by Joe Atwill, The Unz Review: J D Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye is a work with many mysteries attached to it. Perhaps the least of these is that, though the story is both incoherent and morally destructive, it has been forced-fed to adolescents by America’s public school system for sixty years. A mystery more […]

y’all want to join?

The 'One Tree Hill' alum says her faith leads her to other ways of disciplining children. Continue reading…

After all the fake polls, a real poll. The post 75% of New York Jews Don’t Like Mamdani, Only 15% Do appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

'this is their pattern'

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Fortnite will once again be playable on iPhones in Australia, following a significant court ruling that targeted Apple and Google’s control over mobile app distribution. The federal court found both companies had leveraged their dominant positions, and steep in-app purchase commissions of up to 30 percent, in ways that harmed competition. Epic Games’ chief executive Tim Sweeney revealed on X that the title will arrive on iOS via the Epic Games Store, though no launch day is set. He noted the timing will depend on how the company navigates the changes brought on by Australia’s antitrust decision. The ruling stems from two separate lawsuits Epic filed against Apple and Google, one in late 2020, the other in early 2021, which were later merged before Justice Jonathan Beach. While Beach concluded that both firms’ marketplace practices undermined competition, he dismissed claims that their actions breached consumer protection laws or amounted to “unconscionable conduct,” a term used for behavior considered severely unfair or oppressive. The full decision, running more than 2,000 pages, has yet to be released publicly. Google spokesperson Dan Jackson welcomed the court’s decision to reject Epic’s demand for mandatory third-party store access within Google Play and the removal of security safeguards. Still, he said the company disagreed with the court’s view of its billing model and certain past business arrangements. Apple took a similar position, expressing approval at some parts of the outcome while disputing others, and insisting the App Store remains both competitive and safe for users. Epic’s broader legal fight began in the United States on August 13, 2020, producing mixed results. Against Apple, the company came away with only partial victories, though Apple may still be forced to loosen its App Store rules after failing to comply with a previous order. The case against Google turned out far differently: a jury found in late 2023 that the Play Store and its billing system were operated as an illegal monopoly, and that verdict was upheld in July by a Ninth Circuit appeals panel. If Google cannot secure a delay or fresh review, it could face sweeping changes to its Android business. Fortnite was originally pulled from Apple’s App Store in 2020, but has since made selective returns, including on iPhones in the EU through the Epic Games Store last year and a brief reappearance in Apple’s marketplace this May. With the Australian decision, the game’s comeback is now poised to reach yet another major market. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Fortnite Set to Storm Back Onto iPhones in Australia After Landmark Court Ruling appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

The PBS News Hour aggressively, almost amusingly avoided the term “illegal” to describe illegal immigrants in Friday’s story on President Trump’s call for a new U.S. Census that would not count illegal immigrants, a move that would change the recorded population of various states and perhaps result in fewer members in the congressional delegation of some states with high illegal-immigrant populations. Host Geoff Bennett: President Trump's call for a new census is foreshadowing a potential constitutional clash. The pronouncement came in a social media post, in which he added that -- quote -- "People who are in our country illegally will not be counted." John Yang explores what the president hopes to achieve and how his requested recount aligns with another of his priorities, redrawing congressional maps. Note that the only reference to the illegal status of the immigrants came from Trump, and host Bennett made sure to set the phrase off in quotes. Bennett along with PBS reporter John Yang and their NPR reporter guest shunned the term in the proceeding report. John Yang: Geoff, excluding those without legal status from the census would mean millions of people living in America go uncounted, reshaping the contours of the country's congressional districts. Opponents argue that it would violate the 14th Amendment's requirement that the allocation of congressional seats be determined by counting the whole number of persons in each state. Hansi Lo Wang covers the census for NPR…. NPR's Hansi Lo Wang used the same "legal status" euphemism: Hansi Lo Wang: There is a federal law that says there could be a mid-decade census, but a lot of caveats to put there. It's a mid-decade census that right now that's really outside the time frame that can't really be carried out at this point. But there is a bill that President Trump says he supports. It's a bill, a proposal by Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. And this bill would exclude any U.S. resident without citizenship, so not just the people without legal status that President Trump is calling for to be excluded…. Reporter Yang worked up another formulation to avoid saying "illegal." Yang: Do we know which party would benefit if you exclude people not in the country legally? Wang answered that it was hard to say which political party would benefit. Indeed, both the blue states of California and New York and the red states Florida and Texas possibly losing seats based on their large illegal immigrant populations. “People without legal status” is yet another way journalists soften descriptions about illegal immigrants so they don't land harshly on tender liberal ears. “Undocumented immigrants” is also a PBS favorite. This segment was paid for, at least for now, by taxpayers like you. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 8/8/25 7:31:31 p.m. (ET) Geoff Bennett: President Trump's call for a new census is foreshadowing a potential constitutional clash. The pronouncement came in a social media post, in which he added that — quote — "People who are in our country illegally will not be counted." John Yang explores what the president hopes to achieve and how his requested recount aligns with another of his priorities, redrawing congressional maps. John Yang: Geoff, excluding those without legal status from the census would mean millions of people living in America go uncounted, reshaping the contours of the country's congressional districts. Opponents argue that it would violate the 14th Amendment's requirement that the allocation of congressional seats be determined by counting the whole number of persons in each state. Hansi Lo Wang covers the census for NPR. Hansi, the Constitution makes the census a congressional responsibility. How much say does a president have? Hansi Lo Wang, NPR: The president has some say that Congress could delegate to his administration and what the commerce secretary, who oversees the Census Bureau that has to carry out the census. This is codified in federal law. But, like you said, I think we have to go back to Article I of the Constitution gives ultimate authority over the census to Congress. Congress has passed laws with directions on how presidential administrations should carry out censuses. John Yang: And how might — using the authority that they do have, how might the Trump administration try to get around that the congressional requirement? Hansi Lo Wang: There is a federal law that says there could be a mid-decade census, but a lot of caveats to put there. It's a mid-decade census that right now that's really outside the time frame that can't really be carried out at this point. But there is a bill that President Trump says he supports. It's a bill, a proposal by Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. And this bill would exclude any U.S. resident without citizenship, so not just the people without legal status that President Trump is calling for to be excluded. And it would also call for a new census, a new round of redistribution of House seats, and a new round of congressional redistricting all before the 2026 midterm election. John Yang: Redistricting and reallocation is a long process. Would there be enough time to do this in time for ballots to be printed, for election officials to be ready for the 2026 midterms? Hansi Lo Wang: The census experts I talk to say no, not the kind of census that most of us are used to, which is, like you said, there are paper forms. There's door-knocking. It's a months-long process to do the counting because you are trying to count every person living in the country. It's a big country. There's a lot of people. And it usually takes more than a decade of planning, of research, of testing. It sounds impossible to a lot of census experts to have that kind of a census before the midterm election next year. John Yang: How does this fit in with the Republican strategy of getting Republican states to redraw the districts now to try to pick up seats in the House? Hansi Lo Wang: It's really not clear. I think we should go back to what President Trump has said so far, calling for a new census. We're not sure if he's talking about the 2030 census. We're not sure if he's talking about the census before a 2026 midterm election that Representative Greene is calling for. And so there's a lot of confusion there, a lot of questions. But it is happening at the same time, this call for a new census, as well as this push in Texas, as well as other states, to redraw congressional maps. And if there were to be a new census, there would be a lot of legal questions. There will be lawsuits. But it would theoretically come up with a new set of numbers that could theoretically shift congressional seats among the states. But there are a lot of legal hurdles, there are a lot of practical hurdles that have to be overcome before we even get to those type of — to get to that point. John Yang: Do we know which party would benefit if you exclude people not in the country legally? Hansi Lo Wang: One thing to keep in mind is that the formula used to redistribute House seats is a very sensitive formula. Small changes in populations can make a difference between whether that last seat, those last two seats go to this state or the other state. And so with so many changes in immigration patterns, with increased immigration enforcement, it's hard to predict by the time there is a census what the country, what those dynamics look like. And so it's really hard to say. John Yang: Hansi Lo Wang of NPR, thank you very much. Hansi Lo Wang: You're welcome.