Displaying the most recent of 90425 posts written by

Ruth King

Biden Admin Considering Cash Payments to Central America to Control Migration By Samuel Allegri

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-admin-considering-cash-payments-to-central-america-to-control-migration_3770249.html

The Biden administration is considering sending cash to Central American countries to alleviate economic problems that motivate their citizens to leave for the United States.

Alongside the conditional cash transfer program, they are also considering sending CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus vaccines to those countries, the White House’s southern border coordinator Roberta Jacobson told Reuters.

She didn’t specify which entity would be potentially obtaining the cash, but the program in consideration is aimed at people from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, which make up for the vast majority of illegal immigration presently occurring at the border.

“We’re looking at all of the productive options to address both the economic reasons people may be migrating, as well as the protection and security reasons,” said the White House official.

CBP released an Operational Update on Thursday which stated that more than 172,000 illegal immigrants were apprehended in March along the Southwest border.

Jacobson didn’t explain to Reuters how exactly the program would function but said that they won’t be handing out checks to people.

“The one thing I can promise you is the U.S. government isn’t going to be handing out money or checks to people,” Jacobson, who announced she will be leaving the White House at the end of the month, said.

On Friday, top Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) disapproved of the idea of cash transfers.

How a Political Prisoner of 17 Years Resisted Communist Cuba’s Persecution By Mimi Nguyen Ly and Joshua Philipp

https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-a-political-prisoner-of-17-years-resisted-communist-cubas-persecution_3765484.html

After 17 years of political persecution and imprisonment at the hands of the Cuban communist regime, and having ultimately found refuge in the United States, Jorge Luis Antonis reflected on what he learned and what helped him resist oppression during a very difficult period in his life.

It was March 15, 1990. Luis was 25 years old. He and a number of others were enthusiastic about reforms and events at the time in Eastern Europe that signaled the fall of communism, such as the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall and the impending total collapse of the Soviet Union.

That day, Luis recalled being in a public venue where a broadcast was underway showing a speech Cuban dictator Raul Castro was delivering about the upcoming Fourth Congress of the Cuban Communist Party.

“I took the opportunity to openly declare myself as political opposition,” Luis told The Epoch Times’ “Crossroads” program, in Spanish.

Since Fidel Castro came to power in Cuba in 1959, citizens were systematically denied fundamental freedoms such as speech, association and assembly, movement, due process, and privacy. By 1990, nothing had changed—civil and political rights were still a figment of the imagination.

“Back then, it was a real defiance of the regime because there was basically no opposition activists, there were no human rights groups, or independent journalists,” Luis explained. “And there, I started shouting slogans in favor of change, in favor of democracy, in favor of respect for human rights. I was beaten brutally and I was sentenced to prison, charged with ‘verbal enemy propaganda.’”

Can We Win in the ‘Gray Zone’? by Richard Kemp

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17235/gray-zone-conflict

The gray zone is the space between peace and war involving coercive actions that fall outside normal geopolitical competition between states but do not reach the level of armed conflict…. They usually seek to avoid a significant military response, though are often designed to intimidate and deter a target state by threatening further escalation.

[B]ut do liberal democracies in the 21st Century have the political will to do the dirty work that is necessary to win?

Western nations have multiple pre-emptive and reactive options to respond to gray zone actions directed against them or their allies, most effectively involving multilateral coordination. The objective should be to frustrate or deter, avoiding escalation that might lead to all-out conflict. Broadly, options fall into four categories: diplomatic, informational, economic and military.

Democracies’ fear of escalation is a significant deterrent against the use of violent military options in the gray zone, and that is exactly the fear that authoritarian states like Iran wish to instil…..[F]ear of escalation is not the greatest obstacle to the use of a military option — transparency is.

Deterrence is not down to the military option alone. Where possible, diplomatic, informational and economic actions are preferable in providing the necessary punishments. But gray zone opponents who are willing to use military action must also be confronted with a credible military jeopardy to them, and not just a paper capability which will quickly be seen for what it is.

How confident can we be that liberal democracies mean business in the gray zone? When British troops were being killed and maimed in large numbers in Iraq by Iranian proxies… more than a decade ago, the UK government would not even consider any form of gray zone military action, even non-lethal, against Iran, despite a clear capability to do so. Instead they relied on diplomatic démarches — and the killings continued. The consequences of such weakness are still being played out in Iran’s widespread gray zone aggression. If back then — in the face of the slaughter of dozens of their own troops — political leaders’ fear of escalation and political fallout caused such paralysis, how likely is it that they will seriously contemplate violent gray zone operations today….

In March, US President Joe Biden issued his Interim National Security Strategic Guidance. Across the Atlantic, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson presented the Integrated Review of Security, Defense, Development and Foreign Policy to parliament. Both leaders expressed concern over the increasing challenges in the gray zone and promised measures to respond more effectively.

Iran: Between Illusion and Reality by Amir Taheri

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17269/iran-between-illusion-and-reality

As for voter turnout, we now know that the regime has set the stage for an “historic event”. Revolutionary Guard chief Gen. Hussein Salami says the “Supreme Guide” has ordered “an epoch-making turnout” that his force will help assemble.

[I]t is clear that the “Supreme Guide” will not tolerate the slightest deviation from the course he has set: a revolution that he claims is moving from strength to strength. “Today we are stronger and America is weaker,” he said recently. One of his ideological gurus, Dr. Hassan Abbasi, aka “Dr. Kissinger of Islam”, goes further: “America is the sunset power,” he says. “We are the sunrise power!”

[The coming election] could end the illusion that the Khomeinist regime might change course and seize opportunity offered to it to re-join the global mainstream…. The four-decade pursuit of “behavior change in Tehran” would have to be reviewed.

Khamenei speaks of a “conspiracy” to force Iran to become a “normal nation” like everyone else and vows to never allow that to happen.

The Khomeinist system isn’t a Middle Eastern version of the people-based Scandinavian Social Democracy…. It is a despotism of the medieval kind with a pseudo-modern varnish borrowed from misunderstood Marxism.

The replacement of illusion with reality, no matter how bitter, may be good news after all.

The old script is out of the files and dusted, the décor shined and up, and the puppet-master testing the strings and flexing his fingers. But something is still missing: new puppets to make the show attractive to those who have seen the same old puppets once too often.

Got it? We are talking of the presidential election in the Islamic Republic in Iran, scheduled for next June but so far attracting little attention. In previous versions of the show, interest in it started up to two years before polling day as rival factions within the regime mobilized to reach for the prize or at least make an impression. On at least two occasions the rigmarole produced one pleasantly surprising result and one unexpectedly horrible one. On a third occasion, it triggered a nationwide prising that pushed the Khomeinist regime to the edge of collapse.

Those of us who had long conceded that this simulacrum of an election was an insult to human intelligence, nonetheless maintained an interest in it for at least two reasons.

Cancel Culture and Identity Politics are the Road to a One-Party State By Daniel Greenfield

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/04/cancel_culture_and_identity_politics_are_the_road_to_a_oneparty_state.html

America is at war. This time the enemy isn’t on some distant battlefield or hiding in a barren cave thousands of miles away. Instead, the enemy is not only here, but it’s ruling over us.

That’s the powerful message of David Horowitz’s latest book, The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America. This isn’t just a warning, it’s the reality around us.

“Americans are more divided today than at any time since the Civil War,” Horowitz writes. “In the course of the anti-Trump wars, we have become two nations with little shared ground on the core issues that previously defined us.” And it’s the Left that brought us to this state, not just in the last five years, but going all the way back to the fundamental strategy of its divisive politics.

In The Enemy Within, Horowitz exposes the Communist roots of identity politics that have been used to turn Americans against each other and reduce them to hostile warring tribes, rather than citizens of a common nation invested in its welfare, success, and prosperity.

Identity politics is the delegitimization of America and Americans. It’s a hate campaign that justifies any extremity, and any attack on the country and her people. “It is this regressive attack on America’s fundamental principles by the Left that is the source of the irreconcilable conflicts and ugly passions that are currently tearing the nation’s fabric apart,” Horowitz writes.

Class warfare, racial warfare, gender warfare, and the countless other forms of identity politics injected into schools, workplaces, government offices, and every area of life are aimed at forcing Americans to identify radically and tribally, rather than nationally. Divide and conquer.

David Horowitz, a veteran of the radical politics of the Left, has the knowledge, the experience, and the training to expose not just what the movement he was once a part of is doing, but the ideological origins of its tactics, and how they feed it into its dreadful vision for America.

America is delegitimized through revisionist history smears, like the 1619 Project, that rewrite the powerful force for equality and freedom that is the true history of the United States into the big lie of systemic racism, while Americans are accused of various forms of oppressive privilege so that, just by existing, they oppress everyone who does not fit into the same artificial category.

In The Enemy Within, Horowitz tackles the radical and racist roots of these ideas, from Karl Marx to Derrick Bell, a supporter of Farrakhan, and how they exploded into violence and tyranny in the streets of our cities and the halls of power as Black Lives Matter mobs used lies to unleash racist violence and Democrat officials used racist myths to build a one-party state.

But it’s not just BLM.

Do Vaccine Resisters Risk Being Waco’d? Without any qualms, American authorities have boarded up small businesses and bankrupted—even arrested—their “scofflaw” owners for the crime of working. What’s next? By Ilana Mercer

https://amgreatness.com/2021/04/10/do-vaccine-resisters-risk-being-wacod/

Because of the natural mutation the clever little RNA strand undergoes, it is clear to anyone with a critical mind that the COVID-19 vaccines will go the way of the flu vaccines: An annual affair if one chooses to make it so.

Choice, alas, is quickly becoming a quaint concept in COVID-compliant America.

Vaccine Passports 

The possibility of a vaccine passport, a “certification of vaccination that reduces public-health restrictions for their carriers,” has been floated. Without finesse, it amounts to, “Your papers, bitte!”

While Fox’s Tucker Carlson did term the idea an Orwellian one—it took civil libertarian Glenn Greenwald, the odd-man-out among the authoritarian Left, to place the concept of a vaccine passport in proper perspective.

The popular TV host (and perhaps the only good thing on Fox News) had asked Greenwald if he felt a vaccine passport “would work to convince more Americans to get vaccinated.”

But judging a policy by its positive outcomes for the collective, rather than by whether it violates individual rights is utilitarianism. It is the rule among politicians and pundits. 

“It doesn’t work”: How often have you heard those words used to describe grave violations of your rights? As if using coercion to decrease “vaccine hesitancy”—is ever a good reason for coercing vaccination! As if employing coercion to decrease “vaccine hesitancy” is ever an appropriate use of state or corporate power!

The Benthamite utilitarian calculus is thus rightly associated with a collectivist, central planner’s impetus.

America’s founders, conversely, held a Blackstonian view of the law as a bulwark against government abuses. Their take has since been supplanted by the notion of the law as an implement of government, to be utilized by all-knowing rulers for the “greater good.”

To his great credit, later in the program, Carlson did advance a rights-based argument against the vaccine-passport outrage: the individual right to privacy.

It fell, however, to Greenwald to take note of the three different ways in which the passports constitute a draconian invasion: 

Number one, coercing citizens to put a substance into their body that they don’t want in their body, a pretty grave invasion of bodily autonomy, one of the most fundamental rights we have. Secondly, gathering a new database that can track people in terms of their health, that can easily be expanded as government programs often do into a whole variety of other uses, and then thirdly, . . . restricting people’s movement. Freedom of movement is one of the most fundamental rights we have. It’s actually guaranteed in the Constitution.

The Fatuousness of Guilt as an Instrument of Policy Roger Kimball

https://amgreatness.com/2021/04/10/the-fatuousness-of-guilt-as-an-instrument-of-policy/

When the world no longer speaks meaningfully to us, we shout into the void and pretend the echoes come from on high.

In Europe’s Last Summer, his brilliant book about the origins of World War I, the historian David Fromkin dilates on the seductive beauties of the summer of 1914. It was, he notes, the most gorgeous in living memory. That serene balminess seemed an objective correlative of the rock-solid political and social stability that Europe had enjoyed for decades. Percipient observers might have discerned troubling clouds on the horizon. But there were plenty of soothing voices to point out that the world’s increasing economic interdependence rendered any serious conflict impossible. There had been no war among the Great Powers for nearly half a century, ergo the status quo would persist for decades, maybe forever. There would always be honey then for tea. 

When war did finally break out, it was greeted in many quarters as a lark, a holiday, a deliverance from the tedious routines of everyday life. Yes, there were some cautionary voices. In August 1914, for example, Sir Edward Grey, the British foreign secretary, mournfully predicted, “The lamps are going out all over Europe. We shall not see them lit again in our time.” But at that moment, Grey’s was a minority perspective. “We’ll just pop over to France next week and be home by Christmas.” That was the popular refrain. 

In Germany, the mood was triumphalist. Thomas Mann, for example, cheered “the collapse of the hated world of peace, stinking of the corruption of bourgeois-mercantile ‘Civilization’ with its enmity to heroism and genius.” 

Then in September came the first battle of the Marne. Its unprecedented slaughter exacted half a million casualties in a week. It is accounted a great victory for the Allies. But although it halted the German advance, it also paved the way for four years of that butchery by attrition that is trench warfare in the age of total war. 

Cultural Consequences?

The Great War had enormous economic and political consequences, of course. It also had enormous consequences in the realm of cultural endeavor, in the visual arts and literature. It is often said that the primary existential or spiritual effect of the war was disillusionment. Barbara Tuchman, for example, notes in one of her classic studies of the Great War that the war had many results but that the dominant one was “disillusion.” She quotes D. H. Lawrence, who observed, “All the great words were cancelled out for that generation.” Honor, nobility, valor, patriotism, sacrifice, beauty: who could still take such abstractions seriously after the wholesale slaughter of the war?  

Biden Builds Back Obama’s Middle East By Matthew Continetti

http://And makes a mockery of his democracy agenda

That didn’t take long. One week after piously and erroneously repudiating the Commission on Unalienable Rights established by his predecessor Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State Antony Blinken revealed the hollow selectivity of this administration’s commitment to human rights and democratic reform.

On April 7, Blinken said he was “pleased to announce” the reinstatement of tens of millions of dollars in aid to the West Bank and Gaza and of some $150 million to support the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). “All assistance will be provided consistent with U.S. law,” Blinken added.

Easier said than done. The Taylor Force Act, signed into law in 2018, withholds aid from the Palestinian Authority until the State Department certifies that the ruling party of the West Bank has terminated payments to family members of terrorists. It hasn’t. That was one reason the Trump administration slashed the aid in the first place. Nor is there evidence that suddenly the Palestinians have curtailed the so-called pay-to-slay schemes that incentivize the murder of civilians and the perpetuation of conflict. On the contrary: They bristle at the idea of changing their corrupt and self-destructive ways.

A second law from 2018, the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act, holds beneficiaries of foreign assistance legally and financially responsible for terrorism committed against U.S. citizens. This notion — that the Palestinian Authority might actually have to pay a price for its incitement to anti-Semitic violence — so terrified the leadership in the West Bank that it sent a letter to the Trump administration in February 2019 renouncing U.S. aid. I must have missed the make-up note postmarked Ramallah.

What Should Be Done to Curb Big Tech? A few billionaires currently have the power to decide that some Americans’ speech rights are more sacred than others. Clarence Thomas offers a remedy. Bari Weiss

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-should-be-done-to-curb-big-tech

Do your eyes gloss over when you see the words “Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act”? Mine do.

Yet the subject of Big Tech’s might — Should Facebook have the power to ban a president? Should Amazon have the power to ban the sale of a controversial book? Should Twitter have the power to permanently bar a user over a single tweet? And if not, what should the government be doing about it? — is both fascinating and incredibly important.

I don’t think there is a group left in America who is happy about the power that companies like Facebook and Twitter and Google have arrogated to themselves. According to a recent poll from Vox and Data for Progress, 59% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans think Big Tech’s economic power is a problem. It’s hard to think of another issue with that kind of bipartisan consensus.

The nature of your anger, of course, depends on where you sit. (Twitter’s decision to ban Trump in January found 87% approval from Democrats and a mere 28% of Republicans in the same poll.) But the point is that this subject touches everyone. 

So why is so much of the writing about tech so confusing? One of the reasons it confuses, I think, is that the loudest “progressive” and “conservative” arguments are the opposite of what you’d imagine.

Progressives are supposed to be against corporate power. And yet on this subject, they are the ones pushing for more of it. They are enraged that these companies don’t crack down harder on “disinformation,” arguing that the Zuckerbergs and Dorseys of the world put profit above principle when they allow groups like QAnon to run wild on their platforms. Sure, President Trump was banned, but only after he lost the election. Why didn’t it happen earlier? Private companies are not hamstrung by the First Amendment, so why do they hesitate to ban dangerous people whose online words lead to real-world violence?

Here We Go: New Hampshire Governor Will Sign Bill For Voting Machine Audit

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/04/go-new-hampshire-governor-will-sign

A voting machine audit is coming! 

On April 8th, the New Hampshire Senate passed a bill to mandate an audit of the Windham, New Hampshire election results.

All that remains for the audit to take place is a signature from the Governor.

At a press conference, New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu (R) says he will sign the bill.

The Washington Examiner reported:

The governor of New Hampshire announced on Thursday that he intends to sign a bill allowing an audit of voting machines used in the town of Windham for the 2020 election.