Alcatraz is arguably the most famous name in American penology, yet its life as a federal prison was surprisingly short—spanning only 29 years (1934–1963). Located on a rugged island in the heart of the San Francisco Bay, it was designed not just to hold prisoners, but to break the will of the most incorrigible criminals in the country. From the “Birdman” to Al Capone, the walls of Alcatraz have seen some of the most notorious figures in criminal history. Here is the story of the island they said no one could leave. The Fortress Origins Long before it was a federal penitentiary, Alcatraz had a very different mission. Discovered in 1775 by Spanish explorer Juan Manuel de Ayala—who named it La Isla de los Alcatraces (Island of the Pelicans)—the land was eventually claimed for the U.S. military by President Millard Fillmore in the 1850s. The Citadel: During the Civil War, the island served as a fort, bristling with over 100 cannons to protect the bay. The Natural Barrier: By the late 1850s, the military began using it to hold prisoners. The logic was simple: the bay’s frigid, high-velocity currents created a “natural wall” that made escape by swimming seemingly impossible. As the inmate population grew, prisoners were forced to build their own cages. They constructed a massive new cellhouse containing 600 cells, along with a hospital and mess hall—structures that still haunt the island’s skyline today. Life in the “Inescapable” Prison Alcatraz was never a high-capacity facility. It averaged between 260 and 275 inmates at any given time—a tiny fraction of the federal population. However, these men were the “worst of the worst”: escape artists, violent offenders, and high-profile gang leaders. Life on “The Rock” was defined by: Minimal Privilege: Inmates were guaranteed only food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. Everything else—including library access and mail—had to be earned through absolute obedience. The Goal: If a prisoner could endure the harsh monotony and strict rules of Alcatraz, they might eventually be “promoted” back to a standard federal prison to finish their sentence. The Rogues’ Gallery The prison’s reputation was bolstered by its infamous “guest list.” The facility held men guilty of everything from high-stakes bank robbery to cold-blooded murder. Some of the most notable included: Over three decades, 36 men were involved in 14 separate escape attempts. The statistics speak to the difficulty of the task: 23 were recaptured. 6 were shot and killed during the attempt. 2 were confirmed to have drowned. 5 remain missing to this day (officially presumed drowned, though legends of their survival persist). One of the most violent episodes was the “Battle of Alcatraz” in 1946. Six prisoners overpowered guards and seized weapons, but failed to secure the keys to the outer doors. The resulting standoff lasted two days, claiming the lives of two guards and three inmates. The End of an Era In 1963, the heavy iron doors of Alcatraz closed for good. The reason wasn’t a lack of security, but economics. Operating a prison on an island was a logistical nightmare. Every scrap of food, gallon of water, and liter of fuel had to be ferried across the bay. Furthermore, the salty sea air was literally dissolving the concrete and steel structures. Rather than pay for a massive renovation, the government opted to shutter the facility. Sources: The Anti-Immigrant Policies in Trump’s Final “Big Beautiful Bill Act” Explained The First 100 Days of the Second Trump Administration The Trump Administration’s 2025 Changes to Immigration Law

The United States may not be in the midst of a spiritual revival, as President Donald Trump touted during the State of the Union address, Feb. 24. The data is mixed, with religion being viewed as “very important” to less than half of Americans, as a recent Gallup survey found.  Nevertheless, for the nation to prosper and bind together, religiosity is not only a crucial aspect of civil society, but vital to its sustainability. This sentiment was expressed by none other than the country’s first president, George Washington. Although private in his own religious convictions and skeptical of fanaticism, in his Farewell Address (1796), Washington’s clarion, prescient warning to contemporary and future Americans—on national and international affairs—definitively emphasized that “[o]f all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” Moreover, to “subvert” such “great pillars of human happiness”—like the freedom of religious expression—would be considered unpatriotic.   Indeed, Washington believed religiosity served as a bedrock for national stability and individual virtue, and a lack thereof would cripple cohesion, writing:  And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. He was not the only Founding Father to stress religion’s intrinsic importance to the new republic. John Adams once reflected, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Benjamin Franklin, likewise, considered religious practice important for developing virtue, and believed “[God] ought to be worshipped” and “the most acceptable service we render to him is doing good to his other children.”  Even Thomas Jefferson, the most notable deist among the Founding Fathers, warned about the consequences of abandoning religious conviction entirely. While advocating a “wall of separation” between church and state, he also stated: God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Washington’s—or the other Founding Fathers’—rationale was not without historical precedent. For centuries, Christianity has served as the basis for establishing institutions that we take for granted, such as universities, hospitals, economic systems, and—most importantly—the philosophy undergirding the truth that “all men are created equal.” Indeed, as observed by Alexis de Tocqueville—a 19th-century political scientist—in “Democracy in America,” religion is the “companion of liberty” and a “safeguard” in preserving the “pledge of freedom.”  Today, however, American religiosity is struggling—and the consequences borne from this sociological trend have reverberated across civil society and political dynamics. In the early 1950s, 75% of Americans found religion to be “very important” in their lives. Now, that is 47%. Moreover, the March Gallup survey shows that “in each year since 2022, 28% of Americans have said religion is ‘not very important’ in their lives,” which is the “highest proportion” in this trend and “more than double the rate seen as recently as the early 2000s.” Concurrently, as a recent Pew Research Center survey discovered, the United States is “the only place” where “more adults (ages 18 and older) describe the morality and ethics of others living in the country as bad (53%) than as good (47%).” The relationship between these trends may not be purely coincidental. Religious affiliation has historically declined since the 21st century’s outset; meanwhile, the importance of one’s political party affiliation has risen and, in some cases, supplanted not only religion as an identifiable characteristic, but race, culture, and even language. Additionally, in recent years, Americans have shifted their self-defining characteristics to better align with their politics; in effect, a political platform has increasingly informed one’s values and principles, instead of one’s beliefs being rooted by families, churches, and communities.  Psychologically, this identity shift heightens emotional reactions toward political criticisms since debate—or opposition—now challenges the core of a person’s personality. Even brain activity confirms political conflict has a similar effect as being physically attacked and/or threatened. It should be unsurprising then, as a result, America has seen increased polarization and even violence against political adversaries.  At the same time, American civil society has receded. Fewer opportunities exist for neighbors to gather together, regardless of political affiliation, and pursue a common goal. In the past, religious organizations and charities were cornerstones for such activity; today, however, as religiosity fades—which had been a motivating impulse propelling communal outreach—a void has formed. Indeed, the less religious are less likely to be civically engaged.  This massive disconnect between an individual and society at-large presents an existential crisis in the modern United States. Civilizations cannot survive without a firm foundation. In an American context, morality was not borne from thin air nor from moral relativism—but formed by Western philosophy and the Judeo-Christian religions.  In response to this phenomenon, President Trump has launched several initiatives—such as “America Prays”—and established the White House Faith Office to reinvigorate religiosity. At the same time, there are signs Gen Zers and young adults are returning to church, but whether these developments signal a lasting trend remains uncertain. Yet Washington’s fatherly advice in his Farewell Address remains relevant to modern audiences, and must be heeded: when religiosity disappears from the public square, the moral framework supporting civil society wanes and weakens. A transcendent set of principles, however, unifies and moors the nation in common principles.   As the country celebrates the 250th anniversary of America, the moment offers an opportunity to recommit to the “indispensable” pillars of society: prayer, worship, and charity. Faith alone may not reverse every sociological problem; indeed, people are not angels. But a revival of religious commitment could renew the civic bonds that sustain, safeguard, and preserve a free society.  So help us God, let us hope in a revival. In Him we must trust.  This article was originally published by RealClearReligion and made available via RealClearWire. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post George Washington’s Warning About Religion Still Matters appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Meta is quietly dismantling one of its few genuine privacy commitments. Starting May 8, end-to-end encryption for Instagram direct messages disappears, taking with it the one technical guarantee that kept those conversations private from Meta itself. “If you have chats that are impacted by this change, you will see instructions on how you can download any media or messages you may want to keep,” the company said in a help document, framing the loss of message privacy as a data export problem. Collect your things, the walls are coming down. The feature being removed was never universal anyway. End-to-end encryption for Instagram DMs had been available only in certain regions, not enabled by default, since Meta began testing it in 2021 as part of what CEO Mark Zuckerberg called his “privacy-focused vision for social networking.” That vision apparently has an expiration date. Meta also made encrypted DMs available to all adult users in Ukraine and Russia in February 2022, weeks after the Russian invasion began. That access, too, is ending. The timing is revealing. TikTok told the BBC last week that it has no plans to bring end-to-end encryption to its DMs, arguing that privacy makes users less safe. Meta is now arriving at the same destination from a different direction. The stakes are straightforward. End-to-end encryption means only the people in a conversation can read it, a technical lock that excludes the platform, third parties, and anyone who might later obtain a warrant. When that lock disappears, Meta and its employees can read Instagram DMs, law enforcement can subpoena them, and advertisers may eventually benefit from what gets learned. Instagram users who relied on encrypted DMs have until May 8 to decide what to archive. After that, their private conversations are Meta’s to read. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Meta is Ending Instagram Direct Message End-to-End Encryption appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

CBS: US Intel Showed Even Khamenei Thought Nepo Babytollah Was Incompetent

Who Wants to Tell Her? Dem Rep Shakes Her Fist at Trump REFUSING to Pass the SAVE ACT, Just 1 Big Problem

LH Grey Goes OFF on Toads Who Doxxed Cynical Publius in Maybe the Most VICIOUS Post We've Ever Seen on X

Amazon can be a great place to sell tech products, but not everything is fair game. Here's what you need to know about the products Amazon won't allow.