Daily Archives: January 17, 2021

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : New Peer-Reviewed Study: Lockdowns Are No Good Against Coronavirus

undefined
Across the world, people have been suffering because of coronavirus crackdowns marketed as means to limit or even stop the spread of coronavirus. Yet, looking around, many people have observed that it seems there is little to no benefit from oppressive measures such as stay-at-home and business closure orders given that coronavirus spread and dangers appear not to be significantly reduced in countries that impose harsh mandates as compared to those that maintain greater respect for liberty and commerce. 

The same seems to be the situation when comparing state and local governments in America that have adopted policies justified as reactions to coronavirus that range from draconian to rather limited.

A new peer-reviewed study examining the effects of coronavirus policies employed by various governments backs this conclusion. The study by scientists at Stanford University concludes no benefit can be determined to come from harsh measures such as stay-at-home and business closure mandates.

Read more about the new study, and find a link to it, at a Sunday ZeroHedge article here.

While coronavirus crackdowns appear to provide no benefit in countering coronavirus, they impose tremendous damage on people around the world. Businesses are destroyed. Employment is eliminated. Economies are scuttled. People’s ability to interact with each other is greatly limited. Travel is curtailed and made uncomfortable and difficult. Medical care not related to coronavirus is delayed or forgone. People are even forbidden from showing their faces. The list goes on. The coronavirus crackdowns are a horrifying example of governments at war with the people they claim to serve.

— Read on www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2021/january/17/new-peer-reviewed-study-lockdowns-are-no-good-against-coronavirus/

Looking Through An Adversary’s Eyes: A KGB Agent’s Prophecy | ZeroHedge

Authored by ‘Jean Chen’ via The Epoch Times,

Human beings have a weakness: It is easy for us to see others’ problems, but not our own problems. Actually, most of us are nearly blind to our own problems.

However, if we examine how our enemies look at us, some insights may be revealed.

For many people right now, the aftertaste of the 2020 presidential election is bitter. They feel that something is very wrong with our country. But what is it?

For current events, it may be useful to look through the eyes of an adversary that many thought had been vanquished: the USSR in the 20th century

The Prophecy of a KGB Agent

I came across a YouTube video of a 1985 interview of Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who defected to the West in 1970.

The interview is about the Soviet Union’s strategy to subvert the United States. It is eye-opening and I wish to share a quote here first:

“Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students, without being challenged or counter-balanced by the basic values of Americanism and American patriotism … The demoralization process in the United States is basically completed already … Most of it is done by Americans to Americans thanks to lack of moral standards.

As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures. Even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp he will refuse to believe it until he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom. When the military boot crashes him, then he will understand, but not before that. That’s the tragic of the situation of demoralization.”

It is scary to watch the video. (More video here and here.)

What Mr. Bezmenov described 35 years ago is unfolding in front of our very eyes. To me, what is most alarming is that the demoralization is mostly “done by Americans to Americans due to lack of moral standards.” Actually, as Bezmenov pointed out, “for the last 25 years, actually it’s over-fulfilled because the demoralization now reaches such areas where previously not even Comrade Andropov [KGB leader during 1967–1982] and all his experts would even dream of such a tremendous success.”

According to Bezmenov, only 10 to 15 percent of the KGB’s personnel and resources were allocated to traditional clandestine espionage in James Bond’s style, with the rest going to “legitimate, overt, and open” ideological subversion. He said that subversion happens in four stages: demoralization, destabilization, crisis, and “normalization.”

The first stage, lasting for about 15 to 20 years, the period of time needed to raise a generation, is to brainwash the public with communist ideology. Manipulation of the media and academia is required for this purpose.

The second stage focuses on throwing society into chaos, and it usually takes 2-5 years. During this stage, the status quo in economy, foreign relations, and defense systems are changed. The establishment promises all kinds of goodies in order to win people’s support for creating a massive government that is intrusive to people’s lives. Media and academia are also essential to make it successful.

The third stage instigates a crisis that leads to a civil war, revolution, or foreign invasion. This stage only took 2-6 months. This is the stage when the leftist idealists, or “useful idiots,” are no longer needed, because they would be disillusioned and become obstacles. They are going to be eliminated, exiled, or imprisoned, like what has happened in Grenada, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and China. “It is the same pattern everywhere,” said Bezmenov.

These three steps culminate in the fourth and final stage of “normalization”—the populace begins to accept and assimilate communism. This final stage can take up to 20 years to complete.

Today, 35 years after the interview, Bezmenov’s chilling prophecy still sounds so relevant. According to annual polls by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, support for socialism and Marxism among young people in the United States increases steadily. Actually, that is happening in all Western countries. Ambitious proposals like the “Great Reset Initiative” are aiming to change the world fundamentally in economy, international relations, and defense systems, and establish global governance, which sounds like Bezmenov’s stage two, destabilization.

The United States is lauded as the beacon of democracy and freedom. But our once-proud institutions based on the Constitution and the separation of powers seems so powerless under the stress test of the 2020 presidential election. The deep frustration and distrust of the system cannot be dissipated by political intimidation, or deliberate ignoring of evidence-based allegations of irregularities. Many people are deeply worried about our country’s future.

“The United States is in a state of war. Undeclared total war against the basic principles and the foundations of this system… The time bomb is ticking. Every second, the disaster is coming closer and closer. Unlike myself, you will have nowhere to defect to unless you want to live in Antarctica with penguins. This is it. This is the last country of freedom and possibility.” (Bezmenov)

How did we get this far almost unknowingly?

The Surreptitious Path of Infiltration

Sen. Ted Cruz once commented about the law school of a prestigious university he attended:

“There were more self-declared communists [in the faculty] than there were Republicans. … If you asked [them] to vote on whether this nation should become a socialist nation, 80 percent of the faculty would vote yes and 10 percent would think that was too conservative.”

The amazing book, “How the Specter of Communism Is Ruling Our World,” gives a comprehensive analysis of the non-violent infiltration of communism in the West. In 1884, a year after Karl Marx’s death, the British Fabian Society was founded to bring about communism gradually. It encourages its members to advance socialist aims by joining suitable organizations and ingratiating themselves with important figures, such as cabinet ministers, senior administrative officials, industrialists, university deans, and church leaders. Since then, many American intellectuals began accepting communist ideas or its Fabian socialist variant.

The 1960s counterculture movement produced a large number of young anti-traditional students who were influenced greatly by cultural Marxism and Frankfurt School theory. After graduation, they entered the institutions with the most influence over society and culture, such as universities, news media, government agencies, and non-profits. What guided them at that time was mainly the theory of “the long march through the institutions” proposed by Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci. This “long march” aimed to alter the most important traditions of western civilization. As a result, generations of young people have been indoctrinated with the communist ideology.

Why are Intellectuals So Prone to Communism?

Intellectuals tend to be fooled by radical ideologies. This phenomenon has drawn the attention of scholars. British historian Paul Johnson found that radical intellectuals share the fatal weaknesses of arrogance and egocentrism.

This arrogance is exhibited in a statement by nineteenth-century French politician and art critic Jules-Antoine Castagnary: “Beside the divine garden from which I have been expelled, I will erect a new Eden … At its entrance, I will set up Progress … and I will give a flaming sword into his hand and he will say to God, ‘Thou shalt not enter here.’”

Rapid scientific progress since the 18th century greatly strengthened humankind’s confidence in its own ability and fueled the intellectual trend of progressivism. People started to worship humanist reason instead of God. Reason is believed to be able to lead people to the path of happiness and morality. People want to create a utopia, a “paradise on earth,” which is the essential idea of communism. As the “pastors” of modern science, intellectuals believe that they are the interpreter of the truth, and their cause is so important that no means are off-limits to serve their ends. This has caused a deluge of blood and misery.

What Can We Do?

Two hundred years of experimenting with human pride and reason has led to the declining of morality and the loss of tens of millions lives due to the ravages of communism.

Founding Father John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Interestingly enough, a ruthless communist dictator, Joseph Stalin, echoed his point from another angle, “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”

It is time for us to be humble again, look inward, and follow the true wisdom of righteous spiritual beliefs. This is our only solution.

— Read on www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/looking-through-adversarys-eyes-kgb-agents-prophecy

Ex-Facebook exec calls for de-platforming OANN and Newsmax, laments that some conservatives have BIGGER AUDIENCES than CNN — RT USA News

Ex-Facebook exec calls for de-platforming OANN and Newsmax, laments that some conservatives have BIGGER AUDIENCES than CNN

Former Facebook executive Alex Stamos likened Republicans in Congress to ISIS supporters and argued that conservative voices such as OANN and Newsmax must be quieted to return Americans to “consensual reality.”

“We’re going to have to figure out the OANN and Newsmax problem – you know, that these companies have freedom of speech, but I’m not sure we need Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and such to be bringing them into tens of millions of homes,” Stamos said Sunday in a CNN interview, suggesting that the conservative news outlets be banned by cable TV carriers. “This is allowing people to seek out information if they really want to, but not pushing it into their faces, I think, is where we’re going to have to go here.”

Stamos, who was chief security officer at Facebook until August 2018, said press freedoms are being abused by “bad actors” that have an economic interest in becoming “more and more radical.” As Fox News fell out of favor with devout Trump supporters for some of its post-election coverage – which Stamos called introducing “realism” in its reporting – OANN and Newsmax outflanked Fox “on the right” and allowed viewers to “put themselves into a sealed ecosystem,” he argued.

“That becomes a huge challenge of figuring out, how do you bring those people back into the mainstream of fact-based reporting and try to get us all back into the same consensual reality?” Stamos said.

 Also on rt.com

Democrats claim censorship necessary to stop ‘fascism’, but they still serve militarism and corporatism, Glenn Greenwald tells RT

He called for the same kind of collaboration between social media companies and law enforcement that helped stop ISIS recruitment on their platforms after he joined Facebook in 2015. But Stamos, who is currently director of the Stanford Internet Observatory, added that “ISIS did not have a domestic constituency in the United States Congress.”

 Read more

‘This is bigger than one account’: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey hints at future crackdowns in leaked VIDEO after Trump booted from site

“There’s over half of the Republicans in Congress voted to overturn the election, and there will be continued political pressure on the companies to not take it seriously,” Stamos said.

He called for Big Tech to focus first on removing “violent extremists,” then “turn down the capability” of conservative influencers to reach large audiences. “There are people on YouTube, for example, that have a larger audience than daytime CNN, and they are extremely radical and pushing extremely radical views,” Stamos said. “So it’s up to the Facebooks and YouTubes, in particular, to think about whether or not they want to be effectively cable networks for disinformation.”

The call for aggressive de-platforming of conservative voices – following a purge that’s already seen the banning of the president of the Unites States and a coordinated takedown of free-speech Twitter alternative Parler – was welcomed at CNN, which has already lobbied to push Foxoff the airwaves in the wake of the January 6 US Capitol riot.

“Just a reminder that neither Verizon, ATT nor Comcast have answered any questions about why they beam channels like OANN and Newsmax into millions of homes,” CNN media reporter Oliver Darcy said. “Do they have any second thoughts about distributing these channels, given their election-denialism content? They won’t say.”

Darcy made no mention of the content at CNN and other mainstream media outlets denying the legitimacy of the 2016 presidential election – based on claims, without evidence, that President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians to win.

“What kind of totalitarian society are you cheering on?” Fox contributor Lisa Boothe asked. “CNN recently had to settle a big lawsuit for getting the facts wrong. Is this really a fair game to play?”

Author Tim Carney questioned whether CNN’s pressuring of cable carriers to drop competitors might be considered a violation of antitrust law. Former California congressional candidate Beatrice Cardenas asked Darcy, “Who are you to demand censorship of freedoms of the press, psycho?”

Owen Paun, director of North Macedonia’s International Republican Institute, said Stamos and CNN “want to return to a simpler time, when the establishment was the gatekeeper of ‘truth.'” Pennsylvania engineer Pete Finnegan said the simpler time might be a fictional one, as in George Orwell’s “1984.”

— Read on www.rt.com/usa/512819-facebook-exec-deplatform-oann-newsmax/

IL Congress member signs onto effort to remove Christian influence from American culture – Illinois Review

WASHINGTON DC – The name of a Congressional member that represents Illinois’ 6th CD – which includes what was once known as America’s center of Christian Evangelism, Wheaton College, where the late evangelist Billy Graham attended college – is included among a group demanding President Joe Biden and VP Screen Shot 2021-01-15 at 1.07.08 PMKamala Harris remove Christian influence from the nation’s culture. 

“We urge you to lead our nation on a path that revives the Founders’ vision of religious freedom in our government and promotes a unifying patriotic pluralism—not dogmatic religious chauvinism—in American society,” states the Secular Democrats of America within a 28-page list of demands. “We believe that this is a moment not only to enact policies to advance constitutional secularism but to position the Democratic Party to take back the mantle of religious freedom and pluralism from the Republican Party.” 

The document, presented to the Biden-Harris transition team by Representatives Jamie Raskin and Jared Huffman, was endorsed by Representative Jerry McNerney. Those three are listed as founding members of the Congressional Freethought Caucus – one of which is Illinois Congress member Sean Casten (IL-6).

The document calls on Biden to make the following changes:

  • Eliminate government support for all crisis pregnancy centers and all abstinence-only education programs in schools.
  • Deny free speech and religious liberty to select Americans based on their religious beliefs.
  • Incentivize states to strip parents of all non-medical exemptions to mandatory vaccinations for children in schools or daycare centers.
  • Remove “In God We Trust” from U.S. currency.
  • Repeal the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA)
  • Rescind and replace the Trump DOJ’s federal protections for religious liberty.
  • Appoint an attorney general who will support governors whose emergency COVID-19 executive orders restrict gatherings at houses of worship.
  • Reverse the Trump administration policies that have allowed faith-based government-funded contractors to provide adoption and foster care services and work with Congress to pass the Every Child Deserves a Family Act.  
  • Fully and robustly fund “comprehensive” sex education, which to the leftist means encouraging elementary and middle school-age children to declare themselves one of dozens of made-up non-biological gender identities and learn how to engage in various deviant forms of sex.
  • Work with governors to educate and combat Project Blitz and encourage the introduction of the Do No Harm Act at the state level. [Project Blitz is a pro-family lobbying group described by the Secular Democrats as “a coordinated effort by Christian Nationalists to inject religion into public education, attack reproductive healthcare, and undermine LGBTQ equality using a distorted definition of ‘religious freedom.’”
  • The document tells Biden: “We urge you to avoid invoking the phrase ‘Judeo-Christian values,’ as it has been weaponized by the religious right to advance an agenda that has the veneer of inclusivity but actually undermines religious freedom and tolerance and does not represent tens of millions of Americans implicitly excluded from its formulation.

For more information, see “Democrats Demanding Biden Clamp Down on Conservative Christians, Remove Them From Public Office and Re-educate Trump Voters”

The 28 page document can be found HERE

— Read on www.illinoisreview.com/illinoisreview/2021/01/il-congress-member-signs-onto-effort-to-remove-christian-influence-from-american-culture-.html

Mr. T says there’s an antidote for hatred: ‘God’ – The Christian Post

Actor and retired professional wrestler Mr. T has been actively using his platform to promote his Christian faith, which he believes is the antidote to a contagion that’s engulfing the United States. 

