialism” and “Communism” that span 28,000 words but lack any discussion of the genocides committed by socialist and communist regimes, in which tens of millions of people were murdered and starved.

“The omission of large-scale mass murder, slave labor, and man-made famines is negligent and deeply misleading,” economics professor Bryan Caplan, who has studied the history of communism, told Fox News.

In a blog post, Mr. Sanger said examples of bias on Wikipedia “have become embarrassingly easy to find,” pointing to the entries for former Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump.

“The Barack Obama article completely fails to mention many well-known scandals: Benghazi, the IRS scandal, the AP phone records scandal, and Fast and Furious, to say nothing of Solyndra or the Hillary Clinton email server scandal — or, of course, the developing ‘Obamagate’ story in which Obama was personally involved in surveilling Donald Trump,” Mr. Sanger posted in May 2020. “A fair article about a major political figure certainly must include the bad with the good.”

He said the entry about Mr. Trump shows that Wikipedia’s neutrality “is a joke.”

“Just for example, there are 5,224 none-too-flattering words in the ‘Presidency’ section,” he wrote. “By contrast, the following ‘Public Profile’ (which the Obama article entirely lacks), ‘Investigations,’ and ‘Impeachment’ sections are unrelentingly negative, and together add up to some 4,545 words — in other words, the controversy sections are almost as long as the sections about his presidency.”

He said Wikipedia frequently asserts “in its own voice, that many of Trump’s statements are ‘false.’ Well, perhaps they are. But even if they are, it is not exactly neutral for an encyclopedia article to say so, especially without attribution.”

The Wikimedia Foundation said in a statement that Wikipedia “is a living, breathing project, and is always evolving just as our shared understanding of a topic does.” It said the foundation does not directly control the content on the site, which is written by volunteer editors.

The spokesperson also pointed to a Harvard study that “shows how the more people edit an article, the more neutral it becomes,” Fox News reported.

Daily Mail:

His own Wikipedia page documents a long history of criticism against the site he co-founded.

Sanger’s woes with the company were first revealed in 2004 when he wrote an article for the website Kuro5hin.

Sanger’s article claimed that Wikipedia, which calls itself ‘the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit,’ is not perceived as credible by librarians and academics because it lacks a formal review process and is ‘anti-elitist.’

In 2007, Sanger criticized Wikipedia again after the launch of Citizendium, another wiki-based encyclopedia he created to address the ‘flaws’ with Wikipedia.

Sanger said Wikipedia was ‘broken beyond repair’ and had ‘a whole series of scandals’ from ‘serious management problems’ to ‘frequently unreliable content,’ according to IT News.

The techie again distanced himself from Wikipedia in September 2009 when he claimed: ‘I thought that the project would never have the amount of credibility it could have if it were not somehow more open and welcoming to experts.’

‘The other problem was the community had essentially been taken over by trolls to a great extent. That was a real problem, and Jimmy Wales absolutely refused to do anything about it,’ Sanger told Internet Revolution.

Sanger sent a letter to the FBI in April 2010 claiming that Wikimedia Commons was hosting child pornography, according to a BBC article.

‘I think Wikipedia never solved the problem of how to organize itself in a way that didn’t lead to mob rule,’ Sanger said in an interview with Vice in November 2015.

‘People that I would say are trolls sort of took over. The inmates started running the asylum.’

In the Vice interview, Sanger equated the alleged trolls that took over the platform with modern-day social justice warriors.

He again called Wikipedia ‘a broken system’ in a May 2019 interview with 150Sec, his page noted. He said the leaders did not ‘come up with a good solution’ ‘to stop bad actors from ruining the project.

Sanger described Wikipedia as ‘badly biased’ in a May 2020 blog post in which he claimed the site no longer had an effective neutrality policy.

‘The notion that we should avoid “false balance” is directly contradictory to the original neutrality policy. As a result, even as journalists turn to opinion and activism, Wikipedia now touts controversial points of view on politics, religion, and science,’ he wrote.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Justice Thomas: Supreme Court REFUSAL to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is ‘INEXPLICABLE’

The last honest man …….

Justice Thomas: SCOTUS Refusal to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is ‘Inexplicable’

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to reject the review of two 2020 Pennsylvania presidential election cases Monday, but Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas believe they should have been given hearings.

By Katie Pavlich, Town Hall, February 22, 2021:

https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1363861459193786374?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1363861459193786374%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2021%2F02%2Fjustice-thomas-supreme-court-refusal-to-hear-pennsylvania-election-cases-is-inexplicable.html%2F

In his dissent Justice Thomas argued mass mail-in voting, which was conducted in Pennsylvania for the first time ahead of the 2020 presidential election in November, combined with election rules being rewritten last minute, makes the process prone to fraud and mistrust.

“The Constitution gives to each state legislature authority to determine the ‘Manner’ of federal elections…Yet both before and after the 2020 election, nonlegislative officials in various States took it upon themselves to set the rules instead. As a result, we received an unusually high number of petitions and emer- gency applications contesting those changes. The petitions here present a clear example. The Pennsylvania Legislature established an unambiguous deadline for receiving mail-in ballots: 8 p.m. on election day,” Thomas wrote.  “Dissatisfied, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended that deadline by three days. The court also ordered officials to count ballots received by the new deadline even if there was no evi- dence—such as a postmark—that the ballots were mailed by election day. That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set elec- tion rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

“One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us,” he continued.

RELATED ARTICLE: Supreme Court WON’T Hear Pennsylvania Election Lawsuits

RELATED TWEET:

EDITIORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

SICK: Wuhan Lab Eligible To Receive U.S. Taxpayer Funding Through 2024

Rewarding the CCP for the overthrow of “We the People” using Chinese bio-weaponry developed in Wuhan.

Wuhan Lab Eligible To Receive US Taxpayer Funding Through 2024

  • The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is authorized to receive taxpayer funding for animal research through January 2024, according to the National Institute of Health.
  • The WIV received $600,000 in taxpayer funds between 2014 and 2019 through the nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance to study bat-based coronaviruses. 
  • The president of EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, was the sole U.S. member in the World Health Organization delegation that investigated the origins of COVID-19 in China.
  • Daszak said the White House should blindly accept the WHO’s determination that it’s highly unlikely that COVID-19 could have unintentionally leaked from the WIV.

By: Daily Caller Foundation, February 21, 2021:

The Wuhan Institute of Virology is authorized to receive taxpayer funding for animal research until January 2024, the National Institute of Health told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The WIV is at the center of widespread speculation that COVID-19 could have entered the human population in China due to an accidental lab leak. Researchers at the lab were studying bat-based coronaviruses prior to the outbreak, a project partially backed by $600,000 in U.S. taxpayer funds routed to the lab through the nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance.

The president of EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, was the sole U.S. member of the World Health Organization delegation that investigated the origins of the pandemic on the ground in China in January and February. While the WHO delegation has yet to release a report on their findings, Daszak said the White House should blindly accept their conclusion that it’s highly unlikely the virus could have leaked from the WIV.

Daszak also said American intelligence, which indicates researchers at the WIV became infected with COVID-like symptoms before the first known cases in December 2019, shouldn’t be trusted.

EcoHealth Alliance’s work researching bat-based coronaviruses in China was funded by a $3.7 million grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in 2014, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The grant was terminated by the National Institutes of Health in April amid criticism over EcoHealth Alliance’s relationship with the WIV. The NIH said in a letter the nonprofit’s work in China did not align with “program goals and agency priorities.”

The NIH told EcoHealth Alliance in July it would restore the grant if it met certain conditions, one of which was to arrange for an independent team to investigate the WIV to determine if it had possession of the SARS-COV-2 virus prior to the first known cases in December 2019.

Daszak told NPR that the NIH’s conditions were “preposterous.”

“I’m not trained as a private detective,” Daszak said. “It’s not really my job to do that.” (RELATED: US Scientist With Close Ties To Wuhan Lab Discussed Manipulating Bat-Based Coronaviruses Just Weeks Before Outbreak)

However, the WIV still has an active Foreign Assurance on file with the NIH Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, which enables it to continue receiving taxpayer funds to engage in animal research, according to the NIH Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare.

A NIH spokeswoman told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the WIV’s Foreign Assurance was approved on Jan. 9, 2019, and is currently set to expire on Jan. 31, 2024.

The spokeswoman did not confirm whether the WIV is currently receiving direct or indirect taxpayer funding for research activities involving animals. EcoHealth Alliance’s last known subgrant to the WIV was in May 2019, according to USASpending.Gov.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Three More Voices Silenced by Twitter

As reported in American Greatness, the New York Post, and elsewhere, on February 7, “the sanctimonious and hypocritical censors of Twitter came for Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft, radio host Wayne Allyn Root, and freedom activist Pamela Geller.”

Geller can still be found on her own website, The Geller Report, on Facebook, as well as on YouTube and Instagram. But for how long?

Jim Hoft still has his website, The Gateway Pundit, and can still be found on FacebookInstagram, and the durable Gab. Along with being banned from Twitter, Hoft’s Parler account went down with the platform. What’s next?

As for Wayne Allyn Root, he can still be found on Newsmax, as well as on his own website, along with FacebookYouTube, and LinkedIn.

What were the thought crimes committed by these three? Apparently they are willing to “report and highlight the many irregularities and unanswered questions surrounding the 2020 presidential election.”

For that, they are banished from Twitter, and one may expect if they keep it up they’ll be banned from other platforms.

There’s no guarantee the truth, or, equally important, sincere dissent that may or may not be entirely accurate, will survive online. The crackdown has just begun. But “irregularities and unanswered questions” about the November presidential election are not going away. This recent Winston84 newsflash has links to some of the most informative, most suppressed analyses.

Anybody who has a strong opinion on the election, particularly if they’re convinced that fraud could not possibly have been a factor in the outcome, should read these reports. Maybe they don’t constitute proof, but at the least they identify areas where voter integrity must be restored, or it really won’t matter any more who runs for office in the future, or what voters want.

Meanwhile, we have Winston84 profiles for all three of Twitter’s latest victims, Pamela GellerWayne Allen Root, and Jim Hoft, where you can find links to the many platforms where they’re still active, as well as broken links to the platforms where they’ve been banned.

EDITORS NOTE: This Winston84 Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Cripples Immigration Law Enforcement: When Executive Orders handcuff agents – and set law violators free.

On February 18, 2021 the Washington Post reported, Biden memo for ICE officers points to fewer deportations and strict oversight.

Here is how that news report began:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will need preapproval from a senior manager before trying to deport anyone who is not a recent border crosser, a national security threat or a criminal offender with an aggravated-felony conviction, according to interim enforcement memo issued by the Biden administration Thursday.

The narrower priorities are expected to result in a steep drop in immigration arrests and deportations. Biden officials said the new guidelines — which will be in effect for the next 90 days — will allow the agency to make better use of its resources while prioritizing public safety threats.

Having spent 26 years as an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) special agent provides me with a unique perspective that I have provided at numerous congressional hearings and when I provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

As I read Biden’s Executive Orders and the various proposals for immigration law changes and massive amnesty programs, I am disheartened and frustrated.  What was the point to the hearings and the 9/11 Commission when the President promulgates policies that not only ignore the 9/11 Commission but actually take America in precisely the opposite direction from where we should be going?

With the stroke of his pen, and without legislation, Biden has profoundly undermined immigration law enforcement.

The DHS (Department of Homeland Security) was created in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks.  The INS which had been under the Justice Department was replaced by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and moved into the DHS.  ICE agents have the same lawful authority to enforce and administer the Immigration and Nationality Act as did agents of the INS and are important elements of what is referred to as the “Interior enforcement” of our immigration laws.

Under the law such agents are empowered to make warrantless arrests of aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  This is important to back up the efforts by the Border Patrol to prevent the un-inspected entry of aliens into the United States and the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors at ports of entry who admit aliens under various categories of visas.

Any alien who runs the border or violates the terms of his/her entry into the United States should not ever feel confident that they will not be discovered and arrested.  This is important to not only address alien law violators who are present in the United States but to deter foreign nationals who may seek to enter the United States illegally or otherwise violate our immigration laws.

This contributes to the integrity and credibility of our immigration laws and, indeed, all of our laws in general.  It has been said that you only get one opportunity to make a first impression.  Generally the first laws alien encounter are our immigration laws.  How we enforce those important laws sets the tone for all that follows.

Aliens who illegally take jobs are subject to deportation.  This is to protect the jobs and wages of American and lawful immigrant workers and is of particular importance during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Biden’s Executive Order, stripping ICE agents of discretionary authority to arrest illegal aliens they encounter sends a dangerous message to aspiring illegal aliens from around the world- that in America violations of our laws will not only be tolerated, but rewarded!

Preventing ICE agents from arresting aliens who are not “recent border crossers” is absurd.  No record of entry is created when aliens enter the United States without inspection.  From a practical standpoint, any illegal alien can now avoid arrest by lying about when he/she ran the border.

ICE agents would find it virtually impossible to refute such false claims as to the date the alien entered the United States.

The interior enforcement of our immigration laws and immigration fraud were identified by the 9/11 Commission as key issues and, in point of fact, The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel addressed these issues.

Page 54 contained this excerpt under the title 3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot.”

Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.

In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

While I agree that law enforcement has to prioritize actions which get the “most bang for the buck” through the creation of a sort of triage system where violent criminals should be the focus, it is wrongheaded and dangerous to ignore aliens who are not “aggravated felons.”

It is also wrong and dangerous to require ICE agents to provide information to local law enforcement about impending arrests since this presents a potential security problem, especially in “Sanctuary” jurisdictions.

Sleeper agents are foreign terrorists who are careful to not attract anyone’s attention. It has been said that effective spies would not attract the attention of a waiter or waitress as a “greasy spoon diner.”  International terrorists operate in the exact same manner, and, in point of fact spies and terrorists may well work as waiters or waitresses as they go about their deadly and nefarious goals.

Therefore there is no such thing as a “minor case.”

My very first fraud investigation, as a brand-new agent, caused me to trip over a terror plot in Israel.  A young man from Israel arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in the summer of 1976.  He had apparently altered his visa by chaining the date of expiration and the fact that he had already used that visa to enter the U.S. the previous year.  (The visa was valid for one entry and he had changed the number “one” to the number “two.”)   I was instructed to take a statement from him, if he was willing to cooperate.  This was supposed to be more of a training exercise for me.  He was going to be sent back to Israel, no matter what he might have to say.

Because of his recalcitrance to answer certain questions, I called the Israeli consulate in New York and they sent over several security officials to interview him.

During the course of interviewing him I found that his shirt did not fit properly.  I had him remove his shirt and was surprised to find that a pocket was sown into the inside of his shirt.  The pocket contained a piece of paper with an ink-drawn schematic diagram and Arabic writing.  I handed it over to the Israelis and we were all shocked that the diagram was of an oil refinery in Israel.  He was, we later found out, here to get the money to buy explosives to be used in a terror attack.

My superiors notified the FBI and working with the Israeli National Police six would-be co-conspirators were arrested in Israel just days before the attack was to have been carried out.

Another memorable case involved an alien working in a glass factory in Brooklyn.  He claimed to have been a naturalized citizen.  His story, however, did not add up.  He lied about his name and other facts.  As it turned out, he had been convicted of a homicide years earlier, served time in jail and was then deported back to his native Belize.  He was arrested when he reentered the United States without permission and was serving a prison sentence in a federal penitentiary for the crime of Reentry After Deportation (8 U.S. Code § 1326) when he escaped from the prison.  He took a job in that factory where we found him.  His boss, the factory’s owner, was shocked; he told me that he actually trusted him to lock up the factory the night when he had to leave early and had invited him to his home for dinner.

Rather than deterring violations of our nation’s immigration laws by aliens, which constitute our first and last line of defense, Biden has singled-handedly deterred the enforcement of those vital laws by dedicated ICE agents.

There is an expression used by agents that is worth considering:  “Big cases- big problems, little cases- little problems, no cases- NO PROBLEMS!”

It would appear that a new version of the “Miranda Warning” should be given to ICE agents warning them that anything that they do may be used against them!

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

Facebook Stomps On Small Publishers

This is personal. Facebook’s bullyboy tactics could crush MercatorNet.


Facebook unfriended all of Australia last week. Locked in a battle with the Federal government over legislation which would force it to pay for links to news publications, it wiped Australian news sources from viewer’s feeds.

So when you checked your Facebook feed on February 18, you didn’t see anything from The Australian, The Guardian, the Sydney Morning Herald, the Herald Sun, Daily Telegraph or, initially, the Bureau of Meteorology, Western Australia’s Department of Fire and Emergency Services, Western Sydney Health, South Australia Health, various state health services and some state Governments. This is in the middle of the fire season and a Covid-19 pandemic, for which many people rely on Facebook for updates.

You also didn’t see anything from MercatorNet or BioEdge, our related publication about bioethical issues. They’re news sources; they’re published in Australia; and they’re cancelled.

Basically, Facebook has screwed us.

Websites like MercatorNet grow when readers share links to stories that they like. There are other ways to achieve this, but the most powerful and efficient one is through Facebook. MercatorNet’s marketing plan is based on Facebook. And now Facebook has stomped on us like Godzilla squashing an ant. Do not ask me what I think of Mark Zuckerberg.

Let me try to be objective for a moment. What are the issues behind Facebook’s astonishing decision?

Traditional news media are in danger of extinction. Everywhere newspapers are losing circulation to internet news sources. Nearly 1,800 newspapers closed in the United States between 2004 and 2018, including more than 60 dailies and 1,700 weeklies.

Between them, Google and Facebook have sucked up 81 percent of online advertising in Australia. News media only have about 19 percent.

The media companies can only fight back with government help. In Australia they have proposed a statutory media bargaining code and the government, led by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, is backing it to the hilt. The idea is that Google and Facebook will be forced to compensate the media companies for using the news that they display. Google has agreed; Facebook gave the Australian Government the finger.

Facebook acknowledges that news in a Facebook feed “enriches” a user’s experience. But it claims that it adds almost no commercial value. It also says that fewer than 5 percent of clicks on Facebook come from news stories. Why should it be forced to pay for giving a free platform to news organisations? The new law, it says, “fundamentally misunderstands the relationship” between its platform and publishers who use it to share news content.” (Translation: Facebook is a for-profit company, not a goddam charity.)

Furthermore, as they say, “the internet wants to be free”. The internet will be broken if users have to pay for links. Other countries, particularly in Europe, are waiting to see what happens in Australia. So Facebook has to make a stand here or it will be forced to strike deals with traditional media companies everywhere.

You know what? I sympathise with Facebook’s frustration. Behind the Australian government’s proposal is Rupert Murdoch’s News Ltd, which owns more than half of the country’s newspaper market. Zuckerberg probably feels that Rupert Murdoch is using the Australian government to shake him down to subsidize a dying industry. He’s probably right.

Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who loathes Murdoch, recently tweeted: “You cannot argue with a straight face that Zuckerberg has a monopoly on the internet, while ignoring the objective reality that Murdoch has a monopoly in print. The answer is to subject both companies to a Royal Commission, not side with one billionaire against the other.”

But leave that for another day.

Today’s issue is that Facebook is using raw commercial power to blackmail a sovereign nation. It is displaying contempt for the government and for its users in Australia. In its battle to stay unregulated, it is creating immense collateral damage.

The fact that Zuckerberg fails to face up to is that Facebook has become a quasi-public utility and now it is abusing its monopoly power. World-wide, it has 2.6 billion users. It is the principal source of news for many of those readers. Without news in their Facebook feed, democracy dies in the hearts of those users. If they don’t read MercatorNet (or The Australian) in their feed, they’re not going to search out the websites. They’re going to look at more cat videos.

Facebook’s chess game displays not just arrogance, but staggering immaturity. Commercial companies serve the public and have to act in a socially responsible way. Facebook seems to be channeling the bullyboy capitalism of the United Fruit Company.

As the Australia Institute’s Centre for Responsible Technology, pointed out: “The social network is destroying its social license to operate. Facebook actions mean the company’s failures in privacy, disinformation, and data protection will require a bigger push for stronger government regulation.”

Sure, Facebook has a case. As Salvatore Babones writes in Foreign Policy, “If Australians don’t want to pay for news about their own country, it’s hardly the responsibility of foreign companies to foot the bill for them.”

But that doesn’t excuse its reckless, kick-sand-in-your-face tactics. In this battle of monsters, it’s crushing innocent bystanders – like MercatorNet.

COLUMN BY

Michael Cook is the editor of MercatorNet More by Michael Cook.

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

Stanford University Researcher Indicted For Being A Secret Member Of China’s Military

Until America is made aware of the Democrats’ (the Left’s) treachery and treason, we will continue to fail at monstrous speed.

Stanford University researcher indicted for being a secret member of China’s military

By: Sara Carter, Feb 20, 2021

JIUJIANG CHINA-Nov 8, 2016:the military band of the Chinese people’s Liberation Army under the leadership of the Communist Party of China was singing revolutionary songs for the audience on the stage.

