Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

  1. Site: AntiWar.com
    5 days 30 min ago
    Author: David Gornoski
    The relentless bombing of Gaza, with its gut-wrenching toll on civilian lives – children buried under rubble, families torn apart, entire neighborhoods reduced to ash – has become a grotesque spectacle on the global stage. The effort to bully Americans into co-signing this carnage, framed as a necessary strike against Hamas terrorists (whom Israel itself … Continue reading "The Gaza Crisis and the Repeal of Christianity’s Personhood Revolution"
  2. Site: The Unz Review
    5 days 30 min ago
    Author: Ted Rall
    Democrats constantly accuse Donald Trump of constantly lying. Journalistic factcheckers, who work for Democratic-aligned media companies, back their claims with statistics. But it's the Democratic Party that's facing historically low approval ratings. In poll after poll about one issue after another, voters say they trust Republicans more. A major contributing factor to the diminishment of...
  3. Site: The Unz Review
    5 days 30 min ago
    Author: Chris Hedges
    There are few pieces of literature that remain as prescient and relevant throughout history as John Milton’s Paradise Lost. Thomas Jefferson, Malcolm X, Virginia Woolf, Thomas Paine and dozens more drew inspiration from and studied Milton’s grand work and the revolutionary themes within it. Professor Orlando Reade, in his book, What in Me Is Dark:...
  4. Site: The Unz Review
    5 days 30 min ago
    Author: Gregory Hood
    Journalists and politicians have repeatedly declared that populism and nationalism are fading. There have been setbacks, but the overall trend is positive. Nationalism is clearly on the rise in Europe, even though patriots face a race against time as demographics change. Romania recently crushed a right-wing challenge through tactics that most would call brutally authoritarian...
  5. Site: AntiWar.com
    5 days 31 min ago
    Author: Medea Benjamin
    After twenty months of horror in Gaza, political rhetoric in Western countries is finally starting to shift – but will words translate into action? And what exactly can other countries do when the United States still shields Israel from efforts to enforce international law, as it did at the UN Security Council on June 5th? … Continue reading "Is There a Crack in Western Support for Genocide?"
  6. Site: The Unz Review
    5 days 31 min ago
    Author: Paul Craig Roberts
    Scott Ritter says the attack on Russia’s strategic bombers was a British operation that the CIA knew about. According to the White House, Trump was not informed. As Russian war doctrine calls for a strategic response to such an attack, both British and US intelligence risked launching a nuclear attack on the country or countries...
  7. Site: The Unz Review
    5 days 31 min ago
    Author: Robert Stark
    The Triforce overlaid over my photo of June Lake, where I had a mystical experience, represents the Divine Source at the top supported by the Divine Consciousness and the avatars) Hypothetical names for the new religion: Cosmoplatonism, Cosmotheosophy, Cosmotheism, Cosmotheology, Cosmodeism, The Church of Divine Science, and The Church of Divine Emanations. I am leaning...
  8. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 1 hour ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Peter Daszak's Smokescreen Attack on Dr. Bhattacharya

    Authored by Randall Bock via The Brownstone Institute,

    Peter Daszak’s recent X posts (June 2, 2025) labeling Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the new NIH Director, an “anti-science Luddite” who is “destroying public health” are a masterclass in projection.

    Daszak, former head of EcoHealth Alliance (facilitator and co-conspirator of that recent pandemic, what was it called? Oh yes, SARS CoV-2 Covid-19), accuses Bhattacharya of having a “vendetta against the NIH” and claims his policies will cost lives, while pointing fingers at organizations like Brownstone Institute for being part of a right-wing conspiracy (how original!) to dismantle science. Let’s cut through the noise.

    Calling Bhattacharya anti-science is absurd. Erstwhile Stanford professor and co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, Bhattacharya has consistently championed evidence-based public health, advocating for open scientific debate over dogmatic policies. His focus on data-driven approaches—like considering natural immunity and the harms of lockdowns—earned him censorship under the previous administration. His leadership at the NIH promises transparency and rigor, both of which seem to terrify Daszak—operating without (his previous sponsor) Dr. Fauci’s golden parachute of a Biden/autopen pardon.

    Now, let’s talk about Daszak’s version of “science.” EcoHealth Alliance, under his watch, funneled US. taxpayer dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) for gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses—research that may have contributed to the unleashing of the novel coronavirus in Wuhan. 

    As I detailed in my Brownstone articles, Daszak’s collaboration with WIV’s “Bat Woman” Zhengli-Li Shi involved modifying coronaviruses to make them more infectious to humans, fitting the NIH’s own definition of gain-of-function despite his denials. That second article of mine only came about after EcoHealth Alliance’s bullying. When I had pointed out EcoHealth’s complicity in my original Dr. Anthony Fauci’s Own Gain-of-Function, Daszak’s minions tried to bully Brownstone into retracting the reference. 

    When that failed, he blocked me on X to dodge accountability.

    How “science-y” is that? Blocking someone for raising legitimate questions about your role in a global pandemic isn’t the mark of a scientist—it’s the mark of someone with something to hide.

    Daszak’s attacks on Bhattacharya are a distraction from his own failures. Why were US funds sent to a CCP-controlled lab with poor oversight instead of trusted allies? Why the lack of transparency? These questions remain unanswered, and his attempts to silence critics—like me—only deepen the suspicion around EcoHealth’s actions.

    Science thrives on open debate, not censorship. Bhattacharya represents a return to that principle at the NIH, while Daszak’s behavior—blocking dissenters and evading tough questions—shows what anti-science really looks like. The public deserves better, and with Bhattacharya leading the NIH, we might finally get it.

    NEVER FORGET: Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance tried to quash and have Brownstone retract my: Dr. Anthony Fauci’s Own “Gain-of-Function”—October 9, 2023.

    Instead, I researched further, doubled down, and produced this: “EcoHealth Alliance’s Wuhan-Virus Dalliances” October 22, 2023.

    After which, crickets…Peter Daszak blocked me on X.com. The essence of bullies is cowardice.

    Please see also my Fauci’s ‘DNA of Caring’ By Randall Bock, August 9, 2024, Brownstone.org.

    Republished from the author’s Substack

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 22:35
  9. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 2 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Bayer's Push For State-Level Roundup Immunity Sparks Backlash In The Heartland

    In a brazen bid to shield itself from a tsunami of lawsuits over its toxic Roundup herbicide, Monsanto (acquired by Bayer Pharmaceutical) has unleashed a multi-state lobbying blitz to secure immunity from liability, with Missouri as a key battleground. 

    The agrochemical giant, reeling from over $8.68 billion in pre-reduction jury verdicts and $11 billion in settlements, is pushing state legislatures to pass bills that would block "failure-to-warn" claims tied to glyphosate, Roundup's cancer-linked ingredient

    But their heavy-handed tactics have sparked fierce resistance, exposing the corporate underbelly of a company desperate to dodge accountability.

    In Missouri, home to Bayer's North American Crop Science headquarters, the company ramped up its lobbyists from four to nine - or about 1.29 lobbyists for each of the seven Senators of the Missouri Senate Agriculture Committee - directly before introducing Senate Bill 14, and its companion House Bill 544.

    Both bills - nearly identical to those seen in each state where courts have awarded billions for harms - were aimed at shielding Monsanto-Bayer from lawsuits claiming Roundup causes non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

    Missouri trial lawyer Matt Clement has successfully represented clients in their claims that Roundup was the cause of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

    "Monsanto is trying to push legislation that would take away constitutional rights," Clement told ZeroHedge. "It [Bayer] has not been successful in getting courts to buy its preemption argument, so it is resorting to trying to pass state legislation that will do what most courts have refused to do."  

    Missouri courts have already hammered Bayer with massive verdicts: $611 million, upheld on appeals in 2025 for three plaintiffs in Cole County (originally $1.56 billion), and $1.25 million for John Durnell in St. Louis. 

    With 40,000 cases still pending in Missouri alone, Bayer's panic seemed palpable. Their strategy? Convince lawmakers that EPA-approved labels, which omit cancer warnings - despite jurys awarding plaintiffs a whopping total of $19.68 billion in verdicts and settlements to-date - should preempt state litigation.

    "State law claims, which Monsanto is trying to take away with the proposed legislation, are the only way for private citizens to hold companies accountable," Clement explains. 

    In 1947, Congress created The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Last significantly amended in 1972, FIFRA - administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - requires pesticides to be registered with the EPA before they can be sold or distributed in the United States. 

    The law aims to ensure that pesticides are safe for human health and the environment when used according to their labeling.

    However, when FIFRA was last reviewed by the EPA, the alleged harms of Roundup (backed by $19.68 billion in settlements) were not yet known. In addition, courts have held that private citizens can't use FIFRA to sue pesticide manufacturers for damages if they are injured by a chemical.

    "In other words," Clement tells ZeroHedge, "only the EPA can enforce the terms of that law. Because the EPA only reviews the chemicals every fifteen years, there is no real enforcement mechanism except state law. If the proposed legislation takes that away, there is nothing left for an injured person to do." 

    Due to the fact that registration and warning labels are administrative law, the only way to hold a company like Monsanto-Bayer accountable for not properly warning consumers, is through state-based constitutional law. Rather than pay out billions in on-going settlements, Bayer shifted its focus to PR and lobbying state lawmakers. 

    Bayer's campaign, funneled through the Modern Ag Alliance and "murky groups" like the Protecting America Initiative, has spent an estimated $150,000 to $700,000 across 12 states, including Missouri, Iowa, and Georgia. 

    In Missouri, nine Freedom Caucus Senators were targeted—Nick Schroer, Brad Hudson, Rick Brattin, Ben Brown, David Gregory, Mike Moon, Joe Nicola, Adam Schnelting, and Jill Carter—with vicious direct-mail flyers. 

    The mail flyers accused the Freedom Caucus members of betraying American farmers and aiding China by opposing the bill. The senators, incensed by what they called "dark money" attacks, vowed to investigate via the Missouri Ethics Commission, effectively killing HB 544 in the Senate through a filibuster.

    The missteps were catastrophic.

    Bayer underestimated bipartisan fury, with 24 House Republicans and 48 Democrats rejecting the bill. 

    Bayer is essentially bribing both Republican and Democrat congresspeople to insert an extraordinary provision into the Farm Bill that would give the German company immunity from lawsuits over its pesticides, especially Roundup. If these products are as safe as the pesticide… https://t.co/29BJr1vKAv

    — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) September 13, 2024

    Aggressive ads and sponsorship of Governor Mike Kehoe's inauguration reeked of corporate overreach, alienating allies and fueling perceptions of prioritizing profits over public health. Critics also pointed to Monsanto's history of manipulating science, as exposed in California courts, which found the company focused on PR over safety.

    Nationwide, Bayer's playbook proved more successful as Georgia passed an immunity bill (SB 144) into law this year. The new law could impact a $2.1 billion jury verdict awarded to plaintiff John Barnes, as Bayer is expected to appeal the case. 

    North Dakota and Montana also passed shields, but legislative efforts faced resistance in states like Iowa, Florida, Tennessee and Idaho. With 54,000–67,000 lawsuits still looming and a $16 billion litigation war chest, Bayer's now scrambling for help from the U.S. Supreme Court and lobbying hard for Farm Bill amendments that reinforce federal preemption.

    However, Congress could just as easily amend FIFRA to explicitly preserve states' rights or strengthen EPA labeling oversight. Meanwhile, the Trump administration can also update EPA regulations or issue executive guidance to limit the scope of federal preemption

    These steps would close the loophole Bayer is attempting to exploit at the state level, ensuring victims of Roundup's alleged harms, can seek justice without federal interference

    Either way, the fight highlights the need for regulatory reforms as the outcome will shape pesticide regulation for years to come.

    Bayer's attempt to rewrite the rules and escape accountability has only hardened resolve among farmers, health advocates, and legislators alike. But, just as this saga illustrates the "corporate capture" outlined in the MAHA Report, the fight over Roundup's label is far from over.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 22:10
  10. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 2 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Judge Says Education Department Remains Barred From Canceling COVID-19 School Aid

    Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

    A federal judge issued an order on June 3 preserving a previous preliminary injunction that had blocked the Department of Education from rescinding extensions given to states for accessing COVID-19-related funds for school districts.

    District Judge Edgardo Ramos of the Southern District of New York said the injunction he issued on May 6 will remain in effect amid the ongoing litigation involving 16 states and the District of Columbia, which brought the case on April 10 alleging that the Education Department’s reversal in granting the extensions for accessing the Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) was arbitrary, in violation of the law.

    ESF allocated more than $276 billion to support school districts in mitigating the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    States were initially given until Sept. 30, 2024, to obligate the use of funds, and until Jan. 28, 2025, to access the funds to liquidate the obligations.

    The department later granted extensions to the plaintiffs, allowing them to access the funds through March 2026.

    Education Secretary Linda McMahon subsequently informed the states in March this year that the previously granted extensions were being rescinded because the pandemic was over and extending the deadline was no longer aligned with the department’s current priorities, although the states could reapply for extensions.

    In the June 3 ruling, Ramos ordered the department to process the plaintiffs’ outstanding and future requests for the funding “without delay” and provide a status report detailing the payment.

    The department was also barred from enforcing a May 11 directive requiring the plaintiffs to liquidate their obligations under the ESF by May 24, according to the ruling.

    The Department of Education did not return a request for comment by publication time.

    Government lawyers argued in an April 24 brief that the department’s actions were not arbitrary and capricious “because rescission of the prior extension was within the Department’s discretion” and that they “did not conflict with the relevant appropriations statutes.”

    The lawyers also stated that the plaintiffs would not suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction because they still had the option to reapply for a fresh extension but had chosen not to do so.

    Ramos issued the preliminary injunction on May 6, blocking the department from rescinding the previously approved extensions for accessing the funds. The judge also required department officials to give the plaintiffs at least 14 days’ notice before making any changes to the extensions.

    The lawsuit was brought by the attorneys general of New York, Arizona, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, and the District of Columbia, as well as Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 21:45
  11. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 3 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Mexico's $10 Billion Lawsuit Against U.S. Gunmakers

    The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously tossed out Mexico's 2021 lawsuit against seven U.S. gunmakers and one wholesaler, ruling that firms like Smith & Wesson and Glock are shielded from liability under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

    Mexico's lawsuit accused U.S. gunmakers of knowingly enabling illegal firearm sales to dealers linked to drug cartels, fueling cartel violence. The government sought $10 billion in damages and a court order imposing stricter rules on the marketing and distribution of firearms.

    Mexico attempted to use PLCAA's narrow "predicate exception," claiming the gunmakers knowingly violated federal firearms laws by aiding and abetting illegal sales by U.S. dealers.

    Here's the Supreme Court's rationale that went into their unanimous decision: 

    • The Court, led by Justice Elena Kagan, found that Mexico's complaint did not plausibly allege that the manufacturers took deliberate, affirmative steps to facilitate crimes — a requirement for aiding and abetting liability.

    • Allegations that manufacturers failed to monitor dealers or cut off suspected "bad apple" dealers were deemed insufficient. Passive nonfeasance or general market activity does not amount to aiding and abetting.

    • Design and marketing choices (e.g., Spanish-language branding, military-style weapons) were not enough to imply culpability under U.S. law.

    Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, acknowledged rampant cartel violent crime, but found that Mexico failed to present allegations strong enough to overcome PLCAA's liability shield, rejecting claims that the gunmakers aided and abetted illegal firearm sales.

