Follow NewsClips channel at Brighteon.com for more updatesSubscribe to Brighteon newsletter to get the latest news and more featured videos: https://support.brighteon.com/Subscribe.html

The truth was out there. The post ‘Songs in the Key of X’: the surprising impact of a 1996 ‘X-Files’ inspired CD compilation first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Thanksgiving is really the holiday that made the other American holidays possible. Were it not for the Pilgrims having courage, absolute faith in their cause and calling, and the willingness to sacrifice and risk everything, they never would have attempted to cross a vast ocean on the 94-foot Mayflower, a ship of questionable seaworthiness. The Pilgrims’ fourth major achievement was the rejection of socialism and the adoption of private enterprise. The Thanksgiving holiday, which commemorates one part of the Pilgrim story, remains the favorite holiday for many Americans. And for good reasons, beyond enjoying a feast. With our country passing through troubled times, it is worth revisiting the Pilgrim’s five significant achievements, which created the seminal story of America, and reveals remarkable insight into who we are and the qualities of character we need to overcome our present challenges. First, of the many groups of settlers who came to America, only the Pilgrims were singularly motivated by a spiritual quest for religious freedom — one that had its origin with the Protestant Reformation a century before. William Bradford, the long-serving governor of Plymouth Colony and author of Of Plymouth Plantation (written between 1630–1651), repeatedly framed the Pilgrims’ voyage and settlement in explicitly biblical terms, drawing direct parallels to the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt to the Promised Land. Thus, both American Christians and Jews find profound meaning in the Pilgrim’s Thanksgiving story. After a harrowing passage across the Atlantic — one that included wild pitching and broadside batterings by gale force winds and ferocious seas that caused the splitting of the ship’s main beam — the Mayflower was blown off course from arriving at the territory assigned by the London-based sponsoring Virginia Company — a territory that is now northern New Jersey.  Making landfall on the barren sands of Cape Cod, the Pilgrims knew not where they were nor how to proceed. So, they beseeched the Almighty for help to find more suitable land with fresh water and fertile soil to establish a new and independent settlement. Now, after a frightening voyage and facing hunger from spoiled and depleted provisions and anxious about settling outside the purview of Virginia Company charter territory, the secular Mayflower passengers were restless and insolent. And this is when the Pilgrims accomplished their second major achievement that would shape the future of America. Pilgrim leaders John Carver, William Bradford, and William Brewster recognized that Mayflower passengers, diverse as they were, needed to maintain unity to survive in a potentially inhospitable environment. So, off the Cape Cod coast they drafted a governing agreement that would be acceptable to both their Christian brethren and the secular crew members and merchant adventurers — who made up about half the 102 people aboard the Mayflower. That governing document, known as the Mayflower Compact, provided for peace, security, equality, and democratic decision-making for everyone in their anticipated settlement. With every man aboard signing the Mayflower Compact the Pilgrims established the foundation for democratic self-government based on the will of people for the first time. And so it was that the Mayflower Compact laid the cornerstone of the U.S. Constitution, which would be drafted and adopted some 170 years later. Although the Pilgrims all survived the squalid and cramped ship quarters during the dangerous crossing of a vast ocean, their fate changed once they found suitable land for settlement, which they called “New Plymouth,” in December of 1620. The first winter was frigid and devastating, with illness afflicting most and over half the Pilgrims dying, including four entire families. But it could have been worse. The fate of the Pilgrim colonists would surely have been more difficult had they not settled where they did, adjacent to friendly natives, the Pokanoket Indians,  who were part of the Wampanoag tribe, led by chief Massasoit. And it seems providential that there were two Indians who could speak English from prior interaction with the British — Squanto and Samoset — without whom perhaps none would have survived. Squanto and his fellow native tribesmen would teach the Pilgrims survival skills, showing them how to hunt, fish and plant various crops, such as corn, squash, and varieties of beans — which were unknown to the Englishmen. The Pilgrims’ third major achievement was the Pilgrim-Wampanoag Peace Treaty, made possible by Squanto who played a critical role as translator in what was the successful negotiation and maintenance of the peace. The treaty was signed on April 1, 1621, by Massasoit and leaders of the Plymouth colony. That treaty would last more than 50 years — longer than any other peace treaties between subsequent colonists and Indian tribes that inhabited other territories that would later become part of the United States. Despite learning from the native Indians how to plant, cultivate, and harvest new crops in their first year, the Pilgrims complied with their sponsoring Virginia Company charter that called for settlement farmland to be owned and worked communally and for harvests to be equally shared. This socialist common property approach created disincentives to work. William Bradford recorded in his memoirs that while “slackers showed up late for work … everybody was happy to claim their equal share … and production only shrank.” Although no one is certain of the exact date of the first Thanksgiving, we know it was a Pilgrim initiative, celebrated in November 1621 to give thanks to God for their survival — having lost so many during that first winter in Plymouth, and for the first harvest — meager though it was. When Massasoit was invited to join the Pilgrims, it was assumed he would not bring more guests than the 50-odd Mayflower survivor hosts. Massasoit arrived with twice that number, well-stocked with food, fowl, and game of all kinds — including five deer and of course, turkeys. There was more than enough for everyone, enabling the first Thanksgiving celebration to last three days, punctuated by Indian song, games and dance, Pilgrim prayers and even a military parade by Myles Standish. The Pilgrims’ fourth major achievement was the rejection of socialism and the adoption of private enterprise. After the meager Thanksgiving harvest, the second season of collective farming and distribution proved equally disappointing. Governor Bradford had seen enough, recording that the system “was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.” So, before the 1623 season he scrapped socialist farming and replaced it with private ownership of land for each of the families. As a result of becoming responsible for their own welfare and gaining freedom to choose what to grow for consumption or trade, the Pilgrims’ productivity surged. The fifth factor that distinguished the Pilgrims was their model relational behavior. While tolerance enabled them to keep relative harmony within their diverse community, they also looked outwardly to serve and help others. In March of 1623, it came to be known that Massasoit was on the brink of death from an unknown illness. Senior Pilgrim elder Edward Winslow immediately set out on foot for some forty miles to administer medicinal broth, natural herbs, and prayers to Massasoit. Astonishingly, upon making a full recovery within three days, Massasoit remarked, “Now I see the English are my friends and love me; and whilst I live, I will never forget this kindness they have showed me.” In summary, the Pilgrims’ five achievements and the qualities of character that made them exemplary are needed more now than ever. In addition to gratitude, a contemporary Thanksgiving makeover might include: rekindling a quest for adventure; developing the faith to hold on to a vision of a “promised land” no matter what; mustering the courage to go against the crowd and defend the truth; being willing to endure hardship and defer immediate gratification; revitalizing respect for and tolerance of people of different beliefs; and renewing the predisposition to extend appreciation, love and assistance at every appropriate opportunity. READ MORE from Scott S. Powell: Martin Luther King Jr.: More Relevant Than Ever Far More Than a Culture War Rages in America How the U.S. Can Solve the Current Trade Tariff Impasse With China  

Sweden has spent the past month debating a court ruling that has unsettled even a nation accustomed to difficult conversations about immigration. In October 2025, the Court of Appeal for Upper Norrland upheld the conviction of Yazied Mohamed, an eighteen-year-old Eritrean refugee who raped 16-year-old Meya Åberg in a pedestrian underpass. The details were clear, the evidence immediate, the conviction uncontested. What stunned the country — and was reported across Aftonbladet, Expressen, SVT, and internationally by GB News — was the court’s conclusion that Mohamed could not be deported. The rape, the judges wrote, “did not last long enough” to qualify as “exceptionally serious,” the threshold required to override his protected refugee status. (RELATED: Europe’s Urban Decline Exposed) That phrase has become a kind of national mirror. For some Swedes, it reflects an immigration system applying humanitarian law long after the conditions that justified it have changed. For others, it symbolises a deeper institutional discomfort with defending the country’s own moral boundaries. But almost everyone agrees on one point: the ruling arrived at the worst possible moment. (RELATED: Asylum to Austerity: Germany Leads Europe’s Retreat From Open-Ended Migration) Sweden reported more than 10,167 rapes in 2024, according to the Swedish Ministry of Justice. That is an extraordinary figure in a country of 10 million people. Earlier this year, The Telegraph published research showing that 63 percent of those convicted of rape in Sweden are foreign-born or the children of immigrants. The number does not implicate entire populations. But it does undermine the long-standing political claim that Sweden’s demographic transformation has no bearing on its public-safety landscape. (RELATED: The Outbreak of Migrant-Related Crime and Rape in the EU) Several recent cases illustrate the connection. In Frölunda, a girl under 15 was picked up by four young men — two Swedish, two foreign nationals — driven to a forest, and raped. As reported by Aftonbladet, prosecutors neglected to request deportation for the two non-citizens; the appeals court ordered it only after public outcry. Before that, Swedish media uncovered an Afghan child-exploitation ring, in which men in their 20s raped 13-year-old girls, filmed the assaults, and used the footage to blackmail the victims. In Österåker, a twelve-year-old girl was lured into asylum housing and raped — an incident referenced when Brå, Sweden’s crime-prevention agency, reported a rise in child sexual offences. And in Malmö, two Syrian asylum-seeker brothers kidnapped and raped multiple women; one later received over 800,000 SEK in state compensation after Sweden’s Supreme Court ruled he had been mistakenly sentenced as an adult. This case was widely reported internationally, including by the Daily Mail. Each of these stories came and went. None stayed long enough in the national debate to force a reckoning. But now, in the light of the Eritrean ruling, they read differently — not as anomalies but as a pattern Sweden can no longer dismiss. Sweden’s political leadership … has long treated certain crime patterns as too sensitive to acknowledge. A deeper issue lies beneath these crimes: the institutional instinct to protect the narrative rather than the public. Sweden’s political leadership — humane, but chronically anxious about social harmony — has long treated certain crime patterns as too sensitive to acknowledge. This posture filtered into policing. In 2015, Swedish police withheld information about sexual assaults at the We Are Sthlm festival because naming the perpetrators was considered politically risky. Over time, this defensive posture became routine. Crime statistics from Brå began arriving with unusually cautious interpretations, and police spokespeople increasingly described their work as “strategic communication” — language that tends to raise eyebrows in any functioning democracy. But to understand why Sweden’s institutions hesitate, one must confront a subject often avoided in polite debate: the cultural dimension of migration. Many of the men implicated in Sweden’s most serious sexual offences come from societies where the norms governing gender and public behaviour differ dramatically from Sweden’s. In parts of the Middle East, the Horn of Africa, and South Asia, women’s autonomy is shaped by religious jurisprudence, communal expectations, and legal structures that regulate modesty and movement. These are not incidental differences; they are social systems. And they do not dissolve upon arrival in a new country. When migration occurs at a scale too rapid for deep integration — ethical, not just linguistic — Sweden encounters a collision of assumptions. Criminal behaviours in Stockholm may be everyday occurrences in Mogadishu or Kabul. This does not excuse them, but it does dismantle the idea that Sweden’s liberal norms will simply seep into newcomers through exposure. Values require transmission, not proximity. Sweden’s demographic winter complicates things further. As native birthrates decline and migration rises, a political reluctance has emerged to assert that Sweden’s ethical foundation – equality before the law, personal safety, bodily autonomy – is not merely one cultural preference among many but the core that makes Sweden Sweden. The fear of appearing intolerant has led to a moral imbalance in which institutions sometimes act more vigorously to protect the residency rights of offenders than the rights of those harmed by them. (RELATED: The Happiness Hoax: Are Nordic Nations Really Better Off Than America?) Sweden’s humanitarian instincts were sincere. But sincerity is not a strategy. Immigration without integration is not generosity; it is abdication. And the price of that abdication is now being paid by the most vulnerable: women, girls, and minors without social defenses. (RELATED: The Scandinavian Lesson: What Malmö Warns Us About America’s Sanctuary Cities) This is why the case of Meya Åberg feels like a national hinge point. It forces Sweden to confront a question every liberal democracy must answer — including the United States: Can a society remain open, coherent, and safe if it lacks the confidence to articulate the values it expects all who live within it to uphold? Sweden postponed that question for decades. It can no longer afford to. READ MORE from Kevin Cohen: The Vanishing Englishman: Inside the Schools Forecasting the UK Future Hungary’s Sovereignty Renaissance: The Europe That Refused to Fall Asylum to Austerity: Germany Leads Europe’s Retreat From Open-Ended Migration

WASHINGTON — Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is my new hero. Duffy is promoting a “civility” campaign that urges passengers to be polite and dress up rather than wear sweatpants and slippers when they fly. If everyone dresses better, everyone will behave better, Duffy offered. It’s an idea that could bring smiles to the friendly skies around the Thanksgiving holiday. During a press conference at Newark Liberty International Airport Monday, Duffy was wearing a suit and red tie. This was an outfit that answered the question: What would President Donald Trump wear? The good news: Duffy did not propose a business-attire dress code that would be enforced on board. Duffy ticked through the litany of air travel woes — long lines, brawls at baggage claim, flight delays and cancellations often due to bad weather — that have resulted in an uptick in incivility. (RELATED: When Public Service Really Matters) According to the Department of Transportation, there has been a 400 percent increase in outbursts on planes since 2019. Clearly, the flying public has been getting surly. One in five flight attendants report experiencing physical incidents on the job. There’s no law Congress can pass to make people behave more courteously, Duffy acknowledged, but maybe dressing up will encourage fliers to act more adult. Duffy offered commonsense advice, which he noted most people already observe. Don’t take your shoes off. If you’re watching a movie, wear headphones. Say please and thank you. Because lines will be longer, “Come a little early.” Passengers who give themselves more time are more likely to arrive at their destinations with a good attitude, Duffy added. Confession time: I love to fly. I love going places. I love coming home. I love people watching in airports. I love to see what people are wearing. In the terminal, I eavesdrop shamelessly. It’s one of my favorite things about travel. Sadly, too much of the chatter in airports these days is about how awful flying is, how irksome the airlines have become, and how infuriating people find nightmarish cancellations and even minor delays. And yet, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, the percentage of Americans who fly keeps expanding. In 1971, fewer than half of Americans had ever flown, and only 1 in 5 had flown in the last year. In 2023, fewer than half had flown in the last year, and while 85 percent of Americans had flown in their lifetimes. It seems the more people fly, the less of an occasion flying becomes. I don’t wear cocktail dresses when I fly, but I try to dress well and comfortably. Duffy’s crusade tells me that I can do better. At the Newark presser, FAA administrator Bryan Bedford took pride when he said, “This week is our Super Bowl.” (Not that passengers should act like they’re at the Super Bowl.) The government, Bedford cautioned, will not hesitate to use its enforcement authority for those who break rules. I’ve seen how that works. Many years ago when there was shuttle service between Washington, New York, and Boston, I was on a flight that ended with a fellow passenger being walked off the plane in handcuffs. There was a $10 dispute, and he would not pay his full fare on the credit card trolley, which was the standard way to pay on that shuttle. I can only imagine what his legal bills were. He probably didn’t realize that passengers don’t have the same rights on a plane that they enjoy on a sidewalk. So there is one advantage to all those viral videos of air rage episodes: They end with the consequences. READ MORE from Debra J. Saunders: Six Democrats and One Trump Equal Trump Exhaustion Syndrome The Bonfire of the Academies Burisma, Meet Your Brother Binance Contact Review-Journal Washington columnist Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@reviewjournal.com. Follow @debrajsaunders on X. COPYRIGHT 2025 CREATORS

The federal Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against California, charging that the Golden State practices unequal treatment by granting illegal aliens in-state tuition, student loans, and other benefits that they deny to U.S. citizens from out of state. As Americans should know, this is a relatively recent development. The primary mission of the University of California is to serve the top nine percent of the state’s high-school graduates. In 2013, California hired as UC president Janet Napolitano, a former Arizona governor and Department of Homeland Security director with no experience in higher education. Napolitano proceeded to transform the University of California into an immigration agency. (RELATED: California’s Memory Loss) In 2014, Napolitano launched the President’s Advisory Committee on Undocumented Students. The program provided legal services and advice, counseling, and “Training for students and volunteers in immigration services.” Napolitano also established the California DREAM loan program for undocumented students, with initial funding of $5 million from UC funds and state general funds appropriated to the UC system. In other words, an academically qualified African-American student from Mississippi would have to pay the “supplemental tuition,” higher than in-state tuition. The undocumented students are “charged resident fees and exempted from out-of-state supplemental tuition.” In other words, an academically qualified African-American student from Mississippi would have to pay the “supplemental tuition,” higher than in-state tuition. A white student from Mexico — “Hispanic” is not a race — gets the lower in-state tuition. This is what the DOJ now regards as unequal treatment for out-of-state students. Those students might wonder why it took so long, and why the DOJ and the federal Department of Education ignored other questionable activities in California. In 2017, when Napolitano was raising tuition and demanding more state funding, state auditor Elaine Howle uncovered a secret slush fund of $175 million. Napolitano’s office interfered with the audit, but state attorney general Xavier Becerra declined to investigate. (RELATED: California’s Elaine Howle — DOGE Before DOGE Was Cool) The UC system is on the federal gravy train, but shows no funds from the government of Mexico or other nations to cover the educational costs of their citizens illegally present in the United States. If American taxpayers thought that was unfair treatment, it would be hard to blame them. As they should know, the Golden State has a record of denying admission to qualified students. (RELATED: Oh Say Can UC?) The University of California at Davis twice denied medical school admission to Allan Bakke, a highly qualified veteran, because he was a person of pallor (“white”). UC Davis reserved places for accredited minorities of other skin shades and ethnicities. In 1978, Bakke sued and won, but California continued to give preference on the basis of race and ethnicity. By the 1990s, meaningful change was in the wind. The California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) eliminated racial preferences in state education, employment, and contracting. Contrary to opponents, the measure did not eliminate “affirmative action.” The state could still lend a hand on an economic basis, and California had always cast the widest possible net. The great Jackie Robinson, for example, was an alum of Pasadena City College, founded in 1924. In 1939, Robinson enrolled at UCLA, and in 1954, future Olympic decathlon champion Rafer Johnson attended UCLA on both athletic and academic scholarships. CCRI, Proposition 209 on the 1996 ballot, passed by a margin of  54.55 to 45.45. As Thomas Sowell noted in Intellectuals and Race, the number of African-American and Hispanic students graduating from the University of California system went up, including a 55 percent increase in those graduating in four years with a GPA of 3.5 or higher. Even so, the state education establishment continues to oppose the measure. In 2020, the University of California board of regents endorsed Proposition 16, which targeted Prop 209 for elimination. “It makes little sense to exclude any consideration of race in admissions,” Napolitano contended, “when the aim of the University’s holistic process is to fully understand and evaluate each applicant through multiple dimensions,” obvious code for racial and ethnic preferences. Californians rejected the measure by a margin of 57.2 to 42.8, wider than the vote for Proposition 209 in 1996. That left Assembly Constitutional Amendment 7 (ACA-7), which allowed the governor to make “research-based,” or “research-informed,” exceptions to the 1996 law. The amendment was not put forward for a vote in 2024, and by now, the lessons should be clear. Proposition 209 remains the strongest force for equality, merit, and high standards. Meanwhile, students across the country will see if the DOJ’s case against California brings them equal justice. READ MORE from Lloyd Billingsley: NIH Announces New Pandemic Playbook China’s New Hongqi Bridge Collapses — Could California’s Chinese Bridge Be Far Behind? World Series University: Life Lessons From the MLB

On Nov. 17, the Palestinian flag was raised for the first time in front of Toronto’s city hall. There had been a great deal of protest from Jewish activists in anticipation of this event, but to no avail. Toronto’s mayor, Olivia Chow, is a prominent member of the New Democratic Party (NDP), Canada’s equivalent of America’s Democratic Socialists, and one might say she is Mamdani lite. Unlike New York’s mayor-elect, she has no charisma and no charm, but she’s a dyed-in-the-wool leftist with similar principles. In response to a letter-writing campaign, she explained that the decision had been made by “staff” according to the rules treating all “nationalities” the same. And since Palestine is now officially a state, Prime Minister Mark Carney having recognized it as such on September 21, that was that. Never mind that Hamas had thanked him for the favor and immediately withdrew from the ceasefire talks that were then in progress, and this so-called state is not yet a member of the United Nations. (RELATED: Mark Carney Is Incredibly Dangerous) In the wake of this event, my junior high school teacher — who also happens to be my oldest living friend — has announced that he and his wife want to move to Israel. They no longer feel comfortable living in Canada. He is 96 years old, and she is 99, but they won’t be the oldest Israeli immigrants. Recently, that record was set by 100-year-old Sarah Unterberg, who immigrated from Uruguay. I imagine that my parents, were they still alive, would also by now be feeling uncomfortable living in Canada. My parents were Holocaust survivors who had survived by fleeing to the Soviet Union. They were separated when my father was drafted into the Soviet army and lost their first child due to a shortage of medicine, but miraculously, they somehow both survived. (About a third of the Polish Jews who had survived by fleeing Poland to the Soviet Union had perished due to the harsh war conditions.) After the War, they returned to Poland to pick up the pieces, but there was nothing much to pick up since literally everyone who had not fled had perished. Moreover, even after the Holocaust, there was a huge pogrom in the Polish town of Kielce. My parents were so shocked when they heard about it that once again, they felt the need to flee. They were smuggled out of Poland by an organization called the Bricha, which was composed of partisans and Jewish Palestinians, who were what Israelis were called before the founding of the Jewish state. Even then, the preborn state was trying to save Diaspora Jews. There was no government support for refugees in Canada back then. My father went to work in a sweatshop a day or two after our arrival, and we set about pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps. Our first residence was a one-room cold-water flat on the third floor of a Victorian house on Huron just north of Dundas. I still remember heating water on the stove for the tin bathtub in the middle of the floor, the chamber pot, and the nice Japanese lady who lived below us, who returned my little ball on the soft end of a broom when I dropped it into her kitchen from a hole in the floor. My father expanded his workweek to 70 hours as quickly as he could and maintained that pace until his retirement. Once we were settled and starting to get comfortable, my father would remark from time to time that Canada was “a golden land…the best country in the whole world.” (RELATED: Friends May Betray Us, but Choose Agency) Before the Trudeau regime, both Liberals and Conservatives believed in Canada’s merit-based immigration system. My parents both passed away about 10 years ago, just before the Liberal Party under the leadership of Justin Trudeau came to power. Though I wish that they were still alive, I cannot help but be grateful that they did not live to see what has happened to Canada since they passed on. Had they lived, they would be both frightened and appalled because of the enormous increase in antisemitism in Canada under Trudeau’s rule, especially since 10/7. There was already antisemitism in Canada when we arrived, but it wasn’t nearly as virulent as it is now, and, on the contrary, for most of my parents’ lives, Canada, like America, became an increasingly more tolerant country. Before the Trudeau regime, both Liberals and Conservatives believed in Canada’s merit-based immigration system. That is no more. Moreover, Canada’s immigration quotas have gone through the roof, and its borders have become extremely porous. The present immigration policy does not sit well with most immigrant families like mine, nor with immigrants from all sorts of other backgrounds where chaos and tyranny prevailed. The Liberal immigration policy has dismayed many legal immigrants, in particular because it is largely due to it that Canada has increasingly come to resemble the countries from which we fled. Under Mark Carney, Canada is continuing along the path set by Justin Trudeau, which allows and even tacitly encourages Canada to increasingly become a country whose Jewish minority continues to be harassed, intimidated, and threatened. It is now a commonplace, with the advent of the “globalize the intifada” movement, that supporters of terrorists have themselves become terrorists. Since 10/7 in Canada, a Toronto Jewish school has been shot at 3 times, synagogues in Toronto and Montreal have been firebombed, and Jewish businesses have been vandalized. Carney, like Trudeau before him, is a dyed-in-the-wool globalist elitist, and notoriously, they do not do what the people want but rather the bidding of their little club of plutocrats. Though it is not as far down the road to perdition, Canada has been following Europe’s lead rather than America’s under President Trump. However, if Canada continues along the same trajectory, then Canada’s Jews will be forced to get the hell out of Dodge. (RELATED: Canada: A Socialist Paradise Lost) It is noteworthy that one prominent group that has been experiencing a higher level of antisemitism than others is students in medical school. The cause of this is evident. Canada, like America, is not producing enough home-grown doctors to meet the country’s need, and much of the deficit is being imported from countries such as Pakistan, where Jew-hatred is prevalent and considered normal. Recently, the Jewish Medical Association of Ontario (JMAO) did a survey of Jewish medical students. “JMAO organizers pronounced themselves ‘stunned’ to discover 80 percent of respondents — about 380 people — had faced antisemitism at work since October 7, 39 percent in hospitals, and 43 percent in academic institutions. Thirty-one percent of respondents from Ontario — about 150 people — are considering emigrating to the U.S. or Israel on that account.” A similar thing is happening in Australia, where recently a tranche of about 100 Jewish doctors announced that they are emigrating to Israel. Israel could use the extra doctors, but one cannot help wonder what happens to countries like Canada and Australia when all the Jews have left. Time will tell, but if so-called liberal democracies cannot protect any given minority, how will they be able to protect the rest, because it never ends with the Jews. In any case, it is astounding to think that the evil of Jew hatred has followed families like my own from one country to the next within the course of a mere three generations. READ MORE from Max Dublin: Japan at the Crossroads Problems in Canada’s Constitution Lead to Land Grab for Cowichan Tribes Peace Pact Raises New Questions on Qatar

by Martin Armstrong, Armstrong Economics: QUESTION: Merz said he told Trump that Germany is “fully in line with Ukraine, that the sovereignty of this country must not be jeopardized.” He also said that the war in Ukraine is a threat to all of Europe. Do you see any hope for Europe avoiding war? TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/ […]