Stanford University researcher in neurological studies has been indicted by a federal grand jury for hiding her affiliation as a member of the Chinese military forces while in the United States, the DOJ stated Friday.

The grand jury issued the “superseding indictment” that charged Chen Song with visa fraud, obstruction of justice, destruction of documents, and false statements “in connection with a scheme to conceal and lie about her status as a member of the People’s Republic of China’s military forces while in the United States.”

“We allege that while Chen Song worked as a researcher at Stanford University, she was secretly a member of China’s military, the People’s Liberation Army,” said U.S. Attorney David L. Anderson for the Northern District of California.

“When Song feared discovery, she destroyed documents in a failed attempt to conceal her true identity,” Anderson stated in a press release. “This prosecution will help to protect elite institutions like Stanford from illicit foreign influences.”

Song, 39, allegedly entered the United States on Dec. 23, 2018. According to the superseding indictment she used a J-1 non-immigrant visa to conduct research at Stanford University. According to FBI Special Agent in Charge Craig D. Fair, with the FBI’s San Francisco Office, Song took “active steps to destroy evidence of affiliation with the Chinese military.”

He noted that she also took steps to destroy her “current PLA credentials depicting her in military dress uniform.”

She obtained the J-1 visa “for individuals approved to participate in work-and study-based exchange visitor programs” with an application she submitted in November 2018.

Many times, foreign and industrial spies use the student and other non-immigrant work visa’s to enter the United States and steal research and information. China has been prolific in its tendency to steal from U.S. researchers and companies. Moreover, the Chinese communist government has notoriously attempted to infiltrate U.S. intelligence and defense apparatus, according to numerous analysts.

In Song’s visa application, she described herself as a “neurologist who was coming to the United States to conduct research at Stanford University related to brain disease.”

DOJ PRESS RELEASE:

As part of the application, Song stated that she had served in the Chinese military only from Sept. 1, 2000, through June 30, 2011. She further stated that her employer was “Xi Diaoyutai Hospital” located at “No. 30 Fucheng Road, Beijing, 100142,” and that her highest rank was “STUDENT.”

The superseding indictment alleges that these were lies, and that Song was a member of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the Chinese military, when she entered and while she was in the United States, and that the hospital she listed on her visa as her employer was a cover for her true employer, the PLA Air Force General Hospital in Beijing.
Assistant Director with the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division Alan E. Kohler Jr., who was directly involved in the investigation, noted in the press release that members of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army “cannot lie on their visa applications and come to the United States to study without expecting the FBI and our partners to catch them.”

“Time and again, the Chinese government prioritizes stealing U.S. research and taking advantage of our universities over obeying international norms,” Kohler stated.

Evidence of Song’s Connection to the Chinese Military (DOJ PRESS RELEASE BELOW)

The superseding indictment also adds allegations and charges of obstructive conduct by Song. Specifically, the superseding indictment alleges that Song found out about a case against another PLA member, who was charged on June 7, 2020, in the Northern District of California with visa fraud. The superseding indictment alleges that she then attempted to delete a digital folder of documents on an external hard drive that she possessed containing records relating to her military service and visa fraud, including:

  1. A digital version of a letter from Song, written in Chinese and addressed to the People’s Republic of China consulate in New York, in which Song explained that her stated employer, “Beijing Xi Diaoyutai Hospital” was a false front, and that because relevant approval documents were classified, she had attempted to mail them;
  2. An image of Song’s PLA credentials, with a photograph of her in military dress uniform, covering the time period from July 2016 to July 2020; and
  3. A digital version of a resume for Song, written in Chinese, again with a photograph of her in military dress uniform and listing her employer as the Air Force General Hospital.

Further, according to the superseding indictment, Song lied to FBI agents when interviewed, denying any affiliation with the PLA after 2011, and information associating Song with the PLA or Air Force General Hospital began to disappear from the Internet after the FBI’s investigation of Song was known to her. Finally, the superseding indictment alleges that, after Song had been charged by criminal complaint in this case, she selectively deleted relevant emails from that account, including certain emails relevant to her military service, employment, and affiliations.

Song is charged with visa fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a); obstruction of official proceedings, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2); two counts of alteration, destruction, mutilation, or concealment of records, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1); and making false statements to a government agency, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2).

An indictment merely alleges that a crime has been committed and Song, like all defendants, is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

If convicted, she faces a maximum statutory penalty of up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for the visa fraud count; up to 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for each of the obstruction and alteration charges; and up to five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for the false statements charge. In addition, the court may order additional terms of supervised release. However, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

Song’s next appearance is scheduled for April 7, 2021, at 12:00 p.m. PST, before the Honorable William Alsup, U.S. District Judge, for pretrial conference, with a trial scheduled to begin on April 12, 2021.

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Nominee for Top State Dept Spot Wrote About How Jewish Lobby Controls American Politics

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

The Media, Democrats And Social Media Teaming To Damage Ron DeSantis

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has gained tremendous popularity among conservatives nationwide with his deft handling of the COVID pandemic, personal freedoms, open-for-business attitude and almost Trumpian willingness to fight against the establishment and elitist wisdom but with a Harvard-trained communications ability.

As such, he has been under relentless attack by the Democrat media, seen most obviously when comparing the attack dog media coverage of DeSantis to the lap dog media coverage of New York Gov. Andrew Coumo — a governor that has done a much worse job by every single measurement.

But as DeSantis ramps up for his 2022 re-election campaign, and perhaps eyeing a 2024 run for the White House, the media has become that special combination of hilarious, jaw-dropping and nauseating. The past few days have been a perfect example.

With Florida’s large elderly population, and the elderly by far the most vulnerable to the virus, DeSantis has targeted the 65 and older crowd, along with health care workers, as the top priority.

He’s done it in partnership with hundreds of Publix pharmacies and other pharmacies around the state, state-run distribution sites and unique three-day pop-up clinics to pinpoint smaller areas being missed. These pop-up clinics are aimed at elderly communities with high demand but lower saturation of vaccines. This is actually quite brilliant management, and has been held at mobile home parks, minority communities, The Villages, and so on. DeSantis goes to nearly every one, spreading the word. And it’s smart politics.

Well Tuesday, a pop-up clinic was held in Lakewood Ranch in Manatee County, just another of more than a dozen held without much media comment — until the media attack dogs found an angle to go after DeSantis, and the salivating howling began.

The Bradenton Herald, knowing the demographic makeup of Lakewood Ranch, ran the first story under the headline: “More COVID vaccine coming to Manatee. Only residents of these two zip codes can get it” Well, yes. That’s because they are aimed at specific communities.

The second attack dog, the Orlando Sentinel, picked up the assault, running the specific racial demographics for the zip codes. The result?

Headline: “DeSantis defends his choice of wealthy senior community for pop-up vaccine site”

Lead: A testy Gov. Ron DeSantis blew off criticism Wednesday that the state’s latest pop-up COVID-19 vaccine site was limited to residents of wealthy neighborhoods in Manatee County, including a senior community with family ties to a major DeSantis donor.

