Trump Set to Slash Grocery Costs With EPA Fix

From Newsmax.com (May 21):

President Donald Trump is set to roll back two Biden-era EPA refrigerant rules Thursday in a move the administration says will slash grocery costs and save businesses billions of dollars.

According to an administration official who spoke with USA Today, the changes target federal regulations on hydrofluorocarbons, refrigerants widely used in freezers, refrigerators and air-conditioning systems.

The Trump administration argues the Biden rules imposed costly mandates on supermarkets and other businesses without meaningful environmental benefits.

One action would extend compliance deadlines under the EPA’s 2023 Technology Transitions Rule, giving grocery stores and other companies more time to phase out hydrofluorocarbons used in refrigeration systems.

Hydrofluorocarbonsare considered powerful greenhouse gases, though they remain in the atmosphere for shorter periods than carbon dioxide.

The White House estimates the rollback will generate roughly $900 million in savings, including $800 million for grocery stores, by increasing the supply of approved refrigerants available to businesses and homeowners.

The EPA is also expected to revise the agency’s 2024 Emissions Reduction and Reclamation program by exempting refrigerated trucks and other road transport refrigeration units from new hydrofluorocarbon leak requirements. The administration projects that move alone will save another $1.5 billion.

Trump is expected to announce the changes during a Thursday morning Oval Office event attended by executives from Kroger, Piggly Wiggly, Fareway Stores, and other grocery chains.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin blasted the Biden administration’s rules in a statement to USA Today, saying they burdened businesses with unnecessary costs.

"The Biden administration’s refrigerant rules didn’t protect human health or the environment and instead piled on costly, unattainable restrictions beyond what the law requires," Zeldin said.

"Our actions allow businesses to choose the refrigeration systems that work best for them, saving them billions of dollars. This will be felt directly by American families in lower grocery prices," he added.

The refrigerant rollback is the latest step in Trump’s aggressive deregulation agenda, which has targeted a wide range of Obama- and Biden-era environmental and climate policies.

The administration is also seeking to highlight efforts to reduce consumer costs as inflation continues to weigh on Americans ahead of the November midterm elections.

The Consumer Price Index rose 3.8% in April, the sharpest inflation increase in three years, driven largely by rising oil prices tied to the U.S. conflict with Iran.

Meanwhile, grocery prices climbed 2.9% compared with a year earlier and increased 0.7% from March to April. [source]

More stupid Biden regulations that needed to be undone. Another win!

FACT CHECK: Tulsi’s remarkable record at DNI…

From Revolver.news (May 22):

Tulsi Gabbard has resigned as the Director of National Intelligence after quite a remarkable run.

Enrique Alejandro had a remarkable rundown on X of her accomplishments:

Tulsi Gabbard’s Record as America’s TOP Director of National Intelligence❗️

– Referred Russiagate Criminals to DOJ for Prosecution

– Declassified “Russian Collusion” & Impeachment Conspiracy Documents

– Spearheaded the Investigation into Voter Fraud in Georgia

– Investigated the Dark Origins of COVID-19

– Fought the CIA to Declassify Hidden JFK Assassination + MK-Ultra Files

– Revoked Security Clearances From 37 Officials (Russia Hoaxers, Biden/Obama Holdovers, and Impeachment Letter Signers)

– Fired Officials Who Contradicted Trump on Venezuelan Gangs

– Moved CIA’s In-Q-Tel Under DNI Oversight for Greater Accountability

– Uncovered Ukraine Government Plot to Illegally Reroute Hundreds of Millions in U.S. Taxpayer Dollars to Biden’s 2024 Campaign

– Launched Declassification Effort to Expose the Truth About UAPs

– Slashed Bloated Intel Bureaucracy With 50% Staff Cuts at ODNI, Saving $700 Million

– Exposed the Intel Community’s Political Weaponization

All of this, even as the CIA breathed down her neck and tried to tie her hands at every turn.

THIS IS WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE VOTED FOR.

We looked into Enrique’s claims below and they all checked out. [read more]

Hope her replacement does just as good a job. Prayers and thoughts to her husband getting better.

A Reminder About the Moral Difference Between the Christian and Muslim Worlds at This Time

From Townhall.com (Aug. 16, 2022):

About 30 years after Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued his fatwa calling for Muslims to murder Salman Rushdie, the Indian author was finally attacked and nearly killed.

Stabbed 10 times by a young Muslim living in America, Rushdie is in a hospital, where his prognosis as of this writing is partial paralysis and the loss of an eye.

What was Rushdie's "crime"? He "insulted" Islam.

Tens of millions of Muslims believe that if a person insults Islam, Muhammad or the Quran, he should be killed. Any Muslim who does kill a person deemed to have insulted Islam goes straight to heaven when he or she dies.

The most famous case of Muslims murdering people charged with insulting Islam occurred in 2015, when two French Muslims entered the Paris editorial offices of the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, and murdered 12 people and wounded 11 others. Charlie Hebdo had printed cartoon images of Muhammad, which most Muslims consider forbidden even to non-Muslims.

That same week, Muslims also entered a kosher supermarket in Paris and murdered four Jews. For many Muslims, Jews don't have to do anything to insult Islam; their mere existence is an insult to Islam.

It is instructive to compare Christian reactions to insults to Christianity with Muslim reactions to what they perceive as insults to Islam.

If Christians reacted to insults to Christianity the way Muslims react to insults to Islam, there would be daily murders in America and elsewhere. Christianity is constantly insulted in America and elsewhere in the West, and Christians are regularly murdered by Muslims in the Middle East and Africa.

Perhaps the famous example of the former is the "artwork" by Andres Serrano titled "Piss Christ," which features a crucifix in a jar of urine.

Imagine how many people radical Muslims would kill if a Quran or an image of Muhammad submerged in a jar of urine were displayed in museums around America. It would never happen because museums would never put their staff or their visitors in that kind of danger. Museum staff and visitors to museums that featured this work would be killed.

Why doesn't that argue for the moral superiority of most Christians relative to most Muslims at this time in history? After all, some scholars argue that Muslims and Muslim civilization were morally superior to Christians and Christian civilization at various times during the Middle Ages. Whether or not that is accurate, no one charges the scholars who make that argument with an anti-Christian phobia or with harboring anti-Christian bigotry. Yet, anyone who would argue that contemporary Christian civilization is on a more elevated level than Muslim civilization -- while of course acknowledging that this does not apply to all Muslims or to all Christians -- would be attacked as an "Islamophobe," lose his reputation and quite possibly lose his job and career.

This inability to judge the West -- which was created by Christians and has, with all its many flaws, been rooted in Judeo-Christian morality -- as morally more elevated than the Muslim world goes to the heart of the crisis facing the West: the Left's desire to destroy it. Western elites in academia, media, politics and the business world -- in short, everywhere -- are moral fools.

They claim to be unable to make moral distinctions between the two civilizations -- because of Western slavery and treatment of native populations, for example. Yet, they either do not know or simply ignore Muslims' far worse history of slavery and wiping out native populations. And they know but choose to ignore the fact that the worldwide antislavery movement began in the West and was founded by Christians. It did not begin in the Muslim world, which had no such widespread movement.

The Left has the same morally bankrupt view regarding Israel and its Muslim enemies. On the Left, Israel, with its robust freedoms that extend to its large Muslim minority, is not morally superior to its unfree, terror-honoring Muslim neighbors (e.g., Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Hamas).

It is true that it was only one Muslim who stabbed Salman Rushdie. But it is millions of Muslims who believe anyone who "insults" Islam should die. It was also one Muslim who murdered Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh for "insulting" Islam's take on women. And it was a lot more than one Muslim member of the Islamic State who slit the throats and beheaded countless infidels -- that is, non-Muslims.

Author Taslima Nasrin fled her native Bangladesh, fearing for her life, after a court said she had hurt Muslims' religious feelings with her novel "Lajja" ("Shame"). Unlike virtually every Western author and leader, her reaction to the attack on Rushdie noted that the would-be murderer was Muslim: "I just learned that Salman Rushdie was attacked in New York. I am really shocked… If he is attacked, anyone who is critical of Islam can be attacked."

Exactly. [source]

The African Slave Trade Wouldn’t Have Been Possible without African Elites

From Mises.org (Aug. 26, 2022):

There is a revival in the study of the transatlantic slave trade. Several studies pinpoint the slave trade as the genesis of defects in African societies. Continuing in the intellectual tradition of Walter Rodney, these later works posit that the transatlantic slave trade underdeveloped Africa. However, there is no verdict on the transatlantic slave trade’s effects because scholars are still divided over its consequences.

But despite their differences, opposing camps in the literature adopt a lopsided stance by fixating on the implications of the slave trade instead of discussing Africans’ agency. Researchers tend to explore how the slave trade altered African societies rather than showing that European traders became embedded in Africa’s complex sociopolitical networks.

Africans were building empires and chiefdoms long before interactions with Europeans, so when Europeans arrived in Africa, they quickly recognized that their fortunes were linked to the benevolence of African elites. Without complying with local regulations, European traders could not engage in business. Frequently, it is taught that Europeans constructed forts in Africa, but it is rarely noted that such forts could not have been built absent the African elites’ permission.

In the Galinhas empire, the Vai adage “Sunda ma gara, ke a sunda-fa,” which means “A stranger has no power but his landlords,” describes foreign traders’ relationships with African rulers. Africans were unwilling to tolerate squatters, so Europeans had to pay for their quarters.

In West Africa, for example, the Akwamu collected rents from European forts and employed a customs officer to oversee trade flow. This excerpt from a report compiled by a Danish official captures the authority of African rulers: “The King of Akwamu charges customs duties here on all goods which pass along the river and to ensure that these are paid, he has employed an official to take care of his interest.”

Not only did Africans extract financial benefits by charging Europeans for building forts on African soil, but they also retained property rights to the land. In some cases, Africans invited Europeans to their trading centers. Renting space to Europeans became so lucrative that on the Gold Coast, African elites permitted one European group per trading town. Further, the intense rivalry between Europeans elevated Africans’ position and allowed them to benefit from lower prices and a wider array of goods.

The transatlantic slave trade was a harrowing event, but it was a business nonetheless and can be analyzed using economic tools. The trade’s victims were disproportionately African, but this should not conceal the fact that for many Africans, the slave trade was a legitimate venture connected to preexisting trading arrangements. In his new book, Slave Traders by Invitation: West Africa’s Slave Coast in the Precolonial Era, Finn Fuglestad avers that the slave trade was sustained by Africans who beckoned Europeans to trade.

Africans even formalized trading relations with Europeans by participating in treaties that governed the purchase of slaves. Moreover, according to the fifteenth-century reports of Portuguese official Diego Gomez, some monarchs were so inclined to their pursue economic interests that they demonstrated an “overwhelming willingness” to offer natives as slaves. Collaborating with Africans was crucial to the success of the slave trade and European trading centers like Liverpool.

According to David Richardson, Africans were instrumental in establishing the networking and institutional arrangements that enabled British slaving to thrive. “Without African agency and support, British slaving could not have reached the scale that it did,” he writes.

Other than downplaying African agency, historians usually argue that the transatlantic trade undermined African economies. But this assumption is a failure to understand economic utility. If imported items satisfied Africans’ demands, then we cannot argue that imports made them worse off.

Africans had the upper hand in trade negotiations and often determined the quality and prices of the products they obtained from Europeans. Before deciding to import copper, for instance, Daniel Cunha explains that Africans would check “the quality of copper by evaluating its material properties of redness, luminosity, and sound, which served to embed it into ritual and mythological systems.”

Due to African traders’ high standards, goods were in fact frequently rejected without even an explanation. Neither is there compelling evidence to indicate that imports impeded local production. Notwithstanding imports, the iron industry flourished in Cameroon and Bassar as late as the nineteenth century. Pieter Emmer in a classic article completely shatters the myth that the transatlantic slave trade had a substantial impact on African economies:

The value of the European imports into West Africa could not have been more than 5 percent of the value of Africa’s internal production and that is assuming that the Africans pro­duced no more than their subsistence…. In sum, there is no evi­dence to show that between 1500 and 1800 either quan­ti­tatively or qualitat­ively the Atlantic trade in goods could have made much of a differ­ence to the economy of West Africa.

Indeed, the brutality of the transatlantic slave trade evokes feelings of hostility; however, emotionalism should not deter us from studying the topic with an objective eye. For centuries, slavery was considered legitimate commerce; hence, Africans, like their peers, sanctioned it and were willing to participate in the sale of their people to advance economic and political agendas. Whitewashing Africa’s involvement in the transatlantic trade only succeeds in infantilizing black people. [source]

In other words, the powers-that-be sanctioned the slave trade—“trade” is the opportune word here because the slaves weren’t stolen—they were traded.

At least 5 whistleblowers come forward against Biden family

From Breitbart.com (May 15, 2023):

The whistleblowers are in addition to the multitude of witnesses that Republican members of Congress have interviewed behind closed doors.

The whistleblowers range from an IRS agent to an Obama administration stenographer, encompassing alleged corruption in Ukraine and Mexico, along with the FBI and DOJ.

1) Chuck Grassley: Whistleblowers Say FBI Has Evidence Joe Biden Involved in Family Business Schemes

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who testified before the House’s new Select Subcommittee on Political Weaponization in 2023, said whistleblower disclosures indicate the FBI has evidence that Joe Biden is aware of the family business schemes, a statement that directly contradicts the president.

Grassley said the whistleblower disclosures “make clear the FBI has within its possession very significant, impactful, and voluminous evidence with respect to potential criminal conduct by Hunter and James Biden.”

It is unclear why the FBI has not acted on the alleged evidence.

The FBI is in possession of Hunter Biden’s infamous “Laptop from Hell,” which has caused many to dub the Biden family the “Biden Crime Family.”

2) Former Hunter Biden Partner Tony Bobulinski Meeting with Senate Investigators to Turn Over Information

Tony Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter, personally met with Joe and Hunter Biden in 2017 for an hour to discuss “the Bidens’ family business plans” for a Chinese energy deal. That deal appears to have never been finalized. The deal included ten percent “held by H for the big guy,” who Bobulinski said was Joe Biden.

“We discussed the Bidens’ history, the Bidens’ family business plans with the Chinese, with which he was plainly familiar at least at a high level,” Bobulinski told reporters in 2020 about the business meeting with Joe Biden.

Bobulinski has handed over intelligence about the deal to former FBI “point man” Timothy Thibault, who reportedly buried the information.

He also has conveyed emails, WhatsApp chats, agreements, documents, and other evidence to a Senate investigation committee.

3) Ex-White House Aide: FBI Ignored Joe Biden’s Role in Ukraine Business Dealings

Former Obama White House stenographer Mike McCormick alleged in 2023 that the FBI has ignored Joe Biden’s role in the family’s foreign influence-peddling “conspiracy” in Ukraine.

McCormick, who told the New York Post he has relevant information implicating Joe Biden in the family’s business affairs in Ukraine, submitted a tip to the FBI in February. McCormick said he never heard back from the FBI — the same law enforcement agency which allegedly “shut down” the investigation into Hunter’s abandoned “Laptop from Hell.”

According to McCormick, Biden’s former national security aide, Sullivan, told reporters on April 21, 2014, on Air Force Two as an anonymous “senior administration official” that the United States intended to help Ukraine’s natural gas industry.

Unknown to the public at the time, Hunter Biden was already a board member of Burisma, a Ukrainian natural gas company. Hunter’s position on the board was not disclosed by the company until May 12, 2014, nearly a month after Sullivan’s statement to reporters.

4) IRS Whistleblower Says Biden Admin Interfering in Hunter Tax Fraud Probe

An IRS whistleblower alleged in 2023 that two Biden administration political appointees within the Justice Department are working to block charges against Hunter Biden for tax violations against recommendations.

In addition, the whistleblower alleges Weiss asked to be named as a special counsel in the probe to provide a degree of separation between the probe and Joe Biden. That request was apparently turned down.

According to the whistleblower’s attorney, Mark Lytle, his client wishes to speak with congressional investigators to corroborate his claims of political interference in the probe, which he has reported to the Justice Department’s top watchdog, according to a report.

5) Joe Biden Bribery Allegations Were Flagged to DOJ in 2018

Bribery allegations were brought to the Justice Department by a whistleblower in 2018 against President Joe Biden; but the allegations were ignored, a former federal prosecutor revealed last week. The second allegation of bribery against Joe Biden involves Hunter Biden’s board membership for Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, the New York Post reported:

Bud Cummins, a former federal prosecutor, first reported the bribery allegations to then-New York US Attorney Geoff Berman on Oct. 4, 2018, in an email claiming he had evidence that Joe Biden had “exercised influence to protect” his son’s Ukrainian employer “in exchange for payments to Hunter Biden, Devon Archer, and Joe Biden.”

In the email obtained by John Solomon’s Just The News, Cummins said that Ukraine’s then-Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko wanted to travel to the United States to meet Berman, and could produce two “John Doe” witnesses to corroborate his claims about the Bidens.

Despite Cummins claims, Berman did not respond. [source]

It's like Biden is a mob boss.

Dream-shaping tech from MIT channels suggestions into your dreams

From Live Science.com (Sept. 25, 2020):

MIT scientists have figured out how to manipulate your dreams by combining an app with a sleep-tracking device called Dormio. In their new study, the researchers were able to insert certain topics into a person's dreams, with some pretty bizarre outcomes.

To do so, the researchers at MIT Media Lab's Fluid Interfaces — a group that develops wearable systems and interfaces to enhance cognitive skills — used a technique called targeted dream incubation (TDI).

Prior studies have shown that during a rare dream state known lucid dreaming, in which a sleeper is aware that a dream is taking place, dreamers can use that awareness to consciously shape aspects of their dreams. TDI takes advantage of an early sleep stage, known as hypnagogia, to achieve a similar result (though not quite "controlling" dreams outright), researchers told Live Science.

During hypnagogia — a semi-lucid dream state that occurs during the onset of sleep — TDI introduced "targeted information" to a sleeper, "enabling direct incorporation of this information into dream content," the scientists wrote in a new study, published in the August issue of the journal Consciousness and Cognition. They conducted dream experiments by performing "serial awakenings" during daytime napping sessions in 25 participants.

Subjects first recorded audio prompts in an app, such as, "remember to think of a tree" and "remember to observe your thoughts," and then prepared for sleep, according to the study.

A hand-worn sleep tracker monitored the subject's heart rate, electrical changes on the skin surface, and the amount their fingers were bent or relaxed, to detect when a sleeper entered hypnagogia and was therefore "open to influence from outside audio cues," said lead study author Adam Haar Horowitz, a doctoral candidate in MIT Media Lab's Fluid Interfaces Group. The Dormio sleep tracker communicated with the app, "which delivers audio at the correct times, and records audio of dream reports" when the subject is awake, Haar Horowitz told Live Science in an email.

Just as a subject drifted off to sleep and entered hypnagogia, Dormio would coordinate with the app to wake them up with the pre-recorded prompts. This cycle repeated several times, with the sleeper also recording a brief "dream journal" entry into the app when they were awakened.

"Simply put, people tell us whether the prompts appear in their dream," Haar Horowitz said. "Often, they are transformed — a 'tree' prompt becomes a tree-shaped car — but direct incorporation is easily identified."

The scientists found that 67% of the subjects' dream reports mentioned dreams that incorporated a tree. "I was following the roots with someone and the roots were transporting me to different locations," one participant recalled. Another mentioned "a tree from my childhood, from my backyard. It never asked for anything." The same subject, in later awakenings, described "trees splitting into infinite pieces" and "a shaman, sitting under the tree with me, he tells me to go to South America."

"Dream reports increased in bizarreness and immersion with each awakening," but the scientists did not develop a universal rating system for the bizarreness of the dreams, the study authors reported. [read more]

Sci-fi to sci-fact. The benefits and drawbacks of the tech from Grok:

MIT's TDI/Dormio tech offers exciting opportunities for creativity boosts, therapy, and self-understanding by bridging waking intention with dreaming. However, it comes with ethical pitfalls around autonomy, privacy, and unintended psychological effects. As dream engineering advances, balancing benefits with safeguards (as the MIT team has discussed in their ethics work) will be crucial. More independent, long-term studies are needed before widespread adoption.

IED near Alabama reservoir detonated after officials warn of 'unprecedented' critical infrastructure threat

From Fox News.com (May 15):

A grenade-type improvised explosive device was discovered and detonated in an Alabama reservoir that serves as the sole drinking water source for roughly 350,000 people, officials said Thursday.

Divers surveying the Converse Reservoir Dam for routine maintenance discovered the bomb, which the Mobile Area Water and Sewer System (MAWSS) described as a "grenade-type IED," and immediately alerted the Mobile County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), according to authorities.

The device was secured and detonated by a multi-agency team of operators including personnel from the FBI Bomb Squad, Mobile Police Department Explosive Ordnance Detail, Alabama Law Enforcement Agency's Bomb Squad, MCSO and the Daphne Search and Rescue Team, according to MAWSS.

MAWSS Director Bud McCrory called the IED discovery "an unprecedented threat" to the area's drinking water, adding "we are fortunate that this device was discovered before it could cause serious damage to our water supply or harm to individuals."

The Converse Reservoir is the sole source of drinking water for the Mobile area's 350,000 residents, according to MAWSS.

"We are grateful for the professionalism and competency of our law enforcement partners – as well as the quick thinking of our contractors and divers – in identifying this device and safely destroying it," McCrory said.

MAWSS said it is working with law enforcement agencies to investigate how the bomb got in the reservoir and how long it had been there. The agency will also work with law enforcement to increase security around the dam.

The Converse Reservoir and its dam are federally designated critical infrastructure. The dam is classified as a high hazard potential, according to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials.

The high hazard designation means a structural failure would "probably cause loss of human life," according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Fox News Digital contacted MAWSS, MCSO and the FBI for additional comment. [source]

Glad the divers found the IED in time. 

Treasury Sanctions Iran Shipping, Banking Networks

From Newsmax.com (May 19):

The Treasury Department announced new sanctions Tuesday targeting businesses, vessels, and financial networks accused of helping Iran move billions of dollars through oil sales, foreign currency exchanges and covert shipping operations despite existing U.S. sanctions.

The action targets more than 50 companies, individuals and vessels that Treasury said helped Iran access the international financial system and move money tied to oil, petrochemical and other commercial transactions.

"Iran's shadow banking system facilitates the illicit transfer of funding for terrorist purposes," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said.

"As Treasury systematically dismantles Tehran's shadow banking system and shadow fleet under Economic Fury, financial institutions must be alert to how the regime manipulates the international financial system to wreak havoc," he added.

Treasury said Iranian exchange houses and front companies use networks across multiple countries to process foreign currency transactions, move money for sanctioned Iranian banks and disguise the origin of Iranian oil and petrochemical exports.

Treasury accused some companies of managing cross-border money laundering operations, while others allegedly arranged payments tied to Iran’s petroleum, metals, manufacturing and automobile industries.

Treasury also targeted vessels accused of transporting Iranian oil, liquefied petroleum gas, petrochemicals and fuel products through shipping networks operating under multiple national flags.

The sanctions campaign aims to reduce revenue available to Iran’s government and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

"Treasury is aggressively advancing Economic Fury and has disrupted billions in projected oil revenue, taken actions that have led to the freezing of nearly half a billion dollars in regime-linked cryptocurrency, and cracked down on Tehran's shadow banking networks," the department said.

The Trump administration warned foreign companies and financial institutions that they could also face penalties if they help facilitate Iranian commerce or sanctions evasion.

The latest action follows other recent Treasury enforcement efforts tied to Iran sanctions.

One case announced Monday involved a settlement with a company tied to Indian billionaire Gautam Adani after Treasury accused it of arranging liquefied petroleum gas imports that allegedly originated in Iran.

Treasury said the imports were routed through a Dubai-based supplier claiming the gas came from Oman and Iraq, but investigators concluded warning signs should have alerted the company to the fuel’s Iranian origin.

The company agreed to pay $275 million and adopt additional compliance measures to settle potential sanctions violations. [source]

Good! It would be better if the IRGC's bank accounts were frozen, but a still pretty good tactics to put pressure on them.

5 Christian evangelists traveling to plant new church thrown off boat and drowned in Uganda

From Christian Post.com (Sept. 9, 2022):

NAIROBI, Kenya — Muslim extremists killed five Christian workers by throwing them off a boat into central Uganda’s Lake Kyoga, sources said.

The evangelists from End Time Word Ministry church were traveling on Aug. 10 from Nakasongola District to Apac District on a commercial transport boat with plans to plant a church in the Aduku area, a Christian survivor of the attack told Morning Star News.

The survivor, Amos Kyakulaga, a deacon at a church in Namutumba who was acting as a guide, said the five evangelists began proclaiming Christ to a group of 10 Muslims in Islamic attire aboard the boat.

“On our way, Tonny Ankunda started preaching to the people on the boat, which resulted in a huge argument between Muslims and the missionaries concerning the Sonship of our Lord Jesus Christ,” Kyakulaga told Morning Star News.

He said one of the Muslims, identified only as Bashir, began threatening the Christians, saying, “If you continue insisting that Jesus is the Son of God, then Allah will kill all of you.”

Citing Scripture, the evangelists continued affirming the sonship of Christ and, according to Kyakulaga, Bashir told them, “We are giving you one last minute to stop your blasphemy and to convert by confessing the shahada (Islamic creed), or else your lives are at risk.”

When the five evangelists refused to renounce Christ, the Muslims seized them and pushed them off the boat one by one, Kyakulaga said. While the lake is only 4 to 5.7 meters deep, they were 200 meters from shore, and all five Christians drowned.

The 10 Muslims aboard were in agreement that the Christians should be killed, and neither they nor the boat’s pilot did anything to intervene, Kyakulaga said.

The Muslims asked him if he was one of the missionaries, sparing him when he said he was not part of the church-planting team, he said. When the boat docked, he took a motorcycle to the church in Aduku that had invited them, where an elder obtained help from local officials and a fishing group to find and remove the bodies from the lake.

Morning Star News has obtained photos of the bodies of the five victims: Ankunda, 44; Peter Agaba, 28; Juliet Ashaba, 39; Johnson Karungi, 27; and Julius Lweere, 52.

Police have contacted officials in Nakasongola District and leaders of the sending church of the Christians, a church source in Aduku said.

Along with Bashir, two other suspects were identified as Jamil Budde and Juma of Nakasongola.

The attack was the latest of many instances of persecution of Christians in Uganda that Morning Star News has documented.

Uganda’s constitution and other laws provide for religious freedom, including the right to propagate one’s faith and convert from one faith to another. Muslims make up no more than 12% of Uganda’s population, with high concentrations in eastern areas of the country. [source]

Pure evil.

Glenn Beck: Here's What's Wrong with Conservatism Today

From Glenn Beck.com (Nov. 4, 2025):

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

• for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
• for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
• for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
• for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
• and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn't cling to the past -- he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still. It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself. This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to ¬nd.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past,that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want. They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for. Do you? [watch the video]

Great principles now and in the future.

CIA Officer: Agency Defies Trump's Order, Withholds 40 Boxes of JFK and MKULTRA Files

From JFK Facts.substack.com (May 13):

Active duty CIA officer James Erdman III testified in front of the Senate Oversight Committee on Wednesday about Agency obfuscation of findings around the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In his prepared remarks, he made an explosive detour into the JFK case.

He stated that the CIA took back control of 40 boxes of documents that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was reviewing for declassification under President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14176. That January 2025 decree ordered the release of records concerning the JFK, MLK and RFK assassinations.

Shortly after his testimony, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, the chair of House Oversight Committee’s Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, reacted bluntly with an X post addressed directly to the CIA:

“Return the documents immediately to” ODNI, she wrote. “JFK was declassified under an EO. MK ULTRA WAS REQUESTED BY CONGRESS.”

Congresswoman Luna revealed on X that she had sent a preservation notice on the stationery of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

CIA spokesperson Liz Lyons said in a statement:

“The Committee acted in bad faith by subpoenaing an Agency officer for testimony today without notifying CIA, despite having already obtained closed-door testimony from the individual previously. The witness testifying today is not appearing as a whistleblower in pursuit of the truth, but instead in response to the subpoena issued by Chairman (Rand) Paul.

This proceeding amounts to nothing more than dishonest political theater masquerading as a congressional hearing. As the CIA has already assessed, COVID-19 most likely originated from a lab leak, and efforts to undermine that conclusion are disingenuous.”

The remark about withheld JFK documents came roughly 20 minutes into a 90-minute hearing focused on disclosure of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. Erdman had served in a joint duty assignment within DNI in a unit called the Director’s Initiatives Group (DIG) from March 2025 until April 2026, at which time he returned to the CIA.

“The legislative and executive branches will continue to be misinformed if this type of behavior is not addressed,” Erdman said immediately after the comments about the JFK and MKULTRA boxes, but presumably also referring to the primary subject of the hearing, information regarding COVID-19.

Nearly 2,700 files have been released in full under Trump’s executive order. As recently as last month, Rex Bradford of the Mary Ferrell Foundation — the nonprofit whose vast digital archive contains nearly 2 million pages of documents, government reports, books, essays, multimedia, and innovative research tools focused on the assassinations of the 1960s — said he believed that the era of mass declassification was largely over.

Wednesday’s testimony could indicate that there is more to come, while also encouraging speculation as to why so much material was withheld in defiance of the executive order.

MKULTRA documents were understood to have been destroyed in 1973 under the orders of outgoing Director of Central Intelligence Richard Helms. The possible existence of never-before-seen documents related to the Agency’s mind control experiments dating back to the 1950s could put the CIA’s bad behavior back on the Congressional agenda.

“The CIA famously said that all [MKULTRA] documents had been released and others were destroyed, so these are allegedly those documents that apparently never existed,” Congresswoman Luna told NewsNation’s Katie Pavlich.

At the end of his allotted five minutes during the hearing, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) called for a new Church Committee, referring to the mid-’70s Senate committee that explored possible misdeeds by U.S. intelligence agencies.

In his response contextualizing the challenge of forming a new congressional investigative body, Chairman Paul (R-Ky.) revealed that for the last two years the CIA has stonewalled his request to access the complete and unredacted final Church Committee report, now 50 years old.

This latest controversy puts Director Ratcliffe in a difficult political position. Erdman did not accuse the Agency of withholding the documents on Ratcliffe’s orders, meaning Ratcliffe may have been unaware of what career CIA officials were doing, thus raising the question of both his and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s control over the sprawling spy agency. [source]

The Agency should return the boxes. I wonder if Director Ratcliffe knew about this action or not. It does sound like a Deep State coverup.

The crazy plan to explode a nuclear bomb on the Moon

From BBC.com (May 8, 2023):

The moment astronaut Neil Armstrong stepped out on to the Moon's surface in 1969 is one of the most memorable moments in history.

But what if the Moon Armstrong stepped onto was scarred by huge craters and poisoned from the effects of nuclear bombardment?

At first reading, the title of the research paper – A Study of Lunar Research Flights, Vol 1 – sounds blandly bureaucratic and peaceful. The kind of paper easy to ignore. And that was probably the point.

Glance at the cover, however, and things look a little different.

Emblazoned in the centre is a shield depicting an atom, a nuclear bomb, and a mushroom cloud – the emblem of the Air Force Special Weapons Center at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, which played a key role in the development and testing of nuclear weapons.

Down at the bottom is the author's name: L Reiffel, or Leonard Reiffel, one of America's leading nuclear physicists. He worked with Enrico Fermi, the creator of the world's first nuclear reactor who is known as the "architect of the nuclear bomb".

Project A119, as it was known, was a top-secret proposal to detonate a hydrogen bomb on the Moon. Hydrogen bombs were vastly more destructive than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, and the latest in nuclear weapon design at the time. Asked to "fast track" the project by senior officers in the Air Force, Reiffel produced many reports between May 1958 and January 1959 on the feasibility of the plan.

Incredibly, one scientist enabling this horrific scheme was future visionary Carl Sagan. In fact, the existence of the project was only discovered in the 1990s because Sagan had mentioned it on an application to an elite university.

While it might have helped to answer some rudimentary scientific questions about the Moon, Project A119's primary purpose was as a show of force. The bomb would explode on the appropriately named Terminator Line  – the border between the light and dark side of the Moon – to create a bright flash of light that anyone, but particularly anyone in the Kremlin, could see with the naked eye. The absence of an atmosphere meant there wouldn't be a mushroom cloud.

There is only one convincing explanation for proposing such a horrendous plan – and the motivation for it lies somewhere between insecurity and desperation. [read more]

Crazy indeed.

Democrats Falsely Claim Trump Assassination Attempts Were Staged To Cover Up Their Own Domestic Terrorism

From The Federalist.com (May 13):

Three weeks ago a gunman armed with multiple firearms burst through security lines at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner to try and assassinate President Donald Trump and members of his cabinet. But according to 34 percent of Democrats, that assassination attempt was staged.

In fact, that assassination attempt was only the latest staged attempt — if you ask some Democrats.

A NewsGuard/YouGov poll found 30 percent of Americans “believe that at least one of the three attempts on President Donald Trump’s life over the last two years was staged.” When broken down by party affiliation, 34 percent of Democrats said the WHCA dinner was staged. Forty-two percent of Democrats say the Butler assassination attempt — in which Trump was visibly hit and bleeding and in which Corey Comperatore was murdered — was staged. Twenty-six percent of Democrats say the attempted assassination that took place just weeks after Butler, in which Ryan Routh tried to assassinate the president on his golf course, was also staged. Thirteen percent of Republicans said the White House Correspondents’ Dinner assassination attempt was staged, while 7 percent said both the Butler and Routh attempts were staged.

The poll surveyed 1,000 Americans between April 28 and May 4.

The assassination-denial conspiracy theories aren’t limited to everyday Democrats, however; leftist pundits are also on board. Former MSNBC host Joy Reid said that “odd things … keep happening around Trump” before referencing a “fake assassination” of Viktor Orbán that the Russians purportedly staged. “So, all of this thrown in together, you’re like, when something seems too perfect, people, they don’t — they don’t believe in it. And Donald Trump now again gets victimized by an alleged would-be assassin in front of the perfect witnesses — the press.”

The View co-host Ana Navarro suggested Trump staged the attempt because he “lies.”

“It’s odd to me that in a place that is teeming with Secret Service … this could happen,” Navarro said. “But also I think people jump to that conclusion that it is staged because Trump lies … so people do not trust and do not believe anything Trump says. His lips are moving, the likelihood is, he is lying.”

TDS-infected author Don Winslow claimed the entire weekend around the dinner was “coordinated.”

So after badgering the public day in and day out with rhetoric designed to justify and even incite the most egregious political violence possible, Democrats now want to pretend the violence that predictably follows as a result of that rhetoric is “staged.” Democrats and their allies in the propaganda press have spent years depicting Trump and his supporters as existential threats to democracy, “fascists,” “dictators,” Nazis, and enemies of the state. Now they don’t want to accept responsibility for the consequences of their rhetoric.

But it’s hard not to see the connection.

The propaganda press has run an assassination prep campaign that, as The Federalist co-founder and CEO Sean Davis explained, is fueled by language “meant to justify and even incite the most extreme measures, up to and including unconscionable violence.”

To give just a few examples, The Atlantic’s Marc Novicoff published a piece this past January entitled “How to Tell If Your President Is a Dictator.” The piece claims Trump’s second term is “literally dictatorial.” A 2023 Washington Post op-ed by Robert Kagan said, “A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending.” Kagan also said a second Trump administration would be akin to Hitler’s regime.

Democrat politicians are eagerly peddling the same assassination-prep rhetoric. Ilhan Omar called Trump “the leader of the Pedophile Protection Party” and added that “at least in Somalia they execute pedophiles not elect them.”

Just months ago, Democrats in Virginia elected Jay Jones to serve as attorney general despite text messages from 2022 showing Jones wishing to kill his Republican colleague and former state House Speaker Todd Gilbert. “Gilbert gets two bullets to the head,” Jay said in one message. “Yes, I’ve told you this before. Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy,” he wrote in another, adding that Gilbert’s children are “little fascists.”

Graham Platner, the Democrat who had the Nazi tattoo and is running for Senate, suggested in 2018 that voters can’t “expect to fight fascism without a good semi-automatic rifle.” Elliot Forhan, a Democrat running for attorney general in Ohio, posted a video this past January explaining how he would “kill Donald Trump” if elected to serve as attorney general. Forhan said he would kill the president “with the requirements of due process, resulting in a sentence, duly executed, of capital punishment.”

As Eddie Scarry highlighted in these pages, the owner of a Wisconsin brewery who is now running for governor as a Democrat offered free beer when “either a brother or sister in the Resistance” gets their “marksmanship” right and Trump is successfully killed. Notably, the brewery also suggested Trump may have “faked another assassination to get a positive news cycle.”

When Democrats and corporate media leftists repeatedly tell Americans that Trump is Hitler and Republicans are fascists, they present violence to that end as justified, even acceptable — and their assassination prep has gained clear traction. In fact, Routh called Trump a “dictator” in a handwritten letter, and he asserted in a self-published book that Trump “perpetrated” the Jan. 6 unrest. The alleged shooter at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Cole Tomas Allen, reportedly left a manifesto falsely accusing Trump of being a “pedophile, rapist, and traitor.” He allegedly wrote, “And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes,” adding that he was not obligated to “yield [elected officials and judges] anything so unlawfully ordered.”

The rhetoric allegedly espoused by the WHCA dinner suspect is the same rhetoric shared by members of the Democrat Party and the corporate media. In fact the normalization and acceptance of political violence by the left has become so obvious even Politifact wrote that “Democrats and liberals are becoming more open to political violence.”

PolitiFact also noted that “younger Americans today are more open to political violence than members of other age groups” and that “the strongest Democratic rate of justifying violence was to remove Trump from office. More than 27% of Democrats said violence was justified for that purpose.” PolitiFact was citing polling by the Chicago Project on Security and Threats and NORC.

A Marquette Poll taken days after Charlie Kirk was assassinated by a leftist showed 15 percent of Democrats believed that it is “justified for Americans today to resort to violence in order to achieve political goals.” Twenty-five percent of respondents who identify as “very liberal” agreed with the statement. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found 7 percent of Democrats agreed with the statement that it is justifiable “for someone in my political party to commit violence to achieve a political goal,” according to PolitiFact.

The assassination attempts — which were not “staged” — did not happen in a vacuum. Democrats and the propaganda press have spent years excusing, justifying, and even legitimizing political violence. Then when that violence becomes reality, they insist it was staged. And it’s not because they genuinely believe it was “staged,” but because acknowledging the reality of the attacks would force Democrats and the press to acknowledge that they are partially responsible for creating the conditions that have led to such violence.

So instead, leftists will gaslight the public — the bullets were fake, the blood was fake, and Comperatore actually agreed to be murdered — all while spewing the same assassination-prep language that led to the assassination attempts they deny. [source]

Either that or the Dems are just insane.

Inside Pope Leo’s Customer Service Snafu With His Chicago Bank

From NC Register.com (May 6):

It is a scene that feels more like a sitcom script than a Vatican reality: Two months after Robert Francis Prevost, a Chicago-born cardinal, was elected Pope Leo XIV, he found himself at the mercy of a customer service representative.

The story now making rounds on social media and first picked up by The New York Times was shared by Father Tom McCarthy, an Augustinian priest and longtime friend of the Pope, during a gathering in Naperville, Illinois.

According to Father McCarthy, the leader of the global Catholic Church decided it was finally time to update his personal banking records.

The Call That Failed

Calling his local branch back home, the Pope identified himself by his birth name, Robert Prevost, and explained that he needed to update the phone number and address on his account.

The security screening began. One by one, the Pope provided the correct answers to the bank’s verification questions. But as anyone who has wrestled with a call center knows, “correct” isn’t always enough.

“He was told that it wasn’t enough — he would have to come to the branch in person,” Father McCarthy recounted to the laughing audience.

The Pope, now feeling the weight of the Atlantic Ocean and the walls of the Apostolic Palace between him and his local teller replied, “Well, I’m not going to be able to do that. I gave you all the security questions.”

The Ultimate ‘Don’t You Know Who I Am?’

The employee apologized but remained firm. Finally, the Pope decided to play his only remaining card.

“Would it matter to you if I told you I’m Pope Leo?” he asked.

The response was immediate. Believing she was being pranked by a particularly ambitious crank caller, the employee hung up.

Fortunately for the Holy Father, the issue was eventually resolved — not through the bank’s official phone tree, but through the classic Chicago method of “knowing a guy.” Another priest with a direct line to the bank’s president intervened to clear the block on the papal account.

While the bank account is now up to date, the fate of the woman on the other end of the line remains a mystery.

“Could you imagine being known as the woman who hung up on the Pope?” Father McCarthy asked.

It turns out that while the Pope may hold the keys to the Kingdom, the keys to a Chicago checking account are a little harder to come by, as this most-relatable tale illustrates. [source]

Funny, but stupid. The Pope answered all the required security questions so the customer service lady should have been able to help him.

Why the State Won’t Tolerate Independence for Christianity

From Zachary Yost on Mises.org (Mar. 11, 2021):

On February 25, the House of Representatives passed the Equality Act, a bill that is touted as a step forward for civil rights in the United States. If enacted, the bill would add sexual orientation and gender identity to the federally protected classes that cannot be discriminated against and would expand where such protections are applied. While expanding such protections is not necessarily widely opposed (Mormon Republican Chris Stewart has introduced the Fairness for All Act as an alternative bill), the act explicitly says that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 cannot be invoked, and this has generated tremendous concern that both private businesses and religious institutions will be forced to toe the current cultural line regarding sexual and gender ideology, or else face discrimination suits and be sued into oblivion.

Organizations such as the Heritage Foundation and Christianity Today have argued against the bill on the basis of its effects on religious institutions, private schools, the legal rights of parents, and women’s athletics. While a discussion of such effects is important, the conversation has largely been missing the broader context of where this legislation and the numerous other proposals like it emerge from.

In his important essay “The Balance of Power in Society” sociologist Frank Tannenbaum argues that “society is possessed by a series of irreducible institutions, perennial through time, that in effect both describe man and define the basic role he plays.” These perennial institutions are the state, the church, the family, and the market. These institutions have eternally striven against each other to gain dominance and become what sociologist Robert Nisbet would call the primary reference group for its members, meaning the primary way in which they understand themselves and shape their beliefs and actions. At various times we can see one group coming to dominate the others, such as when the “trustee” form of family dominated social life in clan-based societies, or when the Roman Catholic Church exhibited tremendous power over the political affairs of Europe. Currently, we live in an epoch where the state has come to dominate social life to an extent never previously seen in human history.

It is useful to analyze the Equality Act from this perspective to truly understand its full implications. State hostility towards religion and the religious institutions through which religion is exercised is not driven solely, or in some cases even primarily, by the current secular zeitgeist. Rather, religion and religious institutions represent a major obstacle to the exercise of state control and the centralization of social power. In the Western context, orthodox Christianity especially poses a threat to this agenda due to its adherents’ membership in a kingdom “not of this world.” It is difficult for the immanent state to compete to be the primary reference for people who, by virtue of their religion, are members of a transcendent order.

However, it cannot be denied that the state has been very successful in undermining and sapping the power of religious institutions through two different means. The first is by expropriating those mundane areas of social responsibility and function that have traditionally been the purview of the church, such as charity and education. While churches are still involved in such things, the state has supplanted them as the primary social institution that provides them.

As Nisbet argues in his book The Quest for Community, a social group cannot survive for long if its chief functional purpose is lost, and unless new institutional functions are adapted, the group’s “psychological influence will be minimal.” No doubt the state has succeeded in centralizing so much power due to its success in poaching the historical functions of the church and family.

I noted above that in the Western context the emphasis of orthodox Christianity on transcendental concerns has proven to be a stumbling block to the state when it comes to becoming citizens’ primary reference group. However, the state has also attempted to muscle into that territory as well. Earlier I classified the state and the church as being two different institutions with separate functions. While this is often true, especially in the West due to the Augustinian formulation of the City of God and the Earthly City, in various times in history the functions have been unified.

In his work The Political Religions, political theorist Eric Voegelin explored this idea and traced its earliest sophisticated formulation back to Amenhotep IV/Akhenaton, a fourteenth-century BC pharaoh who temporarily upended Egyptian civilization by abolishing the old deities and introducing the monotheistic worship of the sun god Aton. By abolishing the old gods (references to traditional deities were eradicated and Amenhotep changed his name so that it no longer referenced the old god Amon), the newly named Akhenaton also abolished the old priesthood as well. What was new and innovative about Aton was that he was not just a limited god of Egypt, but in fact the god of the universe, who speaks and acts through his son, the Pharaoh. By obliterating the old gods such as Osiris, Voegelin argued that Akhenaton abolished those aspects of the Egyptian religion that were of the utmost importance to individuals, such as judgment and life after death, and replaced them only with a collective political religion of empire. This inability to fulfill the spiritual needs of the people, combined with the reaction of the defrocked priestly caste, led to backlash and restoration of the old order after the death of Akhenaton, when it was his turn to be obliterated from history.

Voegelin traces this idea of political religion through the ages and argues that Christianity, through the work of Augustine, seriously upended “the cosmos of the divinely analogous state” by subordinating the political-temporal sphere to the spiritual one. For hundreds of years this understanding dominated medieval Europe, but with the advent of the Enlightenment began to crack apart under a succession of philosophers, most notably Thomas Hobbes with his conception of the Leviathan state. However, Voegelin notes that over time, as the world has secularized, the political religions have closed themselves off to claims of being the conduit for God’s action on earth and instead have come to embody immanent forces such as “the order of history” or “the order of blood.” Metaphysics and religion have been banished in favor of a vocabulary of “science” that is “inner-worldly” and therefore closed off to what Voegelin would call the ground of being through which humans experience transcendent reality.

In the United States, our political religion takes the form of progressivism, which itself is the product of Protestant clergy who abandoned orthodoxy in the nineteenth century in favor of an immanent ideology in which the US would serve as the instrument to build God’s kingdom on earth. In his essay “The Progressive Era and the Family,” Murray Rothbard traces this movement to the rise of what he terms “evangelical pietism” and the way in which it altered traditional doctrine to require that man work for his own salvation by working for the salvation of the rest of the world through its immanent reformation.

The song “Battle Hymn of the Republic” was one product of this way of thinking and, in the words of one Voegelin scholar, its author “transforms Christ’s redemptive mission—which is not of this world—into the world immanent social activism of the Anti‑Slavery movement.” Rather than waiting for Christ to return, when he shall establish a new heaven and a new earth, the progressive creed held that it is the job of every true Christian to redeem the fallen world and to build God’s kingdom on earth right now. The Civil War was understood as one such redemptive episode (complete with a martyr in the form of Abe Lincoln), as was the First World War. In his book The War for Righteousness, historian Richard M. Gamble documents the way in which Progressive Protestant clergy led the charge to bring the US into the war with hopes of redeeming the world. Like Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson was perceived as a tragic martyr for the cause and was viewed with clearly religious veneration.

While the American political religion began by attempting to build the kingdom of God on earth, it has, in Voegelin’s term, ended up as an “inner-worldly” religion that does not even attempt to maintain a connection to the transcendent order of reality, and instead justifies itself as being the conduit through which the inexorable march of “progress” flows forth. Democracy and equality, not the return of Christ, are the new end of history.

The end result is that the state seeks to not only supplant religious institutions by usurping their mundane functions but by usurping their spiritual functions as well. Like the priests of Akhenaton’s day, American religious institutions, especially orthodox Christian ones, are both a competing pole of social power and the manifestation of a rival religion that must be subdued if the “State-God,” in the words of J.R.R. Tolkien, is to prevail.

In this context, with legislation like the Equality Act the state is not only seeking to further erode the social power of religious institutions by making religious education or adoption more difficult, but it is also advancing a rival religious doctrine at the same time by foisting progressive sexual and gender ideology on society.

It is likely that the Equality Act will not manage to pass the Senate in its current form, but the reality of the situation is that as long as the progressive political religion remains a potent force in American life, independent repositories of social power such as the family and the church will continually be under sustained attack. We can only hope that one day progressivism will meet the same fate that Aton did after the passing of Akhenaton, but until then, those who do not adhere to the cult of the “State-God” can only resist its impositions as best we can. [source]

The Left doesn’t want independence for Christianity (or Judaism for that matter) but independence for Islam is fine. But appeasing the Islamists only gets you slavery or death. They don’t want to assimilate with any country that is not Islamic.

By Compensating Slave Owners, Great Britain Negotiated a Peaceful End to Slavery

From Mises.org (Sept. 8, 2022):

The 2018 announcement that the British government completed the payment of a loan that was borrowed to compensate slave owners for the abolition of slavery continues to evoke a flurry of emotions. Many find it outrageous that the British government would contemplate compensating planters rather than the enslaved. Such responses are expected because people are using current moral standards to judge historical realities.

But an appreciation of the sociopolitical events surrounding the loan suggests that compensating planters was a feasible alternative at the time. English laws and customs placed a premium on protecting the rights of property owners, and slaves were considered property. The idea of owning people today seems abhorrent; however, this was not always the case. In British colonies, planters fiercely guarded their right to acquire slaves and appropriate their labor.

Questioning the right to own property provoked contention, even when the property was a human being. This was also the case in the context of indentureship in Barbados, where white indentured workers were perceived as property and could be inherited. British colonies in the West Indies valued autonomy and often resented Britain’s involvement in West Indian affairs.

As a result, when dealing with West Indian colonies, the British government had to tread carefully or face the wrath of the powerful British West India interest. The concerns of West Indian planters were voiced by proslavery parliamentarians in England, who were unwilling dissolve the plantation system without a fight. Politics is futile without compromise, so to abolish slavery, the British government had no option but to negotiate with proslavery forces who saw abolition as a violation of property rights.

Due to the primacy of property rights in England, proslavery lobbyists were able to galvanize the support of nonplanters by arguing that abolishing slavery without compensating property owners would more broadly erode protection for property rights. Their messages were carried by newspapers, journals, and pamphlets admonishing abolitionists for hesitating to compensate enslavers.

Contextualizing the case for compensation, Kathleen Mary Butler shows that the proslavery West India interest employed blackmail to guilt parliamentarians into granting compensation:

The interest argued that successive British governments had condoned and encouraged slave holding…. On several occasions, the Quarterly Review pointed out that various acts of Parliament had encouraged slave owners to spend vast sums of money to buy land and slaves. To deny them compensation, the Review believed constituted a “flagrant breach of faith.”

Jamaican planters weaponized the rhetoric of property rights with equal vigor to bolster the case for compensation. Radical journalist and reformer Augustin Hardin Beaumont, editor of the Jamaica Courant criticized slavery but still noted that enslavers deserved compensation because slavery was enabled by the British and hence it was only fair for British taxpayers to compensate West Indian planters. Throughout the West Indies, slave owners echoed the sentiment that abolishing slavery without compensation was unjust.

These views were so widespread that black slave owners were unwilling to part with slaves unless they received compensation. In 1831, free people of color in Saint Ann Parish, Jamaica, organized a meeting to flesh out the problems of abolition and its effect on property rights. The chairman of the meeting was the prosperous Benjamin Scott Moncrieff, a prominent official who possessed four hundred slaves, owned three estates, and served as an attorney for other properties.

Kathleen Mary Butler reveals that this community endorsed compensation as a tool to safeguard their property rights:

Those attending the meeting objected strongly to comments that Stephen Lushington, the British abolitionist, had allegedly made to the effect that in Jamaica the free people of color had authorized him to emancipate their slaves. The members categorically denied giving any such authorization and stressed their determination to defend their property and surrender it only “for the most full and ample compensation.”

In fact, their resolutions were published in Jamaican newspapers and sent to proslavery outlets in Britain. The historical accounts covered indicate that compensation was a creative strategy to placate enslavers who refused to cede authority to abolitionists. Absent compensation, abolition would have been delayed and blacks would have served remained in slavery for a longer time. Some feel that slaves deserved compensation, but bribing planters was the best tradeoff that the political climate could accommodate.

Yet despite the complexities of the decision, many think that the British owe blacks an apology. However, the truth is that the British atoned for their actions years ago. Britain in 1846 instituted the Aberdeen Act, which intercepted Brazilian ships suspected of trafficking Africans and prosecuted slave traders in British admiralty courts. Historians assert that maintaining the African Squadron alone came at the cost of $6.8 million and the lives of five thousand seamen and officers, who died primarily due to malaria, all in the name of suppressing the slave trade.

The cost of resourcing the African Squadron was also greater than the value of Britain’s trade with the continent. Suppressing the global slave trade incurred considerable expenses for the British, and few appreciate this bold political move that came at the expense of British taxpayers. Indeed, it is ironic that the British are instructed to atone for the slave trade when their counterparts in the Middle East and Africa were coerced into abolishing slavery due to Western directives. Compared to its peers, Britain was a moral superstar and should be lauded for taking a tough stance when others vacillated on the question of slavery. [source]

Those slaveowners were laying down a bunch of bull crap.

Tiny robots made from human cells heal damaged tissue

From Nature.com (Nov. 30, 2023):

Scientists have developed tiny robots made of human cells that are able to repair damaged neural tissue. The 'anthrobots' were made using human tracheal cells and might, in future, be used in personalized medicine.

The research "points the way to a 'tissue engineering 2.0' that synthetically controls a range of developmental processes", says Alex Hughes, a bioengineer at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

Developmental biologist Michael Levin at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, and his colleagues had previously developed tiny robots using clumps of embryonic frog cells. But the medical applications of these 'xenobots' were limited, because they weren't derived from human cells and because they had to be manually carved into the desired shape. The researchers have now developed self-assembling anthrobots and are investigating their therapeutic potential using human tissue grown in the laboratory. They published their  findings in Advanced Science.

Levin and his team grew spheroids of human tracheal skin cells in a gel for two weeks, before removing the clusters and growing them for one week in a less viscous solution. This caused tiny hairs on the cells called cilia to move to the outside of the spheroids instead of the inside. These cilia acted as oars, and the researchers found that the resulting anthrobots - each containing a few hundred cells - often swam in one of several patterns. Some swam in straight lines, others swam in circles or arcs, and some moved chaotically.

To test the anthrobots' therapeutic potential, Levin and his colleagues placed several into a small dish. There, the anthrobots fused together to form a 'superbot', which the researchers placed on a layer of neural tissue that had been scratched. Within three days, the sheet of neurons had completely healed under the superbot. This was surprising, says study co-author Gizem Gumuskaya, a developmental biologist also at Tufts, because the anthrobot cells were able to perform this repair function without requiring any genetic modification. "It's not obvious that you're going to get that kind of response," she says.

Going forward, Levin, Gumuskaya and their colleagues think anthrobots made from a person's own tissue could be used to clear arteries, break up mucus or deliver drugs, with or without genetic engineering. By combining several cell types and exploring other stimuli, it might also be possible to develop biobots - robots made from biological material - with potential applications in sustainable construction and outer-space exploration.

"Once we understand what cell collectives are willing and able to do, then we can begin to control that not just for stand-alone bots, but for regenerative medicine," says Levin, including to regrow limbs. [source]

Nice.

Senator: Biden Agency Used ‘Benghazi’ To Hide Emails On Planned Parenthood Loans

From The Federalist.com (Apr. 29):

The moment is etched in 21st century memory. The shrill voice of then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, agitated and stretched, still rings in the ears. 

“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?” Clinton, with dreams of the White House dancing in her head, scolded Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., during an early 2013 Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.

The Wisconsin Republican had gotten under Clinton’s skin, asking her about the secretary’s slow response to a preventable attack in September 2012 on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. Benghazi became a political lightning rod, the leading symbol of the Obama administration’s anemic, incompetent, and deceptive foreign policy, particularly Clinton’s ineffectual “Smart Power” strategy. More so, the committee investigating Benghazi opened the lock to Clinton’s emails, the secret server, and more Clinton lies and obfuscation that contributed to her stunning loss to Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

So what on earth does Benghazi have to do with abortion factory Planned Parenthood? It appears to be the codename for cover-up involving some $90 million in taxpayer-funded Covid-era forgivable loans to a nonprofit organization ineligible to receive the government handout.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, is asking the Department of Justice to open an investigation into why President Joe Biden’s Small Business Administration used “Benghazi” in the subject lines of internal communications regarding the funding. Ernst, chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, asserts “Benghazi” is code for “the possible unlawful concealment and attempted concealment of federal records by President Biden’s Small Business Administration officials, and potentially their White House colleagues — a violation of the Federal Records Act.”

‘Benghazi (PPP/PPH) Decisions’

In a letter this week to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Ernst details the emails her office has obtained to date revealing that Biden officials, apparently led by the SBA’s top lawyer, developed strategies to explain how Planned Parenthood qualified for Paycheck Protection Program Loans.

An email from SBA General Council Peggy Hamilton, dated April 30, 2021, appears to be the first with the subject line, “Benghazi (PPP/PPH) Decisions” in the subject line. Note that the reference to the small business loan program and the abortion provider are in parentheses, making requests for communications about the Covid relief program nonresponsive, or not relevant to key records search terms. The agency arguably would not have to turn over the requested information because, understandably, “Benghazi” would not be in the Freedom of Information Act request.

Hamilton’s email was part of a months-long thread about Planned Parenthood’s SBA loans, as well as the abortion giant’s loan forgiveness requests.

“The context of Hamilton’s email, as subsequent SBA emails elucidate, is whether or not the Biden administration would require the repayment of COVID-era Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans made to potentially ineligible Planned Parenthood affiliates and how the SBA would respond to Congressional inquiries over its decisions,” Ernst’s letter states.

The loans were meant for employers with less than 500 employees, designed to help cover the paychecks for employees of small businesses hit hard by the pandemic and the destructive government-ordered lockdowns that accompanied it. Republican lawmakers, upon learning of PPP loans going to to the abortion industrial complex, demanded President Donald Trump’s DOJ at the time investigate which Planned Parenthood facilities received forgivable loans.

“These Planned Parenthood entities self-certified eligibility for these loans despite the clear ineligibility under the statutory text of the CARES Act,” Republican senators wrote in a letter to then-Attorney General Bill Barr. The CARES Act was the first massive infusion of panic cash thrown about to deal with Covid and the fear attached to it.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America denied any wrongdoing, asserting that some independent operations were awarded loans under the “eligibility rules established by the CARES Act and the Small Business Administration (SBA).” [read more]

More Biden regime corruption...