    "The question presented is whether Mexico's complaint plausibly pleads that conduct. We conclude it does not," Kagan wrote.

    Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress have introduced legislation intended to reduce the flow of guns across the border. Yet Democrats facilitated four years of disastrous open borders under the Biden-Harris regime era... 

    *   *   * 

    Read the Supreme Court's ruling.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 21:20
  12. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 3 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    US Energy Strategy Hinges On Mexico

    Authored by Haley Zaremba via OilPrice.com,

    • The United States and Mexico have a vital energy trade relationship, with U.S. natural gas exports to Mexico increasing dramatically in recent decades, creating a high level of economic interdependence.

    • Experts argue that the energy trade between the U.S. and Mexico is so crucial for both nations' economies that it may be largely shielded from tariff threats, which are possibly being used for diplomatic leverage.

    • The U.S. strategy of near-shoring its energy supply chains heavily involves Mexico, making the maintenance of good relations between the two countries' leaders essential for both nations' economic and energy goals.

    Tariff whiplash under the Trump administration has raised a lot of concerns about the United States’ relationship with its first- and second-largest trading partners, Canada and Mexico. This is especially true for energy trade, which all members of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) depend on to keep their economies healthy. Experts contend that recognizing the vital role of energy trade for all parties, and strengthening those relationships, is critical in these volatile times.

    While this is true for all of North America, it is particularly true of the energy trade relationship between the United States and Mexico, which has massively expanded in recent decades. In January of this year, pipeline exports of natural gas from the United States to Mexico reached a whopping 199.2 billion cubic feet. That marks a more-than ten-fold increase since 2012, and a nearly 200-fold increase since 1990. This rapid growth has made the two economies more inextricably interlinked than ever before. 

    Because of the scale and rapid expansion of this relationship, the United States and Mexico both need a healthy energy trade relationship for their respective economic well being, according to experts.

    “For Mexico, reliable access to competitively priced U.S. energy is essential to sustaining economic growth, enabling industrial competitiveness and stabilizing the electric grid,” states a recent opinion piece from The Hill, written by Duncan Wood.

    “At the same time, for the U.S., Mexico has become an indispensable customer, so much so that any downturn in Mexican demand would ripple through U.S. refineries, gas producers and the infrastructure companies that have built pipelines and terminals to serve the southern market,” Wood continues.

    This means that tariffs could pose a major threat to what is a foundational piece of the continental trade agreement and economy. But it could also mean that the tariffs never really stood a chance. In April of this year, Carlos Guadarrama, a senior energy consultant at the World Bank, said that energy trade between the two countries is so integrated and important that it is essentially shielded from tariffs, and implied that Trump’s tariff rope-a-dope with Mexico is founded on empty threats. 

    “I don’t think the tariffs will impact bilateral energy trade because at this point, we’ve seen the U.S. threaten tariffs on Mexico several times,” Guadarrama told Natural Gas Intelligence.

    “I think Trump is using the tariffs as a threatening mechanism so that the Mexican government complies with the U.S. on other requests and areas of interest beyond energy, and I personally don’t think they will have any effect in bilateral trade when it comes to energy,” he went on to say.

    This means that the two new presidents of the United States and Mexico, Donald Trump and Claudia Sheinbaum, will need to maintain good relations and a high level of diplomacy if the United States wants to keep making money off of Mexico’s grid, and Mexico wants to keep growing its own economy using relatively cheap and abundant American energy imports. 

    What is more, maintaining energy trade relations with Mexico is paramount to the United States’ own energy strategy, which is moving away from global supply chains and toward friend-shoring and near-shoring. Around this time last year, the Atlantic Council reported that cooperation between the two new regimes in the United States and Mexico would be critical for loosening trade reliance on China. The United States’ plans for nearshoring its energy supply chains – moving their lines of production closer to home – feature Mexico prominently.

    At that time, when the potential outcome of the United States election was still the subject of much debate, the Atlantic Council advised that “The United States should seize the opportunity to work with the incoming Sheinbaum administration to strengthen the Mexican energy sector, thereby enabling supply chain security gains through nearshoring.”

    So far, Trump has worked against Mexico as much as with them. But with such complementary mutually beneficial energy market needs, he may just be blowing smoke.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 20:55
  13. Site: Public Discourse
    5 days 4 hours ago
    Author: Ralph Hancock

    Editors’ Note: This is Part II of a two-part essay on Jonathan Rauch’s Cross Purposes: Christianity’s Broken Bargain with Democracy.

    Rauch presents his proposal of his “Gospel of Compromise,” we have noted, as a recovery of a “thick Christianity,” as opposed to the “sharp,” that is, conservatively accented version. He regards his favored version as “thick” because he thinks it offers a way of reconciling human and divine law, a way of seeing liberalism’s “permanent process of public negotiation” as a core value of Christianity. It is in this context that Rauch offers his surprising proposal, namely that the teachings of the LDS Church offer the most perfect specimen of the “thick theology” he is looking for.  

    The “thick” theology that thrilled Rauch comes down essentially to placing “good-faith negotiation at the very center of the Constitution’s meaning.” This approach, Rauch argues, goes far beyond mere mechanical difference-splitting to foster a “creative, generative, pro-social endeavor,” one allows the parties to develop “peaceful habits of collaboration, and feelings of goodwill and fellowship.” At the same time, Rauch observes, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints continues to make rigorous demands on the personal lives of its members, thus “combining high personal investment with high communal returns.” Thus, although Rauch recognizes that Latter-day Saints continue to affirm a teaching on homosexuality that is “repugnant and harmful,” as well as a view of gender roles that is “discriminatory and archaic,” he finds the church’s ideas about “pluralism” “compelling.”

    Rauch’s proposal of an LDS–liberal alliance does not address only immediate and practical concerns. The author ventures briefly but suggestively into a properly theological engagement with LDS beliefs. This engagement centers on the idea of “agency,” which he rightly understands to be a central idea of LDS theology and anthropology. Rauch highlights the distinctive interpretation of Adam’s fall, certainly a very unorthodox or heretical doctrine from the standpoint of the mainstream Augustinian tradition of Western Christianity, namely, that Adam’s “transgression” was gloriously good news. Rauch cites LDS scholars Terryl and Fiona Givens: “Instead of deploring Eve’s and Adam’s transgression, one might find in it a cause for rejoicing.” 

    This is not the place for a full or even adequate account of LDS doctrine, which is surely no more free of paradox and mystery (how can it be good to transgress God’s law?) than the traditional Augustinian view.  But Rauch is certainly right that there is something distinctive in the foundations of LDS belief that grounds the goodness of human choice and practical action in an understanding of ultimate reality and a “great plan of happiness” laid down before the foundation of the world. Rauch writes that, for the Latter-day Saints, “[l]ife is not a process of moral repair or atonement under the oppressive curse of original sin; it is a process of moral development under the tutelage of experience.”  

    To be sure, Rauch is mistaken to sever “moral repair” from “moral development,” and his argument approaches self-refutation when he extends it to claim that, for the LDS, “we cannot develop morally unless we confront all kinds of choices.” From this he thinks there is “but a short step to Madisonian pluralism.” If what Rauch calls Madisonian pluralism is equivalent to the view that a political community can somehow be morally neutral and boundlessly pluralist, yet based on materialistic science, then this small step is in fact a gigantic leap across an unseen abyss. Let us grant, all the same, that Rauch has put his finger on a distinctive feature of LDS belief that is relevant to the question of Christianity and liberalism.

    Rauch skillfully, though in the end preposterously, appeals to Latter-day Saints with the heady possibility that they might provide the model of a new interpretation of Christianity centered on those teachings or dispositions he elevates as truly Christian (as well as “Madisonian”): the disposition to forgive and to have no fear of secularism, and the readiness to “negotiate” all the way down to our very understanding of the human good. The effectual truth of this appeal to his truncated version of LDS belief is that the acceptance of political exile and complacency in negotiation on liberal terms will continue to rise to ascendancy over those substantive LDS beliefs that he regards as “discriminatory and archaic.” This is the hand of friendship that Jonathan Rauch has extended, no doubt in all sincerity, to American members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Certainly it does more credit to the obliging good will of his LDS audience than to their intellectual discretion that not a few seem inclined to accept the invitation, or, at least, to praise the gesture.

    Rauch is not wrong to place “agency” at the heart of LDS belief.  But he distorts it beyond recognition by reducing this rich concept, deeply embedded in a moral and cosmological vision, to the idea that the best social framework for the development of our humanity is one with the least encumbrance of moral authority, that more “choice” is always better, and, finally that the act of choosing can be considered the essence of human meaning, without reference to the reality of good and evil that is thought to guide our choices. Rauch does not even pause to consider the question whether the ideal of limitless choice is in any way practicable, or even thinkable as an ethical principle. His understanding of “agency” is neither a remotely adequate phenomenology of human choice nor a serious rendering of LDS belief. In fact, LDS leaders have generally qualified the word “agency” with the word “moral,” precisely to avoid the nonsensical proposition that more freedom, a freedom divorced from moral accountability, is always better.  

    LDS agency is very clearly a moral and lawful agency, an understanding of active human choice as central to man’s eternal vocation, but emphatically within a divine plan and a morally meaningful cosmos. Inconveniently for Rauch, this divine plan affirms the centrality of the procreative family. This is the great irony in Rauch’s attempt to cement a deep alliance with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in forging a liberal future unimpeded by any enduring moral contents that cannot be generated from within the purely scientific-constitutional framework that he proposes: Latter-day Saints are arguably the most fundamentally irreconcilable of all religious groupings to his post-Obergefell liberal settlement. Latter-day Saints believe, not only that the highest meaning of marriage is both natural (heterosexual) and sacramental, but also, and perhaps uniquely, that the marriage between man and woman is eternal and grounded in the eternal significance of sexual difference and complementarity. 

    More generally, the LDS concept of agency is inseparable from a belief in eternal standards of righteousness and in a rigorously normative “plan of salvation.” That said, Rauch is not wrong to point to a distinct break in LDS teachings with the anthropology of creedal Christianity. The second of our thirteen “Articles of Faith” (formulated by Joseph Smith in response to a Chicago newspaper reporter) is as plain as can be about the rupture with all things Augustinian: “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.” Thus, the LDS idea of “agency” is bound up with a Christian concept of “sin,” or the recognition of the orientation of human freedom by permanent principles of right and wrong, good and evil. 

    To be clear, this is not to say that the LDS understanding of human freedom falls into the category of a Pelagian reliance on works as opposed to grace. The Third Article of Faith makes clear the dependence of human agency on divine redemption: “We believe that, through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.” Agency, for Latter-day Saints, is inseparable from the “infinite atonement” effected by the Savior’s ultimate sacrifice.

    A Time for Compromise?

    It is precisely in order to guard against the potential antinomian tendencies of the concept of “agency” when elevated to the status of a leading principle that LDS authorities routinely favor the expression “moral agency” to indicate the profound difference with a purely secular and liberal understanding of individual freedom. Rauch’s appropriation of the LDS term “agency” is thus tendentious at best. This is not to deny that Rauch’s spin on agency has found some resonance among Latter-day Saints eager to make peace with mainstream liberalism. This readiness to entertain Rauch’s liberal politics of negotiation must be understood against the background of recent LDS experience in the political realm. Some church leaders were apparently surprised by the negative publicity and violent acts of discrimination and anti-religious hatred that resulted from its institutional support in 2008 for California’s Proposition 8 against homosexual marriage. It might be argued as well that some LDS church members have been insufficiently appreciative of the positive cultural and evangelical effects of the church’s alliance in this cause with Roman Catholics and others committed to the defense of marriage. The Church’s outward-facing posture since the struggle in California and the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Obergefell has been to look for opportunities to make peace with advocates of homosexual rights and to participate in the fashioning of legislative compromises.  

    The trade-offs of these compromises and their long-term effects are certainly debatable, but it is important to note that the church has made very clear in the case of every political compromise that no changes are intended to its fundamental moral and religious doctrines. The church’s position has clearly been that the religious meaning of “marriage” has not changed, even though we must learn the uses of political pragmatism, so it is argued, in order to secure the protection of our religious freedom. To be sure, the path of pragmatism can prove to be a slippery slope, and this slipperiness appears in the very rhetoric that seems necessary to justify compromise.  

    Rather than simply acknowledging the necessity to accommodate political circumstances unfavorable to certain basic teachings of the church, defenders of compromise almost irresistibly slip into a vocabulary of “fairness” and “respect” that all but explicitly concedes moral equivalence to opinions fundamentally opposed to what are held to be sacred truths. In a democratic system, it is hard to address pragmatic political necessities without adopting language that goes well beyond the strictly pragmatic. The “respect” inherent in the process of coming to terms with a political rival is almost irresistibly defended, in the relativistic language of equal respect for all opinions (which of course does not follow from respect for persons as such). It is hard to make a democratic bargain on the basis of a rhetoric that says: “You are profoundly and disastrously wrong, but I see for now that your view must to some degree prevail.”  

    Even more concerning is the apparently irresistible temptation to cover political necessity with the Christian language of love: I compromise with you because I have been commanded to love you. Here the bond between the first part of the Great Commandment, to love God absolutely, is at risk of being absorbed by the second part, the love of fellow human beings. The Christian commitment to “peacemaking” comes perilously close to endorsing not only the fundamental dignity of all God’s children, but even the ideological self-understanding of those with whom we find that we must compromise. Christian love thus risks losing its vertical orientation, its moral and religious substance, as it embraces the rhetoric inherent in democratic political compromise. It is one thing to submit obediently to a post-Obergefell political and legal regime; it is another step, a fateful one, to deny that at some fundamental level the new regime is based on a mistaken view of reality, not to say on a lie, and thus can only have disastrous consequences in the long term. If the metaphysical demand for human autonomy that underlies the radical redefinition of marriage is wrong, even evil, then it would be wrong to “respect” it, even when we must accommodate it legally and politically.

    It is precisely the audacity of the secular liberal project, the imprudence of a liberalism that declares its independence from all traditional and religious morality, that is apparently inaudible to Jonathan Rauch and those who celebrate his proposed “Christian”–liberal alliance. The secular prophets of a pure and autonomous liberalism simply assume as true the false liberal proposition that opinions may be regarded as equally worthy of “respect,” and thus as equally subject to negotiation and compromise, regardless of their bearing on the realities of human nature and the human condition. When truth is defined in terms of democratic negotiation, then propositions of the public good that appeal to natural or divine truths not subject to human mastery are disqualified in principle. Democratic process is no longer the negotiation of serious, substantive truth-claims, but itself advanced as a substitute for truth. In Rauch’s view of liberalism, “love” no longer implies concern for the natural happiness or the eternal soul of one’s neighbor, but equal “respect” for all opinions, lifestyles, and identities.

    But again, although some LDS advocates of “Fairness for All” have shown a weakness for rhetoric that tends to slip toward progressive relativism, the substance of LDS teaching is very clearly on the side of permanent moral and anthropological truths, especially where sexuality and procreation are concerned. Rauch and others who hopefully await the LDS church’s renegotiating of the religious understanding of marriage to include a same-sex version will be disappointed. The church’s authoritative (and not at all innovative) 1995 statement on the matter, its Proclamation to the World on the Family, clearly states: “We [the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles] warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.” This bold and clear proclamation, which church leaders have emphatically endorsed throughout the recent period of political pragmatism, is hardly compatible with the rhetoric of “equal respect” for all politically powerful viewpoints. 

    Moral Agency and Sustainable Liberalism

    More characteristic of LDS social teaching addressed to the faithful as religious teaching (as opposed to pragmatic accommodation) is an official General Conference address by Elder D. Todd Christofferson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles on “Sustainable Societies” (2020). The question of sustainability necessarily points beyond the immediate necessities of negotiation and compromise to the deeper problem of the enduring parameters of human nature and thus to the ineluctable preconditions of a healthy society. Christofferson plainly states: “when people turn from a sense of accountability to God and begin to trust instead in the ‘arm of flesh,’ disaster lurks. Trusting in the arm of flesh is to ignore the divine Author of human rights and human dignity and to give highest priority to riches, power, and the praise of the world (while often mocking and persecuting those who follow a different standard).” 

    He continues:

    A society . . . in which individual consent is the only constraint on sexual activity is a society in decay . . . Follow-on consequences that work against sustainability of a healthy society include growing numbers of children raised in poverty and without the positive influence of fathers, sometimes through multiple generations; women bearing alone what should be shared responsibilities; and seriously deficient education as schools, like other institutions, are tasked to compensate for failure in the home.

    These reflections and authoritative teachings are in a register wholly unlike the view of religion at work in Rauch’s search for a religion that might provide a moral backstop for his autonomous liberalism. The point is not so much that Christofferson gives answers to social and political problems that are different from Rauch’s. What we cannot fail to notice is that he asks questions that Rauch (and his temporarily enthralled LDS audience) have altogether forgotten to ask. Beginning from a pseudo-Madisonian perspective of individual rights as the most fundamental concept of political theory, Rauch is not even aware of the problem of sustainability, or, therefore, of the question of the human good or of the common good of the political body. 

    We may choose, or not, like Rauch, to consider all rights as, at bottom, assertions of our autonomous humanity and thus ultimately matters of social and political compromise, but the natural conditions of happiness and sustainability, including the essential role of the natural reproductive family, will not be subject to our negotiation. Rauch would do well to consult, on the question of compromise and its limits, a classic address by Elder Dallin Oaks:

    Our tolerance and respect for others and their beliefs does not cause us to abandon our commitment to the truths we understand and the covenants we have made. . . .  We are cast as combatants in the war between truth and error.  There is no middle ground.  We must stand up for truth, even while we practice tolerance and respect for beliefs and ideas different from our own and for the people who hold them.

    If moral principle is not only an accident of religious belief but grounded in the truth of human nature and the human vocation, it follows that any peace based on Rauch’s violent stretching of the LDS theology of “agency” must be ill-founded and by nature unsustainable. Without undertaking a presentation of this theology, let me conclude with a suggestion of its real value and bearing on our present political circumstances, that is, on the present stage of the crisis of liberalism. If there is a contemporary political lesson to be drawn from the LDS idea of the eternal significance of moral agency, this insight would not at all be aligned with Rauch’s fundamentally secular and ostensibly neutral and pseudo-scientific liberalism.  

    Instead, one might find in a certain “moral agency” the outlines of a view of humanity and eternity that would resonate with a kind of conservative liberalism, a practical yet deeply moral liberalism equipped to avoid the pitfalls of integralism, both left and right. The LDS understanding of moral agency is in the spirit of Tocqueville’s praise of “liberty under God and the laws”; it weaves together eternal law and personal choice in a practically meaningful way that resonates at the deepest, ontological level. The touchstone of this moral agency is neither the supposedly pre-modern attitude of “heteronomy,” nor the chimera of liberal “autonomy,” but the reality of productive, creative action under a personal God and Savior within an orderly and meaningful cosmos.  

    Image by Seadog81 and licensed via Adobe Stock.

  14. Site: Ron Paul Institute for Peace And Prosperity
    5 days 5 hours ago
    Author: Adam Dick

    During the United States presidential election last year, then Libertarian Party Chairman Angela McArdle spoke openly of her desire to use the Libertarian Party to help elect Republican Party presidential nominee Donald Trump. She even arranged for Trump to make a campaign speech at the Libertarian Party’s national convention and released through the party, around a week before election day, a video promoting Trump.

    Via a Thursday post at Twitter, McArdle suggested to fellow Trump campaign supporter Elon Musk, who went on to become a Trump administration official leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), that Musk “should just take over the Libertarian Party.” Doing so is “not hard,” McArdle added. McArdle was replying to a post in which Musk had brought up the possibility of starting a new political party.

    McArdle, who resigned her party chairmanship less than three months after the presidential election, apparently knows a thing or two about taking over the Libertarian Party. But, if Musk wants to take over the party, he may have to act quickly. Last month, Steven Nekhaila, who became chairman of the Libertarian Party after McArdle’s resignation, warned the Libertarian National Committee, which oversees the party, that the party is on the verge of a “full collapse.”

  15. Site: 4Christum
    5 days 6 hours ago

     

    Although he is being convicted by the Argentine courts, Bergoglio never initiated any canonical proceedings against him to remove him from clerical status.

    Homosexual predator Gustavo Zanchetta returns to his victims' diocese to serve a lax house arrest in a Convent.

    Zanchetta, even though he has been convicted by the Argentine justice system, continues to be treated as if he were a retired bishop, just as happened with the homosexual predator McCarrick.

    Zanchetta spent more than a year in Rome due to alleged health problems and only spent four months in prison.


    His protégé in Oran, Luis Antonio Scozzina, authorized the house arrest of the homosexual convicted Zanchetta in a convent.



    Parishioners reject Zanchetta's house arrest in a convent.





    In Prevost's church the gates of Hell prevail, which are heresy and vice.

  16. Site: PaulCraigRoberts.org
    5 days 6 hours ago
    Author: pcr3

    Can Reality Any Longer Be Acknowledged?

    Paul Craig Roberts

    The attack on Russian strategic forces by Ukraine, with or without President Trump’s knowledge and with or without help from Washington and the British, could have been the most dangerous event in East-West relations during my lifetime.  The reason is that recently revised Russian war doctrine states that an attack, even by a non-nuclear country, on the Russian strategic triad requires a strategic response.  Strategic usually means nuclear or at least a disabling response.  

    Putin dodged the responsibility (more later), but no one knew for certain that he would.  In other words, whoever is responsible for the attack on Russia’s strategic bombers subjected Ukraine, Europe, the US to the possibility of nuclear attack, depending on whom the Russians decided was responsible.  This person or persons is a madman, a maniac who must be identified and removed from his position.  Try to imagine how it is possible for, say Zelensky, to launch an attack that could result in nuclear war between the US and Russia.  How can control over whether or not the US faces nuclear war be in the hands of Zelensky?  If Zelensky is responsible, the US and NATO have a massive failure in command and control.  If Trump or someone in the Trump administration gave the green light, they should be removed for committing the most potentially dangerous act during my lifetime.

    The extraordinarily reckless and extremely dangerous attack on Russia’s nuclear triad is being treated by all concerned as a nothing event, a mere terrorist act, not an act of war.  The fact that there is no acknowledgement in Washington, Europe, Moscow, or the media of the seriousness of an attack on Russian strategic forces, and thereby no measures put in place to prevent such dangerous acts, means either full scale, not proxy, war between Russia and the West or Russia’s surrender. Perhaps Putin would like to surrender in order to avoid nuclear war, but he won’t be permitted to surrender.

    Putin took the lead in burying the seriousness of the attack on Russia’s nuclear triad.  By designating the attack a “terrorist act” he evades the responsibility that Russian strategic doctrine imposes on him for a strategic response.  

    Nothing of consequence has happened, says the President of Russia. Amen say Washington and Europe. Therefore, whoever is responsible for the attack knows that the next attack can go further. It too will be unacknowledged as an act of war.

    How many times can Putin pretend that attacks on Russia’s sovereignty, which is what attacks on Russia’s nuclear triad are, are mere terrorist events before he discredits himself with the Russian people?  

    The purpose of the recent revision of Russian strategic doctrine was to discourage or prevent attacks by Western proxies such as Ukraine on Russian strategic forces. It failed because Putin has taught the West not to take him seriously.  He is ever ready to turn the other cheek.  Now Putin has shown that he will not acknowledge attacks on Russian strategic forces as anything other than a terrorist event, not an act of war.  So Putin has negated Russian strategic doctrine.  It means nothing.  Now that the West knows this, Russia can expect escalating provocations.  All of Putin’s good intentions have ended in disaster, and a major war will be the consequence.

    It could be that Russia is doomed.  Decades of successful Western propaganda have turned most of the Russian professional and intellectual class into Atlanticist Integrationists. They think that Russia belongs as part of the West and are willing to make concessions of sovereignty to be part of the West.  Clearly this point of view is strong in the Kremlin and the Russian Foreign Ministry.

    The zionist American neoconservatives are very much aware of this Russian weakness, and they are adept at taking advantage of it. They don’t have to do much, because Putin does their work for them. 

    Putin has declared Ukraine to be conducting terrorism, not war, against Russia.  Putin’s declaration also absolves Washington and Europe for any responsibility.

    Here are English language Russian headlines of Putin’s hiding from reality that apparently he is unable to face up to.  Or perhaps he is not yet ready, being at work constructing a powerful military that US/NATO cannot resist. 

    “‘Illegitimate Kiev regime’ turning into terrorist organization” – Putin

    “The latest terrorist acts carried out by Ukraine in Russia are the outcome of decisions made by the Ukrainian political leadership.”  Putin added that “the decisions to carry out such crimes were, of course, made in Ukraine” by the political leadership in Ukraine. In other words, Washington and Europe have no responsibility for the act of war, which is not an act of war, but merely terrorism.  https://www.rt.com/russia/618651-kiev-regime-rejecting-peace/ 

    In other words, the Kremlin has said that Washington and Europe have nothing to do with the attack on Russia’s strategic triad, and that Ukraine is merely creating terrorist incidents, not making war against Russia. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/01/31/russia-ukraine-rubio-trump/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_opinions 

    I find it hard to believe that Putin is this stupid.  My bet is that he is not yet ready.  He keeps the minor Ukraine conflict going while he builds up to remove NATO from Russian borders.

    Trump can remove the coming conflict by giving Putin the mutual security agreement Russia has been requesting for years.  This would be the costless solution, but Trump is not really in power, and the power and profit of the US military/security complex needs the Russian Enemy.

    So, how will a devastating war be avoided?  Information such as I have just presented is banned by the official narratives.

  17. Site: AsiaNews.it
    5 days 6 hours ago
    Today's news: two weeks after the first failed attempt, Pyongyang has launched its warship. At least five people, including three journalists, have been killed in Israeli raids on an Anglican hospital in Gaza. During the night, Russian drones and missiles rained down on several Ukrainian cities, including Kiev. Xi and Trump spoke on the phone for 90 minutes, with the 'trade war' at the centre of the talks. ...
  18. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 6 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    China Automakers Are Overtaking Japanese Competitors In Thailand

    Japan’s hold on Thailand’s auto market is quickly slipping as Chinese brands make big gains. Japanese automakers’ market share fell to 65% in April—down over 10 points from a year earlier and far below the ~90% they once enjoyed, according to Toyota Motor Thailand data.

    Meanwhile, six Chinese-owned brands doubled their share to a record 24%, led by BYD at 14%, according to Nikkei.

    While Thailand’s auto market grew just 1% year-on-year to 47,193 vehicles—thanks to a boost from the Bangkok International Motor Show—sales are being held back by high household debt and tough auto loan approvals, keeping monthly sales at around 40,000 units. Even pickup truck sales, the “national car,” have slumped 21%.

    Toyota’s April sales fell 8% but it still led with 38% share. Isuzu dropped 18% to 12% share, Honda’s sales plunged 42% to 7% share, and Mitsubishi’s sales fell 21% to 4%.

    Nikkei writes that Chinese automakers saw huge growth: BYD sales jumped 7.3 times, giving it 14% share, passing Isuzu and Honda. MG’s share hit 5% with a 46% sales increase, while Changan hit 3% after a 53% rise.

    Driving China’s surge: BYD’s aggressive discounting at the motor show, plus new plug-in hybrids and EVs. BYD’s sales now outpace Japanese brands in some segments.

    Recall, we wrote last month how China part makers in Thailand had tripled. 

    And we said we couldn't help but notice the timing - with tariffs on goods coming from China through the roof - seems to be...coincidentally beneficial for Chinese corporations.

    In the Eastern Economic Corridor, about two hours from Bangkok, new factories are rapidly rising. Battery maker Sunwoda Electronic is investing over $1 billion to build a lithium-ion battery plant, with mass production set for 2025. Battery cells will be made locally, and a Thai official noted it’s likely to become Southeast Asia’s first plant producing batteries from cells.

    More than 20 Chinese auto brands, including BYD and Great Wall Motor, have entered Thailand.

    BYD’s factory, which began production in July 2024, is becoming the hub of a growing supply chain. Alongside Sunwoda, battery makers CALB, Gotion, and SVOLT have started local production, while CATL is building a joint venture plant with Thailand’s state-owned PTT.

    However it may not all be tariff related. Nikkei writes that Chinese manufacturers began accelerating their investments in Thailand around 2018, amid rising U.S.-China trade tensions.

    As of March, Chinese-invested auto parts companies in Thailand reached 165—over triple the number from the end of 2017. Across Southeast Asia, Chinese companies established more than 7,000 firms by 2023, with direct investment topping a record $25 billion that year.

    This growth is expected to continue. In April, Ningbo Tuopu Group announced plans to invest up to $300 million in a Thai factory, saying the move would help it “win more orders and strengthen support for important foreign customers.”

    Nikkei writes that Japanese automakers, dominant in Thailand since the 1960s, have built a network of about 1,400 local suppliers through joint ventures and vertically integrated operations. In contrast, Chinese carmakers are building independent supply chains, often excluding Japanese-linked suppliers.

    Chinese parts are nearly 30% cheaper than those from Japanese firms, and Chinese companies typically produce core components like batteries in-house or source them from affiliated suppliers. “Thai suppliers will not be able to fully benefit from the Chinese push into the country,” Sompol said.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 18:00
  19. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 6 hours ago
    Author: S.A. McCarthy

    Pressure is growing on federal agencies to regulate the abortion drug mifepristone, following publication of a series of alarming reports. The latest report, published last week by the Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI), analyzed Medicare and Medicaid data and discovered that the vast majority (over 80%) of women who visited an emergency room with complications from the abortion drug had their abortions miscoded as miscarriages.

    The study examined nearly 30,000 emergency room visits and found that between 2016 and 2021, a period of five years, miscodes of emergency room visits following surgical abortions increased in prevalence from a rate of 26.8% to 73.9%, while miscodes of ER visits following mifepristone abortions increased in prevalence from a rate of 45.5% to 83.5%. Additionally, acuity — that is, the measure of the severity and complexity of a patient’s condition — was significantly higher (at a rate of 50%) among miscoded cases than correctly-coded cases.

    “When abortion-related emergencies are disguised as miscarriages, it impairs a doctor’s ability to make informed, evidence-based decisions. That isn’t just a documentation error — it’s a public health crisis,” said Dr. James Studnicki, vice president and director of data analytics at CLI and one of the authors of the study, in a statement obtained by The Washington Stand. He added, “The abortion industry’s push for concealment is unethical and dangerous. Women deserve honest guidance and proper medical care, not advice that jeopardizes their health.”

    Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

    Another of the study’s authors, CLI Vice President and Director of Medical Affairs Dr. Ingrid Skop, told TWS, “As a board-certified OB-GYN practicing in Texas, I’ve seen firsthand the devastating effects abortion drugs have on women, as I have been called to care for them in the ER regularly.” She explained, “This study exposes the abortion industry’s reckless advice for women to hide their abortion drug use from doctors, delaying proper care and risking their health.”

    Skop continued, “Doctors are disadvantaged when they are unaware of a patient’s abortion history. They may need to intervene more quickly to remove retained pregnancy tissue and/or the dead baby to prevent serious infection when abortion drugs fail.” The veteran medical practitioner added, “No other area of medicine tolerates such dangerous misinformation — it’s a direct threat to women’s safety.”

    Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, told TWS, “The miscoding of a mifepristone abortion as a miscarriage can lead to a delay in care for a mom whose life may be in danger as the result of the use of the abortion drug mifepristone.” She clarified, “Miscarriage and abortion are not the same thing — and they do not have the same impact on a woman’s body. Planned Parenthood even records miscarriage and abortion as separate occurrences; but, at the same time, Planned Parenthood advises women it’s ‘up to them’ whether they tell their doctor about their use of mifepristone.”

    Szoch concluded, “Unfortunately, they leave out that a decision not to tell their doctor they took mifepristone might result in severe bodily harm. Mifepristone is an incredibly dangerous drug. It kills unborn children and maims moms physically and emotionally as it does so.”

    Another recent study, this one from the Ethics and Public Policy Center, found that serious complications related to the use of mifepristone are 22 times more common than claimed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), prompting widespread calls for the health agency to reexamine mifepristone and restore stringent regulations surrounding its prescription and use.

    A subsequent CLI report debunked the “baseless claim that ‘abortion drugs are safer than Tylenol’ because it lacks scientific credibility and evidence.” The report found that the claim must be based on “a controlled, scientifically appropriate study comparing abortion drugs to Tylenol,” which does not exist and “would be impossible to do [conduct] because these drugs are used for entirely different purposes.”

    When the FDA first approved mifepristone for use in 2000, three in-person physician visits were required before the drug could be prescribed, the drug could only be prescribed by a physician, it had to be dispensed and consumed in the physician’s office, and a follow-up visit was required, as was reporting of any complications.

    In 2016, then-President Barack Obama eliminated many of those provisions, including the requirement that the abortion drug be prescribed by a physician and consumed in-office, as well as the mandatory follow-up visit and reporting of complications. The Obama FDA also lowered the number of required in-person physician visits prior to prescription from three to only one and increased the “maximum gestational age” for prescribing the drug from seven weeks to 10.

    In 2023, the Biden administration further weakened the remaining safeguards, requiring no in-person physician visits, no physician to prescribe the drug, no dispensing or consuming the drug in-office, no follow-up visit, and no reporting of complications.

    Earlier this week, newly-minted FDA Commissioner Marty Makary pledged to conduct “a review of mifepristone and work … with the professional career scientists at the Agency who review this data.” As TWS documented, his new promise to reassess the abortion drug is a shift from his previous positions on the subject, refusing to commit to reviewing mifepristone.

    LifeNews Note: S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

    The post Abortion Pill Coverup: Injuries to Women are Falsely Classified as Miscarriages appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  20. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 7 hours ago
    Author: Sarah Holliday

    The Trump administration just overturned a highly controversial Biden-era policy, and pro-lifers are cheering it on.

    President Donald Trump’s Tuesday reversal targeted redefinitions of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) that had stirred intense debate over abortion funding and medical ethics.

    Under the Biden administration, EMTALA was reinterpreted in July 2022 to allow taxpayer dollars to fund what were termed “emergency abortions.” This guidance not only permitted federal funding for these procedures but also imposed penalties on health care workers and hospitals that refused to carry them out, even when such actions conflicted with their deeply held moral or religious convictions. The policy effectively compelled medical professionals to act against their conscience, creating a moral and legal dilemma for those who prioritize the protection of unborn life.

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a joint statement following Trump’s executive order, announcing the rescission of the July 2022 CMS guidance titled “Reinforcement of EMTALA Obligations specific to Patients who are Pregnant or are Experiencing Pregnancy Loss.” The agencies emphasized their intent to restore clarity to the application of EMTALA, stating, “CMS will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration’s actions.”

    Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

    (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

    Moving forward, the Trump administration affirmed that EMTALA would continue to be utilized, but in a manner consistent with its original intent — to ensure emergency medical care without mandating procedures that conflict with ethical principles or state laws.

    Trump’s move has received criticism. Critics argue that the reversal undermines access to critical health care services, particularly in the wake of the 2022 Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and returned abortion regulation to the states. Amy Friedrich-Karnik of the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion organization, stated, “EMTALA’s importance has only increased as our nation reckons with the fallout from the Dobbs decision, which has led to a fractured and chaotic abortion access landscape.”

    She claimed that the policy reversal could exacerbate challenges for women seeking emergency care in states with restrictive abortion laws. Similarly, Alexa Kolbi-Molinas of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) condemned the move, as reported by Axios, saying, “[T]he administration sent a clear signal that it is siding with its anti-abortion allies — a move the group said will come at the expense of women’s lives.”

    In contrast, pro-life advocates have hailed the executive order as a restoration of both legal integrity and moral clarity. Kristan Hawkins, the president of Students for Life of America, took to X, posting that the Trump administration’s move “ends years of pro-abortion lawfare against pro-life states and doctors, as well as the lie that pro-life states deny emergency care to pregnant women.”

    “Let’s be clear,” she added, “every pro-life state already protects moms in medical emergencies. This mandate was never about care or saving lives — it was about coercion & pushing abortion into every hospital, by force.”

    The Heritage Foundation’s Roger Severino, a former Trump administration official, also celebrated the move. “Wide majorities of Americans oppose forcing doctors and hospitals to take innocent human life,” he said, “and this change goes back to respecting conscience and the rule of law.” When following its original intent, “EMTALA requires hospitals to treat unborn children and mothers in labor.” But as Severino went on to explain, “shamelessly, abortion radicals inverted this clearly pro-life law to unlawfully mandate abortion nationwide, even though every state already has life of the mother exceptions.”

    “To add insult to injury,” Severino stressed, “the Biden order refused to acknowledge that the law protected mothers, or even women, instead calling them ‘pregnant patients.’ A stain on America’s conscience is now gone, and good riddance.”

    This enthusiasm was echoed by Mary Szoch, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity, who spoke to The Washington Stand about the significance of the policy shift. “Killing an unborn child has never been and never will be health care,” she asserted. Szoch described the executive order as part of a “growing list of common-sense changes” implemented by the Trump administration to protect both unborn children, mothers, and the conscience rights of medical professionals.

    “Thank goodness President Trump was elected,” she concluded. “Now, the government is no longer attempting to force doctors to kill their patients. Praise God!”

    LifeNews Note: Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand, where this originally appeared.

    The post Trump Policy Confirms Abortion is Not Health Care appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  21. Site: Catholic Conclave
    5 days 7 hours ago
     On an ecclesial day charged with symbolism, Pope Leo XIV received Kiko Argüello, founder of the Neo-Catechumenal Way, in a private audience this morning. The event sparked particular interest, not only because of the visitor's profile, but also because of the doctrinal and liturgical implications underlying this encounter.Meeting with Pope LeoMeeting with previous PopeA liturgy outside the Catholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0
  22. Site: Novus Motus Liturgicus
    5 days 7 hours ago
    On May 18, the Fourth Sunday after Easter, His Excellency Ronald Gainer, Bishop Emeritus of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, celebrated a pontifical Mass in the traditional Roman Rite at St. Joseph’s Church in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. The Mass was sponsored by our friends at the Durandus Institute; the program of sacred music included Victoria’s Missa O Quam Gloriosum. Anyone who has ever served this Gregory DiPippohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13295638279418781125noreply@blogger.com0
  23. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 7 hours ago
    Author: Steven Ertelt

    The Trump administration sharply criticized the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) during a recent Executive Board meeting, accusing the agency of complicity in China’s coercive population control policies.

    The critic comes after recently announcing the complete withdrawal of U.S. funding, totaling $335 million, under the Kemp-Kasten Amendment.

    In remarks delivered on June 3 at the UNFPA segment of the 2025 Annual Session of the UNDP/UNOPS/UNFPA Executive Board, Acting U.S. Representative to ECOSOC Jonathan Shrier condemned UNFPA’s long-standing partnership with Chinese government agencies responsible for implementing forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations.

    “Millions of families suffered under China’s abhorrent population control,” Shrier said, highlighting the “barbaric” legacy of these policies and questioning UNFPA’s silence on the ongoing suffering of affected women.

    Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

    (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

    “Where is their justice?” he asked.

    The administration’s decision to defund UNFPA, first reported by LifeNews on May 9, 2025, marks a continuation of President Donald Trump’s pro-life policies from his previous term. In 2017, Trump similarly cut funding to UNFPA, citing its role in supporting China’s population control regime, which has been linked to human rights abuses, including forced abortions and sterilizations.

    The recent move terminates over 40 existing projects, redirecting $335 million in taxpayer funds away from the pro-abortion UN agency.

    Critics of UNFPA, including pro-life advocates, argue that the agency’s collaboration with China’s government undermines its stated mission to promote reproductive health and rights.

    The Trump administration’s stance aligns with the reinstatement and expansion of the Mexico City Policy, renamed the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance Policy, which prohibits U.S. funding to foreign organizations that perform or promote abortions. The policy, initially introduced by President Ronald Reagan, has been a cornerstone of pro-life foreign policy under Republican administrations.

    UNFPA expressed regret over the funding cut, stating on May 8, 2025, that it “notes with deep regret” the U.S. decision to invoke the Kemp-Kasten Amendment. The agency denied claims of supporting coercive practices, asserting that its work promotes voluntary family planning and human rights. “Over the past four years alone, with the U.S. Government’s life-saving investments, we prevented more than 17,000 maternal deaths,” UNFPA said, urging the U.S. to reconsider its position.

    Shrier’s remarks also called on the UNFPA Executive Board to scrutinize the agency’s financial ties to China, questioning why UNFPA continues to subsidize technical assistance for a country with the world’s second-largest economy.

    “UNFPA should not be complicit in China’s population control,” he said, reinforcing the administration’s commitment to prioritizing human rights in U.S. foreign aid.

    The post Trump Admin Slams UNFPA for Supporting Population Control in China appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  24. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 8 hours ago
    Author: Laura Echevarria

    The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) praised the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner, Dr. Marty Makary, for his planned review of the abortion pill mifepristone.

    National Right to Life today released a letter the organization sent to FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary on May 29, 2025, asking for a review of the abortion drug in light of new studies showing its frequent association with serious, often life-threatening adverse events.

    “The FDA owes it to the American people—especially to women—to reconsider the standards under which this drug was approved and is currently being distributed,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “Women deserve the truth about the risks associated with abortion pills.”

    Tobias continued, “At the very least, the agency should reinstate pre-2016 safety protocols, including in-person physician oversight, an earlier gestational cutoff, and full adverse event reporting.”

    Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

    (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

    NRLC’s letter calls for a full review of the FDA’s approval and deregulation of mifepristone and an immediate halt to online and pharmacy distribution of the drug, pending a complete reevaluation of its safety profile. This followed a new study by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) revealing serious safety concerns at nearly 22 times the rate reported by the abortion industry’s sponsored studies.

    “This is a matter of public health and ethical responsibility,” said Tobias.

    In the letter, National Right to Life highlighted the EPPC study’s findings, which analyzed medical records from more than 865,000 abortion pill users and revealed alarming rates of complications—far higher than those reflected in earlier studies used to justify FDA approval and deregulation of the drug.

    National Right to Life also pointed to similar findings from large-scale studies in Finland and Canada, which reported significantly higher adverse event rates than those cited by the FDA or in studies sponsored by the abortion industry.

    The letter details critical safety issues that have arisen in recent use of mifepristone, including:

    • Use of the drug beyond the FDA’s approved gestational age, as advertised by prominent providers;
    • High rates of emergency room visits by women experiencing significant pain, uncontrolled bleeding, or other serious complications;
    • Improper prescription of the drug to women with undiagnosed ectopic pregnancies, which can lead to life-threatening outcomes;
    • Concerns over the safety and quality of abortion pills shipped by mail without inspection or temperature control;
    • The way abortion pill advocates have minimized the seriousness of complications such as failed abortions, hemorrhages, and even uterine perforations as “minor” to claim high safety rates.

    “The EPPC study paints a stark contrast to the small, idealized clinical trials put forward by the abortion industry,” added Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon, NRLC Director of Education and Research. “This research of EPPC and these other large, neutral foreign studies reflect real-world conditions and demonstrate that many women suffer serious medical complications as mifepristone is currently prescribed and used.”

    Read the full letter here.

    The post With Abortion Pill Injuring Tens of Thousands of Women, FDA is Right to Review appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  25. Site: Catholic Conclave
    5 days 8 hours ago
    Katharina Jost Graf: "Equality is under attack – women's networks are increasingly needed again"Parish chaplain Katharina Jost Graf recently became co-president of the Swiss Women's Federation, together with Pia Viel. She wouldn't have wanted to become president, even though she advocates for equality. "Even we theologians are not entirely immune to clericalism," she says.You were previously viceCatholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0
  26. Site: PeakProsperity
    5 days 8 hours ago
    Author: Chris Martenson
    The China trade wars are anything but over, US consumers are leveraged up, tapped out and rolling over, And Trump is fretting over the huge impact that loss of China's imports represents.
  27. Site: The Orthosphere
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: Richard Cocks

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oADHdNwrpc


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRsHuvqBJAc

    The following is a rough transcript of a video by Academic Agent (AKA, Neema Parvini) with a few minor editorial additions and editing for clarity.

    Recently, James Lindsay made a video on elite theory. As the author of the bestselling book The Populist Illusion, which is a primer on elite theory, and since I am a modern purveyor of elite theory, when somebody critiques it like James Lindsay, I take that seriously.

    Lindsay’s 20-minute video on the topic was, unfortunately, quite disappointing. It was obvious to me that Lindsay had not engaged with any of the material. He had not read The Populist Delusion.  It was obvious to me that he had not really read Mosca or Pareto or Robert Michels. This is understandable in the case of Pareto. The Mind and Society is a big thick book. It is quite complicated. However, The Ruling Class by Mosca is not particularly long. And neither is Political Parties by Michels. The Populist Delusion is an even shorter book, so it is not really that difficult, I think, to get some of the core propositions of elite theory correct.

    One of the things that you are meant to do as an intellectual is to show your interlocutors some intellectual charity. Ideally, what you should be able to do is to summarize their positions as strongly if not stronger than they are able to do and unfortunately Lindsay just did not do that. He did not give an accurate summary of what elite theory is, so in this video I’m going to give a couple of quick pointers as to what elite theory is, and what it isn’t, and why Lindsay’s entire video fell flat as a result of getting these things wrong.

    The first thing to mention is that elite theory simply says that the disorganized mass is always ruled over by an organized minority. It says that in politics the organized minority tends to win over the disorganized mass.

    The organized minority is called the ruling class; the rulers, and the disorganized majority is the ruled.

    In his video, James Lindsay did not really come up with this formulation. He said something like “In every society, elites rule.” And then he said that that is a tautology; that it is true by definition. Or, it is just saying in every society there is an elite class.

    At some level, that is right, but elite theory makes a much stronger claim. It says that regardless of what you call the system; whether you call it monarchy, or whether you call it a communist state, whether you call it social democratic or liberal democratic, a merchant republic, whatever you want to call your system of government, an aristocracy, feudalism, you name it, they all basically have the same structure and the same principles apply to power no matter what you call the system; namely that the organized minority rule over the disorganized mass.

    The truth of this is hard to dispute and most people when confronted with it will concur. To get anywhere in this world you need to get together with some friends and plan and work together, in order to bring about some outcome. The problem is that the people who are in power right now, have an absolute advantage over everybody else who is trying to organize. They have a knowledge advantage. They have a communications advantage. They have technical expertise and skills managerialism that coalesce to make their rule quite difficult to overcome.

    Overthrowing a government is something that only a handful of people have managed in history and the set of conditions that keep the ruling class in place and make them extremely difficult to dislodge is known as “the iron law of oligarchy,” and that is what Michel’s Political Parties is about. So, what James Lindsay did in his video is that he said, well there is a difference between elite theory as a descriptive set of tools and a prescriptive elite theory.

    First of all, none of the elite theorists have any prescriptions. Elite theory is a value-free. It pretends to be a scientific way of trying to approach power and politics. Elite theory resembles economics. Economics is what they call a wertfrei science. It is value free. It does not try to smuggle in any other value. It just describes what is and elite theory is the same. Pareto, who was one of the elite theorists, was of course more famous as an economist, so it is using some of those tools that you would use in economics and applying a similar framework to politics and power.  If you want a political science, that is what it was trying to do. That is what all of them said that they were doing, in the tradition of somebody like Nicolo Machiavelli who was also trying to give an ABCs of power; a set of laws of power that are true pretty much regardless of who is in the system. It is not really concerned with this system or that system; democracy or monarchy or whatever, it is concerned with the actual mechanics of power, regardless of what you call it.  

    Now one of the things that Lindsay did is he said, well the thing is that the descriptive part is fine but the danger comes when it becomes proscriptive; when people take elite theory and they say this the way things ought to be. He says it goes over the is/ought gap that David Hume talked about. This is an issue because, as far as I know, none of the elite theorists did that. That is not the point of their work. In my book the Populist Delusion which is a work of elite theory, I also do not advocate for any particular system of government.

    James Lindsay went on to make a more moral, normative argument where he says that the problem occurs once you start saying that rule by an organized minority is the way things should be. Lindsay takes Curtis Yarvin’s advocation of monarchy as though that were an example of prescriptive elite theory, with monarchy being a particularly clear example of elite rule. However, when Curtis Yarvin advocates for monarchy, that is monarchism, not elite theory. That is, he is just making pro-monarchy arguments. That has nothing to do with elite theory. That is just him favoring that system over the other available systems. Elite theory does not do that. If anything, the elite theorists, to the extent that they advocate for anything at all, talk about an aristocracy of the talents. In other words, a meritocracy; a system which allows the most talented people into the ruling class. They argue that that system would be superior to systems that artificially lock out people of talent from the ruling class. And in fact, if you read Mosca, he says that if you look at the old Chinese system, they had a way of accepting talented people into the ruling class, even though there was an emperor. Elite theorists also argue that it is a weakness in hereditary systems that they do not do this. In a hereditary system, you can have an idiot king and things like that, and this is a problem.

    So to the extent that elite theorists advocate for anything, they just say that if you look historically, these systems tend to have a problem of having a too restricted ruling class. So, the ruling class needs to be adaptive enough to absorb talent from the pool of the ruled.

    [The Ottoman Empire, which ruled Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Kosovo, and Macedonia from 1459 until the early 19th century would take promising young Christian men from all conquered regions back to Constantinople to serve in the administration or the Ottoman military. This practice was called the Devshirme. It involved forced conversion to Islam.

    Daniel, from Daniel and the Lion’s Den fame, was a talented Jew recruited by the Achaemenid Persian regime under King Darius. Jealousy about this foreigner and non-coreligionist being given an important role in the administration was the reason King Darius was tricked into having to put Daniel in the lion’s den overnight. When Daniel survived this ordeal by divine intervention, Darius then took his revenge on those who had wanted to get rid of Daniel by throwing them and their families to the lions who immediately ate them.]

    Lindsay, having falsely attributed a prescriptive element to elite theory, then goes on to claim that those who talk about elite theory are really trying to promote themselves as the new elite:

    that the whole purpose of elite theory is to say that we need to be the new elite. That is just not the case at all. Elite theory is a descriptive, quasi-scientific empirical method of looking at the mechanics of power; the logic of power, and then using that as a way of looking at politics and power today. Elite theory can also be used to look at politics and power historically as well, and it does provide all sorts of illuminating insights, but it is a descriptive and analytical tool. It is not prescriptive or proscriptive (what should be done and what should not be done).

    Machiavelli’s number one maxim was, “I write as things are, not as they ought to be.” Then we get to the crux of where Lindsay’s video falls flat for me which was when he was talking about America and the American Constitution and the founding fathers and saying, “Well elite theory is anti-American.” To talk about elite theory; that the organized minority rule over the disorganized mass, goes against the ideology of the American experiment as he calls it. Now this gets to the crux of the matter, because if you understand elite theory properly they are making a much stronger claim. They say essentially that democracy is impossible. Those who claim to rule in the name of the people are lying. This a delusion. That is the populist delusion. The idea that the people are actually ruling rather than the ruling class is a lie, and what Mosca, Pareto and Michels do in their books is they show you all of the ways in which the iron law of oligarchy tends to prevail. They show you the ways in which dissident energies are contained by the system. They show you the ways in which capital P power generally is able to outmaneuver the rival castles as I call them, as do the later works, like James Burnham’s Managerial Revolution and Machiavelli’s The Prince and Bertrand de Jouvenel is another person I talk about. Burnham and Jouvenel are not typically thought of as the classical elite theorists, but they built on those ideas later on. There is Sam Francis as well. What they are showing is that any system that claims that it is ruling in the name of the people tends to be lying about that fact.

    At the start of The Populist Delusion, I cite a statistic from a Chicago quantitative study across 1779 different laws passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate, which showed zero correlation whatsoever with the wishes of the people. Voters seldom, if ever, get truly what they voted for. What Mosca says is that it is not really accurate to say that the people voted a certain person into power. It is more accurate to say that that person has themselves put into power by their friends and when it comes to big mass democracies, power is concentrated in the media, in newspapers, in the people who are able to fund campaigns, in moneymen, in lobby groups and so on.

    So, when people talk about the ruling class in America, we need to look at things like banking groups. Lindsay refers to the Clintons and the Bushes, and people like Klaus Schwab and Davos. But, there is a whole cluster of people constituting a ruling class. There are these individuals in Davos, but there are those also in investment banks and elsewhere; the funders of the Democratic party and the Republican party. They are not “the people.” They are the organized minority. They are the ruling class, and they are the ones who have a habit of getting their own way; groups like the defense contractors and the military-industrial complex. The American people did not want any of these things and yet they got them.

    A lot of the things that have happened in American history were not voted for. They were either passed by judicial activism by various different judges, or Supreme Court rulings, or Congress passing these massive pork stuffed bills; a lot of other things, like Woke. All of these things come from organized minorities. It is not always the same organized minority. There can be different ones at different times and places who are getting their way over the disorganized mass. So, what the elite theorists are saying is that the fundamental dream of the American Constitution is just a line. Saying “the will of the people” is no different from a medieval king saying, “I rule in the name of divine right.” It is just what Mosca calls a political formula. “BS BS BS therefore I rule.” This is fundamentally what all those lines are and what democracy is. Democracy is particularly good at hiding this fact. It is particularly good at allowing enough quote unquote “normal” people into the ruling class to renew the ruling class and to give a semblance of upwards mobility.

    You could say this is an advantage of democracy. Another advantage of democracy is the fact that so many people believe that when they cast a vote there is a genuine link between that vote and an actual outcome. But, we have seen so many times politicians just openly lie in this country [the UK]. The people voted for Boris Johnson. They voted to take back control of the borders with Brexit. However, Boris Johnson promptly flooded the country with more immigrants than in the entire history of England from 1066 to now. Boris Johnson let in more than six million people in five years, or something ridiculous. [The UK has 68 million people]. Nobody voted for that and yet this is what the ruling class did.

    So, Lindsay’s point misses the mark because he has not grasped what elite theory is saying. Elite theory is not saying it is bad to have the desire of the interests of the ruled registered by the ruling class. It is not saying that the dream of democracy is bad per se. Just that it is impossible, due to the mechanics of power, for true mass rule to prevail. Even if people rise up as an inchoate mob, sooner or later a leader must emerge for any progress to be made. Consider the analogy of an army: a rabble of a thousand people against one hundred well-trained men led by a captain. Who wins? The hundred trained men win ten times out of ten. Elite theorists argue that, with the best will in the world, power always consolidates around an organized minority. Robert Michels, who was part of the German Social Democrats—a democratic party opposed to World War I—witnessed this firsthand. As soon as his party gained power, they betrayed their base and supported the war, demonstrating the “iron law of oligarchy” once again.

    James Lindsay gave a superficial summary of elite theory and ended with a warning: anyone discussing elite theory should be treated with caution. In his video, he spent most of his time talking about Marxism, Lenin, and Vanguardism. While Marxists recognized the need for an organized minority to rule over the disorganized mass, it is inaccurate to equate Marxist vanguardism with elite theory. In fact, Marxists explicitly rejected elite theory for several reasons.

    First, classic Marxism is centered on class struggle, identifying the capitalists as the ruling class because they own the means of production. Marxists critiqued elite theory for being too universal; elite theorists sought a single theory for all systems, while Marxists offered a specific critique of capitalism and the capitalist class. They argued that elite theorists failed to focus on ownership of the means of production, which is central to Marxism. Elite theorists, on the other hand, argued that all systems gravitate towards rule by an organized minority, regardless of ownership.

    James Burnham’s “Managerial Revolution” introduced the idea that power could be severed from ownership. In modern capitalism, asset managers or the expert class like BlackRock control vast resources without owning them. Larry Fink does not personally own BlackRock’s trillions in assets; he manages them. The same elite theory principles apply: passive shareholders are ruled by the organized minority of asset managers. Decisions about those assets—such as funding ESG initiatives and the Woke agenda—are made on behalf of shareholders, just as politicians make decisions on behalf of voters. Thus, democracy in practice functions like any other system: a top-down triangle with elites at the top.

    Previously, tycoons like Henry Ford or J.P. Morgan held concentrated power as sole owners. Now, when companies go public and many people own shares, power shifts to the managers—the CEO and the managerial class. This is applied elite theory, updated for the twentieth century. James Lindsay overlooks this crucial point.

    The second Marxist objection to elite theory is that it draws attention to the power of Marxists themselves when they are in charge. Marxists claim that capitalist rule is bad, but their own rule is good. Elite theory, however, highlights that Marxist regimes are also governed by an organized minority. Communist states often styled themselves as “people’s republics” or “democracies,” claiming to rule in the name of the people. In reality, decisions were made by a small group, just as in any other system. Elite theorists argue that this is not unique to the USSR; it is equally true of liberal democracies like the USA, Britain, or France. They are as totalitarian, top-down, and undemocratic as the USSR. James Lindsay might not be happy with this claim, given his support for liberal democracy, but he knows that much of what we have witnessed concerning wokery and global governance is against the quote unquote “will” of the people from his own work. So, I do not know why he would be against the idea.

    Despite ideals set by the US Constitution, it is difficult to argue that the American experiment delivered true democracy for the people, given how often unpopular decisions are made by organized minorities. We have seen this in our own lifetimes. So many things that were retconned after the fact and things that were unpopular at the time, were brought about by an organized minority. Things that were later written up as if they have the support of everybody. (I believe AA has in mind things like school busing and the forced desegregation of schools).

    The third Marxist critique, articulated by Antonio Gramsci in his “Prison Notebooks,” is that elite theory does not sufficiently account for ideology. Gramsci and later theorists like Paul Gottfried, Sam Francis, Louis Althusser, and Noam Chomsky explored how consent is manufactured in mass democracies through media manipulation and propaganda. (See Edward Bernay’s book “Propaganda.”) While Mosca, Pareto, and Michels mentioned newspapers, they wrote before the rise of mass media, television, and radio. Updating elite theory for the twentieth century requires considering the role of ideology and consent manufacturing.

    In summary, it is inaccurate to claim that Marxists accepted elite theory. They explicitly rejected it for the reasons outlined above and never recognized Mosca, Pareto, or Michels as their own. After World War II, the liberal establishment also sought to reject elite theory in the name of liberal democracy, though many critiques failed to address its core arguments. Interestingly, some elements of the “deep state,” such as the Rand Corporation, Hoover Institute, and neoconservatives, adopted aspects of elite theory, as well as Carl Schmidt, as did some leftists at various times. So, it is not as though there was a blanket rejection of elite theory after World War II. People were writing on elite theory in the ‘50s, ‘60s, ‘70s, ‘80s, and even into the ‘90s and basically accepting its basic tenants. This is because elite theory is almost impossible to deny; its principles are as fundamental as the law of supply and demand in economics. The theory is morally neutral and descriptive, not prescriptive. Most elite theorists have not advocated for specific systems based on elite theory. James Lindsay conflates different ideas, such as Curtis Yarvin’s pro-monarchy arguments, which are not rooted in classic elite theory. And neither is Hans-Hermann Hoppe – the German-American economist associated with the Austrian school of economics, anarcho-capitalism, right-wing libertarianism and opposition to democracy.

    When people discuss elite theory, they are not necessarily advocating for themselves to become the new elite. While some, like Vivek Ramaswamy, have claimed to represent a new elite, following James Burnham’s concept of new elites being cycled in, almost nobody has come to power as a self-identified elite theorist. Tony Blair is one example of a member of the elite who understood elite theory. Possibly Mussolini did. He read the elite theorists. But, this is somewhat incidental because whether they knew elite theory or did not know elite theory, they are still going to be engaging in those ABCs of power. Understanding elite theory is not required to participate in power dynamics, just as one does not need to understand economics to buy a sandwich. Elite theorists simply describe the mechanics of power, which often go unrecognized by those involved.

    The concept of the organized minority is not controversial; it is simply how politics works. Mancur Olson, an excellent American economist and political scientist, wrote “The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups,” (1965) detailing how organized minorities can prevail in democracies because they are focused on a single issue, while the masses are dispersed and less organized. Throughout history, single-issue groups have often succeeded because the general public is too fragmented to oppose them effectively. This explains why organized minorities tend to get their way in democracies.

    In this country, you could say there is currently a Pakistani organized minority who have managed to get their way on all sorts of issues because they are focused on that one thing and everybody else has got hundred different things that they care about. And none of them are organized enough to do anything about it. Another example would be Nigel Farage who really cared about leaving the EU and actually managed to get his way in the long run. And he did it by being part of an organized minority who cared about that one thing. The public is seldom, if ever, all united on one thing, so that is why the organized minority tends to get its own way, especially in a democracy.

    For more on this topic, the author recommends his book, “The Populist Delusion.”

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    From another video, Parvini states that Socrates represents the end of the Athenian hegemony. Asking questions that challenge the most fundamental Athenian beliefs; demanding justifications for basic ideas, spells the end of the regime. Homer marks the beginning and Socrates and Plato represent what Vico calls the Barbarism of Reflection.

    Religion starts out as tribal. For instance, Jews, and no one else, are the Chosen People and God has a special interest in them alone. Barbarian tribes have “asabiya” – a strong group identity and self-belief – a fanaticism and a local religion. The Muslims defeated the Byzantine empire and the Persians through frightening conviction. They were violent and determined. But, once the barbarians have won, if they are too successful, they now have an empire to run. They need an administration. Lions who rule by force and fear are supplanted by foxes who use cunning. Since the empire covers multiple cultures and religions, a new universalist religion arises with a moralizing god who is watching you at all times. Universal religion does not generate the conquering culture. The conquering culture gives rise to the universalist religion. All civilizations become a victim of their successes. They become soft and used to luxury. They become liberal and humanitarian. Towards the end, you get the reign of quantity in the shape of egalitarianism, democracy (maybe), and utilitarianism. Each stage of the cycle generates its own types of people. If you are born in the Winter of civilization, then you cannot have the characteristics of the Spring. Nobody goes from playing their Xbox to becoming Genghis Khan.

    Conservatives always lose because either an empire is expanding, or it and its associated civilization is in the process of collapse. The existence of “conservatives” at all, indicate that the end is nigh. Genghis Khan’s barbarians have no intellectuals and they have no conservatives. Neither do they have liberals. Conservatism arises in response to liberalism and liberalism is the inevitable product of soft living, money and luxury. We can be sentimental and soft-hearted. Women and children are especially protected, but we also lose our taste for violence.

    Conservatives want to preserve the universalist religion and think this will save us, but they are mistaken. The universalist religion is not what got the civilization started in the first place. It was a necessary feature of a certain stage of civilization and it marks the beginning of the end. The civilization has become so large and complex that it needs fox-like bureaucrats running the show. At a certain point, intellectuals start questioning everything and we slide into decadence with the best people lacking all conviction. We lose our self-belief. Women stop having children as a result of their “emancipation” and access to jobs and education and in an acceleration of decline, softness, femininity, looking out for the lost lamb supplants manly virtues of strength, courage, and ambition.

  28. Site: Henrymakow.com
    5 days 9 hours ago
    tweet-sean.jpeg
    Please send links and comments to hmakow@gmail.com



    Mark Carney is the ultimate Insider. His family is part of the Illuminati establishment.

    Yes, Mark's brother Sean Carney works for King Charles as the Chief Operating Officer at Kensington Palace, managing the household of Prince William, the heir to the British throne.-



    While Mark Carney builds his statesmanlike stature in Canada, his brother Sean manages the household of the heir to the British throne. 

    Sean Carney's role places him at the heart of the British royal household, managing day-to-day affairs and supporting the royal family's engagements. His position underscores the Carney family's presence in both Canadian political leadership and British royal administration.

    Additionally, the Carney family includes another brother, Brian Carney, who resides in Northern Ireland.
    --



    Carney belongs to the Predator Class


    https://traiforos.substack.com/p/mark-carney-is-a-crisis-actor

    Of course, Mark Carney's whole career is based on the utter fallacy of de-carbonization, environmental social governance and "sustainability". Instead, the world has spent trillions of taxpayer dollars "sustaining" the wallets of think tanks and institutions of which Mark (of the beast) Carney is or was heavily involved with:

    1. Bilderberg Group - steering committee member

    2. Chatham House - President

    3. Brookfield Asset management - head of ESG policies

    4. United Nations - Special Envoy for climate action

    5. Goldman Sachs - former employee

    6. World Economic Forum - senior member

    7. Bank of International Settlements

    8. Council for Inclusive Capitalism with the Vatican

    9. Bank of Canada and Bank of England

    This leopard won't change his spots. He is a crown plant intent on enriching the stakeholders to whom he is a lapdog of. His new Chief of Staff is Marc-Andre Blanchard - Executive Vice President of CDPQ Global and Global Head of Sustainability. CDPQ is a major investor in the Catalytic Transition Fund of Brookfield Asset Management, establishing significant support for the climate transition strategy and promoting sustainable investment. There is NO short or long-term plan for oil and gas exploration and mineral mining in Canada for these climate zealots."



    Sheldon Whitehouse: Tariffs on Canada Are Just a Tax Scam


    In a fiery Senate speech in April,  Dem Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse dismantles President Trump's so-called "national emergency" with Canada used to justify 25% tariffs on Canadian imports. His message? The tariffs are a backdoor tax on American families and a gift-wrapped loophole for billionaires and big corporations.
    He says only 2% of fentanyl enters from Canada. He calls out the economic damage to Rhode Island, and expose how this entire policy funnels pain upward so the wealthiest can keep dodging taxes.


    -
    hannah-rothschild-2601.jpeg
    A Rothschild Confirms the Masonic Jewish (Satanic) Conspiracy is Real

     It appears the Illuminati "leaders" are now engaging the public directly through social media apps with their openly satanic propaganda.  This Rothschild seems to know precisely what they want to do to the whole world.  They seem proud and not ashamed at all about their "satanic organization".  



    " Hello, greetings. I'm Hannah Marry de Rothschild from England, I belong to the Illuminati Rothschild family, I enjoyed meeting new people, being a manager, economist and  global banker and also a humanitarian leader. My purpose is to serve Humanity and promote the prosperity of Humanity. you have been invited to become part of the ILLUMINATI secret fraternity if you're interested in joining the ILLUMINATI.

    The Illuminati it's a secret satanic organization  it is interpreted as the  New World Order (NWO) hypothesizes a secretly emerging totalitarian world government.

    The reverse side of the Great Seal of the United States (1776).  The Latin phrase "novus ordo seclorum", appearing on the reverse side of the Great Seal since 1782 and on the back of the U.S.  one-dollar bill since 1935, translates to "New Order of the Ages" and alludes to the beginning of an era where the United States of America is an independent nation-state.

    The common theme about a New World Order is that a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian one-world government--which will replace sovereign nation-states and an all-encompassing propaganda whose ideology hails the establishment of the New World Order and betterment of humanity as the culmination of history's progress.  Many influential historical and contemporary figures have therefore been alleged to be part of a cabal that operates through many front organizations to orchestrate significant political and financial events, ranging from causing systemic crises to pushing through controversial policies, at both national and international levels, as steps in an ongoing plot to achieve world domination.

    Hail The Light "
    --


    h fatigued.png
    Carnage has proposed a $10K limit in amount of cash an individual can hold!


    Canada faces CATASTROPHE as Mark Carney pushes MASSIVE military plan and EU defence plan 

    -
    Rand Paul- Our Food is Being Poisoned with mRNA Technology

    Is this Bill Gates and George Soros' Doing?

    Many folks are familiar with mRNA COVID vaccines and the harm they caused to people's hearts and internal organs. However, what's much less known is the extent to which mRNA technology is being used to contaminate the food we eat.






    GROK- "Regulatory bodies like the FDA and USDA tightly control vaccine use in animals, and no approved mRNA vaccines are currently used in U.S. livestock for human consumption. Any suggestion of "transgenic edible vaccines" or mRNA in food lacks peer-reviewed studies or official confirmation. Always cross-check such claims with primary sources like the USDA or FDA."

    -
    The Great Poisoning Explained by Catherine Austin Fitts

    Catherine Austin Fitts says the vaccine was intended to decrease population because pensions are insufficient to cover the liability

    --

    -
    1000040418 (1).jpg
    Hamdy Mig--"Every morning I leave my tent, carrying my small container, and start wandering the streets and camps, covering great distances, in search of a living. One day I find food, and the next I don't. And if I find food, there are hundreds of hungry people in front of me, racing to take what will satisfy their hunger. Unfortunately, it is food cooked from tree leaves, herbs, and poor-quality legumes. This is what is available to us and what we can eat in light of the deadly famine."

    A Way to Help Gaza



    -
    Zionist Motto- What's Yours is Really Mine - Applies to Organized Jewry in General

    DC Dave Martin--"You either want to burn children alive, or you don't. You either want to deliberately starve civilians, or you don't. You either want to bomb hospitals, or you don't. You either want to deliberately assassinate Palestinian journalists while forbidding foreign journalists entry into Gaza, or you don't. You either want to deliberately massacre civilians and systematically destroy civilian infrastructure in order to force the removal of Palestinians from a Palestinian territory, or you don't. And if you don't, you must oppose the state of Israel.

    There is one big reason why Israel can get by with its lawlessness, and it goes back to the very founding of the country.  It holds the levers of power in the United States, controlling its politicians and the national opinion-molding apparatus (NOMA), primarily its press.  The situation has been brought into vivid relief in recent weeks with the United States, virtually alone, continuing to enable the ongoing slaughter in Gaza."



    -
    DC MARTIN- DON'T POKE THE BEAR!


    -

    FED-NEWMAN.png
    Alex Newman-Federal Reserve: The Ultimate Deep State Tool of Control & Destruction

    This privately owned cartel creates currency out of thin air and then lends it to us at interest, stealing the hard-earned wealth of Americans. But restoring honest money is possible, says top expert


    RFK Jr 70% of pharmaceuticals are sold to Americans who represent only 4,5 % of the world population
     
     
     Pharma ads should be banned.

    -
    Surprised Baldwin doesn't mention that Queen Esther was responsible for the genocide of "antisemites" in Persia

    Pastor Chuck Baldwin--Donald Trump Following Project Esther Playbook


    Support for Israel among the vast majority of evangelical churches borders on fanaticism. People write to me every week telling me of their experiences within these Zionist "churches." The word fanaticism is not hyperbolic. Christian Zionism has become a religious cult.

    These very powerful and influential institutions are uber supportive of Trump's anti-free speech tyranny. What has started on university campuses will spill over into the commercial and religious worlds in earnest during the rest of Trump's administration. 

    The so-called modern civilized world is showing itself to be as uncivilized as any corrupt, authoritarian society in world history. And the United States of America and Israel are leading the pack. There are no nations on the planet today that are showing themselves more bloodthirsty, more calloused to the mass murder of innocents and more guilty of international war crimes, genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity than these two countries.

    I think it is more than coincidental that over 80% of Israelis support Benjamin Netanyahu's genocidal mass murder and ethnic cleansing of the people of Gaza and over 80% of evangelicals in America do the same. 

    Both Judaic Zionism and Christian Zionism are eaten up with the spirit of religious bigotry, racial supremacy, hatred, war and death.
    --

    Anna Faris tells Chris Pratt "I want you to poop on me." --  Civility is disappearing as people revert to their disgusting animal nature

    This is disgusting and inappropriate but YouTube doesn't have a category when you report that, just DEI BS




  29. Site: Catholic Conclave
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Former Bishop Zanchetta, convicted of abuse, remains out of prisonThe Network of Survivors of Ecclesiastical Abuse denounced cover-ups and privileges for the former Bishop convicted of sexual abuse. Despite the final sentence, he remains out of the prison system.Gustavo Zanchetta, the former bishop of Orán convicted of aggravated sexual abuse, recently returned to Argentina after spending more Catholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0
  30. Site: Fr. Z's Blog
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: frz@wdtprs.com (Fr. John Zuhlsdorf)
    Let’s continue with a few more pics from the digs of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta on the Aventine Hill. I received this from a reader who also requested a Mass intention for the same.  This seems a worthy … Read More →
  31. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Risk of Escalation With Russia 'Going Way Up' Due To Ukrainian Attacks: Kellogg

    Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

    President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Ukraine conflict said that recent Ukrainian attacks on Russian air bases have created a significant risk of escalation in the war.

    "I’m telling you, the risk levels are going way up – I mean, what happened this weekend," Trump’s envoy, Keith Kellogg, told Fox News.

    "People have to understand in the national security space: when you attack an opponent’s part of their national survival system, which is their triad, the nuclear triad, that means your risk level goes up because you don’t know what the other side is going to do. You’re not sure," Kellog explained.

    On Sunday, the Ukrainian intelligence service, the SBU, launched a major attack on Russian airbases thousands of miles from the front lines. Kiev claims to have disabled one third of Moscow’s fleet of strategic bombers.

    Washington and Moscow each possess the ability to conduct nuclear attacks via bombers, submarines, and land-based ballistic missiles, known as the nuclear triad.

    The White House claims that it was not informed of the attack by Kiev. However, the CIA is deeply tied to the SBU.

    The SBU has conducted other provocative attacks in recent days, hitting Russian railways and bridges and reportedly killing seven civilians.

    Trump said he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin about the attacks on Wednesday.

    "I just finished speaking, by telephone, with President Vladimir Putin, of Russia. The call lasted approximately one hour and 15 minutes," Trump wrote on Truth Social.

    The below is a reaction from independent journalist and geopolitical commentator Michael Tracey:

    - If no one in the US military/intel apparatus knew about the sweeping Ukrainian drone attack on Russia's nuclear triad that was supposedly being planned for 1.5 years, they're catastrophically incompetent

    - If elements of that apparatus did know and purposely kept it from Trump, then Trump is suffering from the same problems we were told dogged him in the first term, and were going to be solved in the second term

    - That is, Trump is being subtly subverted by underlings with conflicting agendas

    - As a compounding factor, it could be the case that Trump still lacks the attention, interest, and/or organizational capacity to ensure his chain-of-command funnels such information to the top

    - It could alternatively be the case that high-level administration officials, up to and including Trump, did in fact know about the attack in advance. After all, it was only last week that Trump warned on Truth Social that "really bad things" may be in store for Russia...

    - In that scenario, Trump and administration officials simply wish to retain plausible deniability for political/diplomatic reasons

    - Without dispositive evidence for any of the possible scenarios, the scenario one thinks to be the most likely will inevitably align with their preconceived notions about Trump, Ukraine, and Russia

    While waiting for confirmed details of drone strikes on Russia's strategic bomber fleet and terrorist attacks on civilian passenger trains, remember...

    ... US media (NYT) already admitted the US runs Ukrainian intel, with US CIA bases established all across Ukraine training… pic.twitter.com/7YgFe1qfMR

    — Brian Berletic (@BrianJBerletic) June 1, 2025

    "We discussed the attack on Russia’s docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides," Trump stated. "It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace. President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields."

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 15:00
  32. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: Alex Schadenberg

    The Massachusetts Public Health Committee is delaying their consideration of the state assisted suicide bill by 30 days. Chris Lisinski reported for Yahoo News on June 3, 2025 that:

    Legislators last week asked for a 30-day extension on a bill that would authorize physician-assisted suicide (H 2505), according to the House clerk’s office, keeping it idling in the Public Health Committee through a Tuesday event that drew both supporters and opponents of the long-debated policy.

    Backers of the proposal, which has stalled out without a House or Senate vote for multiple terms in a row, argued they made “historic progress” last session by winning support from both the Public Health Committee and Health Care Financing Committee.

    Lisinski reported that Senator Jo Comerford told an opponent of the bill that:

    “This is not an easy conversation to have, yet in this State House, we welcome democratic engagement, we welcome debate, we welcome dissent,” the Northampton Democrat said. “If we weren’t asking important questions about whether or not assisted suicide could be made safe — and I do believe it’s made safe in this bill, I do believe that — we wouldn’t be doing our jobs. This is too important a bill for us not to engage seriously with, so you are welcome here.”

    Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

    “If there are ways to make this stronger, let’s do it together, friends. We are not railroading this bill through the State House,” she added.

    As stated by one of the signs at the Public Health Committee, Assisted Suicide Cannot Be MAiD Safe.

    The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition urges our supporters to continue contacting their elected representatives in Massachusetts to oppose the bill. We oppose killing people.

    LifeNews.com Note: Alex Schadenberg is the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and you can read his blog here.

    The post Massachusetts Committee Will Vote on Assisted Suicide Bill in 30 Days appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  33. Site: Fr. Z's Blog
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: frz@wdtprs.com (Fr. John Zuhlsdorf)
    As the pogrom against those who desire the traditional sacred worship of the Roman Rite continues – to build great unity, of course! – I invite the readership to take in some of the liturgical wisdom of Fr. John Thomas … Read More →
  34. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: Alex Schadenberg

    On May 22, the assisted suicide lobby filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Jeff McComas and two Colorado physicians challenging the state assisted suicide law residency requirement.

    The complaint argued that the Colorado assisted suicide law residency requirement violates the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause which “prohibits State officials from restricting non-resident visitors’ access to medical care within its borders absent a substantial State interest and restrictions narrowly tailored to those interests.”

    The assisted suicide lobby made the same arguements in OregonVermont and New Jersey. Oregon and Vermont have subsequently removed their state assisted suicide law residency requirements whereas New Jersey has successfully defended their state assisted suicide law residency requirement in the court.

    Jeff McComas’s rights are not being infringed by Colorado’s assisted suicide law being limited to state residents.

    Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

    (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

    First: Oregon and Vermont will assist the suicide of out-of-state residents. McComas has access to assisted suicide in Oregon and Vermont, therefore his constitutional rights are not being violated.

    Second: Assisted suicide is not a form of medical treatment or care therefore the Privileges and Immunities Clause does not apply to assisted suicide.

    Colorado legalized assisted suicide by passing Proposition 106 during the November 2016 election. In 2024, Colorado passed Senate Bill 24-068 expanding their assisted suicide law by:

    • allowing advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe lethal poison,
    • reducing the waiting period from 15 days to 7 days, and
    • allowing doctors or advanced practise registered nurse to waive the waiting period if the person is near to death.

    The original version of SB 24-068 allowed non-residents to die by assisted suicide in Colorado but this amendment was rejected by legislators.

    The 2024 Colorado assisted suicide report indicated that there were 510 lethal poison prescriptions written in 2024 up by 28% from 398 in 2023. 18 of the lethal poison prescriptions were based on the person having an eating disorder.

    LifeNews.com Note: Alex Schadenberg is the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and you can read his blog here.

    The post Assisted Suicide Advocates Say Killing People is Medical Care appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  35. Site: Catholic Conclave
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Scroll down for today's:Saint of the Day/ FeastReading of the MartyrologyDedication of the MonthDedication of the DayRosaryFive Wounds Rosary in LatinSeven Sorrows Rosary in EnglishLatin Monastic OfficeReading of the Rule of Saint BenedictCelebration of MassReading from the School of Jesus CrucifiedFeast of Saint NorbertBorn at Xanten on the left bank of the Rhine, near Wesel, c. 1080; died at Catholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0
  36. Site: OnePeterFive
    5 days 9 hours ago
    Author: Anna Kalinowska

    Above: A bride in a homemade gown of silk crepe back satin. Fall 2023. Courtesy of Isabel Nolen. In December, 1888, Ellen Terry appeared as Lady McBeth at London’s Lyceum Theatre. She wore a gown adorned with the casings of beetle wings. Only nature could supply the wanted eerie shimmer in that era before plastic sequins.[1] Michael Jackson and countless others have since shimmered more than…

    Source

  37. Site: non veni pacem
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Author: Mark Docherty
  38. Site: 4Christum
    5 days 10 hours ago

    With the complicity of the apostate and schismatic Udo Markus Bentz, a group of sacrilegious dancers with dead decapitated chickens desecrate the German cathedral of Paderborn.


    The apostate and schismatic Udo Markus Bentz desecrated the German cathedral of Paderborn by hosting a sacrilegious spectacle.


    Cathedral desecrated in Germany with blasphemous performance.


    ComplicitClergy: TAKE ACTION: Contact Bishop Bentz and ask him to denounce this scandalous event (blasphemous sacrilege).


    Here we clearly see the example of a headless church, where the "bishops" are unaccountable to their alleged "pope" and commit any sacrilege with impunity. And it is the faithful who defend the rights of the House of God.

    “The abomination shall be seen in holy places, in convents, and then the demon shall make himself the king of hearts.” Our Lady of La Salette


    The apostate Udo Bentz was appointed by Bergoglio

    Bergoglio maliciously chose the apostate Udo Markus, knowing that he supported the schismatic German synodal path.





    Saint Paul warns that sodomites are idolaters who, instead of worshipping God, worship creatures.
    The desecration of a temple by a priest is an unequivocal sign that he has already desecrated his own body with the vice of sexual impurity, thereby expelling the Holy Spirit from himself




    Daniel 11:31

    New Catholic Bible

    31 “Armed forces of his shall obey his command to desecrate the sanctuary, abolish the daily sacrifice, and install the abomination that causes desolation.[a]


    Footnotes

    Daniel 11:31 Abomination that causes desolation: see Dan 9:27; 12:11; this is the characterization of the altar to the pagan god Zeus Olympios set up in 168 B.C. by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, which prefigured a similar abomination that Jesus predicted would be erected (see Mt 24:15; Lk 21:10).




    Paderborn Bishop Silent Amid International Scandal – Gloria.tv

    Gloria TV News:

    The scandal surrounding the 'chicken ballet' in the presbytery of Paderborn Cathedral on 15 May is spreading.

    An online petition entitled 'Against the desecration of Paderborn Cathedral: For the protection of our sacred sites' gained over 20,000 signatures within a few days.

    The oligarchic media in Germany, such as Bild.de and Spiegel.de, as well as many alternative media outlets, have reported on it.

    On Nius.de, Alexander Kissler spoke of the “final stage of a Church that shreds faith because it has lost it”.

    He added: 'What are we to make of a Church that tolerates such a mindless, pointless and tasteless spectacle at the heart of a diocese, in the cathedral, between the altar, the cross and the tabernacle?'

    Birgit Kelle notes on Exxpress.at that “nobody knows how it came about” and that alledgely “everyone was surprised”. It is still unclear “who came up with the idea that this performance group was suitable for any ceremony in a church”.

    Alexander-Wallasch.de filed a criminal complaint for disturbing the practice of religion. The complaint states that the combination of undressed human bodies and dead chickens in diapers in the altar area is likely to seriously offend the religious sensibilities of the average believer.

    The responsible Paderborn Archbishop Bentz, who was sitting in the first pew during the chicken ballet, still refuses to comment.







    Aciprensa: The petition from German faithful, hosted on the CitizenGo platform, is addressed to the Archbishop of Paderborn, Msgr. Udo Bentz. The signatories demand not only a public apology, but also an act of penance and reparation, as well as the rededication of Paderborn Cathedral, which was desecrated by this act.



    Apostate Bentz does not see Prevost as an obstacle to the synodal path.


    Father E. Sylvester Berry (eminent, 20th Century scripture scholar):

    “. . . The ‘abomination of desolation’ has been wrought in many Catholic churches by heretics and apostates who have broken altars, scattered relics of martyrs and desecrated the Blessed Sacrament. At the time of the French Revolution a lewd woman was seated upon the altar of the cathedral in Paris and worshipped as the goddess of reason. Such things but faintly foreshadow the abominations that will desecrate churches in those sorrowful days when Antichrist will seat himself at the altar to be adored as God.

  39. Site: AsiaNews.it
    5 days 10 hours ago
    While the phone call between Trump and Xi Jinping is attracting the world's attention amid the Sino-US trade war, Beijing is moving forward with a project for large free trade zone on its southernmost island. To attract foreign investment, it is also launching a pilot project for direct access to the global Internet for authorised users and under state control.
  40. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Trump 'Purges' Israel Hardliners In Overhaul Of Mideast Policy

    Via The Cradle

    Between late May and early June, in what insiders are calling an "America First" course correction, US President Donald Trump has been removing key pro-Israel hardliners from his foreign policy team.

    He is reportedly targeting individuals known for their militaristic views on Iran and deep alignment with Israeli policy, often in ways critics say undercut broader US strategic goals. Such individuals include National Security Council officials Eric Trager, Merav Ceren, and Morgan Ortagus. The purge comes after Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar in May – a trip that notably bypassed Israel.

    Morgan Ortagus, who was also a former US intelligence analyst and national security contributor to Fox News, AFP.

    Trump is now reportedly seeking to steer his administration toward a more diplomatic and economically driven approach in the region, with moves underway to ease sanctions on Syria and reopen negotiations with Iran.

    According to sources familiar with the changes, the president is looking to replace outgoing officials with voices more aligned with Vice President JD Vance’s anti-interventionist stance, in an effort to reassert White House control over West Asia policy and curb Israel’s internal influence on US decision-making.

    Former National Security advisor Mike Waltz was among the first to be pushed out after reports that he had coordinated with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a potential pre-emptive strike against Iran – without the approval of the White House.

    However, Waltz was quietly reassigned as US Ambassador to the United Nations.

    Merav Ceren’s removal drew particular attention, given her well-known ties to Israel’s military. Before her role at the NSC, she had worked with Israel’s Ministry of Defense and was closely linked to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington think tank known for its hardline stance on Iran and vocal support for Israeli military campaigns in Lebanon.

    Eric Trager, another official on the chopping block, had long been vocal about his hardline views. An Iran hawk who authored critical work on Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood, Trager held a relatively low-profile role within the NSC but symbolized the ideological faction Trump is now sidelining.

    Former US envoy Morgan Ortagus, who led US policy on Lebanon, sparked backlash after publicly thanking Israel for “defeating” Hezbollah during a visit to Lebanon’s presidential palace. Her aggressive push to disarm the group drew criticism from Lebanese officials and raised concerns about undermining regional diplomacy. Though she reportedly sought to take over Syria policy, the role went to Trump ally Tom Barrack.

    The US president reportedly aims to cut National Security Council staff by half, a move that reflects his preference for a tighter circle of loyalists over traditional policy hands, consolidating decision-making around trusted allies.

    Tucker Carlson has been making a lot of noise of late over the undue Israeli influence within the administration...

    Mark Levin was at the White House today, lobbying for war with Iran. To be clear, Levin has no plans to fight in this or any other war. He’s demanding that American troops do it. We need to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, he and likeminded ideologues in Washington are…

    — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 5, 2025

    Behind these moves lies a growing rift between Trump and Netanyahu. Insiders suggest the Israeli leader’s push for military action against Iran clashed with Trump’s renewed interest in deal-making. The shakeup appears designed to dilute Israeli influence in Washington and reassert Trump’s control over US strategy in the region.

    Trump’s Iran policy remains a moving target. After news broke that the administration had offered Tehran a deal allowing low-level uranium enrichment, Trump swiftly denied it. The contradiction reflects the internal tug-of-war still playing out within his reshaped foreign policy team.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 14:20
  41. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    "Thousands" Of Empty Units After LA Wastes $1 Billion On Homeless Housing

    Once hailed as a fast-track solution to California’s homelessness crisis, Project Homekey now looks like a billion-dollar boondoggle littered with empty buildings and broken promises.

    In Los Angeles County, shuttered motels meant to house the unhoused stand lifeless—fenced-off, vacant, and increasingly resembling abandoned movie sets rather than havens for the vulnerable, according to Westside Current.

    Meanwhile, a stone’s throw away, other properties funded by Homekey have become de facto homeless encampments, complete with tents and makeshift fire pits. Out of 2,157 rooms the county bought with $550 million, a staggering 71% sit empty. The city’s record is only slightly better, with 44% of its 1,237 units still unoccupied despite spending $820 million.

    The problem? Bureaucratic delays, ballooning costs, and questionable deals—like a luxury Mid-City apartment building the city bought for $36.5 million despite contractor liens, or a facility flipped for twice the price just days after a private buyer snagged it.

    Westside Current writes that even sites that briefly housed residents often remain empty after relocation. “Construction takes time,” county officials say—yet the clock’s been ticking since 2020. Meanwhile, shelters that do operate are often overshadowed by the gaping emptiness elsewhere.

    Analysts initially praised the plan. But as empty rooms pile up, so do costs—interim housing placements, security contracts, staff salaries, and millions spent just to keep these “investments” from decaying.

    Worse, the program has seen scandal: One developer and its nonprofit partner face foreclosure, lawsuits, and fraud allegations. Lawsuits allege that over $114 million in funds vanished, with the California Attorney General and federal prosecutors now circling.

    While Governor Newsom touts Homekey as a model solution, even he’s ordered new accountability measures.

    On the ground, though, the gap between promises and reality is painfully clear: thousands of homeless remain, while motels meant to house them are as empty as ever.

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 14:00
  42. Site: ChurchPOP
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Author: Caroline Perkins

    The devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus was privately revealed to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, a 17th-century French nun.

    Through her mystical encounters with Jesus, Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque received a message of divine love that would transform the lives of countless faithful and ignite a worldwide movement of devotion to the Sacred Heart.

    The Sacred Heart of Jesus devotion is a powerful reminder of God's boundless love and mercy.

    The private revelations granted to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque provide a powerful invitation to all believers to encounter Jesus's compassionate heart and respond with love and devotion.

    Below are the promises privately revealed to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque by Jesus:

    sacred heart 12 promisesCaroline Perkins, ChurchPOP

    1) I will give them all the graces necessary in their state of life.

    2) I will establish peace in their homes.

    3) I will comfort them in all their afflictions.

    4) I will be their secure refuge during life, and above all, in death.

    sacred heart 12 promisesCaroline Perkins, ChurchPOP

    5) I will bestow abundant blessings upon all their undertakings.

    6) Sinners will find in my Heart the source and infinite ocean of mercy.

    7) Lukewarm souls shall become fervent.

    sacred heart 12 promisesCaroline Perkins, ChurchPOP

    8) Fervent souls shall quickly mount to high perfection.

    9) I will bless every place in which an image of my Heart is exposed and honored.

    sacred heart 12 promisesCaroline Perkins, ChurchPOP

    10) I will give to priests the gift of touching the most hardened hearts.

    11) Those who shall promote this devotion shall have their names written in my Heart.

    12) I promise you in the excessive mercy of my Heart that my all-powerful love will grant to all those who receive Holy Communion on the First Fridays in nine consecutive months the grace of final perseverance; they shall not die in my disgrace, nor without receiving their sacraments. My divine Heart shall be their safe refuge in this last moment.

  43. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Author: Ricardo Pinedo

    A medical emergency was reported on April 4, 2025, at the Cherry Hill Women’s Center, located at 500 North Kings Highway in New Jersey. The incident involved a 37-year-old woman undergoing an abortion procedure.

    The Emergency

    According to public records, a staffer from the abortion facility placed a 911 call around 11:00 A.M. While the official 911 audio was heavily redacted, it features an unusual and notable moment where the abortionist suddenly asks the caller for the phone in order to speak directly with the dispatcher. Abortionists rarely take care of 911 calls themselves. This may be an indicator that the situation was very serious. The abortionist also requested that emergency medical personnel enter the facility through the back entrance.

    Though details of the emergency were redacted in the 911 audio, Operation Rescue obtained radio dispatch recordings that confirm hemorrhaging was at least one complication that required emergency transport. Hemorrhaging is a very common and dangerous abortion complication that can quickly become life-threatening. The patient’s current condition is unknown.

    Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

    (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

    The Abortionist

    During the 911 call, the abortionist identifies herself as Lisa Perriera, a late-term abortionist who apparently has already killed one patient: 22-year-old Lakisha Wilson in 2014. At that time, Perriera was an abortionist at the notorious Cleveland abortion mill, Preterm.. Lakisha Wilson also developed a hemorrhage during an abortion. In 2015, after obtaining Wilson’s autopsy, Operation Rescue reported:

    According to official documents, including abortion records, EMT notes, hospital charts, an autopsy report, and 911 records all in Operation Rescue’s possession, Wilson began to hemorrhage during her abortion on March 21 and her blood pressure began to drop. Instead of stopping the abortion and tending to her patient, Perierra continued the abortion until Wilson went into hemorrhagic shock, suffered cardiac arrest, and stopped breathing. . . . CPR was started and she was shocked once, but those efforts were not successful at restarting her heart or respiration. Nine minutes later, a 911 call for help was placed.

    Though no criminal charges were filed against Perriera, Operation Rescue and other pro-life groups called for a criminal investigation and disciplinary action, providing solid evidence.

    Instead of justice, a year later the abortion cartel presented Perreira with the honorary “George Tiller” award which “recognizes a physician early in their career who provides abortions while demonstrating leadership and courage, even in the face of adversity.”

    “It’s not courageous to let your patient’s heart stop and then wait nine more minutes before calling 911,” says Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “And it’s not leadership to still be sending women with uncontrollable bleeding to the emergency room ten years later. All Perriera should have ever been awarded was a revocation of her medical license.”

    The Aftermath

    There is no way of knowing just how many women Perreira has sent to the emergency room or, even worse, the morgue. Operation Rescue has launched a full investigation into this new case and will be following up with the appropriate authorities.

    “We are deeply concerned about what happened at Cherry Hill Women’s Center,” adds Sarah Neely, Chief Operating Officer of Operation Rescue. “When a patient is rushed to the hospital due to a hemorrhage, it raises serious questions about the facility’s emergency preparedness and overall safety protocols. Women deserve better than secrecy and redacted recordings. Women deserve full transparency and accountability — especially when the abortionist in question has already killed one patient through complete incompetence and carelessness. How many other injuries or deaths have gone unreported? How many women remain silent out of fear?”

    At this time, local emergency services and Cherry Hill Women’s Center have not commented on the specifics of the April 4th incident. Additional details may emerge pending further review and possible state oversight.

    LifeNews Note: This article was originally published by Operation Rescue, a leading pro-life, Christian activist organization dedicated to exposing abortion abuses, demanding enforcement, saving innocent lives, and building an abortion-free America. The author, Ricardo Pinedo, writes for Operation Rescue.

    The post Abortionist Who Killed Woman in Botched Abortion Sends Another Woman to ER appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  44. Site: Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Alex Schadenberg
    Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

    On May 22, the assisted suicide lobby filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Jeff McComas and two Colorado physicians challenging the state assisted suicide law residency requirement. 

    The complaint argued that the Colorado assisted suicide law residency requirement violates the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause which “prohibits State officials from restricting non-resident visitors’ access to medical care within its borders absent a substantial State interest and restrictions narrowly tailored to those interests.”

    The assisted suicide lobby made the same arguements in Oregon, Vermont and New Jersey. Oregon and Vermont have subsequently removed their state assisted suicide law residency requirements whereas New Jersey has successfully defended their state assisted suicide law residency requirement in the court.

    Jeff McComas's rights are not being infringed by Colorado's assisted suicide law being limited to state residents.

    First: Oregon and Vermont will assist the suicide of out-of-state residents. McComas has access to assisted suicide in Oregon and Vermont, therefore his constitutional rights are not being violated.

    Second: Assisted suicide is not a form of medical treatment or care therefore the Privileges and Immunities Clause does not apply to assisted suicide.

    Colorado legalized assisted suicide by passing Proposition 106 during the November 2016 election. In 2024, Colorado passed Senate Bill 24-068 expanding their assisted suicide law by: 
    • allowing advanced practice registered nurses to approve and prescribe lethal poison, 
    • reducing the waiting period from 15 days to 7 days, and
    • allowing doctors or advanced practise registered nurse to waive the waiting period if the person is near to death.
    The original version of SB 24-068 allowed non-residents to die by assisted suicide in Colorado but this amendment was rejected by legislators.

    The 2024 Colorado assisted suicide report indicated that there were 510 lethal poison prescriptions written in 2024 up by 28% from 398 in 2023. 18 of the lethal poison prescriptions were based on the person having an eating disorder.
  45. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 10 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Coal Is The New Bridge Fuel

    Authored by Bernard L. Weinstein via RealClear Energy,

    Once again, the consensus of government and private weather forecasters is that this coming summer will witness above-average temperatures in most parts of the United States. Already, warnings have been sounded that America’s power grids will be under great stress—as has been the case for a number of years—with a strong probability of blackouts and brownouts in some parts of the country.  For example, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s (NERC) summer reliability assessment published on May 18 cited the 15-state Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) as the regional grid most likely to see a meltdown this summer.

    NERC’s warning proved to be prescient. On May 25, more than 100,000 customers in and around New Orleans lost power for most of the day when electricity demand exceeded supply, despite an emergency order from the Department of Energy several days earlier to keep a 1,560 megawatt coal plant in Michigan on-line that was slated for closure by the end of May. ERCOT, the Texas grid operator, has also warned of possible outages this summer due to potential low solar and wind energy availability during peak demand.   

    The strains on America’s power grids are easy to explain. After remaining relatively flat for a decade, electricity demand is now projected to jump 50% over the next 10 years. Investments in server farms, artificial intelligence, crypto-mining, and a revival of manufacturing activity account for most of this growth. For example, a recent study by the Berkeley National Laboratory found that data centers consumed 4% of total U.S. electricity in 2023 but will account for 12% of power demand by 2028.    

    At the same time, construction of new base-load power plants—natural gas, nuclear, and coal—has plummeted. Driven by federal, state, and local tax incentives, wind and solar have accounted for the lion’s share of new installed generation in recent years. The problem, of course, is that these power sources are intermittent, which is why New Orleans lost electricity in May and why the Iberian Peninsula suffered a blackout in April.

    Although several states—most notably Texas—have adopted programs to encourage new construction of natural gas plants, for the near term it’s critical to keep the nation’s remaining coal plants online.

    Since 2010, 300 “always on” coal-fired power plants have been closed, reducing its share of generation from 45% to 16% nationwide. Only about 200 remain on the regional grids today.

    The Trump administration has taken several steps to enhance power grid reliability and resiliency by keeping these coal plants on-line, including a series of executive orders signed by the President in early April. One of these orders allows a number of aging coal plants slated for closure to continue producing power. 

    Not surprisingly, these actions have energized environmentalists who remain committed to shuttering the remaining coal fleet and banning the construction of any new fossil fuel power plants. But the renewables-or-nothing approach they favor is crashing into a new energy reality. Not only is power demand poised to surge but building and connecting wind and solar plants, as well as the infrastructure needed to integrate them into the grid, is proving increasingly costly and challenging. Coupled with higher interest rates and supply chain challenges, local opposition to wind and solar farms, as well as new transmission lines, is having a significant impact on the speed and scale at which new generation is entering service.

    The era of tearing down existing, well-operating power plants before reliable replacement capacity is built and connected to the grid is over. The on-demand power plants already in service are more valuable than ever. While coal’s long-term future remains in question, its near-term importance is clear. Our existing fleet of coal plants can help us manage the transition to a more reliable and resilient energy future as we build the next generation of base-load resources.

    Bernard L. Weinstein is retired associate director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University, professor emeritus of applied economics at the University of North Texas, and a fellow of Goodenough College, London. 

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 13:40
  46. Site: LifeNews
    5 days 11 hours ago
    Author: Bob Unruh

    There was a court case that challenged the approval by the Food and Drug Administration of the use of mifepristone, the abortion drug that is widely used as a replacement for surgical abortions.

    The Supreme Court ruled that the drug should be available, but the ruling was on very narrow grounds, and was based only on the court’s claim the pro-life physicians who brought to challenge didn’t show they had been harmed personally because it would be others who actually used the drug.

    Now there’s going to be a new review of the drug by the FDA itself.

    Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who has advocated for tighter controls over the use of such chemicals, posted on social media that the FDA chief, Marty Makary, “just committed to me to do a full review of the chemical abortion drug’s safety.”

    HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

    Makary said, in fact, the FDA “continues to closely monitor the postmarketing safety data on mifepristone for the medical termination of early pregnancy.”

    “I am committed to conducting a review of mifepristone and working with the professional career scientists at the agency who review this data,” Makary said. He explained mifepristone remains the subject of “pending litigation,” and the FDA doesn’t comment on such matters, so he cannot provide more details now.

    A report in the Washington Examiner said Hawley has been pushing for the FDA to take such action.

    “The review comes after Hawley and anti-abortion groups slammed Makary in April after he said he had ‘no plans to take action’ regarding FDA regulations on mifepristone that have allowed healthcare providers to ship the abortifacient to patients in other states, irrespective of state laws prohibiting elective abortions,” the report explained.

    Those actions, by abortion businesses who sell and ship drugs even to states which have abortion limits following the Supreme Court’s rejection of the faulty Roe abortion standard that was used for years, have been exploding.

    There have been problems because drugs shipped into a state with those limits don’t always comply with that state’s abortion restrictions.

    In chemical abortions, mifepristone blocks the hormone progesterone, causing the death of the unborn child.

    The FDA in 2016 made its rules on the drug lax, allowing its use for chemical abortions and no longer requiring abortionists involved to report complications.

    Then Joe Biden removed in-person screening requirements for patients to obtain the medication, allowing healthcare providers to ship mifepristone to patients in other states without a physical consultation.

    But the report noted a study from the Ethics and Public Policy Center pointing out that “severe complications” from the abortion drug use is “22 times higher than FDA data indicate.”

    When the Supreme Court ruled on the dispute over the lethal drug regarding the physician plaintiffs, several state attorneys general said they would continue the case on their own.

    LifeNews Note: This column originally appeared at WorldNetDaily.

    The post FDA Review of Abortion Drug Could Save Thousands of Babies From Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  47. Site: Catholic Conclave
    5 days 11 hours ago
    He is a Pope with a profoundly Augustinian charisma, a man of dialogue, with a very calm temperament. He is not a centralizer, but neither is he a person who cannot decide. Bishop Luis Marín de San Martín, an Augustinian, undersecretary of the Synod of Bishops, was called to Rome as archivist of the Augustinian Curia by the then superior, Robert Francis Prevost. Today, his old superior has becomeCatholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0
  48. Site: Mises Institute
    5 days 11 hours ago
    Author: William L. Anderson
    The so-called White House “coverup” of former President Joe Biden‘s dementia was really a coverup by the legacy media, which worked with White House officials to ensure Americans would not know the truth.
  49. Site: Zero Hedge
    5 days 11 hours ago
    Author: Tyler Durden
    Netanyahu's Rule In Peril As Ultra-Orthodox Move To Dissolve Knesset Over Conscription Of Haredim

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's ruling government coalition is under a new threat of being toppled after the largest opposition party introduced a measure to dissolve the parliament -- and key ultra-Orthodox political and spiritual leaders, angered over the prospect of ultra-Orthodox youth being included in the country's military draft, are supporting the move to force new elections. 

    Since Israel was created in 1948, ultra-Orthodox Haredi Jews have been exempted from the military conscription that's imposed on almost all other men and women. Haredi men typically dedicate their entire lives to religious study in seminaries called Yeshivas. With Israel waging a multi-front war encompassing Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iran, the exemption has become increasingly unpopular with the other segments of Israeli society that must heed the call.

    Protesters of Haredim draft exemptions outside the Israeli Defense Force induction center push mock coffins (Mothers at the Front)

    In June 2024, Israel's Supreme Court ruled that the government must start drafting the Haredi. "At the height of a difficult war, the burden of inequality is more than ever acute," wrote the court in a unanimous decision. The Haredi erupted in protests -- some of which turned violent. Since last summer, ultra-Orthodox politicians, including the non-Haredi variety, have been pushing for the Knesset to overcome the high court ruling by codifying the exemption. 

    On Wednesday, leading opposition party Yesh Atid advanced a bill calling for the Knesset's dissolution. The first vote on the measure is expected next week. “This Knesset is finished,” said Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid. “It has nowhere else to go. All that it has brought to the people of Israel is pain, and disasters, and bereavement and crises.” That move cam on the same day that two spiritual leaders of a faction of the ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism Party, Rabbis Dov Lando and Degel Hatorah, instructed members to move forward with an attempt to topple Netanyahu's government over the draft issue.  

    Ultra-Orthodox Israeli Jews -- many of whom reject Zionism and the creation of the State of Israel -- demand that their draft exemption continue (Anadolu Agency)

    There are 120 seats in the Knesset, and Netanyahu's coalition controls 68 of them. Of his coalition, 18 come from Israel's two main ultra-Orthodox parties. They've already been boycotting votes for several weeks. Though he's proven his ability to dodge political bullets time and time again, Netanyahu would likely be ousted in a new election: A new survey projected Netanyahu's coalition would garner only 46 to 48 seats, compared to 62 to 72 for an opposition bloc led by former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who has repeatedly opposed the draft exemption. 

    The ultra-Orthodox have rattled their Knesset-dissolution sabers before, but this move is being perceived as far more serious -- as a measure is on the table with the backing of the parties' religious advisors. On Wednesday afternoon, Netanyahu's office assured that a crisis can be averted, saying "there is a way to bridge the gaps on the draft issue.” However, any such bridging threatens to trigger outrage among the non-Haredi whose young family members continue facing death and loss of limbs in Gaza and elsewhere as they're forced to serve.  

    Rabbi Dov Lando, who chairs an ultra-Orthodox faction's Council of Torah Sages, directed Knesset members to support dissolving parliament and forcing new elections (Shlomi Cohen/Flash 90 via Times of Israel)

    The internal division comes as the country is steadily treading deeper into international-pariah territory, owing to growing convictions that the country's military campaign in Gaza has inflicted a wildly disproportionate toll on civilians. In the latest indicator of that dynamic, YouGov reports that support and sympathy for Israel among Western Europeans have reached the lowest levels the firm has recorded in its nine years of polling. Israel's net-negatives are -44 in Germany, -48 in France, -54 in Denmark, -52 in Italy and -55 in Spain. In the United States, Pew Research in March reported that Americans' support of Israel was the lowest in its 25 years of tracking that sentiment.  

    Tyler Durden Thu, 06/05/2025 - 13:00
  50. Site: Catholic Conclave
    5 days 11 hours ago
    In Bavaria and North Rhine-Westphalia, the number of priestly ordinations this year is at an all-time low. This news from the Archdiocese of Hamburg seems almost like a small ray of hope.Better days before he CouncilAfter five years, there is a new priest for the Archdiocese of Hamburg. Archbishop Stefan Heße will ordain a 47-year-old former Bundeswehr officer on Saturday in Hamburg's St. Mary's Catholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0

Pages

Subscribe to Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds