lewrockwell--2020-01-21--The Great Replacement in Switzerland

The Great Replacement in Switzerland

After the article on the Great Replacement in Belgium , I present you the following translation of an article by Polémia on the situation in Switzerland .
The Swiss situation is unique , if only because of the country ’ s objective excellence and exceptional quality of life , and the extraordinary practice of direct democracy .
Thus we have the rather rare situation of citizens actually being allowed to vote on whether and in what conditions new people should be allowed into their country .
Make no mistake : the scale of demographic change is also tremendous in Switzerland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and even Europeans find it very difficult to accede to Swiss nationality ( there is no birthright citizenship ) .
Thus Switzerland provides a model how people might preserve a nice country in the future : a highly-selective , citizenist little republic founded on gentrified democratic localism .
Switzerland has experienced very significant immigration over the past decades .
This immigration is a source of fears or even rejection on the part of a portion of the Swiss people .
These fears concern basically two issues : competition on the labor market by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swiss ] cultural model posed by non-Europeans ; all the more so in that , recently , the integration of the non-European population is failing to be realized .
In the face of this , the Swiss authorities ’ responses oscillate between openness and firmness .
A firmness which is occasionally demanded by the people in the form of the referenda which are regularly organized in Switzerland .
Selective immigration is not an empty slogan in this country , even if a part of the political opposition would like the government to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 Since the Second World War , Switzerland has experienced two significant waves of immigration .
The first coincided with the industrial growth of the 50s and 60s .
The second began in 1975 and has continued ever since .
After the Second World War , the Swiss government granted many residence permits to mostly European workers in a context of industrial recovery .
Immigration was then suddenly stopped with the repatriation of almost 300,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the first oil shock of 1973 .
Every year since then , Switzerland has welcomed a rising and significant number of foreigners , in proportion to its population .
Whereas 92,000 immigrants permanently moved to the country in 1981 , they were 146,000 in 2018 .
Net migration ( immigrants minus emigrants ) has always been positive for the 1962-2017 period .
On average 163,000 more people entered the country every year than left during this period .
.
.
.
The foreign population is constantly increasing in Switzerland .
It rose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1980 to 25 % today .
The Swiss Confederation is among the countries with the highest proportion of residents born abroad .
Whereas the country had 285,000 resident foreigners in 1951 , there are now 2.1 million .
The country ’ s population meanwhile numbers 8.5 million .
Europeans ( Italians , Germans , Portuguese , and French ) represent the biggest contingents of the foreign population residing in Switzerland ( 80 % ) .
The population of immigrant origin ( foreigners born abroad , naturalized citizens born in Switzerland , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with at least one parent born abroad ) was estimated in 2017 to make up 37 % of the population .
Among the resident non-European population , Asians ( 165,000 ) , Africans ( 109,000 ) and Turks ( 67,000 ) form the largest contingents .
According the Pew Research Center , around 6 % of the population is Muslim , around 400,000 people .
According to Pew ’ s forecasts , the Muslim population could in 2050 make up between 8 % and 12 % of the Swiss population .
Competition on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well as the scale immigration have been criticized both with regard to European and non-European immigration .
Several agreements on the free movement of EU citizens have been signed between Bern and the European Union since 2000 , but they remain contested , in particular by the SVP ( Swiss People ’ s Party ) .
This party has , for many years , sought to annul these agreements .
This has raised concerns among people living across the Swiss border , notably many Frenchmen .
While non-European immigration concerns only a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several warning signs are showing that integration is proving difficult or even a failure for a portion of immigrants .
• A study by the Zurich university of sciences came to the conclusion that 21 % of young Muslims living in Switzerland consider that sharia law is superior to Swiss law .
• At the extreme of radicalization , a Swiss central Islamic committee has been established with some 3,500 members .
The organization has been accused of encouraging its members to engage in polygamy and female genital mutilation .
Its members are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• Islamic proselytism has occasionally occurred in Swiss schools .
Thus in Winterthur , teachers have complained that Muslim students are encouraging non-Muslims to fast during ramadan .
• As in other European countries , the Gulf monarchies have been accused of flooding Islamic cultural centers with money .
One of the authors of Qatar Papers [ a book detailing Qatari financing of Islamic activities in Europe ] explained in Geneva : “ The goal is to take in charge every Muslim individual living Europe from cradle to grave.
” The funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saudi Arabia “ are apparently financing mosques and organizations preaching a Wahhabi form of Islam ” according to a professor at the University of Bern .
Turkish mosques [ in Switzerland ] are apparently being financed by [ Turkey ’ s ] Directorate of Religious Affairs , a report from which asserts that Islam is superior to Christianity and Judaism , and that religious dialogue is unacceptable .
One could enumerate many more such examples .
Though Islamism is spreading in Switzerland , the country has many effective “ watchdogs ” who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in initiatives aiming to ban or at least reduce them .
Whether in terms of welfare , crime , or social behavior , many statistics and incidents show that the ‘ integration ’ of a part of the non-Europeans is an empty slogan .
• A recent study by the Federal Office of Statistics showed the over-representation of certain nationalities among welfare recipients .
Thus at the end 2017 , 83 % of Somalians and 54 % of Eritreans and Congolese living in Switzerland are on welfare .
More generally , of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % are foreigners .
• The vast majority of prisoners are foreigners : 80 % in French-speaking Switzerland and 50-60 % in German-speaking Switzerland .
The majority of prisoners in French-speaking prisons are from Eastern Europe , Black Africa , and the Maghreb .
Between 1988 and 2017 , there has been a significant increase in the share of foreigners among pre-sentencing detainees .
On the whole , 7 out of 10 prisoners are foreigners , the highest proportion in Europe .
• Incivility is observed on many occasions : lack of respect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at certain swimming pools ; sexual assaults and death threats against paramedics .
On both cases , the staff pointed to migrants as the wrong-doers .
Switzerland is also unable to prevent violent rivalries between gangs in neighborhoods of migrant origin , notably in the suburbs of Zurich , where gangs are fighting for the title of “ Bronx of Zurich.
” Swiss citizens have been invited to vote many times on immigration issues .
The following issues have recently been subject to referenda in recent years : • A ban on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The actual deportation of foreign criminals ( 2010 and 2016 ) • The primacy of national law over international agreements ( 2018 ) .
This last proposal was rejected , even though unchosen immigration ( family reunification , asylum ) stems from international agreements and treaties signed by the country .
As the lawyer J. L. Harouel has observed : “ public liberties have been overridden by fundamental rights , which mainly benefit immigrants , who systematically accede to all the rights and advantages of European peoples.
” The expulsion of foreign criminals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on building minarets , and the limitation of immigration all won the required double majority of both voters and cantons .
However , the vote against mass immigration did not lead to new rules for the movement of people between Switzerland and the European Union , because of the gridlock of the EU institutions .
A new referendum on the subject will normally be organized in 2020 .
Despite significant immigration , Switzerland has long wished to maintain control over migratory flows and protect its labor market .
The country ’ s selective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demanded to come , live , and work in the country : • In 2014 Switzerland adopted a rule requiring employers to inform residents of job opportunities in certain fields , before being allowed to look further afield .
• For non-Europeans , access to the labor market is even more Draconian : there is a genuine national preference here .
The employer must prove that no Swiss may be employed if a position is given to a foreigner .
Quotas for foreign workers are in place .
Integration into Swiss society is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration policy is also evident in the higher and higher qualifications required of immigrants , which facilitates their entry into the labor market .
• The acquisition of Swiss nationality is very demanding : one must live in Switzerland for 12 years and know the country ’ s ways and customs in order to claim Swiss nationality .
There is no birthright citizenship for second-generation immigrants .
Other initiatives aim to regain control of a situation which , in the eyes of many Swiss , is deteriorating : • The Swiss Confederation does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as 1000 were in 2017 .
• The Swiss government has not ratified the 2017 Marrakesh Pact on migration .
• Some cantons , such as Tessin and Saint Gall , have banned the burqa .
On matters of asylum , a tough line is also being adopted : • Refugees will no longer be allowed to travel abroad .
• In April 2019 , the Federal Council took several measures to accelerate refugees ’ entering the labor market , with a mandatory integration track ( language-learning over three years , numbered targets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ etc ) .
• Those whose asylum claims have been rejected are less likely to be authorized to work in Switzerland .
• Switzerland is remarkable in Europe for the rate of deportation of rejected asylum-seekers : 56 % of deportation decisions are implemented , where the average is only 36 % in Europe ( and 12 % in France ) .
The consequences are apparent : whereas the number of asylum claims is exploding in France , they decreased in Switzerland between 2017 and 2018 .
More and more rejected asylum-seekers are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns Eritreans .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 In the face of significant migratory flows , the Swiss government has taken measures aiming to increase standards relative to immigration , to reduce immigration , and to defend the natives ’ way of life .
The Swiss can , thanks to their democratic system , make proposals and express themselves on issues subject to referenda .
They most recently affirmed their rejection of mass immigration .
If the concrete measures to actually fulfill the popular will can , on some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have enabled tougher policies to be adopted .
In these statistics , “ Asian ” seems to mean “ Asians other than Turks.
” – Guillaume Durocher Prison director Franz Walter observes : “ Unfortunately a substantial number of the Maghrebis come from the banlieues of France.
” – GD Reprinted with permission from The Unz Review .

After the article on the Great Replacement in Belgium, I present you the following translation of an article by Polémia on the situation in Switzerland. The Swiss situation is unique, if only because of the country’s objective excellence and exceptional quality of life, and the extraordinary practice of direct democracy. Thus we have the rather rare situation of citizens actually being allowed to vote on whether and in what conditions new people should be allowed into their country.
Make no mistake: the scale of demographic change is also tremendous in Switzerland, but mainly because of European immigration and even Europeans find it very difficult to accede to Swiss nationality (there is no birthright citizenship). Thus Switzerland provides a model how people might preserve a nice country in the future: a highly-selective, citizenist little republic founded on gentrified democratic localism.
* * *
Switzerland has experienced very significant immigration over the past decades. This immigration is a source of fears or even rejection on the part of a portion of the Swiss people. These fears concern basically two issues: competition on the labor market by Europeans and the challenge to the [Swiss] cultural model posed by non-Europeans; all the more so in that, recently, the integration of the non-European population is failing to be realized.
In the face of this, the Swiss authorities’ responses oscillate between openness and firmness. A firmness which is occasionally demanded by the people in the form of the referenda which are regularly organized in Switzerland. Selective immigration is not an empty slogan in this country, even if a part of the political opposition would like the government to go much further on this issue. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
Very significant migration flows
Since the Second World War, Switzerland has experienced two significant waves of immigration. The first coincided with the industrial growth of the 50s and 60s. The second began in 1975 and has continued ever since.
After the Second World War, the Swiss government granted many residence permits to mostly European workers in a context of industrial recovery. Immigration was then suddenly stopped with the repatriation of almost 300,000 foreign workers during the economic crisis caused by the first oil shock of 1973. Every year since then, Switzerland has welcomed a rising and significant number of foreigners, in proportion to its population.
Whereas 92,000 immigrants permanently moved to the country in 1981, they were 146,000 in 2018. Net migration (immigrants minus emigrants) has always been positive for the 1962-2017 period. On average 163,000 more people entered the country every year than left during this period. . . .
A growing immigrant population
The foreign population is constantly increasing in Switzerland. It rose from 14% of the total population in 1980 to 25% today. The Swiss Confederation is among the countries with the highest proportion of residents born abroad.
Whereas the country had 285,000 resident foreigners in 1951, there are now 2.1 million. The country’s population meanwhile numbers 8.5 million.
Europeans (Italians, Germans, Portuguese, and French) represent the biggest contingents of the foreign population residing in Switzerland (80%).
The population of immigrant origin (foreigners born abroad, naturalized citizens born in Switzerland, or naturalized citizens and foreigners born in Switzerland with at least one parent born abroad) was estimated in 2017 to make up 37% of the population.
Among the resident non-European population, Asians (165,000), Africans (109,000) and Turks (67,000) form the largest contingents. According the Pew Research Center, around 6% of the population is Muslim, around 400,000 people. According to Pew’s forecasts, the Muslim population could in 2050 make up between 8% and 12% of the Swiss population.
European immigration
Competition on the labor market between foreigners and citizens as well as the scale immigration have been criticized both with regard to European and non-European immigration. Several agreements on the free movement of EU citizens have been signed between Bern and the European Union since 2000, but they remain contested, in particular by the SVP (Swiss People’s Party). This party has, for many years, sought to annul these agreements. This has raised concerns among people living across the Swiss border, notably many Frenchmen.
Non-European immigration
While non-European immigration concerns only a minority of the population in Switzerland, several warning signs are showing that integration is proving difficult or even a failure for a portion of immigrants.
A questionable integration
Whether in terms of welfare, crime, or social behavior, many statistics and incidents show that the ‘integration’ of a part of the non-Europeans is an empty slogan.
Referenda on immigration
Swiss citizens have been invited to vote many times on immigration issues. The following issues have recently been subject to referenda in recent years:
A ban on the building of minarets (2009)
The actual deportation of foreign criminals (2010 and 2016)
The end of mass migration (2014)
The primacy of national law over international agreements (2018). This last proposal was rejected, even though unchosen immigration (family reunification, asylum) stems from international agreements and treaties signed by the country. As the lawyer J. L. Harouel has observed: “public liberties have been overridden by fundamental rights, which mainly benefit immigrants, who systematically accede to all the rights and advantages of European peoples.”
The expulsion of foreign criminals (2010 vote), the ban on building minarets, and the limitation of immigration all won the required double majority of both voters and cantons. However, the vote against mass immigration did not lead to new rules for the movement of people between Switzerland and the European Union, because of the gridlock of the EU institutions. A new referendum on the subject will normally be organized in 2020.
National preference and selective immigration
Despite significant immigration, Switzerland has long wished to maintain control over migratory flows and protect its labor market. The country’s selective immigration policy is evident in the conditions demanded to come, live, and work in the country:
In 2014 Switzerland adopted a rule requiring employers to inform residents of job opportunities in certain fields, before being allowed to look further afield.
For non-Europeans, access to the labor market is even more Draconian: there is a genuine national preference here. The employer must prove that no Swiss may be employed if a position is given to a foreigner. Quotas for foreign workers are in place. Integration into Swiss society is also evaluated over time.
Selective immigration policy is also evident in the higher and higher qualifications required of immigrants, which facilitates their entry into the labor market.
The acquisition of Swiss nationality is very demanding: one must live in Switzerland for 12 years and know the country’s ways and customs in order to claim Swiss nationality. There is no birthright citizenship for second-generation immigrants.
Other initiatives aim to regain control of a situation which, in the eyes of many Swiss, is deteriorating:
The Swiss Confederation does not hesitate to deport foreign criminals, as 1000 were in 2017.
The Swiss government has not ratified the 2017 Marrakesh Pact on migration.
Some cantons, such as Tessin and Saint Gall, have banned the burqa.
On matters of asylum, a tough line is also being adopted:
Refugees will no longer be allowed to travel abroad.
In April 2019, the Federal Council took several measures to accelerate refugees’ entering the labor market, with a mandatory integration track (language-learning over three years, numbered targets for entry into the labor market, etc).
Those whose asylum claims have been rejected are less likely to be authorized to work in Switzerland.
Switzerland is remarkable in Europe for the rate of deportation of rejected asylum-seekers: 56% of deportation decisions are implemented, where the average is only 36% in Europe (and 12% in France).
The consequences are apparent: whereas the number of asylum claims is exploding in France, they decreased in Switzerland between 2017 and 2018. More and more rejected asylum-seekers are fleeing Switzerland for France, this especially concerns Eritreans. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
In the face of significant migratory flows, the Swiss government has taken measures aiming to increase standards relative to immigration, to reduce immigration, and to defend the natives’ way of life.
The Swiss can, thanks to their democratic system, make proposals and express themselves on issues subject to referenda. They most recently affirmed their rejection of mass immigration. If the concrete measures to actually fulfill the popular will can, on some occasions, be disappointing, the referenda have enabled tougher policies to be adopted.
Paul Tormenen, 28/09/2019
Notes
In these statistics, “Asian” seems to mean “Asians other than Turks.” – Guillaume Durocher
Prison director Franz Walter observes: “Unfortunately a substantial number of the Maghrebis come from the banlieues of France.” – GD
Reprinted with permission from The Unz Review.


On Whose Authority?

These days one doesn ’ t know—if one ever did—what to believe .
We are told , for example , that Hungary and Poland are sliding into authoritarianism , but is it true ?
Most of us speak neither Hungarian nor Polish , and those people we know who do so are usually parti pris .
It all depends on whether we trust our informants , and largely we do not .
In Hungary , it is said , the media—television and newspapers—are increasingly in the hands of the governing party ; but even if true , how much would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that such media are of ever less importance in forming public opinion , especially among the young .
Much stricter control of the media than anyone has alleged against Hungary has proved perfectly compatible with popular revolt or revolution .
Recently the opposition party won the municipal elections in Budapest , suggesting that opinion is dividing between the metropolitan area and the rest , as it is dividing in many other countries .
Nor are those who accuse Hungary and Poland of authoritarianism necessarily friends of freedom of choice themselves , except in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tonight .
I ’ m bored with Mexican , why not Moroccan ?
This is not necessarily a perfect model for society , or at least for all societies , as a whole .
And in fact there does seem such a political phenomenon as liberal authoritarianism .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 President Macron of France , for example , wants a Europe-wide approach to immigration .
This does not recognize that what suits one country does not necessarily suit another .
It also implies a supranational authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ de facto , to implement such a policy , even against the wishes of a local population .
He wants migrants arriving—illegally , of course—to be shared out among European countries according to a binding formula .
There are many things to be said about this proposal .
The first is that it takes no notice of the preference of the migrants themselves , who may not wish to be delivered like an inanimate parcel to this or that resentful country .
Not that they will necessarily have to stay there : If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the money to go , there will be nothing to stop them from moving .
The Best of Theodore Dalrymple

These days one doesn’t know—if one ever did—what to believe. We are told, for example, that Hungary and Poland are sliding into authoritarianism, but is it true? Most of us speak neither Hungarian nor Polish, and those people we know who do so are usually parti pris. It all depends on whether we trust our informants, and largely we do not.
In Hungary, it is said, the media—television and newspapers—are increasingly in the hands of the governing party; but even if true, how much would it matter? We are also told that such media are of ever less importance in forming public opinion, especially among the young. Much stricter control of the media than anyone has alleged against Hungary has proved perfectly compatible with popular revolt or revolution. Recently the opposition party won the municipal elections in Budapest, suggesting that opinion is dividing between the metropolitan area and the rest, as it is dividing in many other countries.
Nor are those who accuse Hungary and Poland of authoritarianism necessarily friends of freedom of choice themselves, except in respect of which restaurant to go to tonight. I’m bored with Mexican, why not Moroccan? This is not necessarily a perfect model for society, or at least for all societies, as a whole. And in fact there does seem such a political phenomenon as liberal authoritarianism. Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
President Macron of France, for example, wants a Europe-wide approach to immigration. This does not recognize that what suits one country does not necessarily suit another. It also implies a supranational authority that has the power, legal and de facto, to implement such a policy, even against the wishes of a local population. He wants migrants arriving—illegally, of course—to be shared out among European countries according to a binding formula.
There are many things to be said about this proposal. The first is that it takes no notice of the preference of the migrants themselves, who may not wish to be delivered like an inanimate parcel to this or that resentful country. Not that they will necessarily have to stay there: If they can support themselves elsewhere and raise the money to go, there will be nothing to stop them from moving.
Second, the proposal recognizes, or at any rate implies, that the migrants are not a benefit but a liability to the receiving country, which is why they have to be parceled out as if they were the bearers of some contagious disease. It is possible, of course, that they will not prove a liability, for no one knows for certain what the consequences will be in, say, fifty years.There are examples in history in which migrants who were at first unwelcome proved to be beneficial to the receiving country. But the principle of sharing out the burden does not suggest that M. Macron believes the migrants to be an overall blessing, certainly not in the duration of his political career—and he is still in his early 40s.
Read the Whole Article
The Best of Theodore Dalrymple


lewrockwell--2020-01-21--The Windsors Blackmailed by their Grand-Daughter-in-Law

Over the last one hundred years , the British Royal Family has generously provided the world with a parade of scandals more colorful and louder than the socks they wear with their kilts .
But the Meghan and Harry rupture is fundamentally different from any previous crisis to befall the British monarchy .
Prior to now , royal scandals have been cut from the same petticoats as any other public ignominies — i.e.
, the chin-wagging that follows uncovering some form of immoral conduct .
All the throngs of poorly hidden mistresses , caddish boyfriends , toe-sucking on yachts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ horses wait patiently , even consorting with extremes of evildoing , such as found in the company of the late J. Epstein , arose from ordinary human weakness set against an extraordinary backdrop .
They have constituted straightforward disgraces that can unfold only among people with a shared religious heritage and moral code .
Those days are gone .
The roadside bomb in the royal family named Meghan Markle exploded not because of immoral conduct in the conventional sense .
Markle is the first duchess who hails from the American left-wing , post-Christian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journey of self-directed personal actualization .
Her justification after only a few months of marriage for urging hubby away from his family ?
“ It is not enough to survive , you have to thrive.
” Apparently , Harry ’ s fulfilling his role as prince prevents her thriving .
For Meghan , thriving entails doing what you want , no matter if it hurts others or depreciates the generosity that has been heaped upon you .
Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 15.00 Meghan Markle ’ s psychology is affected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek power in relationships as a substitute for the terrifying experience of offering self-sacrificing love .
Markle has two sources of power over the royal family and the millions of people who love them .
She has the ordinary power of a disgruntled daughter-in-law to hurt her in-laws by controlling access to their brother , son , and grandchildren .
She also has the extraordinary power to blackmail the royal family with the indictment of racism !
It is widely reported that Markle has been acceding to the idea that she has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ royals fear being called racist in a “ tell-all ” interview .
The melodramatic flight of Meghan and Harry is being compared to the shattering abdication of King Edward VIII in 1937 .
The two cases bear no resemblance .
King Edward VIII faced a moral dilemma that arose from a conflict with a religiously based code of behavior .
He wanted to marry his mistress .
That was not acceptable to the royal family and the Church of England , so he chose to abdicate , and that was the end of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world where “ organized ” religion ( the kind that comes with a moral code at no extra charge ) is disrespected .
Markle may spend a Christianish day at a baptism , but she is not guided by the teachings of any church , save perhaps the church of Oprah , whose liturgy is “ What works for me ?
” Meghan has followed the career of all power-seeking , disruptive daughters-in-law .
She could have begun her campaign of alienating her husband from his family with vague and irremediable complaints about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Firm .
“ They don ’ t respect you .
They don ’ t appreciate me.
” Wobbly Prince Harry is only too happy to be led away from his family .
Meghan and Harry possess a potent psychobiological weapon : the cry of racism .
Harry drops hints of the dread allegation .
Meghan , just as she has no loyalty to her own family , discreetly ignores that ludicrous speculation against the family she chose to join .
Markle is the kind of self-promoter who frames her stratospheric privilege and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proclaiming she will not live in the U.S. while the current president is in office .
Much noise , no sacrifice .

Over the last one hundred years, the British Royal Family has generously provided the world with a parade of scandals more colorful and louder than the socks they wear with their kilts. But the Meghan and Harry rupture is fundamentally different from any previous crisis to befall the British monarchy. Prior to now, royal scandals have been cut from the same petticoats as any other public ignominies — i.e., the chin-wagging that follows uncovering some form of immoral conduct. All the throngs of poorly hidden mistresses, caddish boyfriends, toe-sucking on yachts, assignations in the deer park while the horses wait patiently, even consorting with extremes of evildoing, such as found in the company of the late J. Epstein, arose from ordinary human weakness set against an extraordinary backdrop. They have constituted straightforward disgraces that can unfold only among people with a shared religious heritage and moral code.
Those days are gone.
The roadside bomb in the royal family named Meghan Markle exploded not because of immoral conduct in the conventional sense. Markle is the first duchess who hails from the American left-wing, post-Christian, anti-moral belief system that worships the journey of self-directed personal actualization. Her justification after only a few months of marriage for urging hubby away from his family? “It is not enough to survive, you have to thrive.” Apparently, Harry’s fulfilling his role as prince prevents her thriving. For Meghan, thriving entails doing what you want, no matter if it hurts others or depreciates the generosity that has been heaped upon you.
Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $15.00 (as of 03:50 UTC - Details) Meghan Markle’s psychology is affected by well managed narcissistic rage. Narcissists seek power in relationships as a substitute for the terrifying experience of offering self-sacrificing love. Markle has two sources of power over the royal family and the millions of people who love them. She has the ordinary power of a disgruntled daughter-in-law to hurt her in-laws by controlling access to their brother, son, and grandchildren. She also has the extraordinary power to blackmail the royal family with the indictment of racism! It is widely reported that Markle has been acceding to the idea that she has been mistreated due to racism and that the royals fear being called racist in a “tell-all” interview.
The melodramatic flight of Meghan and Harry is being compared to the shattering abdication of King Edward VIII in 1937. The two cases bear no resemblance. King Edward VIII faced a moral dilemma that arose from a conflict with a religiously based code of behavior. He wanted to marry his mistress. That was not acceptable to the royal family and the Church of England, so he chose to abdicate, and that was the end of it. Meghan Markle moves in a world where “organized” religion (the kind that comes with a moral code at no extra charge) is disrespected. Markle may spend a Christianish day at a baptism, but she is not guided by the teachings of any church, save perhaps the church of Oprah, whose liturgy is “What works for me?”
Meghan has followed the career of all power-seeking, disruptive daughters-in-law. She could have begun her campaign of alienating her husband from his family with vague and irremediable complaints about her dissatisfactions as soon as she joined the Firm. “They don’t respect you. They don’t appreciate me.” Wobbly Prince Harry is only too happy to be led away from his family.
Meghan and Harry possess a potent psychobiological weapon: the cry of racism. Harry drops hints of the dread allegation. Meghan, just as she has no loyalty to her own family, discreetly ignores that ludicrous speculation against the family she chose to join. Markle is the kind of self-promoter who frames her stratospheric privilege and luxuries into a stand upon conscience, proclaiming she will not live in the U.S. while the current president is in office. Much noise, no sacrifice.
Read the Whole Article


lewrockwell--2020-01-21--‘Like Living With a Gun Pointed at You’

‘Like Living With a Gun Pointed at You’

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte has approved a plan to declare Luzon island , home to Taal Volcano , a ‘ no man ’ s land ’ , effectively ending the possibility of its former residents ever returning to their lives there .
Duterte has yet to issue a formal decree in this regard , and the Philippines volcano agency had long declared Luzon a “ permanent danger zone , ” yet villagers have lived and worked there for decades .
Officials are now calling for regulations to be both tightened and more strictly enforced in the future .
Drone footage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and practically everything on it , from abandoned homes and vehicles to vegetation , all coated in a thick blanket of ash .
Meanwhile , Interior Secretary Eduardo Ano has tasked local officials with drafting relocation plans for displaced residents .
He requested a three-hectare site to rehouse roughly 6,000 families that were evacuated from the island .
The site must be a minimum of 17 kilometers ( 10 miles ) away from the volcano for the residents ’ safety .
“ They lived on the volcano itself with 47 craters .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s like having a gun pointed at you , ” Renato Solidum , the head of the volcanology institute , said .
Volcanoes !
( National G ... Anne Schreiber Best Price : $ 0.10 Buy New $ 2.10 Taal Volcano remains at the second-highest threat level , since it began erupting on January 12 , indicating an imminent danger , continuous earthquakes , and a variety of signs that magma is still rising in the volcanic chamber .
No deaths have been directly attributed to the eruption , though hundreds of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Phivolcs , the Philippines monitoring agency for earthquakes , volcanoes and tsunami , registered at least 12 minor earthquakes in 12 hours on Monday .

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte has approved a plan to declare Luzon island, home to Taal Volcano, a ‘no man’s land’, effectively ending the possibility of its former residents ever returning to their lives there.
Duterte has yet to issue a formal decree in this regard, and the Philippines volcano agency had long declared Luzon a “permanent danger zone,” yet villagers have lived and worked there for decades. Officials are now calling for regulations to be both tightened and more strictly enforced in the future.
Drone footage filmed on Saturday shows the entire island and practically everything on it, from abandoned homes and vehicles to vegetation, all coated in a thick blanket of ash.
Meanwhile, Interior Secretary Eduardo Ano has tasked local officials with drafting relocation plans for displaced residents. He requested a three-hectare site to rehouse roughly 6,000 families that were evacuated from the island. The site must be a minimum of 17 kilometers (10 miles) away from the volcano for the residents’ safety.
“They lived on the volcano itself with 47 craters. That’s really dangerous. It’s like having a gun pointed at you,” Renato Solidum, the head of the volcanology institute, said.
Volcanoes! (National G... Schreiber, Anne Best Price: $0.10 Buy New $3.10 (as of 02:00 UTC - Details) Taal Volcano remains at the second-highest threat level, since it began erupting on January 12, indicating an imminent danger, continuous earthquakes, and a variety of signs that magma is still rising in the volcanic chamber.
No deaths have been directly attributed to the eruption, though hundreds of people have been treated for ash-related breathing difficulties.
Phivolcs, the Philippines monitoring agency for earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunami, registered at least 12 minor earthquakes in 12 hours on Monday.
Reprinted from RT News.


lewrockwell--2020-01-22--Secession Is the Answer to Building a Free Society

“ Once one concedes that a single world government is not necessary , then where does one logically stop at the permissibility of separate states ?
If Canada and the United States can be separate nations without being denounced as in a state of impermissible ‘ anarchy ’ , why may not the South secede from the United States ?
New York State from the Union ?
New York City from the state ?
Why may not Manhattan secede ?
Each neighbourhood ?
Each block ?
Each house ?
Each person ?
” ~ Murray N. Rothbard ( 2004 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State with Power and Market , Scholar ’ s Edition ” , p.1051 , Ludwig von Mises Institute The question seemingly always raised is that the idea of true freedom sounds good , but how do we do it ?
What is the single plan to fix everything ?
Obviously , there is not one answer or any legitimate short answer to this question , and those that ask it , are usually not really interested in real freedom in the first place .
In fact , most people do not want the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government ’ s job easy , because as a rule , the only thing required by the state to keep the apathetic public at bay , is to offer them safety and benefits .
They are happy to remain slaves , so long as they can get the things they want without much effort , and can through their proxy government , use others to gain for themselves .
But what is going to happen when this system fails , and this economy breaks down , which is imminent in my opinion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their welfare stops ?
What will they do when transportation shuts down , and fuel becomes scarce ?
What will they do when their money becomes worthless ?
What will they do when there food supply dwindles , and what will they do when there is civil unrest , riots in the streets , and widespread chaos ?
Waiting until the inevitable happens to take action will be too late .
Man , Economy , and Stat ... Murray N. Rothbard Best Price : $ 24.63 Buy New $ 29.95 The elimination of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the wars of aggression , of all the murders due to those heinous wars , and an end to the slavery by the state that exists in the United States today seem impossible , but is it ?
The ensuing freedom that would result from an end to this governing system is almost beyond imagination , and does appear to be elusive , but what if there were a way , a way that had been tried before and had been successful ?
That way is secession , and is exactly what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this country in the first place .
So if real freedom is desired and sought , why not try secession ?
Secession is simply breaking ties .
This term comes from the Latin word secedere , which means to go apart .
In our country , the initial breaking apart was from England and the king .
When the southern states seceded , they decided due to the massive abuses of a tyrannical central government to leave that union , and become independent , as was their right to do .
The secession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Civil War , as the evil Lincoln decided to war against his own country in order to retain total control of the tyranny that was the federal government ; that central government designed and created by the so-called founders .
His acts of war were proof that the federal governing system created in the late eighteenth century had nothing to do with freedom , but was designed to build a centralized power that was to hold sovereignty over the states and individuals in favor of a political ruling class .
Secession today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary in order to regain freedom for the individual .
It would lead to actual freedom simply due to the fact that separating from the federal government would break the current command that exists in this central power , and would for all those participating , eliminate the central authority .
Without the power to use its taxing “ authority ” and restrictive laws , the federal government would wither and die .
This could be done in several ways , and would not have to be a universal plan or strategy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ secession .
The top down approach would begin with the states , but since many if not most of the state governments are tyrannical as well , bypassing the state governments might be a better option .
But with enough support from the general population , any states that were hesitant , may feel forced to go along in order to retain some form of structure .
Secession is any separation from the ruling class , so this can be done at any level .
States can secede from the federal union , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cities and towns can secede from the counties , and so it goes .
This can also work in reverse from a bottom up position , where the smallest entities , including individuals , could begin the secession movement .
This does not have to be nationwide in order to work .
Once this process begins , the fear that will consume the federal rulers will become obvious , and as the federal system becomes more exposed , its weaknesses will also come to light .
Consider the snowball effect , and know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , the more concessions that will be forthcoming from the central government .
The only other option for the government would be violence , and that could easily cause an awakening of the rest of the common population , an awakening that would never be desired by the governing elites .
This is not 1860 , it is 2020 , and given the technological advances in communications , and the fact that almost every citizen can be reached instantly , the advantage lies with numbers .
I do realize that this sounds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far-fetched , but is it really ?
One of the great advantages of any secession , and at any level , is that the people would have to work together , and this alone could break the horrendous pattern of division that allows the rulers to continue to hold power and control over the masses .
The division of the people was planned and implemented over a long period of time , but any solidarity would break the hold of this evil authoritarian system .
Fighting amongst ourselves ; democrats against republicans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , can only force us to remain in a state of slavery , whereas working together builds strength , and a way to escape this fascist oligarchy where the few control everything .
Isn ’ t secession and independence a better way ?
The Best of Gary D. Barnett

“Once one concedes that a single world government is not necessary, then where does one logically stop at the permissibility of separate states? If Canada and the United States can be separate nations without being denounced as in a state of impermissible ‘anarchy’, why may not the South secede from the United States? New York State from the Union? New York City from the state? Why may not Manhattan secede? Each neighbourhood? Each block? Each house? Each person?” ~ Murray N. Rothbard (2004). “Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market, Scholar’s Edition”, p.1051, Ludwig von Mises Institute
The question seemingly always raised is that the idea of true freedom sounds good, but how do we do it? What is the single plan to fix everything? Obviously, there is not one answer or any legitimate short answer to this question, and those that ask it, are usually not really interested in real freedom in the first place. In fact, most people do not want the responsibility of freedom, and that makes the government’s job easy, because as a rule, the only thing required by the state to keep the apathetic public at bay, is to offer them safety and benefits. They are happy to remain slaves, so long as they can get the things they want without much effort, and can through their proxy government, use others to gain for themselves.
But what is going to happen when this system fails, and this economy breaks down, which is imminent in my opinion? What will the people do when their welfare stops? What will they do when transportation shuts down, and fuel becomes scarce? What will they do when their money becomes worthless? What will they do when there food supply dwindles, and what will they do when there is civil unrest, riots in the streets, and widespread chaos? Waiting until the inevitable happens to take action will be too late. Man, Economy, and Stat... Murray N. Rothbard Best Price: $23.43 Buy New $29.95 (as of 08:10 UTC - Details)
The elimination of government and tyranny, a stop to all the wars of aggression, of all the murders due to those heinous wars, and an end to the slavery by the state that exists in the United States today seem impossible, but is it? The ensuing freedom that would result from an end to this governing system is almost beyond imagination, and does appear to be elusive, but what if there were a way, a way that had been tried before and had been successful? That way is secession, and is exactly what the people did in order to form this country in the first place.
So if real freedom is desired and sought, why not try secession?
Secession is simply breaking ties. This term comes from the Latin word secedere, which means to go apart. In our country, the initial breaking apart was from England and the king. When the southern states seceded, they decided due to the massive abuses of a tyrannical central government to leave that union, and become independent, as was their right to do. The secession of the southern states did not cause the Civil War, as the evil Lincoln decided to war against his own country in order to retain total control of the tyranny that was the federal government; that central government designed and created by the so-called founders. His acts of war were proof that the federal governing system created in the late eighteenth century had nothing to do with freedom, but was designed to build a centralized power that was to hold sovereignty over the states and individuals in favor of a political ruling class.
Secession today is not only viable, but also necessary in order to regain freedom for the individual. It would lead to actual freedom simply due to the fact that separating from the federal government would break the current command that exists in this central power, and would for all those participating, eliminate the central authority. Without the power to use its taxing “authority” and restrictive laws, the federal government would wither and die.
This could be done in several ways, and would not have to be a universal plan or strategy. That is part of the beauty of secession. The top down approach would begin with the states, but since many if not most of the state governments are tyrannical as well, bypassing the state governments might be a better option. But with enough support from the general population, any states that were hesitant, may feel forced to go along in order to retain some form of structure. Secession is any separation from the ruling class, so this can be done at any level. States can secede from the federal union, counties can secede from the state, cities and towns can secede from the counties, and so it goes. This can also work in reverse from a bottom up position, where the smallest entities, including individuals, could begin the secession movement.
This does not have to be nationwide in order to work. Once this process begins, the fear that will consume the federal rulers will become obvious, and as the federal system becomes more exposed, its weaknesses will also come to light. Consider the snowball effect, and know that the higher the pressure from the people, the more concessions that will be forthcoming from the central government. The only other option for the government would be violence, and that could easily cause an awakening of the rest of the common population, an awakening that would never be desired by the governing elites. This is not 1860, it is 2020, and given the technological advances in communications, and the fact that almost every citizen can be reached instantly, the advantage lies with numbers.
I do realize that this sounds not only radical, but also very far-fetched, but is it really? One of the great advantages of any secession, and at any level, is that the people would have to work together, and this alone could break the horrendous pattern of division that allows the rulers to continue to hold power and control over the masses. The division of the people was planned and implemented over a long period of time, but any solidarity would break the hold of this evil authoritarian system. Fighting amongst ourselves; democrats against republicans, black against white, all against all, can only force us to remain in a state of slavery, whereas working together builds strength, and a way to escape this fascist oligarchy where the few control everything. Isn’t secession and independence a better way?
The Best of Gary D. Barnett


lewrockwell--2020-01-22--Diversity and Inclusion Insanity

Diversity and Inclusion Insanity

It ’ s nearly impossible to have even a short conversation with a college administrator , politician or chief executive without the words diversity and inclusion dropping from their lips .
Diversity and inclusion appear to be the end-all and be-all of their existence .
So , I thought I ’ d begin this discussion by first looking up the definition of diversity .
According to the Oxford Dictionary , diversity is “ the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders , sexual orientations , etc.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ equality and diversity should be supported for their own sake.
” The standard definition given for inclusion is involvement and empowerment where the inherent worth and dignity of all people are recognized .
Here ’ s my question to those who are wedded to diversity and inclusion : Are people better off the less they have in common with one another ?
For example , women are less likely to be able to march 12.4 miles in five hours with an 83-pound assault load .
They are also less likely to be able @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and move a wounded comrade weighing 165 pounds while carrying that load .
Would anyone argue that a military outfit would benefit from diversity by including soldiers who can and those who can not march 12 miles in five hours while carrying an 83-pound load ?
American Contempt for ... Walter E. Williams Best Price : $ 5.90 Buy New $ 13.13 You say , “ Williams , the military is an exception !
” What about language ?
The International Civil Aviation Organization has decreed that all air traffic controllers and flight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with international flights must be proficient in the English language as a general spoken medium .
According to UNESCO , there are about 7,000 languages in the world .
The International Civil Aviation Organization could promote language inclusiveness by requiring language rotation .
Some years , Cebuano ( of the Malayo-Polynesian language family ) and in other years Kinyarwanda ( of the Niger-Congo language family ) could be the language of pilots and air traffic controllers .
Keep in mind that it is claimed that the great benefit of diversity and inclusiveness is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of belonging .
It values and practices respect for the differences in the talents , beliefs , backgrounds and ways of living of its members .
Another issue is what should be done when people who should know better praise nondiversity and noninclusiveness ?
Civil rights leader Rev .
Jesse L. Jackson said , “ I applaud commissioner Adam Silver ’ s commitment to diversity and inclusion within the NBA.
” During the 2018-2019 season , more than 33 % of NBA teams had head coaches of color .
The number of assistant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % .
The number of black NBA players was 82 % .
In the face of these statistics , Oris Stuart , the NBA ’ s chief diversity and inclusion officer said , “ Diversity , inclusion and equality are central to every aspect of our game and our business.
” I would like for Jesse Jackson and others who claim that there ’ s racial diversity and inclusiveness in professional basketball to make their case .
The same question can be asked about professional football where 70 % of NFL players are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head coaches are black .
The thornier question and challenge is what can be done to make professional basketball and football look more like the American population ?
Most of the diversity and inclusiveness insanity has its roots in academia .
An example is a paper titled “ Equilibrium Grade Inflation with Implications for Female Interest in STEM Majors , ” written by Naval Postgraduate School professor Thomas Ahn , Duke University economics professor Peter Arcidiacono , Duke University researcher Amy Hopson , and James R. Thomas of the Federal Trade Commission .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , engineering and mathematics programs at colleges and universities lacking female enrollment can be attributed largely to harsh grading policies in these fields .
Their solution to increase the number of women ’ s involvement in STEM is to standardize grading curves , in order to grade less “ harshly.
” The insanity of this approach is to not only weaken standards for women but to weaken standards across the board .
This is more evidence that George Orwell was absolutely right when he said , “ There are some ideas so absurd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The Best of Walter E. Williams

It’s nearly impossible to have even a short conversation with a college administrator, politician or chief executive without the words diversity and inclusion dropping from their lips. Diversity and inclusion appear to be the end-all and be-all of their existence. So, I thought I’d begin this discussion by first looking up the definition of diversity.
According to the Oxford Dictionary, diversity is “the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders, sexual orientations, etc.” The definition gratuitously adds, “equality and diversity should be supported for their own sake.” The standard definition given for inclusion is involvement and empowerment where the inherent worth and dignity of all people are recognized.
Here’s my question to those who are wedded to diversity and inclusion: Are people better off the less they have in common with one another? For example, women are less likely to be able to march 12.4 miles in five hours with an 83-pound assault load. They are also less likely to be able to crawl, sprint, negotiate obstacles and move a wounded comrade weighing 165 pounds while carrying that load. Would anyone argue that a military outfit would benefit from diversity by including soldiers who can and those who cannot march 12 miles in five hours while carrying an 83-pound load? American Contempt for ... Williams, Walter E. Best Price: $14.29 Buy New $11.75 (as of 02:30 UTC - Details)
You say, “Williams, the military is an exception!” What about language? The International Civil Aviation Organization has decreed that all air traffic controllers and flight crew members engaged in or in contact with international flights must be proficient in the English language as a general spoken medium. According to UNESCO, there are about 7,000 languages in the world. The International Civil Aviation Organization could promote language inclusiveness by requiring language rotation. Some years, Cebuano (of the Malayo-Polynesian language family) and in other years Kinyarwanda (of the Niger-Congo language family) could be the language of pilots and air traffic controllers. Keep in mind that it is claimed that the great benefit of diversity and inclusiveness is that it promotes and fosters a sense of belonging. It values and practices respect for the differences in the talents, beliefs, backgrounds and ways of living of its members.
Another issue is what should be done when people who should know better praise nondiversity and noninclusiveness? Civil rights leader Rev. Jesse L. Jackson said, “I applaud commissioner Adam Silver’s commitment to diversity and inclusion within the NBA.” During the 2018-2019 season, more than 33% of NBA teams had head coaches of color. The number of assistant head coaches of color was over 42%. The number of black NBA players was 82%. In the face of these statistics, Oris Stuart, the NBA’s chief diversity and inclusion officer said, “Diversity, inclusion and equality are central to every aspect of our game and our business.” I would like for Jesse Jackson and others who claim that there’s racial diversity and inclusiveness in professional basketball to make their case. The same question can be asked about professional football where 70% of NFL players are black, and 9% of team head coaches are black. The thornier question and challenge is what can be done to make professional basketball and football look more like the American population?
Most of the diversity and inclusiveness insanity has its roots in academia. An example is a paper titled “Equilibrium Grade Inflation with Implications for Female Interest in STEM Majors,” written by Naval Postgraduate School professor Thomas Ahn, Duke University economics professor Peter Arcidiacono, Duke University researcher Amy Hopson, and James R. Thomas of the Federal Trade Commission. The authors argue that science, technology, engineering and mathematics programs at colleges and universities lacking female enrollment can be attributed largely to harsh grading policies in these fields. Their solution to increase the number of women’s involvement in STEM is to standardize grading curves, in order to grade less “harshly.” The insanity of this approach is to not only weaken standards for women but to weaken standards across the board. This is more evidence that George Orwell was absolutely right when he said, “There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.”
The Best of Walter E. Williams


lewrockwell--2020-01-22--The Real Reason Roe v. Wade Should Be Reconsidered

Today , January 22 , is National Sanctity of Human Life Day .
The first such day was proclaimed by President Ronald Reagan in 1984 .
The date was chosen because it is the date in 1973 when the U.S. Supreme Court , in the infamous case of Roe v. Wade , held that a woman ’ s right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment .
States may no longer ban abortions before the fetus is determined to be “ viable.
” Many churches celebrate Sanctity of Human Life Sunday on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anniversary of the Roe decision .
On this Sunday , sermons were preached on the national sin of abortion , literature was passed out regarding the evils of abortion , gruesome pictures were shown of dead fetuses and botched abortions , the horrors of partial-birth abortion were explained , the further liberalization of abortion laws in states like New York was denounced , and Planned Parenthood was singled out for condemnation ( but probably not the “ pro-life ” Republicans who continue to fund the organization ) .
But of course , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as most girls and women in Catholic , conservative , evangelical , and fundamentalist churches—the kind of churches that observe Sanctity of Human Life Sunday—who take their religion somewhat seriously are not likely candidates to have an abortion .
The Free Society Laurence M. Vance Best Price : $ 13.95 Buy New $ 18.00 More than 200 members of Congress ( 39 senators and 168 House members—all of whom are Republicans ) are urging the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade when it takes up the issue of Louisiana ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee and Gee v. June Medical Services LLC .
The members of Congress have filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent and cross-petitioner , Dr. Rebekah Gee , the Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health .
As reported by Kevin Daley , a legal affairs reporter for the Daily Caller News Foundation : “ Forty-six years after Roe was decided , it remains a radically unsettled precedent : two of the seven Justices who originally joined the majority subsequently repudiated it in whole or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision since has been closely divided , ” the brief reads .
“ The Supreme Court ’ s 1992 Casey decision exemplifies the permanent flux of abortion jurisprudence , ” the brief argues .
Casey involved a Pennsylvania law requiring doctors to counsel patients about abortion 24 hours before the procedure and obtain parental consent if the patient is a minor , among other things .
The high court upheld those requirements .
In so doing , it overturned two decisions from the 1980s that blocked comparable regulations .
A similar sequence preceded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lawmakers note .
In Gonzalez , the high court upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act .
That law banned an abortion method called intact dilation and extraction .
Just seven years earlier , however , the justices struck down a Nebraska law much like the federal PBA ban .
“ These incessant retrenchments show that Roe has been substantially undermined by subsequent authority , a principal factor the Court considers when deciding whether to overrule precedent , ” the brief reads .
“ Casey clearly did not settle the abortion issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court to take it up again.
” Elsewhere the lawmakers wrote that abortion case law is “ characterized by Delphic confusion and protean change.
” At issue in the Louisiana admitting privileges law is the requirement that abortion providers must have admitting privileges at a local hospital .
Abortion providers challenged the law and a federal district court judge agreed with their objections .
However , the 5th U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court decision and upheld the law , so the plaintiff physicians appealed to the Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Laurence M. Vance Buy New $ 5.95 There is a better reason why the Supreme Court should reconsider Roe v. Wade : the Constitution , federalism , the Tenth Amendment , and the proper role of the federal government—take your pick .
What James Madison—the Father of the Constitution—wrote in Federalist No .
45 is still true , even though hardly anyone in Congress actually believes it : “ The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government , are few and defined .
Those which are to remain in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There is no power delegated to the federal government by the Constitution that permits it to have anything to do with abortion .
As Ron Paul has written : “ The federalization of abortion law is based not on constitutional principles , but rather on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Roe court.
” Before the Roe decision in 1973 , abortion was strictly a matter of state law .
Thirty states prohibited abortion without exception ; sixteen states banned abortion except in the case of rape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to mother , and/or fetal impairment ; and four states allowed abortions in nearly all cases before the fetus was viable .
What could we expect if the Supreme Court does reconsider Roe v. Wade , and does overturn the decision ?
As a recent World Magazine article points out , Arkansas , Kentucky , Missouri , and Tennessee have passed legislation that will outlaw abortion in those states if the Supreme Court overturns Roe .
Georgia , Kentucky , Louisiana , Mississippi , and Ohio have passed “ heartbeat ” bills—laws to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detectable heartbeat .
Alabama has passed legislation banning abortion at any stage of pregnancy , with exceptions for a mother ’ s health .
Missouri , Arkansas , and Utah have passed abortion bans with cut-off periods ranging from eight weeks to around 20 weeks of gestation .
Governors in Indiana and North Dakota have signed bills to ban a common abortion method known as dismemberment abortion .
Federal judges have temporarily blocked some of these laws .
They could no longer do so if Roe were to be overturned .
Regardless of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adherence to the Constitution , federalism , the Tenth Amendment , and the proper role of the federal government demands that the abortion issue be left up to the states .
The Best of Laurence M. Vance

Today, January 22, is National Sanctity of Human Life Day. The first such day was proclaimed by President Ronald Reagan in 1984. The date was chosen because it is the date in 1973 when the U.S. Supreme Court, in the infamous case of Roe v. Wade, held that a woman’s right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. States may no longer ban abortions before the fetus is determined to be “viable.”
Many churches celebrate Sanctity of Human Life Sunday on the third Sunday of January—the Sunday before the anniversary of the Roe decision. On this Sunday, sermons were preached on the national sin of abortion, literature was passed out regarding the evils of abortion, gruesome pictures were shown of dead fetuses and botched abortions, the horrors of partial-birth abortion were explained, the further liberalization of abortion laws in states like New York was denounced, and Planned Parenthood was singled out for condemnation (but probably not the “pro-life” Republicans who continue to fund the organization).
But of course, this is all just preaching to the choir, as most girls and women in Catholic, conservative, evangelical, and fundamentalist churches—the kind of churches that observe Sanctity of Human Life Sunday—who take their religion somewhat seriously are not likely candidates to have an abortion. The Free Society Laurence M. Vance Best Price: $13.55 Buy New $17.54 (as of 04:55 UTC - Details)
More than 200 members of Congress (39 senators and 168 House members—all of whom are Republicans) are urging the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade when it takes up the issue of Louisiana’s admitting privileges law in the consolidated cases of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee and Gee v. June Medical Services LLC.
The members of Congress have filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent and cross-petitioner, Dr. Rebekah Gee, the Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health. As reported by Kevin Daley, a legal affairs reporter for the Daily Caller News Foundation:
“Forty-six years after Roe was decided, it remains a radically unsettled precedent: two of the seven Justices who originally joined the majority subsequently repudiated it in whole or in part, and virtually every abortion decision since has been closely divided,” the brief reads. “The Supreme Court’s 1992 Casey decision exemplifies the permanent flux of abortion jurisprudence,” the brief argues. Casey involved a Pennsylvania law requiring doctors to counsel patients about abortion 24 hours before the procedure and obtain parental consent if the patient is a minor, among other things. The high court upheld those requirements. In so doing, it overturned two decisions from the 1980s that blocked comparable regulations. A similar sequence preceded the 2007 Gonzalez v. Carhart decision, the lawmakers note. In Gonzalez, the high court upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. That law banned an abortion method called intact dilation and extraction. Just seven years earlier, however, the justices struck down a Nebraska law much like the federal PBA ban. “These incessant retrenchments show that Roe has been substantially undermined by subsequent authority, a principal factor the Court considers when deciding whether to overrule precedent,” the brief reads. “Casey clearly did not settle the abortion issue, and it is time for the Court to take it up again.” Elsewhere the lawmakers wrote that abortion case law is “characterized by Delphic confusion and protean change.”
At issue in the Louisiana admitting privileges law is the requirement that abortion providers must have admitting privileges at a local hospital. Abortion providers challenged the law and a federal district court judge agreed with their objections. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court decision and upheld the law, so the plaintiff physicians appealed to the Supreme Court.
Gun Control and the Se... Laurence M. Vance Buy New $5.95 (as of 11:36 UTC - Details) There is a better reason why the Supreme Court should reconsider Roe v. Wade: the Constitution, federalism, the Tenth Amendment, and the proper role of the federal government—take your pick. What James Madison—the Father of the Constitution—wrote in Federalist No. 45 is still true, even though hardly anyone in Congress actually believes it: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite.” There is no power delegated to the federal government by the Constitution that permits it to have anything to do with abortion. As Ron Paul has written: “The federalization of abortion law is based not on constitutional principles, but rather on a social and political construct created out of thin air by the Roe court.”
Before the Roe decision in 1973, abortion was strictly a matter of state law. Thirty states prohibited abortion without exception; sixteen states banned abortion except in the case of rape, incest, life or health threat to mother, and/or fetal impairment; and four states allowed abortions in nearly all cases before the fetus was viable.
What could we expect if the Supreme Court does reconsider Roe v. Wade, and does overturn the decision? As a recent World Magazine article points out, Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee have passed legislation that will outlaw abortion in those states if the Supreme Court overturns Roe. Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Ohio have passed “heartbeat” bills—laws to ban abortion after the baby has a detectable heartbeat. Alabama has passed legislation banning abortion at any stage of pregnancy, with exceptions for a mother’s health. Missouri, Arkansas, and Utah have passed abortion bans with cut-off periods ranging from eight weeks to around 20 weeks of gestation. Governors in Indiana and North Dakota have signed bills to ban a common abortion method known as dismemberment abortion. Federal judges have temporarily blocked some of these laws. They could no longer do so if Roe were to be overturned.
Regardless of one’s position on abortion, adherence to the Constitution, federalism, the Tenth Amendment, and the proper role of the federal government demands that the abortion issue be left up to the states.
The Best of Laurence M. Vance


lewrockwell--2020-01-22--A New Definition of Warfare

A New Definition of Warfare

Supporters of Donald Trump often make the point that he has not started any new wars .
One might observe that it has not been for lack of trying , as his cruise missile attacks on Syria based on fabricated evidence and his recent assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani have been indisputably acts of war .
Trump also has enhanced troop levels both in the Middle East and in Afghanistan while also increasing the frequency and lethality of armed drone attacks worldwide .
Congress has been somewhat unseriously toying around with a tightening of the war powers act of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a president to carry out acts of war without any deliberation by or authorization from the legislature .
But perhaps the definition of war itself should be expanded .
The one area where Trump and his team of narcissistic sociopaths have been most active has been in the imposition of sanctions with lethal intent .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been explicit in his explanations that the assertion of “ extreme pressure ” on countries like Iran and Venezuela is intended to make the people suffer to such an extent that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about “ regime change.
” In Pompeo ’ s twisted reckoning that is how places that Washington disapproves of will again become “ normal countries.
” The sanctions can kill .
Those imposed by the United States are backed up by the U.S. Treasury which is able to block cash transfers going through the dollar denominated international banking system .
Banks that do not comply with America ’ s imposed rules can themselves be sanctioned , meaning that U.S. sanctions are de facto globally applicable , even if foreign banks and governments do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
It is well documented how sanctions that have an impact on the importation of medicines have killed thousands of Iranians .
In Venezuela , the effect of sanctions has been starvation as food imports have been blocked , forcing a large part of the population to flee the country just to survive .
Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 The latest exercise of United States economic warfare has been directed against Iraq .
In the space of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3rd , the American military , which operates out of two major bases in Iraq , killed 25 Iraqi militiamen who were part of the Popular Mobilization Units of the Iraqi Army .
The militiamen had most recently been engaged in the successful fight against ISIS .
It followed up on that attack by killing Soleimani , Iraqi militia general Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis , and eight other Iraqis in a drone strike near Baghdad International Airport .
As the attacks were not approved in any way by the Iraqi government , it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iraqi Parliament voted to remove all foreign troops from its soil .
The decree was signed off on by Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi , based on the fact that the U.S. military was in Iraq at the invitation of the country ’ s government and that invitation had just been revoked by parliament .
That Iraq is to say the least unstable is attributable to the ill-advised U.S. invasion of 2003 .
The persistence of U.S. forces in the country is ostensibly to aid in the fight against ISIS , but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ check on Iranian influence in Iraq , which is a strategic demand made by Israel and not responsive to any actual American interest .
Indeed , the Iraqi government is probably closer politically to Tehran than to Washington , though the neocon line that the country is dominated by the Iranians is far from true .
Washington ’ s response to the legitimate Iraqi demand that its troops should be removed consisted of threats .
When Prime Minister Mahdi spoke with Pompeo on the phone and asked for discussions and a time table @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Secretary of State made it clear that there would be no negotiations .
A State Department written response entitled “ The U.S .
Continued Partnership with Iraq ” asserted that American troops are in Iraq to serve as a “ force for good ” in the Middle East and that it is “ our right ” to maintain “ appropriate force posture ” in the region .
The Iraqi position also immediately produced presidential threats and tweets about “ sanctions like they have never seen , ” with the implication that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Iraqi economy if it did not get its way .
The latest threat to emerge involves blocking Iraq access to its New York federal reserve bank account , where international oil sale revenue is kept , creating a devastating cash crunch in Iraq ’ s financial system that might indeed destroy the Iraqi economy .
If taking steps to ruin a country economically is not considered warfare by other means it is difficult to discern what might fit that description .
After dealing with Iraq , the Trump Administration turned its guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allies .
Great Britain , like most of the other European signatories to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ( JCPOA ) has been reluctant to withdraw from the agreement over concern that Iran will as a result decide to develop nuclear weapons .
According to the Guardian , a United States representative from the National Security Council named Richard Goldberg , had visited London recently to make clear to the British government that if it does not follow the American lead and withdraw from the JCPOA and reapply sanctions it just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade agreement with Washington post-Brexit .
It is a significant threat as part of the pro-Brexit vote clearly was derived from a Trump pledge to make up for some of the anticipated decline in European trade by increasing U.K. access to the U.S. market .
Now the quid pro quo is clear : Britain , which normally does in fact follow the Washington lead in foreign policy , will now be expected to be completely on board all of the time and everywhere , particularly in the Middle East .
During his visit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The question for prime minister Johnson is : ‘ As you are moving towards Brexit … what are you going to do post-31 January as you come to Washington to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the United States ?
’ It ’ s absolutely in [ your ] interests and the people of Great Britain ’ s interests to join with President Trump , with the United States , to realign your foreign policy away from Brussels , and to join the maximum pressure campaign to keep all of us safe.
” And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Richard Goldberg , a John Bolton protégé anti-Iran hardliner , who threatened the British on behalf of Trump .
James Carden , writing at The Nation , posits “ Consider the following scenario : A Washington , DC–based , tax-exempt organization that bills itself as a think tank dedicated to the enhancement of a foreign country ’ s reputation within the United States , funded by billionaires closely aligned with said foreign country , has one of its high-ranking operatives ( often referred to as ‘ fellows ’ ) embedded within the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further the oft-stated agenda of his home organization , which , as it happens , is also paying his salary during his year-long stint there .
As it happens , this is exactly what the pro-Israel think tank the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies ( FDD ) reportedly achieved in an arrangement brokered by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton.
” Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Buy New $ 10.00 The FDD senior adviser in question , who was placed on the National Security Council , was Richard Goldberg .
FDD @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including vulture fund capitalist Paul Singer and Home Depot partner Bernard Marcus .
Its officers meet regularly with Israeli government officials and the organization is best known for its unrelenting effort to bring about war with Iran .
It has relentlessly pushed for a recklessly militaristic U.S. policy directed against Iran and also more generally in the Middle East .
It is a reliable mouthpiece for Israel and , inevitably , it has never been required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 .
To be sure , Trump also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including David Wurmser , another Bolton associate , who has the president ’ s ear and is a consultant to the National Security Council .
Wurmser has recently submitted a series of memos to the White House advocating a policy of “ regime disruption ” with the Islamic Republic that will destabilize it and eventually lead to a change of government .
He may have played a key role in giving the green light to the assassination of Soleimani .
The good news , if there is any , is that Goldberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the war against Iran was not developing fast enough to suit him and FDD , but he is symptomatic of the many neoconservative hawks who have infiltrated the Trump Administration at secondary and tertiary levels , where much of the development and implementation of policy actually takes place .
It also explains that when it comes to Iran and the irrational continuation of a significant U.S. military presence in the Middle East , it is Israel and its Lobby that are steering the ship of state .
Reprinted with permission from The Unz @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Supporters of Donald Trump often make the point that he has not started any new wars. One might observe that it has not been for lack of trying, as his cruise missile attacks on Syria based on fabricated evidence and his recent assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani have been indisputably acts of war. Trump also has enhanced troop levels both in the Middle East and in Afghanistan while also increasing the frequency and lethality of armed drone attacks worldwide.
Congress has been somewhat unseriously toying around with a tightening of the war powers act of 1973 to make it more difficult for a president to carry out acts of war without any deliberation by or authorization from the legislature. But perhaps the definition of war itself should be expanded. The one area where Trump and his team of narcissistic sociopaths have been most active has been in the imposition of sanctions with lethal intent. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been explicit in his explanations that the assertion of “extreme pressure” on countries like Iran and Venezuela is intended to make the people suffer to such an extent that they rise up against their governments and bring about “regime change.” In Pompeo’s twisted reckoning that is how places that Washington disapproves of will again become “normal countries.”
The sanctions can kill. Those imposed by the United States are backed up by the U.S. Treasury which is able to block cash transfers going through the dollar denominated international banking system. Banks that do not comply with America’s imposed rules can themselves be sanctioned, meaning that U.S. sanctions are de facto globally applicable, even if foreign banks and governments do not agree with the policies that drive them. It is well documented how sanctions that have an impact on the importation of medicines have killed thousands of Iranians. In Venezuela, the effect of sanctions has been starvation as food imports have been blocked, forcing a large part of the population to flee the country just to survive. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
The latest exercise of United States economic warfare has been directed against Iraq. In the space of one week from December 29th to January 3rd, the American military, which operates out of two major bases in Iraq, killed 25 Iraqi militiamen who were part of the Popular Mobilization Units of the Iraqi Army. The militiamen had most recently been engaged in the successful fight against ISIS. It followed up on that attack by killing Soleimani, Iraqi militia general Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and eight other Iraqis in a drone strike near Baghdad International Airport. As the attacks were not approved in any way by the Iraqi government, it was no surprise that rioting followed and the Iraqi Parliament voted to remove all foreign troops from its soil. The decree was signed off on by Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, based on the fact that the U.S. military was in Iraq at the invitation of the country’s government and that invitation had just been revoked by parliament.
That Iraq is to say the least unstable is attributable to the ill-advised U.S. invasion of 2003. The persistence of U.S. forces in the country is ostensibly to aid in the fight against ISIS, but the real reason is to serve as a check on Iranian influence in Iraq, which is a strategic demand made by Israel and not responsive to any actual American interest. Indeed, the Iraqi government is probably closer politically to Tehran than to Washington, though the neocon line that the country is dominated by the Iranians is far from true.
Washington’s response to the legitimate Iraqi demand that its troops should be removed consisted of threats. When Prime Minister Mahdi spoke with Pompeo on the phone and asked for discussions and a time table to create a “withdrawal mechanism” the Secretary of State made it clear that there would be no negotiations. A State Department written response entitled “The U.S. Continued Partnership with Iraq” asserted that American troops are in Iraq to serve as a “force for good” in the Middle East and that it is “our right” to maintain “appropriate force posture” in the region.
The Iraqi position also immediately produced presidential threats and tweets about “sanctions like they have never seen,” with the implication that the U.S. was more than willing to wreck the Iraqi economy if it did not get its way. The latest threat to emerge involves blocking Iraq access to its New York federal reserve bank account, where international oil sale revenue is kept, creating a devastating cash crunch in Iraq’s financial system that might indeed destroy the Iraqi economy. If taking steps to ruin a country economically is not considered warfare by other means it is difficult to discern what might fit that description.
After dealing with Iraq, the Trump Administration turned its guns on one of its oldest and closest allies. Great Britain, like most of the other European signatories to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been reluctant to withdraw from the agreement over concern that Iran will as a result decide to develop nuclear weapons. According to the Guardian, a United States representative from the National Security Council named Richard Goldberg, had visited London recently to make clear to the British government that if it does not follow the American lead and withdraw from the JCPOA and reapply sanctions it just might be difficult to work out a trade agreement with Washington post-Brexit. It is a significant threat as part of the pro-Brexit vote clearly was derived from a Trump pledge to make up for some of the anticipated decline in European trade by increasing U.K. access to the U.S. market. Now the quid pro quo is clear: Britain, which normally does in fact follow the Washington lead in foreign policy, will now be expected to be completely on board all of the time and everywhere, particularly in the Middle East.
During his visit, Goldberg told the BBC: “The question for prime minister Johnson is: ‘As you are moving towards Brexit … what are you going to do post-31 January as you come to Washington to negotiate a free-trade agreement with the United States?’ It’s absolutely in [your] interests and the people of Great Britain’s interests to join with President Trump, with the United States, to realign your foreign policy away from Brussels, and to join the maximum pressure campaign to keep all of us safe.”
And there is an interesting back story on Richard Goldberg, a John Bolton protégé anti-Iran hardliner, who threatened the British on behalf of Trump. James Carden, writing at The Nation, posits “Consider the following scenario: A Washington, DC–based, tax-exempt organization that bills itself as a think tank dedicated to the enhancement of a foreign country’s reputation within the United States, funded by billionaires closely aligned with said foreign country, has one of its high-ranking operatives (often referred to as ‘fellows’) embedded within the White House national security staff in order to further the oft-stated agenda of his home organization, which, as it happens, is also paying his salary during his year-long stint there. As it happens, this is exactly what the pro-Israel think tank the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) reportedly achieved in an arrangement brokered by former Trump national security adviser John Bolton.” Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $10.00 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
The FDD senior adviser in question, who was placed on the National Security Council, was Richard Goldberg. FDD is largely funded by Jewish American billionaires including vulture fund capitalist Paul Singer and Home Depot partner Bernard Marcus. Its officers meet regularly with Israeli government officials and the organization is best known for its unrelenting effort to bring about war with Iran. It has relentlessly pushed for a recklessly militaristic U.S. policy directed against Iran and also more generally in the Middle East. It is a reliable mouthpiece for Israel and, inevitably, it has never been required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.
To be sure, Trump also has other neocons advising him on Iran, including David Wurmser, another Bolton associate, who has the president’s ear and is a consultant to the National Security Council. Wurmser has recently submitted a series of memos to the White House advocating a policy of “regime disruption” with the Islamic Republic that will destabilize it and eventually lead to a change of government. He may have played a key role in giving the green light to the assassination of Soleimani.
The good news, if there is any, is that Goldberg resigned on January 3rd, allegedly because the war against Iran was not developing fast enough to suit him and FDD, but he is symptomatic of the many neoconservative hawks who have infiltrated the Trump Administration at secondary and tertiary levels, where much of the development and implementation of policy actually takes place. It also explains that when it comes to Iran and the irrational continuation of a significant U.S. military presence in the Middle East, it is Israel and its Lobby that are steering the ship of state.
Reprinted with permission from The Unz Review.
The Best of Philip Giraldi