▶️ VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: GENOCIDAL HYPOCRITES
⭐️ HelloKitty’sGotAHairTrigger
VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: GENOCIDAL HYPOCRITES
sss
n October 7, 2023, Hamas killers slaughtered 1,200 people, more than two-thirds of them civilians, inside Israel. For the ensuing three weeks, they refused Israel’s demands to turn over the 251 hostages and to surrender the architects of the massacre. No matter—within a day of the attacks, when Hamas gunmen were still fighting Israeli troops on Israeli soil, the American Left was already screaming “genocide!”
They did not mean Hamas’s intended genocide of Jews, a foretaste of which was seen when it launched a surprise invasion force of more than 4,000 terrorists some 15 miles into Israel. The killers were accompanied by some 2,000 “innocent” Gazan “civilians.” All were bent on looting, murder, rape, torture, and hostage-taking of the defenseless.
Nor did the “genocide” chorus refer to the more than 13,000 rockets, missiles, and drones launched from Gaza after October 7 that predominantly targeted Israeli civilian neighborhoods.
What was most surreal about the charges of “genocide” against Israel—along with all the other slurs of “settler-colonialism, apartheid, occupation, war crimes”—was they so often came from elite first- and second-generation Middle Eastern immigrants to America. Yet these prominent American accusers have remained silent about whether their lurid accusations might far better reflect the sordid histories of their own homelands.
Take the Turkish-American anchor baby Hasan Piker, the millionaire podcaster who has dual citizenship and grew up in Turkey. Piker has gained celebrity as the socialist heartthrob who is the brain of the new Democratic/Socialist/Islamist alliance. Besides his antisemitic rants, he has declared that “America deserved 9/11” and “Oh God, I f-cking hate America so much.”
Yet the outspoken Piker has only once in passing mentioned Turkey’s 1974 invasion and the half-century-long occupation of nearly 40 percent of Cyprus.
Nor did Piker, who damns the creation of Israel in 1948, ever say a word about the Turkish torching of the historic Greek-majority Ionian city of Smyrna in 1922, in which tens of thousands of civilians were incinerated.
Given Piker’s supposedly vast historical recall and outspoken human rights advocacy, one would at least expect him to be sensitive to the horror of Turkey’s Armenian genocide, in which Turkish troops slaughtered more than one million civilians, and for which the Turkish government still denies any culpability. But when once challenged by Armenian-Americans, he dismissed them, saying flippantly, “It’s more fun to enrage you.” And the pattern goes beyond mere podcasters.
Representative Ilhan Omar, a first-generation immigrant from Somalia, also brays loudly about supposed Israeli war crimes. Omar spouts “genocide” and “apartheid” in her frequently antisemitic rants. She has also labeled her adopted nation as “one of the worst countries” in the world.
But Omar is the daughter of a well-known colonel in the truly genocidal army of Somali dictator Siad Barre. The latter waged a decade-long war of extermination against the rival Isaaq clan that opposed Barre’s 21-year-long dictatorship. Estimates of the Barre regime’s murderous toll range from 50,000 to 200,000 killed, mostly civilians. Few in Omar’s politically active Somali immigrant community ever concede that many fled Somalia to America only when Barre’s two-decade reign of terror was finally overthrown, and they feared retaliation from his victims.
Of course, the nation’s biggest elected leftist rising star has also joined in. Zohran Mamdani, mayor of New York City, employs the same tired anti-Israeli and anti-American verbiage. Yet he went further than other anti-Semites when he launched grandstanding threats to jail Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu any time the latter visited New York to address the United Nations.
For America’s 250th birthday, Mamdani’s July 3 “commemorative” address blasted American “monopolies that dominate every industry,” federal agents supposedly “terrorizing our streets,” and a country where we “sell our elections to the highest bidder.” The calumny was odd coming from a dual citizen of the police state of Uganda, where there are no real elections but lots of Indian “monopolies.”
Indeed, Mamdani himself better fits his own charges of “settler-colonist” and “apartheid.” His Indian community in Uganda comprises less than 0.1 percent of the population. But somehow it still accounts for over 60 percent of Uganda’s GDP. It was implanted there by 19th-century British imperialists as a “settler-colonial” community to help control the indigenous black population.
In short, we should remind these privileged ingrates—regardless of what corner of the world they hail from—to look inward before they blast their adopted country and not to project the sins of their own homelands upon either Israel or America. ✪
▶️ JB SHURK: A FAILING CANADA & ENGLAND BLAME TRUMP & PUTIN
⭐️ HelloKitty’sGotAHairTrigger
JB SHURK: A FAILING CANADA & ENGLAND BLAME TRUMP & PUTIN
jjj
ing Charles III’s North American prime minister, Mark Carney, ran to The New York Times last week to talk about his military combat preparations against the United States in the event that President Trump crosses Lake America and liberates Canada from its delusional leaders. What a showboating dunce. The U.S. singlehandedly sustains Canada’s economy and national security, yet the tiny central banker huffed and puffed in a hilariously Napoleonic display of fake strength.
In the same interview with the failing Times, Con-man Carney outlined his intent to integrate Canada’s economy with that of China and the European Union and to replace the U.S. Dollar with a China-linked global reserve currency. Rhetorically defending Canada’s sovereignty while insulting his U.S. benefactor, Little Mark Carney explained how he would subjugate his socialist nanny-state to Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping and unelected European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Mark is the global mascot for “educated” idiots everywhere.
Not to be outdone by not-so-Great Britain’s Canadian cousin, U.K. Prime Minister Poindexter (er, I mean Andy Burnham) informed the United Nations General Assembly last week his government was constructing yet another speech-police organization (this one given the august name, “National Centre for Information Defence,” which should not be confused with the “Research, Information, and Communications Unit,” the “Government Communication Service,” the “Counter Disinformation Unit,” the “Defending Democracy Taskforce,” the “Information Threats and Influence Directorate,” the “Rapid Response Unit,” the “National Cyber Force and Social Cohesion Taskforce,” the “Media Monitoring Unit,” or any of the other information-control agencies already mobilized across totalitarian Britain) to protect the British people from scary thoughts and words.
Burnham blamed the Russians for spreading “a narrative of decline, stoking division, and sowing despair” in the U.K. (and definitely not Westminster’s promotion of decline, division, and despair!) and promised to counteract this “information warfare” by censoring Britons’ public speech and feeding his collapsing country a steady diet of State-sanctioned propaganda. In order to beat back the Russians, Dilapidated Britain must have its very own digital Iron Curtain! Two cheers for democracy! Hip hip…who cares.
The British people are screwed. On average, their government grants settlement or citizenship to an illegal alien every single minute. These foreign nationals receive more welfare from British taxpayers than ever before. The third-world invaders (I mean, “newcomers”) use Britain’s streets as public toilets. Rather than securing the kingdom’s borders, the Home Office hands out a nine-page booklet informing mostly-Muslim men of military age that it is illegal to rape women and children while they conquer the islands. In the last two years alone, the number of illegal immigrants (and future citizens!) arriving by boat has exceeded the size of the entire British Army! But if these outrageous facts disturb you enough to publicly express your feelings on social media, you will most likely join the roughly 65,000 Brits who have been arrested for “speech-related offenses” over the last five years. Foreign invasion? Good! Free speech? Very bad!
Apparently, the British police state also plans to imprison anyone who would rather not fight WWIII against the Russian Federation. During a recent episode of former cabinet minister Jacob Rees-Mogg’s “State of the Nation” on GB News, one leftist-globalist commentator in favor of mass conscription argued, “We would have to lock a few people up…some of the pro-Russian voices, people saying there isn’t a threat, don’t fight for your country, don’t go to war for Burnham, we’ll have to lock ‘em up.” Rather than responding with horror at the suggestion that his fellow Britons should be imprisoned for opposing a catastrophic war, Rees-Mogg pedantically replied, “Well, we suspended habeas corpus during the Napoleonic Wars…indeed, yes.” In another interview, Rees-Mogg nonchalantly remarked that British citizens have a “duty” to “die” for Britain in a war against Russia.In Burnham and Rees-Mogg’s Britain, the only way to “defend democracy” is to imprison anyone who disagrees with the British Establishment and to sacrifice everyone else to the killing fields! The British Isles might as well be renamed the “Gulag Archipelago.”
Interestingly, GB News — which leans conservative — discovered last week that Britain’s media regulator, the Office of Communications (Ofcom), had covered up data showing that viewers trust GB News more than the BBC. GB News, in fact, is ranked above all other networks with regard to viewpoint diversity and impartiality. British authorities apparently did not want the public to know these inconvenient truths because the BBC is treated as an objective, trustworthy, and premier source of news (fact check: false!). In an effort to control the public’s perception of the BBC, Ofcom restricted what information the public was permitted to know. P.M. Burnham takes the “defense of information” very seriously!
How seriously? Burnham and the British government force citizens to pay for the BBC’s awful dreck whether they watch it or not! Every household in the U.K. must fork over a £180 license fee to the BBC each year. Because more households are refusing to pay the license, the government is considering the imposition of a mandatory £11-a-month Internet tax in order to keep the BBC’s fake news funded. The BBC says that the “fee is essential for maintaining the quality and diversity of public broadcasting in the UK.”
What does “quality and diversity” look like at the BBC? Two “reporters” just did a major exposé describing how women who don’t polish their nails perpetuate “white supremacy.” No joke! “Nail art’s historical and creative roots are linked back to black, Latino, and Asian communities and the suggestion that bare nails are now a sign of high status could stigmatise bold manicures,” the BBC “reports. “They are often called elegant or tasteful, and these are often usually euphemisms that perpetuate white supremacist standards of beauty.” Yes, Burnham, force Britain’s working-class to pay for this race-baiting propaganda posing as hard news!
Earlier this year, British authorities announced YouTube and other social media platforms would be forced to manipulate their algorithms and push BBC “news” to the top of feeds in order to counter “disinformation.” In other words, Whitehall steals money from British citizens to pay for State-run TV and then forces them to watch it. During the Cold War, we called that Soviet-style propaganda. Yet if you ask the fake “reporters” at the BBC, Canada’s publicly-funded CBC, or America’s NPR or PBS, all these propagandists would insist that they have nothing in common with the Soviet Union’s Pravda or the Russian Federation’s RT (Russia Today) News. In the West, State-funded media are somehow not State media. Does that sound more like propaganda or breaking news?
Britain’s State-imposed “narrative control” is utterly totalitarian. Dismissing the “narrative of decline” and “despair” in Britain as a “corrosive narrative…which bears no resemblance to reality” and a “distorted and untrue narrative about Britain,” P.M. Burnham casts all public dissent as “far-right narratives.” As military historian Professor Michael Rainsborough mocks, “The problem isn’t the problem, the problem is the people noticing the problem.” Rainsborough points out that right after Burnham rebranded “decline” as “disinformation,” the prime minister laid out a “10-year plan” to fight inflation, housing costs, hopelessness, inequality, and division. “The narrative of decline,” in other words, “bears no resemblance to reality, although reality apparently requires a 10-year plan.”
Both Canada and Britain are failing. The public has noticed. Carney and Burnham wish to whitewash reality with fake “narratives.” The worse things become, the more difficult it will be for their ministries of truth to succeed. Expect the BBC to blame Trump, Putin, and “white supremacy.” ✪
▶️ YOU REALLY DON’T WANT DEMOCRATS TO WIN THE MIDTERMS
YOU REALLY DON’T WANT DEMOCRATS TO WIN THE MIDTERMS
lll
o, you’re thinking about sitting out the midterms. Or you might just vote Democrat to protest. The Iran war has dragged on too long, you say. Months rather than weeks hardly make it Vietnam, though. Casualties are minor.
▶️ 11 Minutes 35 Seconds
Consider: Iran with nuclear weapons would be an uber-terror state. It would pose a 24/7 threat to U.S. security. Victor Davis Hanson is right: Breaking Iran is a gift, yet hard to appreciate now. Higher gas, diesel, and grocery prices are chewing up your budget. No argument. But relief is coming.
The midterms are playing out in a broader context. They’re threshold elections for Democrats. They’re crossing over into socialism. When you appreciate how extreme their agenda is about to become, maybe it would be wise to temper your disgust with Trump and Republicans? For Democrats, there’s no turning back.
Democrats aren’t merely jumping the shark. They’ve been moving left since Woodrow Wilson. Once venerated, Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson are thoroughly reviled by the rank and file. JFK was an outlier.
Full-throttle socialism is Democrats’ logical destination. And not years from now. With socialism comes rigid top-down governance. “Collective” rights over individual rights. Less is more mantras. A potential climate “holocaust” –– unending kudos to grifter Al Gore — makes draconian economic policies mandatory. Do you appreciate how “greens” have hobbled Germany’s economy?
The vanguard, for the benefit of us witless masses, must impose everything from values to personal conduct. China’s ever-evolving surveillance state is a model for American leftists. Flock cameras are a beachhead. Big Brother must watch. Social deviants are to be punished.
Democrats are experiencing generational change, which means sharper conflicts lie ahead. Not within the party, however. Craven, power-hungry establishment Democrats will bend. The ongoing cold war between the left and traditional America is bound to intensify. When it reaches a climax and what that looks like is anyone’s guess. It likely doesn’t end with smiles and handshakes over coffee and poundcake.
The rising generation of Democrats is embracing the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which wants a government-run economy. The DSA has declared for gutting the Constitution. From the DSA’s “Our Campaigns” webpage:
The party will be united around a democratically created program that outlines goals that, enacted together, will allow the working class to rule and end capitalism.
What does working-class rule translate to? Key DSA aims: A new constitution to create a “democratic socialist republic.” Abolishing the Senate and the Electoral College and replacing the president and Supreme Court with an executive committee and high court selected by a unicameral legislature. Extending the franchise to permanent alien residents (noncitizens). Oh, and a goody bag full of other anti-liberty and anti-American propositions.
Do you believe that Zohran Mamdani is unserious? He’s serious as hell. But, no worries, he’ll fail, you say? But if socialism goes a while and then fails, there’s always wreckage, always ruined lives, and if enough people embrace socialism before it crashes, the wreckage and ruin won’t just be contained to New York City.
Progressive Democrats are toxic enough. You know, Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren, Chris Murphy, Hakeem Jeffries — the usual suspects. We need only cast our minds back to Biden’s White House sojourn. It was a mishmash of bad economics, wide open borders, degenerate woke social policies, a thoroughly corrupt FBI, therapeutic policing (meaning, soft on crime), disaster in Afghanistan, and kowtowing to China and, yep, Iran.
When Nancy Pelosi assumed the U.S. House speakership in 2019, what was the first measure out of the chute? Legislation to gut fair elections. Pelosi wanted to enact federally many “temporary” state-level 2020 election measures that caused half the country to doubt the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s election.
If Democrats capture Congress, what happens? Resurrected, the old, familiar bevy of investigations and impeachment to hamstring Trump. They’ll resurface the worst of Biden’s policies. But, of necessity, they’ll introduce some hard left legislation to pacify the growing cohort of socialists among them.
Democrat-Socialists won’t be satisfied doubling, tripling, or quadrupling down on Biden’s follies. They mean to go full Karl. Consider pro-abortion advocates. Many have dispensed with the pretense of being pro-choice. Marx idolaters are brazenly promoting all the hokum that socialists and communists have peddled for nearly two centuries. Many imbibed this poison at universities. That’s why university administrations and faculties need to be confronted and cleaned out, but that’s a subject for another day.
Suffice it to say, across the globe, when socialism rears its ugly head, peoples have witnessed societal catastrophe after catastrophe, and body counts in the tens of millions. Full Karl — from Russia to China to Vietnam to North Korea to Cambodia to Cuba — are bleak testaments. But it can’t happen here, huh?
According to Gallup, socialism is regarded as positive by 40% of Americans. The skew? Among the 18-34 crowd. 57% think going hard left is swell. You don’t trust polls, then go visit a college campus or hang out at a Starbucks. Your eyes and ears won’t betray.
But socialism isn’t today’s problem, right? You’re sick and tired of stretching your paycheck. It’s time to send Trump a message.
If Democrats take the House and/or Senate, the final two years of Trump’s presidency will be scuttled. All the chaff surrounding the war has obscured Trump’s remarkable accomplishments — accomplishments made in just 20 months.
Here goes: Border and immigration victories, which are ongoing. Plummeting murder rates. The “One Big Beautiful Bill” is huge, ongoing tax relief. No tax on tips and Social Security. Trillions of dollars in new foreign investments are or will be pouring into the country. Tariffs are revitalizing the domestic steel industry. Yes, energy production is up here. Venezuelan oil production facilities are being modernized, and oil will arrive more sooner than later. Federal DEI programs are being eliminated. Female athletes are being shielded from Democrat-supported trans infiltration.
Imagine how much more Trump can achieve in his final two years without Democrat obstruction?
Finally, Iran is reaching a breaking point. Trump’s warning to Iran during his speech at the United Nations couldn’t have been starker: Quit or face annihilation. Operation Economic Outcast is biting hard. Ther Iranian economy is faltering. Per Al Jazeera:
Tehran, Iran – Amid dire fuel shortages and mounting economic challenges, the Iranian government is seeking cost-saving measures for government workers and other citizens to deal with the crisis. And the New York Post reported Secretary Scott Bessent saying:
“Probably within the next two weeks, they are going to make their final deliveries of oil to China, and then they will have nothing, It is an empty set. And I believe that they are feeling the pressure here, and that’s why they want a deal.”
Lower gas and energy prices are in the offing. The Strait of Hormuz is opened. WTI crude has plummeted to $91 a barrel (as of this writing) from a high of $105 on September 14.
Yeah, you’ve heard it before. Trump miscalculated the war’s duration, no doubt. But what remains of the Iranian regime gets that when food becomes scarer and nights grow cold, their citizens will grow bolder. Their rule hangs in the balance.
With Trump’s leadership, the next couple of years promise to be brighter and better. Backing the president and keeping a GOP Congress is vital. It’s critical in stopping socialists from gaining footholds. Vote Republican because the alternative is full of regrets. ✪
▶️ TRUMP SAYS HE REGRETS HIS THREE SUPREME COURT PICKS
TRUMP SAYS HE REGRETS HIS THREE SUPREME COURT PICKS
lll
resident Donald Trump said he regrets nominating all three of the Supreme Court justices he appointed during his first term, according to an interview published Thursday.
The president told TIME Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, the three he placed on the high court between 2017 and 2020, have voted against him too often since taking the bench.
Asked whether he regretted the nominations, Trump pointed to the appointments he had handed each justice.
“Yeah. Yeah. What can I do? I put them in,” Trump said. “They voted against me too often. I was very—I gave them the position of a lifetime, and they vote against me often. They vote for me too.”
The president tied his frustration to the court’s rulings on birthright citizenship and his emergency tariffs.
“It’s unfortunate what they did—not to me, to our country,” Trump said of the citizenship ruling. “And it’s become a corrupt business, all because of the Supreme Court decision.”
The court in June found Trump’s order restricting birthright citizenship unlawful, with Barrett and Kavanaugh in the majority and Gorsuch dissenting.
The President also faulted the justices over a February ruling that struck down his global tariffs, arguing a single clause could have spared the government a major payout.
“All they had to do was a little clause saying any money paid does not have to be paid back…would have saved $400 billion,” Trump said. “They chose not to save that.”
Trump praised the court’s Democrat appointees for voting as a bloc, saying he admired their loyalty, before the interviewer asked whether loyalty was what he wanted from his own picks.
“I do like loyalty, yeah,” Trump said. Pressed on the point, he added: “No, I don’t want loyalty. I want good decisions.”
The remarks come weeks after Trump criticized the same justices over a September ruling that declined to let a Postal Service directive restrict mail-in ballots ahead of the midterms, a decision he called “another bad decision” from a court he said had been “bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left.”
“These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. ✪
▶️ ACTIVISTS WANT THE SC TO IMPOSE GREEN NEW DEAL ON VOTERS
ACTIVISTS WANT THE SC TO IMPOSE GREEN NEW DEAL ON VOTERS
kkk
n Oct. 5, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County. In Suncor, the court will consider whether Federal law and the Constitution’s structure bar state-law public nuisance claims seeking to impose liability for alleged local harms attributed to interstate and international greenhouse gas emissions. At stake is whether leftist activists are allowed to weaponize our legal system to bankrupt lawful industries in a last-ditch effort to tear down our capitalist system.
For a generation, left-wing activists have tried to sell the broader electorate on the fundamental reshaping of our economy and way of life. Luckily, it hasn’t worked. Democratic socialism has gained a foothold in some progressive jurisdictions, but the systemwide overhaul that anti-capitalist activists desire has never come to fruition, and for good reason: Voters have heard the pitch and rejected it in election after election.
Now, rather than merely continuing to pursue these unpopular policies in Congress or at the ballot box, the activist Left is more heavily resorting to less democratic tactics. Suncor is part of a mounting campaign of leftists’ ideological lawfare. Close to three dozen climate change liability lawsuits are proliferating in state courts across America, filed by blue states and municipalities against the energy industry.
Plaintiffs, including Boulder, contend their suits are merely about recovering damages from energy companies for their alleged contribution to global carbon emissions. They insist that local infrastructure damage resulting from weather events such as floods, droughts, and wildfires can be traced back to the conduct of specific companies. Boulder hopes a jury will let it pin more than a century of worldwide emissions from innumerable sources, including the plaintiffs, on a handful of energy companies.
If those behind Boulder’s suit can win through a courtroom the policy outcomes they could not win at the ballot box, voters lose their voice and Congress loses its authority over national policy.
✪ Bankrupting Energy Companies
The plaintiffs’ theory of causation is legally baseless, but the threat these suits pose should not be ignored. If unchecked, this lawfare campaign seems almost purpose-built to bankrupt an industry that the left disfavors and to siphon its resources toward left-wing priorities. Adverse verdicts could extract tens of billions of dollars from the energy sector and effectively impose a national carbon tax on American consumers. Gas prices and utility bills would soar, left-wing activists and green advocates would cheer, and working families would bear the cost.
The activists pushing these lawsuits are unbothered by that outcome. In fact, a lawyer representing Boulder predicted the bankruptcy of American energy companies is a likely result of the lawsuits.
✪ Destroying Capitalism
Leftists are trying to weaponize our legal system to bankrupt lawful industries in a last-ditch effort to tear down our capitalist system.
The Green Movement behind this lawfare campaign believes the only way to build its green utopia is to destroy capitalism and reshape our way of life. In 2014, the Sierra Club published an article about climate activist Naomi Klein’s book This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate, which argued the only way to stop climate change is to overhaul our free-market system entirely.
Other groups like System Change Not Climate Change believe social transformation and anti-capitalist revolution are necessary to “address immediate ecological concerns.” Extinction Rebellion, a group that calls for “civil disobedience” as a response to climate change, has described capitalism as the “engine” behind “the biggest death project in human history.” Taking that logic to its extreme, Public Citizen has advocated for charging energy companies with criminal homicide. And last year, the energy industry was hit with the first climate “wrongful death” lawsuit, which a judge in Washington state has since allowed to proceed.
Look under the hood and it becomes clear that this activist-driven campaign will not stop with the energy industry. Any sector, company, or product that can be even loosely tied to climate change will be targeted. In 2024, California Attorney General Rob Bonta launched a lawsuit over plastics. Automakers, manufacturers, cattle ranchers, and every other carbon-emitting industry should expect a flood of lawsuits if Boulder’s case is not stopped.
The Supreme Court should make clear that Boulder’s effort to force societal change through litigation is unlawful and end this lawfare campaign once and for all. ✪
▶️ CHRISTA PIKE LIKELY BRAIN DAMAGED FROM FAILED EXECUTION
CHRISTA PIKE LIKELY BRAIN DAMAGED FROM FAILED EXECUTION
kkk
he just wouldn’t die. Christa Pike should be dead. She should’ve been dead on Wednesday, but a stay was issued regarding a review of mitigating circumstances in her case. In 1995, Pike brutally tortured and murdered Colleen Slemmer, whom she felt was trying to steal her boyfriend. After beating and cutting her, Pike bashed Slemmer’s head in with a rock and kept a piece of her skull. She’s a bad woman who deserves to die.
Yet, when it was ordered to proceed with her execution Wednesday night, she didn’t die. Two lethal injection attempts, and she was later rushed to the hospital. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee has postponed all executions for the rest of 2026. Pike is set to be the first woman executed in the state in over 200 years. Pike remains in critical condition, with reported brain damage.
From The Post:
The death row inmate Christa Pike was in critical condition and receiving medical care, her lawyers said Thursday, a day after Tennessee’s failed attempt to execute her. They called for Gov. Bill Lee to reduce her sentence to life in prison, calling the botched attempt to end her life with two doses of pentobarbital “cruel and torturous.”
The failed execution on Wednesday night was the state’s second bungled death penalty attempt this year, and Mr. Lee on Thursday said he was suspending executions — including Ms. Pike’s — to allow an independent review.
Lawyers for Ms. Pike said that did not go far enough, and urged Mr. Lee to take her off death row. “This is awful, and this kind of thing should never happen again,” said one of her lawyers, Randy Spivey.
Mr. Lee previously denied a similar request and his office did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. Speaking to reporters earlier Thursday, he said the failed execution “shouldn’t have happened.” He added, “We should find out what happened and make those changes necessary to do what the people of this state want done.”
The governor said it was not immediately clear who would conduct the independent review, but said that the Tennessee Department of Correction appeared to have followed its procedures.
Ms. Pike, 50, was to become the first woman to be executed in Tennessee in more than 200 years. It was not clear why the execution attempt failed. Mr. Spivey said it had taken an hour to establish an intravenous line, and that he had counted seven needles used in her left arm alone.
In 1996, Ms. Pike was found guilty of torturing and murdering a classmate, Colleen Slemmer, in an attack carried out with her boyfriend and another friend. They slashed at Ms. Slemmer with a box cutter, carved a pentagram into her chest and removed a piece of her skull.
Ms. Slemmer’s mother, May Martinez, has long favored Ms. Pike’s execution. “Nobody remembers Colleen,” she told The New York Times last month. ✪
▶️ CURRENT HIGH ENERGY PRICES WERE DECADES IN THE MAKING
CURRENT HIGH ENERGY PRICES WERE DECADES IN THE MAKING
kkk
t is a common cliché to say that social media and the deluge of content we consume each day have significantly hampered, if not entirely destroyed, our attention spans. Sometimes it seems like memory itself may be a vestige of a bygone era, when we connected current events to past decisions and, almost like magic, learned to take different actions.
Current high energy prices are blamed on the war in Iran, which started seven months ago. While true, not all cost increases are the result of this relatively new market dynamic.
Numerous Federal and state policy and regulatory choices made over more than a decade ago have played their own roles in current and past pain at the pump.
As recently as 2024, energy was rarely spoken of without its companion “sustainability,” by which advocates meant “transitioning” away from reliable fossil fuels to more intermittent sources (though this last part was not said out loud).
Actions matched that rhetoric. On day one in office, President Joe Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline project and was applauded for it. If he had not canceled it, more crude oil would have been brought to U.S. refineries, boosting fuel supplies and supporting lower prices. The Biden Administration was overtly hostile to increased fossil fuel exploration and production, taking aggressive actions to strictly limit emissions from fossil fuel-powered electric generation plants, which would have led to numerous base load plant closures for noncompliance.
Let’s not forget the 2024 LNG [liquified natural gas] export pause, where then-Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said that LNG was in the “rear-view mirror,” at CERAWeek, one of the world’s largest energy events. At a time when U.S. LNG companies were stepping in to fill the supply gap following Europe’s divorce settlement from Russian gas, our policymakers decided to hit the brakes.
Then there is the matter of the small refinery exemption (SRE) to the Renewable Fuel Standard, the Federal requirement fuel sold in the United States contain a minimum volume of renewable fuels. Enacted in 2005, this policy has incentivized numerous refineries to keep production below 75,000 barrels per day so they do not have to comply with onerous renewable fuel blending requirements. But good intentions do not make good policy. The program has been mired in overly bureaucratic administration and compliance nightmares, all the while keeping production at SRE-eligible refineries depressed.
There are also a host of state policy actions specifically designed to raise energy prices.
Cap-and-trade programs, which some states have adopted, put a price on emissions which increases fuel costs through refineries having to pay fees for producing gasoline and diesel. Likewise, low-carbon fuel standards, which also exist in a handful of states, add compliance costs and reduce refinery input flexibility, both of which increase your price at the pump.
State anti-energy price actions go beyond just costly emissions schemes and fuel blends. Led by California and New York, a handful of states have banned fracking or strictly curtailed oil and gas exploration, and across the Northeast, states have fought tooth and nail to block pipelines that bring crude oil and refined products to market.
The elected officials who run these states failed to investigate the real-world confluence of the results of these policies for energy availability and prices. They were focused on pursuing at any cost net zero, sustainability, ESG and “renewable” intermittent sources of energy.
Now they’re all preaching the gospel of energy affordability as if it can just be plucked out of thin air when needed.
Residents of states like California, Washington, Oregon, New York, Maryland and a few others are currently living with the natural result of decades of anti-fossil fuel policy agendas. But that’s not convenient to discuss.
Rather, amid price increases, those looking for a short-term political fix are, predictably, dusting off the usual playbook: export bans and additional taxes on companies for making a profit while serving market demands. And while those things may be tempting, especially with voters heading to the polls in a few weeks, we know, from memory, that they will have the opposite of their intended effect.
Instead, our leaders at both the state and federal levels should take a real, objective look at the energy policies on the books and ones under consideration and assess them through a simple lens: will this actually make energy more abundant and, therefore, more affordable? It doesn’t take an expert to know which path to choose. ✪
▶️ HALF OF AIRLINE PILOTS WHO CRASH PLANES ARE MUSLIM
HALF OF AIRLINE PILOTS WHO CRASH PLANES ARE MUSLIM
kkk
assenger airline crashes are unusual, intentional ones are rare and intentional pilot crashes are virtually unheard of. Passenger planes are generally flown by highly trained airline pilots, many of them are veterans of their respective air forces, and they remain calm in a crisis.
That’s why there hasn’t been a single case of an American airline pilot deliberately crashing a plane and only one case of an airline pilot taking down a western plane with all onboard and that took place in 2015 when a suicidal first officer crashed Lufthansa’s Germanwings Flight 9525.
The only other case involving a western pilot, but not a western airline, was the crash of Mozambique Airlines Flight TM470 in Africa by a Portuguese pilot. Every other case has involved non-western pilots with two Asian pilots and four Muslim pilots deliberately crashing or trying to crash planes: including the first known deliberate crash of a passenger plane by an airline pilot that took place in 1994 when Captain Younes Khayati deliberately disabled the autopilot on Royal Air Maroc Flight 630 and crashed the plane into a mountain.
The list of Muslim suicide pilots also includes EgyptAir Flight 990 in 1999 where the first officer kept shouting “Allahu Akbar” while downing the plane as well as Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, the subject of endless fantastic conspiracy theories ranging from UFOs to black holes, but that was actually likely the work of Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah.
After the FlyDubai incident in which an Omani Muslim pilot stabbed an Indian pilot in a reported attempt to hijack Flight FZ1073 bound for Israel and possibly crash the plane, the list of Muslim pilots who tried to bring down airplanes is up to 4.
And that means that 44% of pilots who deliberately crashed tried to crash planes were Muslim.
These statistics are all the more startling since Muslim pilots and airlines make up a very limited percentage of the airline travel sector. The Asian and North American market together account for 66% of flights, Europe adds another 23%, Africa comes in at only around 3% and the Middle East only accounts for 5%. Despite that, the Middle East and Africa account for a disproportionate number of deliberate pilot crashes when they represent a tiny minority of flights.
The troubling statistic that nearly half of pilots attempting to crash their own planes were Muslim does not take into account Muslim hijackings, including the Islamic terror attacks of September 11, or any other hijacking attempts, but is limited only to pilots crashing passenger airline planes.
If we were to count hijackings, 9/11 alone would ensure a much worse track record for Muslims flying planes since these were by far the deadliest cases of pilots, however illegal and illegitimate, weaponizing jet airplanes to cause as much damage and loss of life as possible.
The latest incident raises serious questions about the risk entailed by both Muslim pilots and Muslim airlines operating in the United States of America and other known terror targets.
The EgyptAir Flight 990 crash off Nantucket led to claims of Islamophobia when investigators flagged the shouts about Allah on the cockpit recording as concerning even though the crash predated 9/11. The Egyptians initially refused to cede control of the investigation and experts were dispatched to explain Muslim theology to Americans. We were firmly told that when First Officer Gameel Al-Batouti took the opportunity to seize control of the plane while the captain was in the bathroom and sent the plane diving while shouting about “Allah,” this was normal.
It turned out that Al-Batouti had deliberately crashed the plane. The Egyptians refused to admit it and it took extensive work and an attempt by another Egyptian pilot to defector before we got anywhere close to the truth. Even then there were suspicions that it had been a terrorist act that were never proven, confirmed or even discussed because of the political sensitivity of the crash.
A similar cover-up would likely have ensued had the FlyDubai takeover ended in a crash. But instead the Israeli passengers stormed the cockpit, disabled the attacking pilot and allowed the relief pilots to take control of the aircraft. But it is unlikely that the authorities on the ground, currently the Saudis, will allow the truth about what really happened in the air to come out.
It’s unknown how many of the deliberate Muslim airline crashes were due to pilot terrorism because the Muslim countries involved tended to avoid any discussion of the motives involved.
Some of these crashes by Muslim pilots have been attributed to personal issues, ranging from workplace frustration to a failed love affair, while others, notably EgyptAir Flight 990, were falsely attributed to mechanical failure, but western investigators have rarely had direct access to family members, friends and local officials making it very difficult for them to learn anything.
There have been red flags in some of those crashes that raise the possibility of terrorism.
Is it really a coincidence that intentional pilot crashes began in 1994, two years after the first Al Qaeda attack and a year after the World Trade Center bombing, and further crashes have roughly paralleled an upsurge in Islamic terrorist activity?
The passengers on the Royal Air Maroc Flight 630, apart from a Kuwaiti prince, were mostly Europeans while the passengers on the EgyptAir Flight 990 were a mix of Americans and Egyptians, but notably included 33 Egyptian military officers who would have been seen as targets by the Muslim Brotherhood and its various splinter groups including Al Qaeda.
A plane full of Israelis flying to Israel would be viewed as a golden ticket to Islamic ‘paradise’ for any devout Muslim. Especially when that plane could have also crashed into an Israeli building or facility on the way down. The death toll from such an attack could have been extremely severe and also tempting enough to explain what happened on Flight FZ1073.
The troubling statistic that nearly half of deliberate pilot crashes were carried out by Muslim pilots should make us think about where we fly, who we fly with and whom we allow to fly into America. ✪
▶️ NEW YORK MAGAZINE’S NEW MEN’S ISSUE IS A COMPLETE JOKE
NEW YORK MAGAZINE’S NEW MEN’S ISSUE IS A COMPLETE JOKE
ppp
or the cover of its first-ever full-blown “Men’s Style Issue,” New York magazine decided to feature the transgender actor Elliot (née Ellen) Page. This certainly comes as no surprise to anyone who remembers that the Left-wing, Mamdani-loving outlet once did a cover story fantasizing about men wearing high heels for the Fall season. It also will come as no surprise to anyone who is aware that, in the current zeitgeist, straight masculinity is out and non-binary gender disorders are in. This is all by design, of course.
“Now feels like the right moment to devote a special issue to men’s style,” New York mag announced, adding that “We stopped short of announcing another revolution in men’s clothes, though you may soon find guys sauntering through the city in sarongs.”
No, you won’t. Sarong-draped men in public isn’t going to be a thing. Neither is “men sauntering,” for that matter. Allow me to make this clear to fashion editors everywhere: real men – by which I mean normal guys who aren’t confused about their nature and who are fed up with having traditional masculinity labeled toxic – don’t “saunter” around town in sarongs. Not if they want to be taken seriously by men or women.
The issue included a photo-essay headlined “The Boys in the Baths,” featuring “some of New York’s most stylish men,” including Page, almost entirely unclothed at the East Village’s Russian & Turkish Baths. You would think a men’s style issue would feature men in stylish clothing, but you would be wrong. That’s because men’s fashion magazines today are far less about fashion than they are about queering the culture. The aim is to feminize men and break down the despised binary sex status quo of male and female as part of the cultural Marxist goal to undermine Western Civilization. If that sounds like overblown conspiracy-theory thinking, I invite you to look at how successful the cultural Marxist mission has been in the West over the last half-century. Economic Marxism may have been an utter failure wherever it’s been attempted, but cultural Marxism has been stunningly effective.
“I went to a bathhouse recently,” Page tells the magazine, adding that the idea sounded nice, “to like, go somewhere and sit around in your body like that.” I’m sorry, but no man who is comfortable in his own skin uses language like “sit around in your body.” Page went on to confess, seemingly unprompted, that she belts out showtunes in the shower. The subtext there, whether Page is even conscious of it or not, is she is so desperate to be embraced by her fellow elites in a culture of identity intersectionality that she wants them to know she is the right kind of masculine: feminized rather than traditional.
The men’s style issue actually featured multiple covers, not just the one with Page, but why was Page included anyway, much less given a cover? Elliot Page is not a man, no matter how often she drapes herself in ill-fitting suits, how purposefully unkempt she styles her hair, and how often she shows off her mastectomy scars and pretends to be a male sex symbol. I don’t mean to sound uncharitable toward Page, who is obviously struggling with what must be a torturous gender dysphoria, or that I’m singling her out – it is equally untruthful to pretend that actress Naomi Watts’ perpetually miserable-looking son, for example, is a woman. All of it – the cross-dressing, the gender-bending, the virtue signaling, the bodily mutilation, the appropriation of spaces and identities belonging to the opposite sex, the erasing of norms and boundaries – all of it is a Godless lie damaging to everyone involved and to everyone who maintains a polite, silent consent about it.
Is it too much to ask a major magazine issue devoted to men’s style include unabashed examples of normal masculinity rather than a (reportedly) 5’1”, 110-lb. woman and a gaggle of hairless metrosexuals frolicking nearly-nude in a bathhouse? Of course it is. As political commentator Link Lauren put it, “I don’t think they actually care about men or style — they care about clicks. If it weren’t for ‘transitioning’ we wouldn’t even be talking about this actor.” I would add that the magazine did make the choices they did about the issue in order to spark a little attention-getting controversy, but that the editors cared less about clicks than, as I wrote above, reinforcing the narrative that a hyper-feminized, hyper-sexualized masculinity is hip, edgy, and stylish.
There are two Americas: one which lives in the real world, and one which is hell-bent, literally, on deconstructing that world and forcing everyone to submit to a totalitarian narrative of destructive lies. There is no middle ground, and no bridging this gap. As the tagline for the movie Highlander once put it: There can be only one.
The abolition of the family, which Karl Marx explicitly called for, is central to the utopian Communist vision. As I have written many times before, that is why the Left is so hell-bent on eradicating the categories of male and female. Subverting masculinity is key because masculinity is the warrior spirit of the nuclear family, and the first and last defense against the totalitarianism that the power-mad Left wants to implement. And so gender ideology, along with abortion, is the hill that the Left will die on. Let’s make that happen. ✪
▶️ ◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️ ✪✪✪ DONATE ✪✪✪ ◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️◼️
▶️ DONATE VIA PAYPAL (DEBIT & CREDIT CARD)
ALL PayPal Transactions Are Encrypted For Card Holder Privacy & Security
▶️ DONATE VIA ZELLE (DIRECT BANK CASH TRANSFER)
ZELLE is the perfect online alternative to PayPal. It’s an incredibly simple, secure, easy, fast and FREE way to send or receive money to recipients directly from your online banking account without a middleman. Best of all, there are NO fees.
ZELLE is a service provided by your bank and is already built in to your online banking account. You only need to activate it first before using. If you’ve already activated ZELLE in your online bank or credit union account, you can donate to The New Americanist by using our ZELLE address:
vip@thenewamericanist.com
To activate your ZELLE, follow these easy instructions (a simple two minute process):
▶️ DONATE VIA SNAIL MAIL
▶️ RSBN LIVESTREAM LINK: Trump Rally In Mobile, Alabama
⭐️ TokaiseBlessedPatriot