Can’t imagine why he’s testy. Not to be outdone, Politico Florida, had their beer held and also ran the wealth data for the zip codes, and one upped the Herald and Sentinel Democrat operatives. The result?

Headline: “DeSantis defends opening vaccine pop-up site in affluent, mostly white community”

Lead: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis traveled Wednesday to an affluent, mostly white community in Manatee County to tout a pop-up vaccination site he said would make it easier for seniors there to get the shot.

(I’ve chosen not to link to the stories because I don’t want to drive traffic to these Democrat operative sites. However, if you want to read the screeds, just Google and headline and site and you will easily find the stories.)

Of course, there are more than 20 sites in Manatee County where people can get vaccines. And nationally, everyone is grappling with low vaccine rates among black Americans, which is in part because of the Tuskegee-driven distrust of vaccines, and a heightened sense of non-existent “systemic racism.”

No matter, it was another opportunity to attack DeSantis. The story has been picked up and run by newspapers across the nation, as the media worked in tandem to drive the story.

Then social media kicked in, and the hashtag #DeathSantis is trending as this is written. Of course, no fact checks or blocking there, just the full tripod of Democrats, media and social media working together to damage a leading Republican.

The irony is that the Florida vaccine rollout is going very well and Florida’s declining numbers continue to outperform the national average and other large states. By a lot. Florida is thriving under DeSantis’ leadership like no blue state. Therefore, DeSantis is a racist. Same old playbook. And not divisive at all.

©Rod Thompson. All rights reserved. Follow Rod on Parler. Like Rod’s new Youtube channel. Follow him on Parler and Instagram

RELATED TWEET:

Harvard Study: An Epidemic of Loneliness Is Spreading Across America

The lockdowns sure haven’t helped.


Loneliness among Americans has been growing in recent years, but the policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic has drastically exacerbated the problem. A new report by Harvard University researchers finds that 36 percent of Americans are experiencing “serious loneliness,” and some groups, such as young adults and mothers with small children, are especially isolated.

Researchers at the Harvard Graduate School of Education’s “Making Caring Common” project analyzed data from an October 2020 online survey of 950 Americans. “Alarming numbers of Americans are lonely,” they conclude in their paper, and those surveyed “reported substantial increases in loneliness since the outbreak of the pandemic.”

Young adults are the loneliest group. According to the research findings, 61 percent of young people ages 18 to 25 reported feeling lonely “frequently” or “almost all the time or all the time” during the four weeks preceding the fall survey. Forty-three percent of these young adults indicated that their loneliness had increased since the pandemic and related lockdowns began. These results echo similar findings of other Harvard researchers who found that nearly half of young adults were showing signs of depression amid the pandemic response. And in August, the CDC reported that one in four young adults in this age range had contemplated suicide during the month of June.

Mothers with small children were another group experiencing high rates of loneliness according to the recent survey analysis, with more than half of mothers reporting serious loneliness. Forty-seven percent of these mothers said that their loneliness increased during the pandemic response.

While everyone has been forcibly cut off from normal social interaction as a result of government lockdown measures, social distancing mandates, and other public health orders, young people and mothers with small children may be particularly harmed by these policies. In many cases, older teenagers and young adults have been unable to meaningfully connect with their peers during school closures and remote learning plans. Additionally, social distancing requirements on many college campuses have halted normal social interaction and can contribute to loneliness and depression among this cohort. As a fall semester article in BU Today, a publication of Boston University, explained: “BU’s aggressive coronavirus safety protocols—no large groups, fewer in-person classes and meetings, and restrictions on the amount of people allowed in an elevator, laundry room, and even around a dining hall table—can equal loneliness.”

For mothers with small children, being disconnected from other mothers, as well as lacking in-person support from family members and friends, can take its toll and make days with little ones seem even longer and more intense. Additionally, as the Harvard researchers found, periodic daycare and school closures have made the last year particularly challenging for mothers.

In their paper, the researchers cite developmental psychologist, Niobe Way, who says: “We are in danger of alleviating one public health problem—the transmission of disease—while exacerbating another.” Indeed, economists have been pointing out these tradeoffs of the pandemic response since last spring. As FEE’s Antony Davies and James Harrigan wrote in April: “Regardless of whether we acknowledge them, tradeoffs exist. And acknowledging tradeoffs is an important part of constructing sound policy.”

Loneliness in America has been a mounting concern for decades. In his groundbreaking 2000 book, Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam documented the growing alienation of Americans, as previously robust aspects of civil society that fostered connection, such as bowling leagues, faded away.

More recent research showed that loneliness was worsening prior to the pandemic. In 2018, a joint Kaiser Family Foundation and Economist survey found that one in five Americans “often” or “almost always” felt lonely or socially isolated, and results from a large-scale Cigna report released in January 2020 found that three out of five Americans reported being lonely.

Lockdowns and related pandemic response measures amplified feelings of loneliness and isolation, as local businesses and organizations were shut down or forced to reduce capacity and change operating procedures. Restaurants, bars, coffee shops—even playgrounds—have been closed in many areas, limiting opportunities for social connection. Several states continue to restrict the number of people allowed in one’s own home, including Vermont where residents have been prohibited from interacting with anyone outside of their immediate household since November.

Not surprisingly, loneliness has deepened as a result of these lockdowns and restrictions that sever individuals from their communities, and mental health continues to deteriorate. Youth suicide and depression rates are increasing, and drug overdose deaths are climbing. The tradeoffs of these strict pandemic response policies are becoming increasingly clear.

The most obvious solution to the accelerating loneliness epidemic during the pandemic response is to lift the lockdowns and related public health policies that keep people cruelly separated from one another.

In their new paper, the Harvard researchers acknowledge the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on increasing rates of loneliness but continue to endorse the current policy response, including indicating that we “may need to enter another lockdown phase as new variants spread.” They argue for sweeping efforts to combat the loneliness epidemic both during and after the pandemic response.

While the Harvard researchers acknowledge that individuals can take some action to ameliorate loneliness by identifying and reversing their own negative feedback loops, they focus most of their attention on a “collective” response to loneliness in America.

Specifically, they criticize what they call “this age of hyper-individualism,” saying that we must “restore our commitment to each other and the common good.” To achieve this, the researchers recommend “national, state, and local public education campaigns” that highlight the loneliness epidemic. They recommend that schools, colleges, and workplaces provide more resources to combat loneliness, and they urge a much larger role of government in this process. “The federal government should greatly expand its commitment to national service for young people, and state and local governments can do much more to promote many forms of organized service that bring people together to work on common problems,” the researchers state.

More pressingly, the study authors explain that we must shift from “Americans’ focus on the self” toward “the common good.” The undermining of the individual in favor of the collective, or “common good,” typically means empowering government with more authority to try to fix social problems. As the Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman said: “I think a major reason why intellectuals tend to move towards collectivism is that the collectivist answer is a simple one. If there’s something wrong, pass a law and do something about it… On the other hand, the individualistic or libertarian argument is a sophisticated and subtle one. If there’s something wrong with society, if there’s a real social evil, maybe you will make better progress by letting people voluntarily try to eliminate the evil.”

Still, the Harvard researchers are right to point out that the loneliness epidemic is a result of disconnection from community. Encouraging this community connection is a goal that can be best achieved through a robust civil society, or the non-governmental, voluntary institutions of our lives—such as extended family, church, clubs, sports leagues, and benefit societies—that have been tragically eroded at the same time that government has grown and taken on roles that were previously reserved for families and communities. An expanded role of government in trying to combat the loneliness epidemic, or any other social problem, will only make matters worse.

In his 1835 book, Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville reflected on the vitality of American civil society. He wrote:

“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fêtes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes…”

Tocqueville warned that as these voluntary institutions and associations become usurped by government power, individuals slowly lose their free will. He wrote: “Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”

The steady rise of government influence in areas that were previously the domain of civil society has been documented most recently by Howard Husock in his book, Who Killed Civil Society? The Rise of Big Government and Decline of Bourgeois Norms. Husock explains how non-governmental organizations and community nonprofits increasingly rely on government funding that can dilute their local impact. He writes: “Thousands of organizations, which were once independent of the government and funded by their communities, are instead government contractors now. Today, the U.S. government enters into some 350,000 contracts with 56,000 nonprofit organizations. In doing so, our federal government has changed not only the source of funding — it has changed the character of civil society and its ability to serve local communities best.”

The loneliness that many Americans currently feel is heartbreaking. Big government’s ascent prior to the pandemic, and the role of government in responding to the pandemic with coercive measures, have contributed to and exacerbated the loneliness epidemic. Relying less on government and more on the voluntary fabric of civil society can make us all happier, healthier, and more connected to each other and to our communities.

COLUMN BY

Kerry McDonald

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

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

PODCAST: Green New Deal type policies have put Texas in a crisis!

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

ALLEN WEST

Congressman Allen West is a Christian constitutional conservative, combat veteran, and former Member of the US Congress. He now serves as Chairman of the Republican Party of Texas. He is a NewsmaxTV contributor, Senior Fellow of the Media Research Center, and contributing columnist for Townhall and CNS News.

TOPIC: Green New Deal type policies have put Texas in a crisis!

DAN GAINOR

Dan Gainor is the Vice President for Tech Watch, Business and Culture for the Media Research Center and a veteran editor whose work has been published or cited in the following media. Dan will discuss Rush Limbaugh and what he meant to the conservative movement and how he changed the American political landscape.

TOPIC: Senate Impeachment Trial and why Trump prevailed again!

JOEL L. THAYER

Joel L. Thayer Is an attorney with Phillips Lytle LLP. He’s also served as Policy Counsel for ACT — The App Association, where he advised the Association and its members on legal and regulatory issues concerning spectrum, broadband deployment, data privacy, and antitrust matters. He also held positions on Capitol Hill, as well as at the FCC and FTC.

TOPIC: China would love to control the world’s private information!

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Beijing Wants to Sway US Policy Using Climate Change, Experts Warn

Russian Foreign Ministry Calls Out Biden Administration For Persecution And Violating Human Rights Of Trump Supporters

When Russia has the moral high ground and exposes human rights violations, you know this is not America anymore. Especially since this is very true.  This is a nation under siege.

Russian Foreign Ministry Calls Out Biden Administration For Persecution And Violating Human Rights Of Trump Supporters

By Tsarizm Staff, February 18, 20211:

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokewowman Maria Zakharova recently railed against Biden administration hypocrisy of criticizing the Russian Federation’s handling of Kremlin antagonist Alexei Navalny, while persecuting and violating the human rights of Trump supporters.

Zakharova described an “ongoing persecution campaign” taking place “against anybody at all who does not agree with the results of the latest presidential election.” She also mentioned Biden minions calling American patriots ‘domestic terrorists’.

“The FBI has reportedly opened more than 400 criminal cases and applied for more than 500 search warrants and subpoenas for suspects; it has also brought charges against and detained around 200 people. Only several dozen defendants have been released on bail or placed under house arrest. The others are being subjected to harsh pressure, with members of their family and social circle being coerced into giving a ‘convenient’ testimony. Moreover, people who have not even been officially charged are losing their jobs; they are being banned from social media and publicly ostracised.”

“In fact, the majority of those people were ordinary citizens concerned about the situation in their own country,” she said. “These were 74 million voters who voted for their president and defendedtheir views.”

Zakharova then described how Trump supporters will not disappear as the U.S. Left fervently wishes.

“Their protest will not just go away. You cannot just sweep discontent under the rug. Even the rhetoric that the United States allows itself to use with respect to Russia will not help distract public attention from the country’s own problems. They will have to be dealt with. US citizens deserve to be treated according to the law and in line with Washington’s international obligations.”Accordingly, she then called on the United States to respect the “basic human rights” of Trump supporters.

“In this context, we have every reason to express concern and demand that basic human rights be observed,” she added. “US officials are constantly and hypocritically taking care of these rights when it comes to other countries; and yet, they have no scruples in ignoring them at home.”


The full statement is below…

Persecution of participants in January mass protests in the United States

We are deeply concerned about the ongoing persecution campaign against participants in the so-called storming of the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, and against anybody at all who does not agree with the results of the latest presidential election. US officials and an obedient media have labelled them “domestic terrorists.” By the way, did the ambassadors of EU countries or EU representatives in the US react in any way? Did they express concern about Washington’s rhetoric regarding its own citizens? No? Too bad.

The FBI has reportedly opened more than 400 criminal cases and applied for more than 500 search warrants and subpoenas for suspects; it has also brought charges against and detained around 200 people. Only several dozen defendants have been released on bail or placed under house arrest. The others are being subjected to harsh pressure, with members of their family and social circle being coerced into giving a “convenient” testimony. Moreover, people who have not even been officially charged are losing their jobs; they are being banned from social media and publicly ostracised.

Among other things, there is a question about the objectivity of the law enforcement agencies because they are essentially acting under orders and in line with the narrative of the current administration who declared the events of January 6, 2021 a riot and everybody who was near the US Congress on that day all but plunderers. Whereas in fact, the majority of those people were ordinary citizens concerned about the situation in their own country. These were 74 million voters who voted for their president and defended their views. I am using the same words that Washington has used with respect to our country.

Their protest will not just go away. You cannot just sweep discontent under the rug. Even the rhetoric that the United States allows itself to use with respect to Russia will not help distract public attention from the country’s own problems. They will have to be dealt with. US citizens deserve to be treated according to the law and in line with Washington’s international obligations. In this context, we have every reason to express concern and demand that basic human rights be observed. US officials are constantly and hypocritically taking care of these rights when it comes to other countries; and yet, they have no scruples in ignoring them at home. Why don’t you deal with your own problems? There are plenty of them and they need to be solved.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden To Rejoin Disastrous Nuclear Deal, Abandons UN Sanctions on Iran

AUSTRALIA: Leader of the free world ‘compromised…Struggling With Dementia’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Degenerate Democrats Introduce Bill to BAN TRUMP From Being Buried in Arlington National Cemetery

Disappearing the people’s President in the brutal fashion of Stalin, Mao, Hitler.

Pure evil.

Democrats Introduce Bill to Ban Trump From Being Buried in Arlington National Cemetery

By: Caleb Parke, Feb 18, 2021

A new bill in Congress shows just how far Democrats are willing to go with their hatred for former President Trump.

The “No Glory For Hate Act,” introduced by California Democratic Rep. Linda Sanchez, would ban the federal government from commemorating Trump in any way.

H.R. 484 states “twice impeached” presidents will be banned from being buried at Arlington National Cemetery and prohibit federal funds from being used to display their names or acknowledge their achievements.

It would prevent federal projects, buildings, statues, or lands from being named after Trump, including park benches.

“For years, Donald Trump poured gasoline on lies, encouraging racism and hatred, then lit the match on January 6th. A president who has been impeached twice does not deserve the honors bestowed on a former president,” Sanchez said in a statement.

“We should never glorify the hatred Donald Trump personified as President,” she added. “This bill ensures that there is no glory for hate, not a building, statue, or even a park bench.”

At least 13 Democratic representatives have co-signed onto the anti-Trump bill.

https://twitter.com/toddstarnes/status/1362460184644374528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1362460184644374528%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2021%2F02%2Fdegenerate-dems-ban-trump-arlington.html%2F

Nationally syndicated radio host Todd Starnes slammed Democrats for promising unity but stabbing the former president in the back.

“This is bonkers, but this shows you the level of hate and vitriol that the Democrats have for this president,” Starnes said on the Todd Starnes Radio Show Thursday.

“They just can’t quit him,” he added. “Unbelievable.”

RELATED ARTICLE:

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

Stealing the West’s Cultural Heritage

 

My new Freedom Center pamphlet offers a defense of Western culture – and of America.


To order Stealing the West’s Cultural HeritageCLICK HERE.


Here is Sara Dogan’s Foreword to the pamphlet:

Foreword

It has become fashionable of late among the leftist elites to accuse the West of pilfering its treasures — both physical resources and intellectual innovations — from native and minority cultures. The clear moral lesson, we are to understand, is that there is nothing particularly noteworthy or exceptional about Western culture and by extension about America. Instead, we should feel deep shame that our ancestors expropriated the physical and intellectual capital of the peoples we conquered.

In this timely and illuminating new pamphlet, “Stealing the West’s Cultural Heritage,” Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer addresses this lie head-on, first debunking the work of “Middle East expert” Diana Darke who claims in a recent book that some of Christian Europe’s most exquisite structures including Notre-Dame and St. Mark’s were inspired by Islamic mosques. Spencer eviscerates Darke’s claims, showing how the architectural timeline she presents is at odds with the origins and growth of Islam.

Spencer then turns his attention to the wider question of why scientific exploration and innovation exploded in Christian cultures but stalled in Muslim ones. He concludes that the difference lies in the two faiths’ differing conceptions of God. Christians believe that God created the laws of science and mathematics so that humans could study them and understand his divine creation, whereas Islam views God as capricious, and thus not bound to govern the universe according to consistent and observable laws.

This pamphlet is part of the Freedom Center’s ongoing efforts to rectify the onslaught of historical fabrications being taught both in our nation’s K-12 schools and our colleges and universities. Already, the New York Times’ widely discredited “1619 Project,” which seeks to prove that “Out of slavery — and the anti-black racism it required — grew nearly everything that has truly made America exceptional” is being taught as truth in classrooms across America.

“Stealing the West’s Cultural Heritage” is an urgent and essential read for both students of history and those who wish to understand how the academic left is adopting a false and dishonest narrative to undermine Western heritage.

Sara Dogan
National Campus Director
David Horowitz Freedom Center

And you can read it here.

VIDEO: A Utopian Anal Swab for Covid? You have got to be kidding me.

No, this is not political satire, it is happening in the CCP. Covid has a 99+% recovery rate but is being used to strike fear in the hearts of we the people. Is this just another way for tyrants to show how to make us submit to them? As government power grows the rights of we the people shrink.

In a WebMD article titled China Using Anal Swabs for COVID Testing Ralph Ellis reported:

Jan. 28, 2021 — China is not giving up on nasal or throat testing, but the country has adopted a new method for detecting the coronavirus: anal swabs.

Anal testing is being used so far only on select groups, mainly high-risk cases and people in quarantine. Some people who have been subjected to anal testing include passengers arriving in Beijing and a group of more than 1,000 schoolchildren and teachers who were thought to have been exposed to the virus, Forbes reported.

The use of anal swabs is limited because it’s invasive and inconvenient. If a stool sample cannot be obtained, a saline-soaked cotton swab about 1-2 inches long is inserted into the anus, with the sample tested for active traces of the virus.

Read more.

From face masks to social distancing to nose swabs to shutting downs businesses to anal swabs. When will this madness ever end? Government control of we the people is both using Covid as the cause in order for government to take control of every aspect of our lives.

It is time to say enough is enough.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Drive-Thru Anal Swab for Covid-19? The Deep State’s ‘Great Reset’ takes its next logical step.

Australia’s Sky News: U.S. Media Acting as a Biden Protection Racket [Video]

The media down under is saying what American mainstream media refuses to say, Joe Biden’s “cognitive decline”, his dementia, is accelerating. And, they all knew it and kept it secret throughout the 2020 presidential campaign.

Hopefully Youtube doesn’t delete this five minutes of honest analysis being seen across Australia (and around the world) at the oldest cable news network on the continent.

Over 700,000 views since yesterday.  Watch before it is gone! And, get it out far and wide!

‘Never before’ has the leader of the free world been ‘so cognitively compromised’

It is clear US President Joe Biden is not up to the task he has been “sworn in to do”, according to Sky News host Cory Bernardi. “Never before has the leader of the free world been so cognitively compromised,”

Mr Bernardi said “It’s clear to me at the least that US President Joe Biden is struggling with dementia and is clearly not up to the task he’s been sworn in to do.”

Mr Bernardi said it is something which was “evident” during the election campaign, but the “partisan and poisonous” mainstream media chose not to highlight anything which could have “derailed a Biden victory”.

“Even now, after he has been sworn in, many of them are still refusing to speak the truth about Biden’s lack of capacity.”

Joe Biden recently emerged to make his “sanitised” Presidential Town Hall Debut, at which the new president “promptly gave away his teleprompter”.

Read more.

 EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Left Spins as Texas Turbines Freeze

Green energy policies have failed Texas. Power outages, in large part caused by frozen wind turbines and snow covered solar panels, are still keeping nearly 500,000 Lone Star residents freezing in the dark. Now, Big Green and the wind and solar industries are in non-stop spin-mode, trying to drum up an alternative narrative to shift the blame from their failed policies.

As The Wall Street Journal reports:

“While millions of Texans remain without power for a third day, the wind industry and its advocates are spinning a fable that gas, coal and nuclear plants—not their frozen turbines—are to blame.

After imperiling the grid with their wind turbines and solar panels, Big Green is gleefully distributing talking points to the press about natural gas plants failing to keep up with demand.”

Holman Jenkins tells us why in another article at the WSJ:

“Thanks to the Clean Air Act, pipeline compressors run on electricity now rather than natural gas. So blackouts meant to conserve electricity can actually reduce it, by knocking gas-burning generators offline.

Tracing energy problems to their source always leads back to bad Green policy.

Yesterday we were all slapped in the face by some very sad news.

CFACT mourns the passing of Rush Limbaugh who was as much a voice of reason on climate and energy as he was on so many issues where freedom was on the line.

As Peter Murphy writes at CFACT.org:

Rush Limbaugh had a connection to CFACT, which was one of his go-to places for environment and energy issues; in particular, Climate Depot, which he viewed as his favorite source of climate change information other than himself. (That was another part of his humor, his braggart act, which was always meant as lighthearted.)

In the early 1990’s, Marc Morano, before he became CFACT’s Director of Communications, was Rush Limbaugh’s “Man in Washington,” as he described. Admittedly, Rush also once said he never liked the word “Committee” as part of CFACT’s name.

Texans shiver in the dark as Green energy fails.

RELATED ARTICLE: Climate Lockdowns to Break Us into a New Peasant Class

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

Michigan Removed 177,000 Voters from Voter Rolls in January After Certifying Biden Won Michigan by 154,000 Votes in November

So crooked …..

Biden is not legitimate.

Michigan Removed 177,000 Voters from Voter Rolls in January After Certifying Biden Won Michigan by 154,000 Votes in November

By: Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit, February 2021:

Michigan now admits after ‘certifying’ the 2020 Presidential election, that more voters should be removed from their voter rolls than there were votes won by Joe Biden in the race. Mixed with other suspected fraud, (like 141,000 ballot drops at 6am the day after the election) all the ballots in this state should be forensically audited to determine the full extent of the election fraud.

There was so much fraud in Michigan in the 2020 election it is difficult to know where to start. There were late-night ballot dumps

There were vans delivering ballots in the early morning after the election under the Detroit TFC Center where votes were being counted:

Republicans were harassed and prevented from viewing the ballot counting in the same TFC center the next day. When finally some Republican observers forced their way into the room they found the poll workers counting Xerox copies of military ballots all for Biden:

EXCLUSIVE: Detroit Ballot Counters Were Counting “Xerox Copies” as Actual Military Votes (Video)

The Washington Free Beacon now reports:

The Michigan secretary of state removed 177,000 inactive voters from the state’s voter rolls after settling a legal challenge.

The state removed the names from the voter rolls in late January because the voters no longer live in the state or did not respond to the state’s inquiries about their addresses, according to a Tuesday district court announcement. The state performed the post-election audit during a legal battle with the Honest Elections Project, an election watchdog.

Michigan certified the election results in November claiming Joe Biden won by 154,000 votes.

Michigan’s 2020 election was run by crooks.  A forensic ballot count of all the ballots in Detroit, if not the entire state, should be performed.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

When it comes to China, Joe Biden is Relativist-in-Chief

These days, the Holocaust is compared to anything, and Jews frequently resent it. They are right to feel offended. When you compare the systematic killing of six million human beings with, say, imposing economic sanctions on a corrupt South American dictator, we have a problem. And, that problem is the trivialization of the Holocaust.

But, that does not mean that the Holocaust is the only genocide that has ever taken place. In the 20th Century, other such tragedies have happened. And yet, just as there are Holocaust deniers, there are also deniers of those other genocides. For example, renowned American scholar Noam Chomsky has come very close to denying the Cambodian genocide of the 1970s. As scholars typically do, Chomsky has always been extremely careful in choosing his words, so as to avoid the label of genocide-denier. But, effectively, he does seem to believe that most accusations against the perpetrators of that genocide (the Khmer Rouge) rely on fabricated evidence.

Unlike Chomsky, other genocide deniers do not mince words. For example, Turkey’s strongman Tayyip Recep Erdogan has repeatedly insisted that the Armenian genocide never took place. Astonishingly, President Obama followed suit making similar allegations, thus projecting a huge shadow of doubt over his Nobel Peace Prize.

Currently, a new genocide is taking place. More than one million Uighurs are being in concentration camps in China without any legal process, in an attempt to forcefully assimilate them into Chinese culture. As you would expect, China denies such allegations and diverts attention from them by focusing on the murder of George Floyd.

What is somewhat unexpected, however, is that some leaders of the West are complacent about China’s attitudes. For example, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently said that the international community “takes very seriously the label of ‘genocide’ and needs to ensure that when it is used, it is clearly and properly justified and demonstrated, so as not to weaken the application of ‘genocide’ in situations in the past.” With this argument, he refused to acknowledge the Uighur genocide.

Trudeau is correct about the need not to trivialize the word “genocide”. But, what more proof does he want of the atrocities that Uyghurs are undergoing? The evidence is overwhelming and yet he refuses to call a spade a spade. Trudeau has simply become China’s stooge.

Even more surprisingly, US President Joe Biden recently said that “the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China… I am not going to speak out against what he is doing in Hong Kong, with Uyghurs in the mountains of Western China, Taiwan and the One-China policy… he gets it, culturally, there are different norms in each country, and their leaders are expected to follow.”

By arguing that each country has its own rules and foreign leaders should not speak out against them, Biden engages in pure and undiluted relativism, the same sort of approach that justifies horrendous things such as Aztec human sacrifice or female genital mutilation. When Benedict XVI was elected Pope in 2005, his very first public speech warned about the dangers of the “dictatorship of relativism”. At the time, he was perceived by many to be out of touch; his tirade against the threat of relativism was viewed as the ramblings of a paranoid old man.

And yet time has proven Pope Benedict XVI right. In fact, relativism has always been rampant in academia. As early as 1987, Allan Bloom was making that point in his devastating critique of American youth and universities, The Closing of the American Mind: “The students’ backgrounds are as various as America can provide. Some are religious, some atheists; some are to the Left, some to the Right; some intend to be scientists, some humanists or professionals or businessmen; some are poor, some rich. They are unified only in their relativism and in their allegiance to equality. And the two are related in a moral intention.”

So prevalent is relativism amongst students, that the trope of the “freshman relativist” is well-known to professors of ethics. Fortunately, by the time they are out of college, most people begin to grow out of this worldview, and begin to understand that there are universal values that must be defended. But we have a problem when a 78-year old man thinks like a college freshman and spouts relativist dogmas. This is made even worse when this man becomes the leader of the so-called “free world” (which will hardly continue to be free if such a mentality persists).

If the relativist-in-chief continues to play by the Chinese book, there is little hope for Uyghur justice. After the Holocaust, the world made a commitment to “Never Again”. That commitment failed in Cambodia, Bosnia and Rwanda. President Biden still has time to save his honor, and confront Chinese atrocities against Uighurs. But, in order to do that, he must begin by getting rid of the great cultural malaise that lies at the heart of much genocidal complicity: relativism.

COLUMN BY

Gabriel Andrade

Gabriel Andrade is assistant professor of medicine at Ajman University. He received a PhD from University of Zulia (Venezuela), in 2008. He worked as Titular Professor at University of Zulia from 2005… More by Gabriel Andrade

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