As Tech Companies Purge Users, Here Are Some Alternatives | ZeroHedge

By Simon Black at Sovereign Man

By now you’re probably aware of the various purges taking place across tech platforms and social media. Major companies have used the events of January 6th at the US Capitol as an excuse to delete users and deplatform businesses. But the scope of the purge has gone much further than removing calls for violence.

For example, 147 members of Congress are being blacklisted by banks, insurance providers, and hotel companies because they objected to certifying the results of the election.

The entire social media company Parler was shut down when Amazon banned it from its servers, while Apple and Google dropped the app from their stores.

Twitter executed over 70,000 accounts.

PayPal cut ties with the US President, as well as a Christian website that raised funds to send protesters to DC. Shopify removed accounts “associated” with Trump, and payment processor Stripe joined in the purge as well.

Facebook even suspended Ron Paul’s account for a time, before claiming it was a mistake. Ron Paul, keep in mind, has been an outspoken critic of this administration’s defense and monetary policies.

The message is clear: your access, your data, and potentially your livelihood is not safe in the hands of the biggest tech companies, which we have been conditioned to rely on. Express the wrong opinion, and you may be the next casualty.

What this means:

The good news is there are alternatives, and the purge has been a major driving force for people to move to alternative platforms.

For example, Telegram, a private messaging app which allows you to enable encryption in private chats, attracted 25 million new users in a 72-hour period. The app now has over 500 million active daily users worldwide.

Almost 18 million people downloaded the (arguably better) encrypted messaging app Signal between January 5th and January 12th– a 61x increase.

Meanwhile, Facebook-owned WhatsApp’s downloads were down about 20% week on week.

Facebook and Twitter just voluntarily handed market share to their competitors. From January 5-14, Facebook lost over $70 billion of valuation. Twitter lost over $5 billion during the same period.

Don’t go where you aren’t wanted.

Spy-apps that repeatedly censor and abuse their customers have faced calls for an exodus for some time now. But now a critical mass is actually moving, which makes it more likely that the amount of content and users will keep people engaged in social media alternatives.

In that sense, you could consider the purge a good thing.

What you can do about it:

The following are some popular alternatives to common social media platforms. Keep in mind that we aren’t endorsing or vouching for the safety/ privacy of any particular company listed below. The point is to start exploring alternatives so that all your eggs aren’t in one tech-company basket.

Social Networks Alternatives to Facebook and Twitter

  • Gab.com – Similar to Twitter, Gab bills itself as a champion of free speech. It owns and operates its own servers, which means it can’t simply be shut down like Parler. But that also means the website is a little stressed at the moment, as so many new users flock to it.

  • MeWe.com – As a Facebook alternative, MeWe’s main draw is that it does not share or sell user data. But it does state in the user agreement that it reserves the right to terminate users who post “hateful, threatening, harmful” content.

  • Minds.com – This is a blockchain-based social media website which rewards engagement with tokens. Tokens can be used to boost your own content, fund other users, or redeemed for other currency. The website’s code is open source for transparency and accountability, and the content moderation policy is based on the First Amendment.

Private Messaging Alternatives to Whatsapp

  • Signal – This messaging app is end-to-end encrypted so no one can snoop on your communications. And its technology is open source, so anyone who knows the coding language can check that it’s truly secure. Signal does require your phone number to use, but that’s about all the information it collects.

  • Telegram – Plenty of Whatsapp groups are migrating to Telegram for privacy reasons. But it is important to note that only private messages can be encrypted, and even then you have to specifically select the “secret chat” feature.

Video Posting and Viewing Alternatives to YouTube

  • LBRY.com – This is an open source, blockchain-based, decentralized digital content sharing protocol. That means anyone can use it to build apps that allow peer to peer sharing of digital content. But the main selling feature is LBRY.tv or Odysee.com which facilitate the video sharing and viewing portions of the platform. Unlike Youtube, you have ultimate control over your own content.

  • Brighteon.com – Mike Adams, the creator of Natural News, started this video hosting website as a free speech alternative after he was repeatedly censored on YouTube and other social media.

Then there is Brave Browser to replace Chrome, Protonmail to replace Gmail, and plenty of methods to accept cryptocurrency, instead of using typical payment processors.

Clearly, this list is not exhaustive. And in the future we will be talking about more alternatives, and doing a deeper dive on their privacy and accountability. The point is you don’t have to allow these tech giants to have power over you.

— Read on www.zerohedge.com/political/tech-companies-purge-users-here-are-some-alternatives

Joe Biden Looks Totally Lost and Confused After Finishing Up Speech in Delaware (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit

78-year-old Joe Biden on Saturday introduced his “science team” and announced he would be elevating the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to a Cabinet position.

Biden’s ‘science team’ will focus on Covid-19, climate change, technology, the economy and the ‘long-term health of science and tech’ in the US.

This is all a part of the “Great Reset” where Big Pharma and Big Tech will work together to control who can travel, who can work and who can participate in the exchange of commerce.

“We’re going to lead with science and truth,” Biden said at a speech in Delaware. “We believe in both.”

Kamala Harris also spoke on Saturday and blasted ‘climate change deniers.’

“The science behind climate change is not a hoax. The science behind the virus is not partisan. The same laws apply, the same evidence holds true regardless of whether or not you accept them,” Kamala Harris said.

Joe Biden looked totally lost and confused after he wrapped up his speech.

The look on his face says it all.

If he were a Republican, there would be talk of invoking the 25th Amendment.

WATCH:

Here is close up of Joe Biden’s face:

 

Source: Joe Biden Looks Totally Lost and Confused After Finishing Up Speech in Delaware (VIDEO)

Remember the 1991 Gulf War: The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on “The Highway of Death” | Global Research

 

I want to give testimony on what are called the “highways of death.” These are the two Kuwaiti roadways, littered with remains of 2,000 mangled Iraqi military vehicles, and the charred and dismembered bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers, who were withdrawing from Kuwait on February 26th and 27th 1991 in compliance with UN resolutions.

U.S. planes trapped the long convoys by disabling vehicles in the front, and at the rear, and then pounded the resulting traffic jams for hours. “It was like shooting fish in a barrel,” said one U.S. pilot. The horror is still there to see.

On the inland highway to Basra is mile after mile of burned, smashed, shattered vehicles of every description – tanks, armored cars, trucks, autos, fire trucks, according to the March 18, 1991, Time magazine. On the sixty miles of coastal highway, Iraqi military units sit in gruesome repose, scorched skeletons of vehicles and men alike, black and awful under the sun, says the Los Angeles Times of March 11, 1991. While 450 people survived the inland road bombing to surrender, this was not the case with the 60 miles of the coastal road. There for 60 miles every vehicle was strafed or bombed, every windshield is shattered, every tank is burned, every truck is riddled with shell fragments. No survivors are known or likely. The cabs of trucks were bombed so much that they were pushed into the ground, and it’s impossible to see if they contain drivers or not. Windshields were melted away, and huge tanks were reduced to shrapnel.

“Even in Vietnam I didn’t see anything like this. It’s pathetic,” said Major Bob Nugent, an Army intelligence officer. This one-sided carnage, this racist mass murder of Arab people, occurred while White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater promised that the U.S. and its coalition partners would not attack Iraqi forces leaving Kuwait. This is surely one of the most heinous war crimes in contemporary history.

The Iraqi troops were not being driven out of Kuwait by U.S. troops as the Bush administration maintains. They were not retreating in order to regroup and fight again. In fact, they were withdrawing, they were going home, responding to orders issued by Baghdad, announcing that it was complying with Resolution 660 and leaving Kuwait. At 5:35 p.m. (Eastern standard Time) Baghdad radio announced that Iraq’s Foreign Minister had accepted the Soviet cease-fire proposal and had issued the order for all Iraqi troops to withdraw to positions held before August 2, 1990 in compliance with UN Resolution 660. President Bush responded immediately from the White House saying (through spokesman Marlin Fitzwater) that “there was no evidence to suggest the Iraqi army is withdrawing. In fact, Iraqi units are continuing to fight. . . We continue to prosecute the war.” On the next day, February 26, 1991, Saddam Hussein announced on Baghdad radio that Iraqi troops had, indeed, begun to withdraw from Kuwait and that the withdrawal would be complete that day. Again, Bush reacted, calling Hussein’s announcement “an outrage” and “a cruel hoax.”

Eyewitness Kuwaitis attest that the withdrawal began the afternoon of February 26, 1991 and Baghdad radio announced at 2:00 AM (local time) that morning that the government had ordered all troops to withdraw.

The massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Conventions of 1949, Common Article III, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who are out of combat. The point of contention involves the Bush administration’s claim that the Iraqi troops were retreating to regroup and fight again. Such a claim is the only way that the massacre which occurred could be considered legal under international law. But in fact the claim is false and obviously so. The troops were withdrawing and removing themselves from combat under direct orders from Baghdad that the war was over and that Iraq had quit and would fully comply with UN resolutions. To attack the soldiers returning home under these circumstances is a war crime.

Iraq accepted UN Resolution 660 and offered to withdraw from Kuwait through Soviet mediation on February 21, 1991. A statement made by George Bush on February 27, 1991, that no quarter would be given to remaining Iraqi soldiers violates even the U.S. Field Manual of 1956. The 1907 Hague Convention governing land warfare also makes it illegal to declare that no quarter will be given to withdrawing soldiers. On February 26,199 I, the following dispatch was filed from the deck of the U.S.S. Ranger, under the by-line of Randall Richard of the Providence Journal:

“Air strikes against Iraqi troops retreating from Kuwait were being launched so feverishly from this carrier today that pilots said they took whatever bombs happened to be closest to the flight deck. The crews, working to the strains of the Lone Ranger theme, often passed up the projectile of choice . . . because it took too long to load.”

New York Times reporter Maureen Dowd wrote,

“With the Iraqi leader facing military defeat, Mr. Bush decided that he would rather gamble on a violent and potentially unpopular ground war than risk the alternative: an imperfect settlement hammered out by the Soviets and Iraqis that world opinion might accept as tolerable.”

In short, rather than accept the offer of Iraq to surrender and leave the field of battle, Bush and the U.S. military strategists decided simply to kill as many Iraqis as they possibly could while the chance lasted. A Newsweek article on Norman Schwarzkopt, titled “A Soldier of Conscience” (March 11,1991), remarked that before the ground war the general was only worried about “How long the world would stand by and watch the United States pound the living hell out of Iraq without saying, ‘Wait a minute – enough is enough.’ He [Schwarzkopf] itched to send ground troops to finish the job.” The pretext for massive extermination of Iraqi soldiers was the desire of the U.S. to destroy Iraqi equipment. But in reality the plan was to prevent Iraqi soldiers from retreating at all. Powell remarked even before the start of the war that Iraqi soldiers knew that they had been sent to Kuwait to die. Rick Atkinson of the Washington Post reasoned that “the noose has been tightened” around Iraqi forces so effectively that “escape is impossible” (February 27, 1991). What all of this amounts to is not a war but a massacre.

There are also indications that some of those bombed during the withdrawl were Palestinians and Iraqi civilians. According to Time magazine of March 18, 1991, not just military vehicles, but cars, buses and trucks were also hit. In many cases, cars were loaded with Palestinian families and all their possessions. U.S. press accounts tried to make the discovery of burned and bombed household goods appear as if Iraqi troops were even at this late moment looting Kuwait. Attacks on civilians are specifically prohibited by the Geneva Accords and the 1977 Conventions.

How did it really happen? On February 26, 1991 Iraq had announced it was complying with the Soviet proposal, and its troops would withdraw from Kuwait. According to Kuwaiti eyewitnesses, quoted in the March 11, 1991 Washington Post, the withdrawal began on the two highways, and was in full swing by evening. Near midnight, the first U.S. bombing started. Hundreds of Iraqis jumped from their cars and their trucks, looking for shelter. U.S. pilots took whatever bombs happened to be close to the flight deck, from cluster bombs to 500 pound bombs. Can you imagine that on a car or truck? U.S. forces continued to drop bombs on the convoys until all humans were killed. So many jets swarmed over the inland road that it created an aerial traffic jam, and combat air controllers feared midair collisions.

The victims were not offering resistance. They weren’t being driven back in fierce battle, or trying to regroup to join another battle. They were just sitting ducks, according to Commander Frank Swiggert, the Ranger Bomb Squadron leader. According to an article in the March 11, 1991 Washington Post, headlined “U.S. Scrambles to Shape View of Highway of Death,” the U.S. government then conspired and in fact did all it could to hide this war crime from the people of this country and the world. What the U.S. government did became the focus of the public relations campaign managed by the U.S. Central Command in Riyad, according to that same issue of the Washington Post. The typical line has been that the convoys were engaged in “classic tank battles,” as if to suggest that Iraqi troops tried to fight back or even had a chance of fighting back. The truth is that it was simply a one-sided massacre of tens of thousands of people who had no ability to fight back or defend themselves.

The Washington Post says that senior officers with the U.S. Central Command in Riyad became worried that what they saw was a growing public perception that Iraqi forces were leaving Kuwait voluntarily, and that the U.S. pilots were bombing them mercilessly, which was the truth. So the U.S. government, says the Post, played down the evidence that Iraqi troops were actually leaving Kuwait.

U.S. field commanders gave the media a carefully drawn and inaccurate picture of the fast-changing events. The idea was to portray Iraq’s claimed withdrawal as a fighting retreat made necessary by heavy allied military pressure. Remember when Bush came to the Rose Garden and said that he would not accept Saddam Hussein’s withdrawal? That was part of it, too, and Bush was involved in this cover up. Bush’s statement was followed quickly by a televised military briefing from Saudi Arabia to explain that Iraqi forces were not withdrawing but were being pushed from the battlefield. In fact, tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers around Kuwait had begun to pull away more than thirty-six hours before allied forces reached the capital, Kuwait City. They did not move under any immediate pressure from allied tanks and infantry, which were still miles from Kuwait City.

This deliberate campaign of disinformation regarding this military action and the war crime that it really was, this manipulation of press briefings to deceive the public and keep the massacre from the world is also a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the right of the people to know.

Joyce Chediac is a Lebanese-American journalist who has traveled in the Middle East and writes on Middle East issues. Her report was presented at the New York Commission hearing, May 11, 1991.

Source: Remember the 1991 Gulf War: The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on “The Highway of Death”

Death By Vaccine: The Last Things They Wanted You To Hear! (Video) | DC Clothesline

 

“VACCINE DEATHS, ADVERSE EFFECTS”

Recently, a friend of truth, David Knight, reported the deaths of those who have recently received the vaccines and within a very few days they were dead (Proverbs 14:12).

With all of the information that is now available concerning who is behind this criminal conspiracy and what is that is in these untested vaccines, you would think that people would be up in arms by now as well as throwing a whole lot of criminal politicians in jail for their perpetrated fraud upon the very people that they are in fact to serve (Ephesians 4:14).

Here is a look at adverse effects around the world, health professionals balk at vaccination, pharmacist destroys 500 doses intentionally, Romney lays the foundation for the military to push needles into arms and the tragic death of Congressman-elect Letlow, 41, may indicate issues with Fauci’s “standard of care,” Remdesavir (Leviticus 17:11, 19:19).

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media. Article by Bradlee Dean.

Source: Death By Vaccine: The Last Things They Wanted You To Hear! (Video)

Grenell: Susan Rice will be ‘shadow president’ in Biden administration | FOX news

‘I think you need to watch Susan Rice very closely,’ former acting DNI says

Former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice has been tapped to lead the White House Domestic Policy Council in the Biden administration, but former acting DNI Ric Grenell believes she could be in control of a lot more.

“I think you need to watch Susan Rice very closely,” he said on “Sunday Morning Futures.” “She will be the shadow president.”

Grenell called Biden’s pick “interesting” considering Rice has no experience in domestic policy but nonetheless will be “incredibly influential” under the new administration.

SUSAN RICE TAPPED TO LEAD BIDEN’S DOMESTIC POLICY COUNCIL

Having served in the Obama administration as national security adviser, Rice already understands the “entire apparatus,” Grenell said.

Then-national security adviser Susan Rice on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington. President-elect Joe Biden is naming Susan Rice as director of the White House Domestic Policy Council. July 7, 2016. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)

Then-national security adviser Susan Rice on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington. President-elect Joe Biden is naming Susan Rice as director of the White House Domestic Policy Council. July 7, 2016. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)

“I think the reality is, she’s going to be running foreign policy, domestic policy,” he said. “She’s probably extremely happy that Kamala Harris is going to be preoccupied with the Senate… and won’t have a lot of time to get into policy issues.”

Grenell theorized that the Democrats elected Biden because he could be swayed.

“We saw him raise his hand during the Democratic primary for some really radical ideas,” he said. “The progressives have clearly taken over him… And Susan Rice being right there at the White House to be the shadow president is probably exactly where she wants to be.”

Source: Grenell: Susan Rice will be ‘shadow president’ in Biden administration

Report: Biden Already in Talks with World’s Largest State Sponsor of Terror Iran over Return to Nuclear Weapons Pact | Geller Report News

The victory of Donald Trump in 2016 (and 2020) was a response, a complete repudiation of the disastrous Obama presidency. The country will not sit still for Obama 2.0.

Report: Biden Team Already In Talks With Iran Over Return To Nuclear

The Biden administration has already unrolled its plan to return to the 2015 nuclear deal and has begun holding quiet talks with Iran, an Israeli TV station reported Saturday.

Officials for the incoming administration have also updated Israel about the conversations, Channel 12 News said.

A separate report by the Israel Hayom daily said Israel, wary of Biden’s promise to return to the deal, is crafting military options to “undermine Iran’s nuclear efforts or, if need be, counter Iranian aggression, which will soon be presented to the government.”

The paper also quoted Defense Minister Benny Gantz as saying: “Israel needs to have a military option on the table.”

President Donald Trump withdrew from the deal with Iran in 2018 and has since imposed crippling sanctions on Tehran.

During the Obama administration, which spearheaded the deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Israel on occasion threatened to act militarily to prevent Iran from acquiring the bomb.

Also over the weekend, France’s Foreign Minister Jean Yves Le Drian warned Iran aimed to acquire nuclear weapons and blamed Trump for allowing it to happen by quitting the deal.

“The Trump administration chose what it called the maximum pressure campaign on Iran. The result was that this strategy only increased the risk and the threat,” Le Drian told the Journal du Dimanche newspaper.

“This has to stop because Iran and – I say this clearly – is in the process of acquiring nuclear [weapons] capacity,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also said to be putting together a team, which will include representatives form Israel’s security apparatus as well as the Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, the army, the Mossad, and the Atomic Energy Commission, to discuss the deal with the incoming administration, Israeli media reported.

According to Walla News, Mossad chief Yossi Cohen may be appointed to lead the team.

Last week, Netanyahu last week warned against the returning to the deal.

“If we just go back to the JCPOA, what will happen and may already be happening is that many other countries in the Middle East will rush to arm themselves with nuclear weapons. That is a nightmare and that is folly. It should not happen,” Netanyahu said, speaking alongside US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin in Jerusalem.

Iran last week announced that it was resuming enriching uranium to 20 percent, in violation of the accords and a move Israel has warned proves the Islamic Republic is seeking nuclear weapons.

The enrichment is part of a wide-reaching campaign to avenge the November killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the mastermind behind the country’s nuclear weapons program, which Tehran blamed on Israel as well as in response to sanction imposed by the U.S.

According to a New York Times report, Israel was also behind the killing of al-Qaeda’s second-in-command.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that Iran had become al-Qaeda’s new headquarters, and that the two are now “partners in terrorism.”

Britain, France and Germany on Saturday warned that Tehran has “no credible civilian use” for the uranium.

“The production of uranium metal has potentially grave military implications,” said the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany in a joint statement.

Source: Report: Biden Already in Talks with World’s Largest State Sponsor of Terror Iran over Return to Nuclear Weapons Pact

Why They Hate Trump So Deeply | Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

 

undefined

In the words of Ronald Reagan, here we go again. The unbelievable hatred that Democrats, liberals, progressives, and the mainstream press have toward President Trump continues to consume them, with the latest manifestation being a second impeachment of President Trump, just a few days before he leaves office.

Isn’t the purpose of an impeachment to remove a public official from power? Trump is out of power on January 20. The impeachment trial won’t even be held until after January 20. What’s the point?

I’ll tell you the point: hatred — deep, unfathomable, all-consuming hatred for Donald Trump.

After all, if Trump committed a criminal offense by “inciting” an insurrection, a rebellion, a revolution, or a Reichstag Fire, as his detractors are claiming, there is a remedy for that: a criminal prosecution. The Justice Department under President Biden could secure a criminal indictment against Trump the day he leaves office or afterward.

So, why go the impeachment route?

One big reason is the hope that if they can convict Trump, they can then go one critically important step further by voting to disqualify him from ever running for public office again, especially for the presidency.

Trump, of course, has suggested that he might run again in 2024. He already has many millions of dollars in the bank to finance another run. The last thing the Democrats and the mainstream press want is to have Trump back on the campaign trail spouting “End the steal by electing me again.” Given their obvious aim to forever bury any reference to the possibility of fraud in the 2020 election, including by censoring people or simply labeling them as traitors, to have Trump running again spouting off about a fraudulent election would be their worst nightmare. An impeachment conviction followed by a disqualification vote would end that threat.

What is it about Trump that has engendered so much deep hatred and rage among the left?

After all, from a libertarian standpoint, Trump’s term has been an absolutely disaster. His Berlin Wall along the border which he promised would be paid for by Mexico but that was actually financed illegally through the use of a Pentagon slush fund. His destructive trade war with China. HIs continuation of the Pentagon’s and CIA’s forever wars that he promised to end. His deadly and destructive sanctions against Iran. His stoking of a crisis with North Korea, only to fall in love with a communist dictator. And much more that go against the principles of libertarianism.

Yet, despite all of Trump’s anti-libertarian actions, there is no deep visceral hatred among libertarians for the man, as there is among people of the left. In fact, some libertarians even like or respect the guy.

Why is it so different for those on the left?

After all, it’s not as though there are philosophical differences. Both the left and the right, including Trump, favor things like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, the welfare state, farm subsidies, trade restrictions, the Federal Reserve, income taxation, the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, foreign bases, foreign interventionism, coups, alliances with dictators, foreign aid, the drug wars, and much more socialism, interventionism, regulation, militarism, and empire.

And it’s not like the hatred began with the recent Capitol melee. It actually stretches all the way back to the very beginning of Trump’s administration, when the hatred so consumed the left and the mainstream press that they spent the first two years convincing themselves, falsely, that Trump was a covert Russian agent, one whose assignment was to deliver America into the clutches of the nation’s Cold War rival. When that investigation went nowhere, it was followed by Impeachment I, which also went nowhere.

Consider Impeachment II. It provides another good example of the deep hatred that absolutely consumes these people. How much time and deliberation went into that vote? Answer: None. It was done immediately without the careful consideration that should always go into such an important decision.

