Each day at just after midnight Eastern, a post like this one is created for contributors and readers of this site to upload news links and video links on the issues that concern this site. Most notably, Islam and its effects on Classical Civilization, and various forms of leftism from Soviet era communism, to postmodernism and all the flavours of galloping statism and totalitarianism such as Nazism and Fascism which are increasingly snuffing out the classical liberalism which created our near, miraculous civilization the West has been building since the time of Socrates.
This document was written around the time this site was created, for those who wish to understand what this site is about. And while our understanding of the world and events has grown since then, the basic ideas remain sound and true to the purpose.
So please post all links, thoughts and ideas that you feel will benefit the readers of this site to the comments under this post each day. And thank you all for your contributions.
This is the new Samizdat. We must use it while we can.
For those interested, please check out https://vladtepesblog.substack.com/ as an another avenue of expression.
The Kuhner Report – Biden’s Easter
M-F 6AM-10AM ET
https://www.iheart.com/live/wrko-7750/
“…Individualism is linked to creativity…”.
This statement, alone, is a key to understanding our societal divide. This important interview comprising about the first 48 minutes adds meat to this bone, maybe profoundly:
Poland teeters under its new communist government:
https://dorzeczy.pl/kraj/567639/3-lata-wiezienia-z-obrazenie-lgbt-ms-chce-walczyc-z-mowa-nienawisci.html
RFK Jr. Argues Joe Biden Poses a Greater Threat to Democracy Than Donald Trump During CNN Interview (VIDEO)
by Jim H?ft Apr. 2, 2024 10:15 am294 Comments
Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made an explosive argument suggesting that Joe Biden poses a greater threat to American democracy than former President Donald Trump.
The statement came during an interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett on “Erin Burnett OutFront.”
When Erin Burnett questioned RFK Jr.’s stance on the threats to democracy, the environmental attorney and political activist did not hesitate to speak up.
“But do you really believe that when people talk about the threat to democracy that Trump poses, do you really think that that is an equal evil to Biden?” Burnett asked.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/rfk-jr-argues-joe-biden-poses-greater-threat/
The Insurrection Panic
Democrats are fermenting on how to preempt the ability of President Trump to use, should he win a second term, powers Congress provided our presidents since the days of Jefferson.
AP/Alex Brandon
President Trump at Washington, January 20, 2017. AP/Alex Brandon
THE NEW YORK SUN
THE NEW YORK SUN
Monday, April 1, 202417:00:55 pm
Nobody is above the law, eh? How about under it? It turns out that the Democrats are worrying about the Insurrection Act of 1807. Signed into law by Jefferson, the act lets the president, “in all cases of insurrection, or obstruction to the laws” call up “the land or naval force of the United States, as shall be judged necessary.” This power was wielded by Jackson, Grant, JFK, and George H.W. Bush. The fear now is that President Trump, if re-elected, might use it.
Or mis-use it. The Act has proved flexible enough to cover efforts by President Grant to quell illegality by the Ku Klux Klan in the Reconstruction-era South and by Presidents Kennedy and Eisenhower to enforce school desegregation. It was used in 1992 to calm Los Angeles following the verdict in the Rodney King police misconduct case. So why the anxiety now that the law is a cudgel Mr. Trump could wield against violent protests on his watch?
“It’s a huge blank check, it is easily subject to abuse, it’s easy to imagine abuse,” frets a Harvard Law professor, Jack Goldsmith. The Wall Street Journal’s William Galston imagines Mr. Trump using the Act to stifle dissent, foreseeing a day when “more than 100,000 Americans have been arrested” and held “in barbed-wire encampments,” with no recourse because the president “has acted legally under the provisions of the Insurrection Act of 1807.”
Mr. Galston’s fears appear to be based on a report in November in the Washington Post that the likely GOP nominee has “begun mapping out specific plans for using the federal government to punish critics and opponents should he win a second term.” Mr. Trump is weighing plans “to potentially invoke the Insurrection Act on his first day in office,” the Post reported, “to allow him to deploy the military” against protesters.
Such fears appear overwrought. Critics worry that terms in the law like “insurrection,” “domestic violence,” and “rebellion” are, as Mr. Galston puts it, “undefined.” He argues “the risks of leaving such unfettered power in the president’s hands are obvious.” Yet in more than 200 years, the law has not once been abused in the way Mr. Trump’s critics fear. Mr. Trump even refrained from invoking it to quell riots in the summer of 2020, when it might have been useful.
The very breadth of the law’s authority reflects Congress’ intention, Justice Joseph Story noted in Martin v. Mott, the 1827 Supreme Court case that weighed an earlier version of the Act. The power to deploy the military in an emergency is of “a very high and delicate nature,” he wrote. It “results from the nature of the power itself,” he wrote, “to be exercised upon sudden emergencies” and in “circumstances which may be vital to the existence of the Union.”
In such situations, Justice Story wrote, there was no room for the give and take of legislative debate or such oversight contemplated by Democrats fearful of Mr. Trump’s notional post-reelection plans. “A prompt and unhesitating obedience to orders,” the justice wrote, “is indispensable to the complete attainment of the object.” The Founders, after all, knew rebellions could endanger the “domestic tranquility” that the Constitution was written to protect.
Shays’ Rebellion in 1786 helped to spur the Framers to convene the next year to form a stronger central government. The Whiskey and Fries Rebellions — both tax revolts — required prompt action by Washington and Adams to defeat them. No wonder the Congress — and the high court — left it up to the president alone to decide if emergencies warrant calling up troops. Are anonymous rumors in the press a basis to strip that power from future presidents?
Justice Story conceded that “such a power may be abused.” He had more faith than others today in our law. The remedy, he said, “is to be found in the Constitution itself,” because “the watchfulness of the representatives of the nation carry with them all the checks which can be useful to guard against usurpation or wanton tyranny.” Even, he would no doubt add, any such misconduct as might be committed by the occupant of the White House in 2025.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.nysun.com/article/the-insurrection-panic
Leaked Cell Phone Location Data Reveals 200 Mystery Guests On Epstein’s “Pedo Island”
Tyler Durden’s Photo
by Tyler Durden
Monday, Apr 01, 2024 – 07:00 PM
Data from nearly 200 mobile devices reveal the exact path taken by visitors to Jeffrey Epstein’s notorious ‘pedo island,’ which was tracked to 80 cities around the world spanning 26 states or territories.
The data, obtained by Wired, came from recently bankrupt company Near Intelligence, which allegedly traced the phones which went to and from Little Saint James island, where Epstein allegedly ran an underage sex trafficking network.
Near Intelligence, which rebranded itself Azira amid an internal fraud scandal and other controversies, mapped out more than 11,000 coordinates from 166 locations. Some of the locations point to gated communities in Michigan, Florida, as well as homes in Martha’s Vineyard and Nantuckett and a nightclub in Miami, according to the report.
The coordinates that Near Intelligence collected and left exposed online pinpoint locations to within a few centimeters of space. Visitors were tracked as they moved from the Ritz-Carlton on neighboring St. Thomas Island, for instance, to a specific dock at the American Yacht Harbor—a marina once co-owned by Epstein that hosts an “impressive array” of pleasure boats and mega-yachts. The data pinpointed their movements as they were transported to Epstein’s dock on Little St. James, revealing the exact routes taken to the island. -Wired
The tracking data, which dates back as early as July 2016, also includes routes taken inside Epstein’s ‘waterfront temple’ to toe beaches, pools and cabanas located on the 71-acre island. The surveillance data ends on July 6, 2019 – the day Epstein was arrested (for the second time).
Of course, the report excludes “any precise location data that could be used to identify properties or individuals, to protect the privacy of anyone uninvolved in Epstein’s crimes,” however Wired suggests they document “the numerous trips of wealthy and influential individuals seemingly undeterred by Epstein’s status as a convicted sex offender.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/US-Epstein-Map-2_80%281%29_0.jpg?itok=5LzNjHk8
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/leaked-cell-phone-location-data-reveals-200-mystery-guests-epsteins-pedo-island
Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2024/04/anti-gun-group-plagiarizes-photos-of-top-female-shooters-to-gaslight-the-public/#ixzz8WGT2Bjti
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
Anti-Gun Group Plagiarizes Photos of Top Female Shooters to Gaslight the Public
Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 2, 2024 by Lee Williams
Epic Fail Failure Loser Loss iStock-Waldemarus-1301907891
Epic Fail Failure Loser Loss iStock-Waldemarus-1301907891
This is the busiest time of year for professional shooter, wife, mother and Army veteran Julie Golob. She is hosting classes and training hard for the upcoming competition season, which begins later this month. She did not have much time to devote to a controversy that surfaced last week, when her image and personal information were misappropriated for a social media post by the anti-gun group 97Percent, as part of its campaign to gaslight the public into falsely believing it is a moderate pro-gun group.
“I did not endorse their message. I gave no permission for the photo. It is unfair to use my image and likeness to give the perception that I support what they are all about. I certainly don’t,” Golob told the Second Amendment Foundation last week. “And the fact it was used for Women’s History Month is insulting.”
Screenshot of now-deleted tweet, which was posted on Twitter/X last week by the anti-gun group 97Percent, along with similar posts that featured other top female shooters and/or Second Amendment advocates. (Screenshot used for this story with Ms. Golob’s permission.)
A special report published by the Second Amendment Foundation last week revealed how 97Percent uses slick marketing and an aggressive social media campaign to falsely portray itself as a pro-gun organization comprised of gun owners and non-gun owners, while in reality it is nothing more than a run-of-the-mill anti-gun group, not unlike Everytown, Giffords or Brady.
Last Wednesday, ostensibly as part of Women’s History Month, 97Percent posted tweets featuring images and personal information of nine female shooters and/or leaders within the Second Amendment community – six living and three deceased. They included Golob, Rhonda Ezell, Robin Sandoval, Lena Miculek, Kim Rhode and Carrie Lightfoot, as well as Lucille Ball, Mary Edwards Walker and Annie Oakley.
Last Thursday, after Golob responded to the post on Twitter/X and made it clear that she did not give permission to use her likeness or personal information, the group quickly deleted all of its Women’s History Month posts.
97Percent’s executive director, Olivia Troye, said during a recent appearance on ABC’s The View, that her group’s mission is “to bring gun owners into the conversation and to bring them to the table in order to work on reducing gun deaths happening across the country while including them in the solutions.”
However, the recent investigation by the Second Amendment Foundation revealed that 97Percent supports bans on “assault weapons,” standard-capacity magazines, and bump stocks and has called for permits to carry, purchase and even possess firearms. It supports mandatory background checks and mandatory storage laws and claims the Second Amendment is “overprotected.”
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL DOWN TO CONTINUE READING
Troye declined to be interviewed for the previous story, and she did not return emails seeking an explanation for her group’s misuse of the women’s photos and personal information.
Screenshot of now-deleted tweet, which featured Chicago-based Second Amendment advocate, Rhonda Ezell. (Screenshot used for this story with Ms. Ezell’s permission.)
Chicago Guns Matter founder Rhonda Ezell pointed out that 97Percent lifted her image right off of her website, without her knowledge or permission.
“When I first saw it, I was shocked,” she told the Second Amendment Foundation. “Why would an anti-gun group post a picture of me? They never asked to use the photo. This doesn’t make sense. At best, this is theft of intellectual property.”
Ezell has since contacted an attorney.
“I didn’t know of 97Percent. I never interacted with them. They are working against our cause,” she said. “I pick my battles, but I did feel it was rude. The picture they took is from a professional photo shoot.”
Both Ezell and Golob are frustrated by 97Percent’s plagiarism and use of false light.
“Lawful gun owners have to be wary of organizations that make certain claims,” Golob said. “We have to be vigilant and speak up, because when something is done wrong to you, the burden of proof and all of the effort is on you.”
This story is presented by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and wouldn’t be possible without you. Please click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support more pro-gun stories like this.
(Richard: Always remember all gun control laws are racist meant to stop some racial group from having weapons.)
Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2024/04/debate-lott-v-levinson-was-the-second-amendment-a-mistake/#ixzz8WGU1lP8T
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
Debate Lott v Levinson: Was the Second Amendment a Mistake?
Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 2, 2024 by Dean Weingarten
On March 11, 2024, Dr. John Lott debated the eminent law professor Sanford Levinson on the subject: Was the Second Amendment a Mistake? The debate lasted about an hour. It was held at the University of Wisconsin and started at 6:30 p.m. The debate was sponsored by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI). The moderator was Professor Ryan Owens.
Unlike much of what we see in politics, the debate was cordial and civilized. There was no student protest to prevent Dr. Lott from being able to debate Professor Levinson. Dr. Lott is an eminent scholar on gun control issues. Dr. Levison is credited with doing much to give credibility to the scholarly examination of the Second Amendment with his article entitled “The Embarrassing Second Amendment,” published in the Yale Law Journal in 1989.
The format of the debate was: Introductions, 10 minutes to Dr. Lott, 10 minutes to Professor Levinson, 2 minutes to Dr. Lott for rebuttal, 2 minutes for Dr. Levinson for rebuttal; then a question and answer period with questions from the moderator and the audience. Because of time constraints, the Q & A period was merged with concluding remarks, first by Professor Levinson, with Dr. Lott speaking last.
Both men are obviously gifted and well-practiced public speakers. They showed how a civilized debate can be held without shouting and histrionics. As often happens in debates, they answered the question from significantly different points of view.
Dr. Lott’s position was that of an empiricist, appropriate for his training and profession as an economist. His position was the Second Amendment was not a mistake because more guns means more protection for the vulnerable in society.
Professor Levinson’s position was a classic position of Progressives. It consisted of two basic points. First, that was then; this is now. Things have changed. Policies have to change with circumstances. The Second Amendment keeps the government from making changes. Second, restrictions on government are bad. Government is good.
It appeared to this correspondent Dr. Lott’s empirical approach was more persuasive. Professor Levison suggested, at one point, that given Dr. Lott’s position, the government should subsidize the purchase of guns by lower-income people. Dr. Lott responded by saying he would be happy if the government would simply stop making it harder for poor people to purchase and carry guns.
Professor Levison burnished his academic reputation by stating one of the best supports for the U.S. v Heller decision was the Dred Scott decision, decided in 1857. He gave an accurate portrayal of Chief Justice Taney’s explanation of why black people could not be considered citizens. Black people would then be able to carry guns with them wherever they would go. This academic exercise seemed to support Dr. Lott’s position more than Professor Levinson’s.
Student questions in the Q&A were less informed. It is to be expected. Perhaps they were sophomores. Responses to the questions were thoughtful and well-reasoned.
The debate is worth watching. It shows how a civilized debate should be held. Dr. Lott starts with a technique I have used: praising your opponent. It becomes harder for them to use ad hominem attacks, and it sets the tone for a fact-based contest.
Israel’s killing of Zahedi: Taking the fight to the Iranian head of the octopus – analysis
“The Iranians don’t love dying, but it is very easy for them to send others to die,” then education minister Naftali Bennett said at the Herzliya conference in 2018.
“While we’re shedding blood fighting their tentacles, the octopus’s head is lounging in its chair enjoying itself,” Bennett continued. The time had come, he declared, for Israel “to aim at the head of the octopus and not its tentacles.”
Israel, according to foreign reports and Iranian accusations, did just that on Monday, killing Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Mohammad Reza Zahedi in Damascus. Zahedi was the most senior Iranian official killed since the American strike on IRGC Quds force commander Qassem Soleimani in 2020.
Move to Israel now, new private campaign tells diaspora Jewry
The Wall Street Journal termed the killing of Zahedi “the first real price” that Iran has paid “for its proxy warfare in the Middle East.”
In other words, going for the head of the octopus.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-794998
………..
Seth Frantzman:
Israel’s killing of IRGC’s Zahedi marks ends of an era for Iranian commanders
Zahedi will be hard for Iran to replace
Saleh al-Arouri, a key Hamas commander who was residing in Lebanon, was killed in January. Wissam Tawil, a Hezbollah member was also killed. Ali Abed Akhsan Naim, the deputy commander of Hezbollah’s rocket and missile unit was killed in Lebanon in late March.
Iran and its proxies will have a hard time replacing these men. This is because many of them had decades of experience working in their various capacities. They also were key nodes in Iran’s network that links Iran to militias in Iraq and Syria and then links Iran’s network in Damascus to Hezbollah in Lebanon…
Iran relies heavily on its network of senior commanders who know one another. It operates in a sense like a mafia in the region, establishing various miniature versions of the IRGC in several countries and creating proxy networks.
These rely on key individuals. Without those individuals some of these networks are thrown into chaos. That doesn’t mean the networks don’t continue to possess weapons and create threats. However, it does change their cohesion.
Iran has been seeking to knit together all these groups in various years. Tehran describes this as uniting various “arenas” or fronts against Israel. In all, there are at least seven fronts that Iran wants to operationalize against Israel.
This week the unity was on display as an Iraqi militia launched a drone at Eilat, and also as Hezbollah continued its threats against Israel and as Iran sought to destabilize Jordan with protests and also sought clashes in the West Bank with the Palestinian Security Forces.
Iran has sought to smuggle weapons to the West Bank in the last years. This illustrates that Iran continues to manage various fronts against Israel even as it takes losses in other places. The loss of Zahedi is important for Tehran and its nexus in the region and his missing presence at meetings and in other affairs will be felt for years.
https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-794936
Shaiel Ben-Ephraim@academic_la
Israel assassinated Mohammad Reza Zahedi, Iranian IRGC’s Syria-Lebanon chief. Two F-35s dispensed six missiles at a building in the diplomatic sector of Damascus. This is not just another targeted killing. It matters for a few reasons:
1) Zahedi is the replacement for Suleimani and by far the most important person in organizing Hezbollah and associated Shi’ite militias in the region…
That is doubly true since his deputy was also killed. In addition, five other senior officials were killed.
2) It shows the vulnerability of the Iranian inner circle. The amount of intelligence needed to carry this out was tremendous…
Other recent assassinations make this a crisis for Iran. Senior IRGC officer Brig. Gen. Razi Mousavi was killed. Other less prominent but highly important officials in the network arming Hezbollah have been killed in the interim.
3) It is yet another sign that Israeli intelligence is rebuilding its capabilities and prestige after a serious blow on October 7th. These targeted assassinations require amazing capabilities and penetration of the highest echelons of the IRGC.
4) This keeps the Iranian network disorganized and paranoid, lowering their ability to threaten Israel. It also shows Iran that they will pay a price for their destabilizing regional policy.
Apr 1, 2024
https://twitter.com/academic_la/status/1774879918519935480?
Thank you for all you do