Month: April 2024

By Voice of America – https://www.voanews.com/a/sdf-is-using-smoke-suicide-attacks-to-slow-advance-on-last-syria-stronghold/4784555.html, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=77295884

The US and Russia are already embroiled in a de facto proxy war in Ukraine. Now, with the escalating conflict in the Middle East, US foreign policy goals clash with Russia’s, effectively opening a second front. While it’s clear both Washington and Moscow pursue self-interest, their objectives and methods diverge significantly.

Both undertake military interventions and endorse proxy armies in the region. The distinction lies in Russia’s covert military involvement in the Middle East and Africa, primarily through private military companies (PMCs) like the Wagner Group. The US, however, overtly sends uniformed troops to the area. Russia’s PMCs have a notorious history of severe human rights violations, including rape, murder, and torture, leading to their designation as transnational terrorist organizations.

Another contrast in the policy objectives of the two countries lies in their motivations. While it’s often argued that the US only goes to war for oil, this assertion doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Firstly, the US is among the nations with the largest proven oil reserves globally and is effectively energy independent.

Moreover, the US has participated in numerous conflicts in regions with minimal oil resources. For instance, during World War II, the US didn’t take on Japan and Germany because of their oil. Since 1945, the US has been involved in conflicts spanning Greece (1947-1949), Korea, Haiti (1959), Vietnam, Central America, Kosovo, Croatia, and many other countries. The most significant recent wars fought by the US were in Afghanistan, which lacks significant oil reserves, and Iraq, which is oil-rich. However, even in Iraq, the US didn’t seize control of the oil fields. The fields remain the property of Iraq, while they are operated by international companies, with China expanding its share.

Moscow’s interventions in the Middle East and Africa, on the other hand, are primarily driven by a quest to secure resources and strengthen the Russian economy. While the US typically backs the UN-recognized leader of a nation, the Wagner Group aligns itself with whichever strongman or dictator commands valuable resources such as gold, diamonds, or oil, funneling the proceeds back to Moscow through clandestine shell companies.

The U.S. typically ties its economic and military assistance to conditions aimed at enhancing democracy and human rights within a country. While one could argue that these conditions serve U.S. interests, they also contribute to the betterment of people’s lives.

Because Russia neglects human rights and democracy in the countries where it intervenes militarily, Moscow provides diplomatic and military backing for nefarious regimes such as Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, Libyan strongman Khalifa Haftar, or the coup leaders in the Sahel region of Africa. As a consequence of Russia’s support for these dictators, the standard of living and quality of life for the average citizens in these countries sharply decline.

Another contrast between US and Russian intervention lies in the aftermath: when a country aligns with Russia, it often severs ties with the West, as seen in the coup belt of Africa. This termination of Western influence not only hinders potential political and social transformations but also designates Russia as the principal export market, thereby reducing resource prices and exacerbating poverty.

On the other hand, countries aligning with the US effectively align with the EU, G7, and the world’s wealthiest and most developed nations. This alignment enables them to engage in international trade, access funding from traditional lenders like the IMF, World Bank, and Paris Club, and receive aid from Western sources.

Moscow and Washington have cooperated on counterterrorism issues, related to Islamic extremism, but once again, the motivations are different. Putin was quick to join US counterterrorism initiatives after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, however, he was doing so, to cover for his war against separatists in Chechnya and Dagestan. Moscow’s alleged interest in counterterrorism is just the next step in a long history of repression and war against Russia’s domestic Muslim population.

Countries in the Middle East and Africa face a choice between the US and Russia as their counterterrorism and security partner. While the US seeks to balance counterterrorism efforts with maintaining relations with other Middle Eastern nations, Russia takes a different approach by indirectly supporting terrorism through its backing of Iran, which in turn supports Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Russia provided Hamas with weapons taken in Ukraine and has sold weapons to authoritarian regimes all over Africa. Moreover, due to human rights violations committed by Moscow-sponsored groups, Russia has been labeled a state sponsor of terror by the EU Parliament.

Additionally, in response to the Houthi attacks on ships in the Red Sea, Russia obtained an agreement wherein the Houthis would refrain from attacking Russian vessels. In contrast, the US response involved forming an international coalition to prevent the Houthis from targeting ships of any nation.

The two countries have markedly different approaches to arms control. While the US collaborates with the international community to prevent states like North Korea and Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, Russia takes a contrasting stance by providing technology to Iran that could advance its nuclear ambitions. Russia also purchases missiles and drones from Iran, as well as assorted munitions from North Korea, despite international sanctions prohibiting such arms trade. Moreover, supplying Iran with the means to develop nuclear weapons is banned, but Russia declared last year that it no longer felt obliged to adhere to UN restrictions.

Russia maintains its position on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and has consistently vetoed interventions against dictators and despots. Recently, Russia vetoed a resolution aiming to ban nuclear weapons from space. This aligns with Russia’s track record of vetoing resolutions related to nuclear proliferation as well as interventions in the Middle East.

While critics may argue that the US seeks to limit the number of nuclear weapons in the world to maintain its military supremacy, it’s undeniable that a world without nuclear-armed states like North Korea and Iran would be significantly safer than the alternative presented by Russian policies. Moreover, in the Middle East, a scenario where the region’s UN-recognized and democratically elected leaders, supported by the international community, aren’t embroiled in endless conflicts against Russian proxies would undoubtedly lead to greater stability, prosperity, and, most importantly, the well-being of the Middle Eastern population.

The post US vs. Russia in the Middle East and Africa: Clash of Policy Agendas appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

NOTE TO READERS: NOT ONE single mainstream media outlet is willing to be honest with the American public and play video of John Sullivan’s extensive history as a BLM and Antifa organizer.
NOT ONE!

Antifa-Black Lives Matter leader John Sullivan or Jayden X pictured inside the US Capitol on January 6

Antifa-BLM organizer John Sullivan was sentenced on Friday to six years in prison for his actions on January 6, 2021 at the US Capitol.

Antifa-Insurgence leader John Earl Sullivan was arrested in Utah after the US Capitol riots.
As reported previously, Antifa protester John Sullivan was caught on video posing as a Trump supporter during the rioting at the US Capitol on January 6th.

“We About to Go Get that MotherF***er! – It’s Time for Revolution!” – VIDEO – BLM Threatens to Rip President Trump from White House

Footage obtained by the Gateway Pundit from militant Black Lives Matter and Antifa activist John Sullivan’s Discord server shows the so-called “civil rights activist” reveling inside the U.S. Capitol on Jan 6 as he damaged federal property.

Sullivan has maintained in multiple interviews that he regularly attends protests only to record what’s going on, but did not actively partake in the insurgence in Washington.  This was a lie.  He is a leader of the Utah Antifa-BLM movement and was previously arrested in Utah.

Sullivan also organized an Antifa-Insurgence rally on January 6th at the Washington Monument at 11 AM before they stormed the US Capitol.
The mainstream media refuses to report these facts.

The media and January 6 committee missed this for some reason?

Antifa leader Jayden X spent one night in jail and was then released.

The Gateway Pundit first reported on Jayden X back in August 2020 during the BLM riots in Washington DC.

John Sullivan, Jayden X, spoke at the rallies calling on BLM radicals to “go get that motherf**ker” in the White House.

“We About to Go Get that MotherF***er! – It’s Time for Revolution!” – VIDEO – BLM Threatens to Rip President Trump from White House

The media conveniently ignores this too.

Axios reported:

A Utah man who claimed he was acting as a citizen journalist when he joined Jan. 6 rioters and filmed scenes inside the U.S. Capitol, including the fatal shooting of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, was sentenced Friday to six years in prison.

The big picture: John Earle Sullivan, who prosecutors said earned more than $90,000 from selling his video footage of the Capitol breach, was convicted in November of several charges including felony obstruction of an official proceeding and civil disorder.

The 29-year-old from Salt Lake City was also sentenced to 36 months of supervised release and ordered to pay $2,000 in restitution, according to the Department of Justice.

Context: Sullivan, who was wearing a ballistic vest and gas mask when he joined rioters storming the Capitol, was heard on video yelling expletives, including “we’re about to burn this s–t down!,” “we’re f–king s–t up” and “I’m gonna make these Trump supporters f–k all this s–t up,” per court documents.

He told the mob he had a knife and offered it to them as he filmed them trying to break open doors to the House Chamber and the Speaker’s Lobby, prosecutors said. Congress members, staff and journalists were inside the House of Representatives at the time.
Video evidence shows Sullivan climbing through a broken window at the Capitol building and eventually reaching the Speaker’s Lobby, where he can be heard encouraging a mob breaking glass panes in the door and telling police officers to “go home” before Babbitt climbs through and is shot, per the DOJ.

The post BLM Leader John Sullivan Who Sought to “Incite Violence” on Capitol Hill Is Sentenced to Six Years in Prison for His Actions on Jan. 6 – Famously Filmed Ashli Babbitt’s Murder in US Capitol appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A New Mexico high school principal has been removed, and several employees were placed on leave after a raunchy drag performance at the prom left parents outraged.

Students say that the drag performer flashed their crotch, “did twerk on a couple of students,” and “let students twerk on them.”

The lewd performance took place at the prom for Atrisco Heritage Academy High School in Albuquerque on April 20.

Can someone please explain how school administrators thought it was a good idea to have a drag queen perform at senior prom in attire that some kids would not even wear in a swim class? pic.twitter.com/8MMSP4IPFQ

— Louder with Crowder Dot Com (@LWCnewswire) April 26, 2024

NBC News reports, “In a video on TikTok, students can be seen gathering around the performer in thigh-high black boots and a matching body suit, as the performer is bending over, squatting and dancing provocatively.”

The performer has been identified by local station KOB 4 as “Mythica Sahreen.”

“Honestly, it was really interesting, and I didn’t mind it. But the thing is it’s the place and where it happened, full of minors, you know, it wasn’t very appropriate for prom,” a student told the station.

Another student added, “Could have kept it more on the side of like it being more PG with the fact that they kind of did twerk on a couple students it wasn’t exactly the best, but it was something that did happen. And they did let students twerk on them.”

NEW VIDEO: Adult Drag Queen Stripper Touches Students in Lewd Performance at @ABQschools High School Prom. This is unacceptable! Principal Irene Cisneros must be FIRED. Contact APS Board – demand Atrisco Heritage Academy Principal Cisneros be fired NOW: https://t.co/mzJWbLAWZm pic.twitter.com/mNbX3jSt1N

— Elisa Martinez (@elisa1121) April 25, 2024

“They kind of busted down, and I’m pretty sure they showed their crotch a little bit. The clothing was a little skimpy, if that’s the correct way to put it,” said another student.

Lovely. Instead of allowing students to enjoy prom, @ABQschools Atrisco Heritage Academy had a drag queen stripper perform. AT PROM.

WHY?

Imagine if this was an adult female stripper performing for kids at prom.

Contact: Principal Irene Cisneros
below info or here:… pic.twitter.com/p3Td1rXYTs

— Elisa Martinez (@elisa1121) April 24, 2024

The drag queen told the station that he works with the school’s Gay–Straight Alliance.

“He claims he did not get paid for the performance, and it went up the correct chain. However, he wouldn’t tell us who exactly that included or who booked him,” the report adds. “There is commentary on one version of the video going around, claiming the performer stripped during the prom. But there is no video showing that to be true, and the students say they never saw that happen.”

BREAKING: @ABQschools officials announce in email, NEW ACTING PRINCIPAL to replace disgraced Irene Cisneros who allowed Drag Queen Stripper performance at prom.

GREAT NEWS for outraged parents & students! #LeaveTheKidsAlone https://t.co/P69d54I5qi pic.twitter.com/kSMz4Zo6Eh

— Elisa Martinez (@elisa1121) April 25, 2024

Channell Segura, chief of Albuquerque Public Schools, emailed parents and told them that an investigation is underway to determine how this was allowed to happen.

The post Raunchy Drag Show During New Mexico Prom Leads to Principal Being Removed and Several Employees Placed on Leave (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Larry Johnson speaks to the United Nations Security Council on Friday, April 26, 2024, on the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipleline.

The Gateway Pundit contributor Larry Johnson spoke before the United Nations Security Counsel in New York City on Friday, April 26, 2024.

Larry Johnson delivered remarks on the Nord Stream pipeline bombing.

Here is the transcript from Larry’s presentation at the United Nations on Friday.

Larry Johnson: Thank you, Mr. President. My compliments to the distinguished members of the Security Council. My name is Larry Johnson. I’m here today to speak in support of Russia’s desire to have the United Nations Security Council conduct an open and comprehensive investigation of the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline in September of 2022.

I’m here at my own expense without compensation for my time. All material and comments are my own. My goal in addressing you today is simple. I want to propose steps that I believe can help resolve the mystery of the source of the attack on the Nord Stream pipeline and thus help resolve the tensions that resulted from that unprecedented attack. Perhaps I bring a unique unique perspective to this issue because of my past experience with intelligence operations and analysis during my time with the Central Intelligence Agency, with counterterrorism policy and investigations while serving in the State Department Office of Counter Terrorism, with the scripting and execution of more than 200 counterterrorism training missions for US military Special Operations Forces while working as a contractor, and with successful international money laundering investigations carried out in my role as the managing partner of Berger Associates.

One of these investigations included a successful case conducted on behalf of the European Union and the governors of Columbia. But let me start with President Harry S. Truman. I think I am the only one in this August Hall who grew up in Independence, Missouri, and attended middle school across the street from Mr. Truman’s home. I had the privilege of meeting Mr. Truman briefly one morning in September of 1970, as he strolled up North Delaware Street towards his presidential library, accompanied by a single bodyguard. What a difference 54 years makes. It is true that Mr. Truman presided over the start of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. That is an unfortunate legacy. But I want to remind the Council of Mr. Truman’s words to the fledgling United Nations in October of 1950. A 74-year-old message is still relevant and worth remembering.

“At the present time, the fear of another great international war overshadows all the hopes of mankind. This fear arises from the tensions between nations and from recent outbreak of open aggression in Korea. We, in the United States, believe that such a war can be prevented. We do not believe that war is inevitable. One of the strongest reasons for this belief is our faith in the United Nations. The United Nations has three great roles to play in preventing wars. First, it provides a way for negotiation and the settlement of disputes among nations by peaceful means. Second, it provides a way of utilizing the collective strength of member nations under the charter to prevent aggression. Third, it provides a way through which once the danger of aggression is reduced, the nations can be relieved of the burden of armaments.”

I believe it is not only the responsibility, but the sacred duty of the Security Council to take the lead in bringing about a settlement of the Nord Stream matter by peaceful means. I will not review the mountain of evidence that implicates my own country, the United States, in this act of war against the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany. There was no compelling national security interest to justify the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, which has inflicted significant economic pain on the people of Germany. This attack accomplished nothing in terms of helping bring an end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and Ukraine’s NATO facilitators. It made matters worse.

During my time at the CIA, I acquired an understanding of how covert action was planned and executed in places as diverse as Afghanistan and Central America. Such operations are not conducted spur of the moment. They are funded, planned, rehearsed before being executed. Seymour Hirsch’s account of the US covert action against the Nord Stream pipeline is consistent with the knowledge I acquired during my time at the agency in the late 1980s. When I began working for Ambassador Morris Busby in the office of the Coordinator for counterterrorism at the US State Department in the fall of 1989, one of my first tasks was getting country clearances for the FBI as they investigated the terrorist bombing of the plane of Pan Am 103, which crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland, in December of 1988. One of the most important lessons I drew from that experience, which I believe is relevant to the Nord Stream matter, was the difference between a criminal investigation and intelligence activities. Great care was exercised to ensure that the evidence gathered by the FBI was neither tainted nor spoiled by intelligence activities. It was a fine line, but Ambassador Busby made sure that the FBI and the CIA stayed in their own lanes.

And maybe that is the most important lesson of all. The leadership demonstrated by Ambassador Busby. Professional, mature leadership is essential to the successful investigation of complex international operations that result in attacks like Pan Am 103 and the Nord Stream Pipeline. Although the criminal indictments against the two men implicated in carrying out the bombing did not come until November of 1991, the evidence that cracked the case was in hand by March 1990. That’s only 15 months after Pan Am 103 fell from the skies, and it’s 20 months before the criminal indictments. Compare that investigation with the indifference and lack of curiosity demonstrated by the NATO countries with respect to Nord Stream. It has been 19 months since the pipeline was destroyed, and the NATO countries appear to have adopted the posture of the three wise monkeys. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

I have some insight into the logistics and execution of the attack on Nord Stream, thanks to work I did on behalf of the US military Special Operation Forces. That work commenced in the spring of 1994 and ended in 2016. During those 22 years, I was part of a team that scripted multiple counterterrorism exercises. We would create scenarios such as a group threatening to use a biological weapon in a North African country, and then replicate the diplomatic and intelligence traffic, reporting the threat to stimulate a response by the particular military diplomatic task force, tasked both to analyze, contain, and defeat the threat. In the course of this work, we also had to think like saboteurs or terrorists, understand their motives, understand the capabilities required to carry out such an attack, and identify the kinds of resources and training that would underpin such a terrorist operation. Four years after I started consulting with the US military, I, along with four others, started Berger Associates. Two of my partners previously worked with the Drug Enforcement Administration. One ended his career as the Chief of International Operations of DEA. The other ran storefront undercover money laundering operations here in New York City. One of our first jobs was the investigation of what is commonly known as the Bank of New York Russian Money Laundering Case. We also organized investigation and collection of evidence that was used to file a Civil Racketeer, Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, also known as RICO. This was done against major tobacco companies which were laundering money for drug cartels. Two separate causes of actions were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs, the European Union, and the governors of Columbia.

My point in mentioning this history is to emphasize that even in complex international investigations without access to classified material, we were able to gather massive quantities of evidence which would have been admissible and stood up in a US criminal court. In doing these investigations, I learned that Disneyland has it right. It is a small world, after all. The nexus between criminal organizations, major international corporations, financial institutions, and intelligence organizations is not a fantasy. It is real and involves hundreds of billions of dollars.

My experience convinces me that a properly funded investigation carried out by professionals will uncover documents, informants, eyewitnesses that can prove beyond a reasonable doubt who carried out the Nord Stream pipeline bombing. The nations assembled here have one advantage in an investigation that we as private investigators operators did not have. You have signals intelligence, satellites. You have data storage, for example, that can provide intelligence, ranging from the movements of ship to the movement of money. When you combine that data with conventional evidence, you have a powerful means for identifying who ordered and executed the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline.

I can say this much with certainty about that operation. It was carried out with the financial and material support of at least one nation state. There are written records, almost certainly highly classified and stored with very limited access. But there may be available evidence outside such classified records that can illuminate the act significantly, if not solve the mystery.

My message to you today is simple. Follow the money. Also ask,, who benefits? I believe the refusal to conduct a thorough investigation of this matter cast a cloud over the Security Council.

In closing, I reiterate President Truman’s vision enunciated 74 years ago. You have it in your power to provide a way for negotiation and the settlement of disputes among nations by peaceful means. But such negotiations must proceed from a solid, supportable understanding of who performed the act. I believe you can reach that conclusion with a proper investigation that only you, the members of the Security Council, have the power to perform. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank Mr. Johnson for his briefing.

The post The Gateway Pundit Contributor Larry Johnson Briefs United Nations Security Counsel on the Nord Stream Pipeline Bombing – VIDEO and TRANSCRIPT appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Laura Loomer confronted Fani Willis on Friday night at the National Association of Black County Officials (NABCO) in Miami, Florida.

Fani was attending the event with her lover and former lead attorney Nathan Wade.  The two lovebirds are still traveling together on business/pleasure trips. It’s not clear who’s paying the bills.

Willis paid Wade over $653,000 between 2022 and 2023 while the two were dating.  Wade was forced to step down from Fani’s case in mid-March against President Trump after the two were caught lying to the court about the timing of their affair.  It’s not clear why Wade was forced to step down but not Fani who also perjured herself in court about when the two started their affair.

Laura Loomer confronted Fani on stage at the NABCO event in Miami:

Laura Loomer:  Fani, why are you trying to persecute Donald Trump?… Why are you trying to persecute Donald Trump?… Why are you weaponizing our justice system to go after President Trump, Fani?… Fani why are you weaponizing our justice system against Donald Trump?…

The venue had several women walking around half naked. It was a classy place.

It appears like Nathan Wade was with Fani Willis at the event.

Laura Loomer: She ran away.

Laura wrote this on X: “Why are there strippers at the event Fani Willis is speaking at? It’s appalling that the Biden supported DEI District Attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, who is trying to jail President Trump, spoke at an event tonight where strippers were walking around half naked and many people in attendance were smoking weed!”

Here is the video posted by Laura Loomer.

MUST WATCH:

FULTON COUNTY DA FANI WILLIS GETS #LOOMERED IN MIAMI, FLORIDA!

Tonight, after Fani Willis finished speaking at the National Association of Black County Officials (NABCO) black networking event/party in Miami, FL, I confronted her while she was standing on stage.… pic.twitter.com/nU6k9YYX9R

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) April 27, 2024

The post VIDEO: Laura Loomer Confronts Fani Willis at Miami Party for Black County Officials with Half-Naked Women – Watch Fani Flee! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Barons: Money, Power, and the Corruption of America’s Food Industry, by Austin Frerick, Island Press, 248 pages

Austin Frerick declares himself surprised to find conservatives among his allies in his fight against consolidation in American agriculture. In his new book Barons: Money, Power, and the Corruption of America’s Food Industry, he marvels that in the 1990s, when hog farming was making its transition from medium-sized farms to massive, environmentally hazardous “confinements,” the only presidential contender to propose new regulation was “right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan.” This pro-farmer stand was one reason Buchanan came close to winning the 1996 Iowa caucuses, which as Frerick says “elevated him from protest candidate to legitimate contender.”

Frerick is a staunch Democrat, but if there is one issue where the left and the populist right can make common cause, it’s farm policy. This magazine is proud to have published Frerick on this issue. 

Conservatives should read Frerick’s book to learn how the same economic story that fueled the rise of Donald Trump—the hollowing-out of American manufacturing by bad trade deals and globalization—played out almost identically in the food industry. More and more of America’s food is imported, and more of America’s farmland is dedicated to growing for export. “The offshoring the American food system has made our food more like the rest of the American economy: uniform, lackluster in quality, and highly consolidated,” Frerick writes.

As with manufacturing, little of this trade imbalance is attributable to intrinsic comparative advantage. “Nearly 60 percent of the apple juice sold in the United States comes from China, even though most of the United States has a climate conducive to apple production,” notes Frerick. He personally remembers growing up in Iowa and passing acres of farm orchards. About 90 percent of the apple orchards in Iowa in 1992 were gone by 2017, replaced by corn and soybeans.

Industrialized methods have hit Iowa’s livestock farms as well. Since 1992, “the state’s pig population has increased by more than 50 percent while the number of hog farms has declined by over 80 percent,” according to Frerick. Some of this is the result of increased efficiency, though when it comes to raising animals there is a point where “efficiency” becomes grotesque. In a modern hog confinement, 10 percent of animals die before slaughtering and the other 90 percent never see the sun until the truck comes to haul them away. 

But efficiency is not the only reason factory farming looks the way it does. Multinationals like Tyson, as well as local hog barons like Iowa’s Jeff and Deb Hansen (profiled extensively by Frerick), use lobbying and political donations to shape the regulatory landscape. At a time when North Carolina, a longtime top pork producing state, was tightening environmental regulation due to concerns about the effects of waste on residents, Iowa allowed its pork industry to grow unchecked.

In theory, it is possible for consumers to vote with their dollars to support more sustainable farming, but this can be difficult in practice and, ironically, most difficult in states where the farming industry is strongest. “It’s easier to get a healthy, locally sourced meal in Washington, DC, or New York City than it is in my home state of Iowa, surrounded by some of the world’s most productive agricultural land,” Frerick writes.

This is why he ends the book with a list of policy recommendations for federal lawmakers, since government created this problem and government will have to fix it. “The overproduction of corn and soy did not arise naturally,” he writes. “It’s the result of massive government subsidies that underpin the American agricultural economy.” Frerick would eliminate these subsidies, throwing out the Farm Bill as it has existed since the reforms of 1996, and also strengthen anti-trust enforcement to go after vertically integrated corporations that have robbed farmers of their independence.

Putting together a coalition for these reforms is tricky because, as Frerick admits, both parties have played a part in creating this mess. It was Republicans in Congress who thwarted Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack’s efforts to break up chicken monopolies during Barack Obama’s first term. But it was Democratic president Bill Clinton who set the stage for that consolidation in the first place. He was, after all, from Arkansas where both Tyson and Walmart are headquartered. He also signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which decimated American farms that grew crops subject to import competition and supercharged the corn and other commodity growers who found new markets in Latin America and Asia, leading to the collapse of crop diversity.

One reason why conservatives should lend their support to future reforms along these lines is simple: These are our people. Rural voters are one of the few demographics left who lean consistently red. Reform will require both sides to make compromises. Frerick, for example, execrates the H-2A agricultural guest worker visa program, which “by putting downward pressure on wages . . . provides a huge windfall to the largest producers at the expense of press much everyone else.” If a Democrat can oppose higher levels of immigration in order to make farming a more livable occupation for Americans, Republicans should be willing to rethink some of their own orthodoxies in pursuit of the same goal.

The post How American Agriculture Went Wrong appeared first on The American Conservative.

The proposed bi-partisan Kids Online Safety Act purports to address concerns that social media exacerbates depression, eating disorders, and a host of other mental health problems among our nation’s youth. Sixty-five Senators, including conservative stalwarts such as Ted Cruz of Texas, Josh Hawley of Missouri, and Ohio’s J.D. Vance have co-sponsored the bill, and Joe Biden endorsed it at the State of the Union. On April 9, Rep. Gus Bilirakis of Florida, together with Representatives Kathy Castor of Florida, Erin Houchin of Indiana, and Kim Schrier of Washington, introduced it to the lower chamber. 

On the surface, this bill seems appealing. Who could oppose children’s safety and mental health? Unfortunately, KOSA exploits this concern to incentivize censorship and fund research that is likely to be used to advocate for more speech suppression. 

Consider KOSA’s censorship carrot. The bill would create a duty of care requiring “covered platforms,” including free speech platforms like Rumble and X, to take “reasonable measures” to prevent “online bullying and harassment.” The bill does not define “bullying and harassment.” In a world where many maintain that “speech is violence,” it is not surprising that these terms have been invoked as go-to justifications for deplatforming conservatives. YouTube’s “harassment and cyberbullying” policies include “insults” and “slurs”  based on “protected group status” such as “immigration status” and “gender identity and expression.” Thus, misgendering or calling someone an illegal alien has been deemed harassment. Before Elon Musk took over Twitter, the platform applied its targeted harassment as including misgendering and inviting newly-unemployed journalists to “learn to code” and later to attack satire.   

FOSA also funds the National Academy of Sciences to make additional “recommendations related to public policy” about “remedies regarding the harms to minors posed by social media.” The National Academy has already begun similar studies with a report on Social Media and Adolescent Health. The report’s lead editor is Boston University Public Health Professor Sandro Galea, who previously called “hate speech” a “public health issue” and singled out then President Trump’s immigration policies as well as “policies [that] are being promulgated that will limit hard-won gains in transgender rights” as “particularly dangerous from a population health vantage.” Unsurprisingly, the National Academy’s chapter on “online harassment” states “political name calling on social media is cited as a starting point for digital harassment.” 

The bill also empowers the Federal Trade Commission and State Attorneys General to enforce and interpret the law. Many Democratic State Attorneys General have demanded platforms censor “disinformation” and “hate speech” under the guise of fighting harassment. For example, in 2020, three state AGs wrote to Facebook “to request that you take additional steps to prevent Facebook from being used to spread disinformation and hate and to facilitate discrimination” in the form of “redress for users who fall victim to . . . harassment.”  Dozens more have written similar letters. KOSA would give these advocates yet another arrow in a considerable quiver from which to draw in order promote censorship of ideological adversaries. That is not to mention left-aligned plaintiffs’ lawyers who might leverage the “duty of care” the statute creates to go after free speech platforms.

The FTC hinted at what it would consider “reasonable measures” to combat harassment in a 2022 report, Combatting Online Harms Through Innovation. The report outlined “reasonable policies, practices, and procedures” for digital platforms to use AI to address “harms” such as “hate crimes,” “election-related disinformation,” and “harassment.” Among the recommendations: tech companies needed to retain and “create and maintain diverse, equitable, inclusive, and accessible cultures” for “groups like Black in AI, Queer in AI, and LatinX in AI.” Despite the enthusiasm for FTC Chair Lina Khan among some populist conservatives, this record does not make the Commission seem ideal for determining “reasonable” policies around online speech. 

That KOSA has bi-partisan support is reason for more, not less, skepticism. Section 230 itself, the legal shield Big Tech used to censor disfavored speech in the runup to the 2020 election, was a bi-partisan achievement. 

As a father of five, I understand the concerns about how social media affects kids, and we limit our kids’ screen time. No taxpayer-funded study is necessary to know that spending hours a day glued to screens is not good for anyone, much less children. 

But empowering unelected bureaucrats and State AGs to enforce vaguely written rules about “bullying and harassment” will do nothing to help children’s mental health and lead to more censorship and lawfare against conservatives.

The post Kids Online Safety Act Is a Smokescreen for Online Censorship  appeared first on The American Conservative.

Joe Biden alone has already caused the price of everyday staples to soar, but there are other pressures also forcing an increased burden to fall on all Americans.

Thanks to those external pressures, this month, yet another staple food item has soared to prices that won’t come down any time soon.

Coffee is absolutely essential for millions, and many Americans claim they can’t get their day in gear if they don’t have a jolting cup of Joe, and they don’t mean Biden.

But there will soon be more financial pain going forward with your morning cup. Get ready to see your coffee prices given a jolt as supply problems, hoarding, and contract defaults are tearing through the coffee producing industry worldwide causing prices to soar. This is only adding to the skyrocketing costs of breakfast, which is at its highest point since 1979 as it is. And experts say those higher prices won’t go away any time soon, if ever.

The cost of robusta coffee beans soared more than 30 percent early in April and 50 percent now as a heat wave has settled in over Vietnam in one of the world’s top coffee growing regions, according to Bloomberg.

The price jump for robusta has also put pressure on arabica coffee, causing arabica futures to rise more than 3 percent, surpassing the $2-per pound mark for the first time since December, the outlet added.

“Weather conditions are not encouraging,” representatives of London-based importer DRWakefield said this week. “There are still concerns over a possible water shortage for irrigation, which may hurt the output of the next season.”

About 40 percent of the world’s coffee supply is made up of robusta beans whereas the arabica bean is the source of around 60 percent, according to Nespresso.

Analysts also say that some of the rise in prices of these two beans is due to buyers letting their stocks dwindle over past price hikes, but who are now panic buying for fear that crops will dry up on them.

In a more recent follow-up report, Bloomberg added that analysts and sellers are saying they have no idea if the prices will come down.

“We can’t tell when prices will peak,” said Tran Thi Lan Anh, deputy director of Vietnamese export company Vinh Hiep Co.

“We don’t have water for our farms,” said Vietnamese coffee bean farmer Nguyen The Hue. “If the drought persists, we won’t have lots of new beans to sell in the new season.”

The pressure is in full swing. Already, farmers and producers have reneged on coffee contracts as growers have been unable to fulfill contracts for upwards to 200,000 tons of beans, or about 13 percent of the expected harvest.

These failures will soon cause prices of coffee to skyrocket for consumers, Bloomberg warns.

Add this pressure to the rising prices already seen in most other food staples and it all adds up to a huge burden on Americans.

The price of eggs have been fluctuating wildly, for instance, after millions of laying hens had to be destroyed due to infections with the deadly bird flu. Millions of chickens have had to be destroyed this year thanks to the disease.

Bird flu is a growing threat to the American food supply outside of the poultry industry, too.

Farmers and ranchers are also worried because the bird flu has jumped to cattle and dairy herds, threatening dairy and meat producers.

H5N1 bird flu found at 4 more dairy farms, including 2 in Michigan, 1 in Texas and 1 in New Mexico, taking the total to 28 pic.twitter.com/SfzHQMIkYS

— BNO News (@BNOFeed) April 12, 2024

These pressures, along with the grueling effects of Bidenflation and Bidenomics, are causing Americans to put more of their income to just daily survival than they have had to for decades.

And it’s only going to get worse, especially if Biden is reelected in November.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Another Grocery Staple Surging to Record High – The Days of Cheap Breakfasts Are Gone appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

For weeks now organized protests by the far-left and anti-Israeli forces have organized protests, encampments and rallies to condemn Israel, Jews, and America, on college and university campuses across America.

We have witnessed Jewish students threatened, chased, and blocked from campus.  We have seen Jewish students hide in their dorm rooms and told to stay away from their schools they attend.

Of course, these protests are widely accepted on the left and in the pro-Palestinian communities.

Columbia University staff and professors overwhelming support the Pro-Palestinian protesters and join the protest against Israel on campus earlier this week.

Israeli Prime Minister condemned the open anti-semitism on display by young leftists at US colleges and universities the past several weeks.

Benjamin Netanyahu:  What’s happening in America’s college campuses is horrific. Antisemitic mobs have taken over leading universities. They call for the annihilation of Israel. They attack Jewish students. They attack Jewish faculty. This is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s. It’s unconscionable. It has to be stopped. It has to be condemned and condemned unequivocally.

But that’s not what happened. The response of several university presidents was shameful. Now, fortunately, state, local, federal officials, many of them have responded differently, but there has to be more. More has to be done. It has to be done not only because they attack Israel, that’s bad enough. Not only because they want to kill Jews wherever they are, that’s bad enough. It’s also when you listen to them, it’s also because they say not only death to Israel, death to the Jews, but death to America. And this tells us that there is an anti-Semitic surge here that has terrible consequences.

We see this exponential rise of anti-Semitism throughout America and throughout Western societies as Israel tries to defend itself against genocidal terrorists, genocidal terrorists who hide behind civilians. Yet it is Israel that is falsely accused of genocide, Israel that is falsely accused of starvation and all sundry war crimes.

It’s all one big libel, but that’s not new. We’ve seen in history that anti-Semitic attacks were always preceded by vilification and slander. Lies that were cast against the Jewish people that are unbelievable, yet people believe them.

And what is important now is for all of us, all of us who are interested and cherish our values and our civilization, to stand up together and to say, enough is enough. We have to stop anti-Semitism because anti-Semitism is the canary in the coal mine. It always precedes larger conflagations that engulf the entire world. So I ask all of you, Jews and non-Jews alike, who are concerned with our common future and our common values, to do one thing.

Stand up, speak up, be counted. Stop anti-Semitism now.

Anti-Semitism on campuses in the United States is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s.

The world cannot stand idly by. pic.twitter.com/oHlwig1vCl

— Benjamin Netanyahu – בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) April 24, 2024

The post Netanyahu Condemns Open Anti-Semitism at US Colleges and Universities – “Reminiscent of What Happened at German Universities in 1920s” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Conservative Environmentalist: Common Sense Solutions For a Sustainable Future, Benji Backer, Sentinel, 256 pages

Benji Backer shows his cards in his new book, The Conservative Environmentalist: Common Sense Solutions For a Sustainable Future. Yes, this twenty-something leans to starboard; he describes the group he founded, the American Conservation Coalition, as “the largest right-of-center environmental organization in the country.” 

Indeed, Backer deserves credit for reviving “conservation,” the word favored by the greatest environmentalist—oops, make that conservationist—among America’s presidents, Theodore Roosevelt. Backer writes TR was “an avid hunter and fisherman” who “made conserving America’s natural resources a national priority.”

The 26th president waxed lyrical about nature: “There is a delight in the hardy life of the open. There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy and its charm. The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased and not impaired in value.” Yet TR was no green in the sense that the word is used nowadays: to describe an absolutist, oftentimes elitist, almost always Malthusian, mentality. Mindful that people matter, too, Roosevelt said in the very next breath, “Conservation means development as much as it does protection.” 

A century later, Backer echoes that realistic proportionality; words such as “tradeoff” and “balance” dot the book. Yet he does bring a specific point of view. As Backer tells us early on, he’s from a burg in the boonies of Wisconsin, and he retains a guiding empathy for those folks and their ways. “Growing up in a small Midwestern city nestled among dairy farms and forests as far as the eye can see, I witnessed rural America hard at work…I assumed that everyone else recognized rural America’s value too.” Then the jolt: “When I moved to Seattle to go to college, I learned how wrong I was.” As he puts it, when he heard his new classmates belittle rustics, “My stomach turned. (To this day, it still does.)”

So it’s easy for him to describe the circumstances that make rural America red America. Describing the facts confronting a farmer: “sweeping top-down regulations to combat carbon emissions”; “your fuel costs double or triple because of a new tax that penalizes users of fossil fuels”; “you’re also paying a higher electricity bill as electricity companies raise rates to cover the installation of thousands of new EV charging stations across your state.” 

Given his woodsy background, Backer is especially scathing on forest management—a classic TR-type issue. Since today’s greens want the forests to be unmanaged, the fires burn worse. California’s wildfires, just in the year 2020, emitted more greenhouse gases than any reductions the state had made in the previous two decades. Writes Backer: “Twenty years of effort completely gone to waste!”

So while Backer is clearly a nature lover, and maybe even a tree-hugger, he keeps a clear head and a keen eye: “We need solutions that work for everyone, not just the folks for whom buying a new EV and adding solar panels to their house is convenient.” Lest anyone fail to catch where he is headed, “Introducing sweeping one-size-fits-all policies that harm local communities and ruin the livelihoods of thousands of rural dwellers is simply anti-democratic and anti-American.” Want more fair and balanced-ness? Okay: “In thinking about how to solve climate change, it’s imperative that we give farmers, oil field workers and coal miners a voice too.” 

So there’s no scourging or hair-shirting or self-loathing in this book. Instead, there’s a lot of problem-solving. Chapter titles such as “Utilizing America’s Competitive Spirit to Build a Cleaner, Brighter Future” and “Innovating Our Way Out of the Energy Crisis,” stamp Backer as one part Thomas Edison, one part George Gilder, and one part Bjørn Lomborg. After all, if new technology can solve the problem, there’s no need to wallow in it or guilt-trip on it—and there’s also no reason not to solve it. In Backer’s telling, there’s a middle ground between Fox News and MSNBC: higher, and more constructive. 

So when the author writes of permitting reform—streamlining environmental impact statements and all that—he’s talking a language that some on the left are talking, too. 

For instance, the New York Times’ Ezra Klein has been writing about “state capacity”—the capacity to do things, to avoid the fate of California’s boondoggled high-speed rail—for years now. And just last year, Pennsylvania’s Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, rebuilt a collapsed part of Interstate 95 in a matter of weeks. More of this sort of Can Do, please. Whoever does it should reap the credit. 

So Backer’s Conservative Environmentalist can really be seen as the Practical Environmentalist. Let’s fix the things that need fixing—Backer cites removing lead from gasoline and the atmosphere as a great triumph for public health—while still keeping in mind that some fixes have made things worse. 

For instance, Backer is unsparing on the perverse economics of electric cars, not only in the U.S., but around the world. In Norway, the immediate subsidy for an electric car is more than $25,000, as well as other breaks, such as reduced tolls. And yet, Backer calculates, “In order to cut one ton of CO2 emissions through the subsidization of electric cars, Norway has to sell one hundred barrels of oil, which emit forty tons of CO2.” Perhaps some day, EVs will be green-dream transportation, but as of now, for the vast majority—especially the peeps in Backer’s neck of the woods—they’re still a dream. 

Speaking of fond reveries, Backer punctures the hopes of sun worshipers, at least in the near term: “The US and the rest of the world should not have to depend on subsidized, circumvented imports made by forced labor to build our solar energy future.” Elsewhere, Backer notes that the Chinese communists burn a lot of coal to make those solar panels. 

Yet, as he points out, there’s something akin solar energy right under our feet: The core of the Earth is nearly 11,000 degrees Fahrenheit—about the same temperature as the surface of the Sun. So, he asks, Why aren’t we using more geothermal energy? 

One big challenge—a steady theme in this book—is the deadening hand of government regulation: “It’s impossible for a five-hundred-page federal government bill to handle all of the intricacies of our vastly different communities and their needs.” So why, he wonders, “are we always starting at the top to try to solve climate change when we should be starting at an individual and local level first? Why not tap into the rich resources of the private sector and the entrepreneurial spirit that has characterized America as a world leader of innovation?” Why not indeed, other than the risk of being picketed by Greenpeace? 

Backer does not shrink from the challenge of climate change, which he regards as a serious threat. Nor does he shrink from ideas about accommodating human needs, including the need for good-paying jobs, while seeking a solution. 

He notes that carbon fuels account for 80 percent of the world’s energy supply—and that’s not about to change, at least no time soon. So while he holds out plenty of hope for the “all of the above” of geothermal, nuclear, and solar, he also emphasizes carbon capture. It’s a simple enough point: If there’s too much CO2 in the atmosphere, take it out. 

Backer starts with that lowest-tech (unless you count God’s hand as tech) tool for carbon capture, the tree. “Now that is the most powerful carbon sequestration technology I’ve ever seen!” In fact, most industrial processes involve some sort of carbon conversion. For instance, 65 percent of the world’s textiles come from artificial sources, such as polyester—which is to say, they come from carbon-based feedstocks. 

So we can see right there: A large wardrobe of artificial fabrics is a carbon sink. 

Joking aside, carbon fuels, properly thought through, are fully circular, and even renewable. Dig up carbon, burn it, capture it, use it again. Hardcore greens will never accept this sort of circularity, because it’s against their religion. But that’s okay, everyone else can learn to love having their carbon and capturing it, too. That’s the broad pro-energy, pro-clean coalition normies need. 

Speaking for the normies, Backer writes, “We can move forward only if we put political tribalism aside and rise above the noise of scare tactics and denialism. Only then will our generation of environmentalists be able to stand together.” Turning problems into win-wins isn’t particularly conservative, or particularly liberal. But it is practical. And popular—as in, winning elections popular. 

The post The Practical Environmentalist appeared first on The American Conservative.