Blinded by their deep hatred of Trump, the left and the mainstream press would respond, “What is there to deliberate? It’s clear that Trump is guilty of inciting an insurrection.”

Oh, but it is far from clear. In fact, some legal commentators are saying that Trump’s actual words and the timing of his words do not constitute “incitement” under the law. (See here and here).

Moreover, it’s not at all clear that what happened at the Capitol was an “insurrection” or “rebellion” or a “revolution” or a “coup” or a “Reichstag Fire.” It might actually have been nothing more than a peaceful protest gone awry, as protests and demonstrations sometimes do.

Regardless, if Trump himself didn’t do anything illegal, then why should he be impeached? Is the impeachment process to be used to remove a president simply because he is hated by the opposing party or because they disagree with his words or policies?

Indeed, as a libertarian I’d ask why mere words should ever be used to convict a person for “inciting” another person to act. Don’t people have free will? Those Capitol protestors were not automatons or even military personnel. They were perfectly able to say “No” to anyone who “incited” them to engage in illegal conduct. Why should a person who “incites” illegal conduct with mere words but doesn’t actually participate in the illegal conduct be liable for criminal behavior willingly committed by others?

But here’s the point: Why shouldn’t these issues have been carefully discussed and deliberated prior to the impeachment vote? Why weren’t there constitutional and legal scholars summoned to testify as part of the impeachment decision to give their legal opinions on whether Trump has done anything to merit removal from office?

Answer: Because deep hatred causes people to act in impulsive and irrational ways.

Would you like to know the real reason for the deep, unfathomable, uncontrollable hatred and rage that these people have for Donald Trump?

I’ll tell you what it is.

It is acceptable practice for any politician and bureaucrat to criticize things that happen within the Washington, D.C., sandbox in which these people play. But woe to the politician or bureaucrat who challenges the sandbox itself. He is toast.

No president since John Kennedy has dared to do that. Kennedy did it, especially in his famous Peace Speech at American University five months before he was assassinated. He said that the Cold War was a crock and that he was calling an end to it, which, needless to say, constituted a grave threat to the sandbox in which the national-security establishment had been playing and hoped to continue playing for the indefinite future.

We all know what happened to Kennedy, or at least those of us who are not afraid to examine and challenge the dark inner workings of the national-security state sandbox. No president since Kennedy has dared to do that … until Donald Trump came along.

No matter his faults and failures and poor policy decisions, there is one indisputable fact about Donald Trump: He is not like the rest of the Republican and Democrat politicians or their followers and supporters in the mainstream press. During his campaign, he called them out all. He challenged their sandbox or, if you will, their swamp. He appeared to be willing to take on the military and its forever wars as well as the intelligence community and its nefarious, dark-side activities. He garnered lots of support and votes for that stance.

That’s why they hate him. No politician or bureaucrat is supposed to do that. And certainly no president is supposed to do that. Trump was a threat to their established order. He had to be smashed. He has to be terminated. That’s why they are trying desperately to ensure that he departs the political scene and is never permitted to return.

Oh sure, it’s true that for some unknown reason Trump ended up caving to the national-security establishment. Early on, he surrounded himself with generals and warmongers and decided to continue their forever wars. He also surrendered to the CIA’s demands to keep its 50-year-old JFK assassination records secret on the false claim that their disclosure would threaten “national security.”

Nonetheless, the die had been cast. Trump had committed the mortal sin of any national-security state — he had questioned the system itself. He had to go. They have to send a message that this type of thing will never be permitted again.

Reprinted with permission from Future of Freedom Foundation.

Source: Why They Hate Trump So Deeply

Lindsey Graham Asks $64,000 Question: ‘Should We Impeach Barack Obama?’ | The Western Journal

Joined by 10 Republicans, the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives voted last week to impeach President Trump for a second time, a mere week before the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden.

The Senate trial for this politically motivated parting gift is slated to begin after Trump has left the White House. Wherever one stands on the role of Trump’s speech in inciting the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol, the appropriateness of a post-presidency impeachment needs to be examined.

Aside from the fact that new evidence suggests the riot was pre-planned and according to a NPR report (and many others), that the former chief of the U.S. Capitol Police, Steven Sund, said “security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed his early requests to call in the National Guard,” the Democrats have triggered an action that sets a dangerous precedent for both past and future U.S presidents.

On Wednesday night, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is opposed to the impeachment of a former president, appeared on Fox News’ “Hannity.” He said if the Senate chooses to go forward with the Democrats’ foolish gambit, it could lead to future impeachments of former presidents. Graham asked, “Should we impeach Barack Obama because, for 24 hours, he never lifted a finger to help those people under siege in Benghazi? Where does this stop?”

In the terms of the old TV show, it’s the $64,000 question, the question that trumps all others: Is there ever an end to a former president’s culpability of actions taken during his time in office?

The failure in September 2012 of then-President Obama himself, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top administration officials to first prevent Islamic militant group Ansar al-Sharia’s attack on the American diplomatic post in Benghazi, and once it began, to provide assistance to Americans defending the facilities, are well-known and documented.

House Republicans completed a long and formal investigation and issued an exhaustive report in 2016 that detailed the attack that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including a United States ambassador.

In January 2017, Republicans controlled the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives. Anxious to get to work to “Make America Great Again,” the impeachment of the former president for his abdication of duty during the Benghazi assault was not part of their agenda.

Here’s what Graham told Sean Hannity: “We’ll play this out. We impeach the president today without any evidence. It’s just sheer hatred. If this becomes the norm, be careful what you wish for today. Under this theory, the radical left — if you can impeach a president after they’re out of office, why don’t we impeach George Washington? He owned slaves. Where does this stop? So, to my Republican colleagues, let’s stand firm for the idea — whether you like Donald Trump or not, he’s not above the law.”

“If he did something wrong, you know, you can face the consequences of the law. Impeachment is political. What we’re doing here is we’re impeaching the president without any evidence, without any witnesses and we’re going to have a trial after they are out of office. How do you survive as a president in the future? This will be an attack on the presidency in perpetuity.”

Our country is currently in crisis. First, COVID-19 has claimed the lives of nearly 400,000 Americans as of Sunday, according to the Johns Hopkins Coronvirus Resource Center. According to New York Times data, there have been about 23.8 million cases of the virus nationwide. This pandemic has devastated our economy and added trillions to the national debt.

Second, the U.S. must deal with a rising China whose ambition to dominate the planet is a clear and present danger.

Next, the majority of those who voted for Donald Trump believes that the Democrats stole the election through widespread fraud in six battleground states. The political divide in the U.S. is reaching pre-Civil War proportions.

Additionally, the mainstream media long ago lost any pretense of objectivity in reporting the news. It outlets, along with Big Tech, were instrumental in suppressing negative information about Biden and his family, and amplifying stories that were unfavorable to Trump.

The Democrats would rather make a spurious impeachment trial of a former president a major order of business instead of buckling down to address the multiple enormous crises we currently face. It really shows us who they are.

Graham is entirely correct when he said that “if this becomes the norm, be careful what you wish for today.”

Already, the newly minted Republican congresswoman from Georgia, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, has vowed to introduce articles of impeachment against Biden one day after he takes office. She argues Biden was abusing his power as vice president when, in 2015, he gave an ultimatum to then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor general who was investigating Ukrainian energy company, Burisma Holdings, which employed Biden’s son Hunter as a board member, or Ukraine would not receive $1 billion in U.S. aid

Taylor Greene is correct that Biden’s threat, which he boasted about at a 2018 Council on Foreign Relations event, represented a quid pro quo, but do we really want to go down this road?

Do we intend to diminish the gravity of impeachment to such a point where it is used casually and frequently by one party against the other for political gain?

No serious deliberation took place in the House on Wednesday. Democrats delivered reckless and hyperbolic remarks on the House floor without providing any evidence that Trump instigated a riot.

Canadian commentator Conrad Black, as he always does, eloquently explained the Democrats’ folly in pursuing this baseless impeachment in a piece published Saturday.

“The article of impeachment that was passed this week is one third press clippings and contains no plausible legal charge,” he wrote. “Trump is accused of inciting an insurrection, which is a violent uprising against the government; this was what President Lincoln declared when 11 southern states seceded in 1861, starting a Civil War in which 750,000 Americans died.”

Democrats “ignored the months of ‘peaceful protests’ across the country all summer that killed scores of people, injured 700 police, and did $2 billion of damage to mainly minority-owned businesses,” Black continued.

“And now, in the most fatuous exercise in American political history, the House Democrats have launched an impeachment of the president with no argument, no evidence, no witnesses, no due process of any kind, for a proposed trial to remove the president from office well after he will have departed that office at the expiry of his constitutionally fixed term and to do so for conduct that did not occur. This will be a total fiasco and Trump’s enemies in their frenzy are endangering the claim of the United States to be a democracy governed by the rule of law.”

Laughably, the theme for Biden’s forthcoming inauguration is “unity.” If the Democrats truly seek unity, Biden should lean on congressional leadership to end this frivolous action immediately.

Because it doesn’t appear he is doing so, Graham is right to ask, “Where does it stop?” Where indeed.

That’s the $64,000 question — and one Democrats and the mainstream media are unable to answer.

Source: Lindsey Graham Asks $64,000 Question: ‘Should We Impeach Barack Obama?’

Remember When Hollywood Said It Was ‘Patriotic’ and ‘Heroic’ to Overturn Trump’s Election? | PJ Media

 

Martin Sheen. Image from social media video.
Remember when was “sedition” was “patriotic”? When “treason” was “voting your conscience”? Or when a “coups de grace” was “support and solidarity”? It’s understandable if you don’t remember, after all, it was four long years ago in an election far, far away.

There’s been a lot of hyperbolic gobbledygook said about Donald Trump since then, so it’s understandable that this dreck dribbled down the memory hole of dumb things uttered by dumb people.

Four years ago, the Hollywood glitterati produced a video asking Republican members of the Electoral College to ignore the voters and instead dump Donald Trump. They called the video “Unite For America” to “support the electors.”

Oddly, calling for overturning an election was not dismissed out of hand as treasonous or seditious as it is now.

Now, instead of being refused seats on swanky Harvard University committees like Representative Elise Stefanik or being “un-personed” like brilliant Harvard graduates Senator Ted Cruz and Congressman Dan Crenshaw, Hollywood encouraged the electors to be “heroic” and dump Trump because it was “patriotic.”

“The American people trusts that your voice speaks for us all,” intoned one actor.

Another actor affected a grave visage when she lectured from her deep knowledge of the Broadway musical Hamilton – who five minutes ago the Left wanted erased from the $20 bill because was a racist-white-slave-holding founding-father –

“You will make yourself heard on the constitutional responsibility granted to you by Alexander Hamilton himself.”

“You have the position, the authority, and the opportunity to go down in the books as an American hero, Who. Changed. The. Course. Of. History,” said the earnest Martin Sheen-led chorus of professionally lit actors, who play dress up and say words written by other people for a living.

People who routinely dismiss America as a profoundly flawed, racist, and a horrible place to live all of a sudden experienced a frisson of patriotism and implored Republican deplorables that it would be a “service to the American people” in this “great nation” by dumping Trump.

People who had previously dismissed all Trump supporters as white-nationalist-Nazi-racists promised that if they only chose Hillary Clinton, they would “have my respect” … for what that’s worth.

Tom Elliott of Grabien reminds us that, so ardently did the Left want electors to dump the duly elected president, at least one Michigan elector was told he’d be killed with – a “bullet,” a “noose,” or “arson” – if he didn’t vote for Hillary.

 

We agree that raiding the Capitol Building was wrong and the people who did it should be punished.

And let us also agree that wanting an audit of the 2020 hinky election irregularities, as Republican lawmakers asked for, isn’t un-patriotic, treasonous or a coup de grace, either.

 

Source: Remember When Hollywood Said It Was ‘Patriotic’ and ‘Heroic’ to Overturn Trump’s Election?

America’s soaring national debt is a looming disaster | Business Insider

Passengers wearing face masks wait for their bus in front of a national debt display on Pennsylvania Ave. NW in Washington on Monday, May 18, 2020.Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

  • Even as we deal with the economic problems of the pandemic, there’s another crisis looming: our national debt.
  • The problem in the US is our debt isn’t the “good” kind of debt. Our debt continues to rise without promise of repayment, and a majority of tax dollars are spent on mandatory spending.
  • The debt crisis is not going away, and the US needs to understand the consequences of increasing the national debt.
  • Brian Hamilton is the founder of Sageworks and the Brian Hamilton Foundation.
  • This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author.
  • Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

Since the start of the new year, Americans have once again begun to receive more COVID relief checks. In addition to the analysis about the effects on the economy, there has been some discussion about the implications of this for our national debt but. But, to me, there hasn’t been enough.

I often wonder whether economists really understand the nature of debt, because borrowing is not just an economic concept – I believe it is a philosophical one that has economic implications.

Marcus Aurelius said that to understand a man, you have to understand the nature of him. It is difficult to write this article without being too abstract, but the concept of borrowing and debt is confusing, yet understanding the nature of debt is vital and drives everything.

The nature of debt

Borrowing, at its root, is taking money from other people in exchange for a promise to pay it back rather than in exchange for goods or labor. To shore up that promise, a fee is added to that repayment in the form of interest.

On the other hand, the value of work in most cases is derived from the output we personally produce. In this way, earned money is a simpler way to get money because the value of our work directly generates economic value.

When you exercise, you experience some level of pain, but you know that the pain leads to something good. Some medicines don’t taste good, but they are good for you. Studying in school is not always pleasant, but hopefully it leads to more knowledge – a good. Within limits, most of us would agree that exercise, good medicine and studying are clearly good things. There are also things that seem or feel good but may not be good for you. Personally, I like Snickers bars, but they are probably not particularly good for anyone watching their sugar consumption.

In this way, debt at its root is a bad thing because it is money you do not earn through labor – you are taking without giving value at the time of transaction. But, that said, debt could convert into a good thing in certain circumstances.

Borrowing money is a good thing when that money can be reasonably applied to creating more economic good for you and others.

For example, if I own a business and I can borrow money to build or make something that produces economic value, and the cost of the debt is exceeded by the value of what is produced (the investment), then debt is good. Most people would agree with this even though we can’t know for sure whether the cost of debt will be exceeded by the value from deploying it.

Another case is buying a home. Most people need a mortgage loan to purchase a home. In this case, the buyer benefits economically as the home increases in value and the mortgage balance decreases. There is an overall economic net benefit from borrowing in these two cases.

The problem in the US

The problem in the United States today is that our use of debt does not satisfy the conditions for “good” debt. People could make an argument that the country borrowing money to build a road or a tank is a good investment, but it is difficult to evaluate those instances and they are up for debate in many cases. These points, however, are undeniable:

  1. For the past 50 years, the national debt of the country continues to rise. This has been true under both political parties. During the last four years, our national debt has grown a whopping 36%. This will create problems. Would you lend money to someone who never repaid it and kept asking for more money in perpetuity? Or, for investments that clearly don’t return enough to pay down the debt over time?
  2. A rising proportion of what we pay in taxes is going only to mandatory spending, fixed payments on programs like Medicare or financial items like the interest on our outstanding debt that must be funded regardless of the health of the country or our economy. As of now, our country must pay 69.9%of our tax dollars simply to meet fixed obligations that cannot be reduced. In 1962, it was about 32%. You would never lend money to a business that consumes 70% of its revenue just to meet overhead obligations.

For me, COVID has amplified the base assumption that I believe is embedded in the psychology of politicians and the general populace in understanding debt and its consequences. This has manifested itself, not just in temporary payments to people to keep the economy moving (which might be a good thing within a tight range), but in a lack of understanding of the implication of borrowing money instead of earning it.

I’ve listened to a number of economists over the years. Some are concerned with the national debt but they always say the problem is off in the future. Unfortunately, a debt-triggered crisis is not something that can be reversed quickly when it becomes an issue.

The debt crisis of the United States is similar to global warming – it is an incremental but enormous phenomenon that could trigger disaster at a given point. Simply, dealing with the $27.5 trillion in outstanding national debt would be difficult to do if our lenders (us and people outside the United States) ever consider the reality of our strength as borrowers. Suppose they find the US no longer a reliable borrower?

Generally, I don’t like to write doom and gloom pieces since America has a wonderfully resilient economy, but even Tom Brady might not still be playing if his diet consisted of Snickers bars and Oreos.

Brian Hamilton is the founder of Sageworks, where he developed lending software for thousands of U.S. banks and an artificial intelligence platform used to help millions of small businesses understand their financial information. He is also the founder of theBrian Hamilton Foundation, where he serves as the leading voice on the power of ownership to transform lives.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Source: America’s soaring national debt is a looming disaster

Former Facebook Exec Calls For OANN, Newsmax to be Deplatformed: ‘We Have to Turn Down the Capability of Conservative Influencers to Reach Huge Audiences’ (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit

Former Facebook executive Alex Stamos called for conservative news alternatives OANN and Newsmax to be deplatformed during his appearance on CNN Sunday.

Stamos said, “We have to turn down the capability of these Conservative influencers to reach these huge audiences.”

“There are people on YouTube for example that have a larger audience than daytime CNN,” he added and CNN’s Brian Stelter nodded in agreement.

WATCH:

 

Alex Stamos left Facebook after a series of massive failures on his part such asallowing sexualized images of children on the platform yet he believes he is the arbiter of truth.

Source: Former Facebook Exec Calls For OANN, Newsmax to be Deplatformed: ‘We Have to Turn Down the Capability of Conservative Influencers to Reach Huge Audiences’ (VIDEO)

FBI, Justice Department knew there was no Russia collusion by spring of 2017

The top Justice Department official in early 2017 overseeing the FBI’s Russia probe testified he was briefed as many as six times on its status and was told there was no evidence of Trump campaign collusion, a newly released transcript shows.

Source: FBI, Justice Department knew there was no Russia collusion by spring of 2017

‘Pop culture will take your kids to hell,’ warns James Dobson | WND

Dr. James Dobson

The result of Democrats controlling Washington will be “more regulation, less freedom, more taxation, less religious liberty, more socialism, less democracy [and] more funds for abortion,” contends James Dobson.

And, he said in his latest newsletter, there will be “less support for the sanctity of human life, less funding for the military, more illegal immigration, more restrictions on speech, less patriotism, more wasteful spending, less support for families, more regulations on business, more appeasement of China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea, less support for the electoral college, trillions more dollars for climate nonsense, more LGBTQ propaganda, less moral compunction, more governmental corruption, less oversight of elections, more ‘cancel culture,’ fewer police officers, more gun control, and less government of the people, by the people and for the people.”

Dobson is the founder of Focus on the Family, the James Dobson Institute and host of the “Family Talk” radio program.

He previously described Joe Biden’s declared support of transgender surgery for children as “lunacy.” And he warned of Biden’s plan to “bring an open season on the unborn child.” And he said, “Biden’s regime will also usher in other forms of moral depravity.”

Dobson, who has advised multiple presidents, written 71 books and broadcasts on more than 1,300 radio station, said the Democrat’s agenda could cost America its “government of the people, by the people and for the people.”

He said nation is facing a “momentous and dangerous” time.

The U.S. Supreme Court “lamely punted” away an opportunity to evaluate critical issues concerning the legitimacy of the 2020 election, he said.

The court was the “one institution” that could have sort out the truth, he said.

Dobson noted a new Quinnipiac University poll that found 38% of voters believe there was widespread fraud during the November election. But now, he said, the issue is “unresolved.”

With Democrats winning the two Georgia Senate seats, the upper chamber is now in the hands of Vice President Kamala Harris, Dobson noted.

“As I warned in December, there will be no checks and balances within our system of government. The most radical ideas promoted by President Joe Biden and his majority party will be enacted,” he wrote.

For example, he said Americans should expect approval of the “horrendous” Equality Act.

“You might want to keep track of these items as they occur. This is just the beginning,” he said. “America and Western civilization will never be the same, because it is not possible to back up on a freeway. Once radical changes are implemented, they will become ensconced in law and culture. I am most concerned about what all this means for the next generation. Children are extremely vulnerable to leftist curricula in the public schools.

“Specifically, I am worried about parental rights and the legality of home schooling. It is the only protection for kids,” he said. “Writing now to parents and grandparents in 2021, never in history has it been more important for you to defend your kids and your rights to raise them in the fear and admonition of the Lord. Fight for it with your very lives. If you are too intimidated or distracted to give priority to your children, the popular culture will take them to hell.”

He continued: “We conservative Christians are now experiencing one of the most difficult challenges of our lives. Everything we have fought to defend and preserve seems to have been lost. … We conservative Christians have been ridiculed and out-voted at almost every turn. We have won a few battles, but there have been many devastating losses, especially during 2020. Some may be asking, ‘What should we do, Lord?'”

The answer, he said, is to keep battling.

“We must not abandon our conservative politicians who are up against formidable opposition from the Left. Our Bible-believing pastors are facing unrelenting pressure, and it isn’t going to get easier. Godly teachers and professors need to know we have their backs. Many Christians in the military may feel lonely and overwhelmed. Police officers and firefighters need to know we are praying for them. Those of us on the home front must not cut and run. Your children are watching you daily. Don’t disappoint them at this time of crisis. We must stay in the field.”

Source: ‘Pop culture will take your kids to hell,’ warns James Dobson

CDC recommends wearing mask, social distancing even after receiving vaccine

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said on Friday that people should, “continue to #WearAMask over your nose and mouth, stay 6 feet from others, avoid crowds, and wash your hands,” even after getting vaccinated for COVID-19.

Source: CDC recommends wearing mask, social distancing even after receiving vaccine

January 17 Evening Quotes of the Day

Do Not Spare Sin; It Will Not Spare You
Romans 8:13; Colossians 3:5

Use sin … as it will use you. Spare it not, for it will not spare you. It is your murderer, and the murderer of the world. Use it therefore as a murderer should be used. Kill it before it kills you; and then, though it kill your bodies, it shall not be able to kill your souls; and though it bring you to the grave, as it did your head, it shall not be able to keep you there. If the thoughts of death, and the grave, and rottenness, are not pleasant to you, do not let the thoughts of sin be pleasant. Listen to every temptation to sin as you would listen to a temptation to self-murder, and as you would do if the devil brought you a knife and tempted you to cut your throat with it; so do when he offers you the bait of sin.

RICHARD BAXTER

Ritzema, E., & Vince, E. (Eds.). (2013). 300 Quotations for Preachers from the Puritans. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Too Much Studying Is Sloth
1 Corinthians 8:1–2; 1 Timothy 3:5; 5:13

To spend too much time in studies is sloth; to use them too much for ornament is affectation.

FRANCIS BACON

Ritzema, E. (2013). 300 Quotations for Preachers from the Reformation. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

%d bloggers like this: