What a Creep

Abortion pills are probably the most dangerous way to kill your kid in the womb. A recent study by the Guttmacher Institute‚ an overtly pro-abort group‚ indicated that of all the abortions that took place in 2023‚ more than 60 percent of them were conducted through chemical abortions induced by the abortion pill. This study comes just before the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments surrounding mifepristone‚ one of the two pills involved in the abortion pill regimen.  The uptick in abortions using pills rose after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June of 2022. With SCOTUS pushing decisions on abortion laws back to the states‚ many areas used the opportunity to broaden abortion access while others took the decision to push more pro-life laws and protect innocent life.  “As abortion restrictions proliferate post-Dobbs‚ medication abortion may be the most viable option - or the only option - for some people‚ even if they would have preferred in-person procedural care‚” Guttmacher principal research scientist Rachel Jones said.  Mifepristone and misoprostol‚ the two-pill regimen used to terminate a baby inside the womb and force a woman to deliver the dead baby‚ became widely accepted. Distributors began delivering them via mail to ladies all across the nation. Pharmacy chains like CVS and Walgreens stocked their shelves with them and recently‚ New York City became the first in the country to launch what it called “Virtual ExpressCare” for women to virtually visit with a doctor and get the pills shipped and delivered ASAP. All that to say‚ there’s been intense moves by the left to distribute as many abortion pills as possible.  According to the Guttmacher Institute’s report of the Monthly Abortion Provision Study‚ there were approximately 642‚700 medication abortions in the United States in 2023 alone. This is a roughly ten percent increase in the number of medication abortions that took place in 2022.  Sadly‚ that isn’t even the all-encompassing number. “The medication abortion counts for 2023 do not include self-managed medication abortions that take place outside of the formal health care system or abortion medication mailed to people in states with total abortion bans‚” the report noted. That means that more than 642‚700 babies were killed by just one method of abortion in 2023. How sick! An important thing to note is that the abortion pill is not safe. The pills not only promote abortion as something that’s casual but they put women at extreme risk and‚ if successful‚ kill at least one human being. As a matter of fact‚ medication abortion has been reported to be “four times more dangerous” than surgical abortions and has reportedly increased abortion-related ER visits by 500 percent from 2002-2015. Next Tuesday the Supreme Court will hear a case between the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA‚ which will likely point out the FDA’s negligence in researching these pills and how dangerous they really are.  The Guttmacher Institute’s report puts a number to the reality of how influential these drugs are. It’s a sad‚ scary and harsh element of what pro-lifers are up against. The Guttmacher Institute insisted that “it is critical to ensure access to medication abortion” but I think it’s actually most critical to facilitate a culture that doesn’t think pregnancy is a disease that needs to be treated with pills or that babies' lives have no value.  That’s what’s really critical.

Unelected pundits unceasingly tell us democracy is in danger. Yet as voters grit their teeth for a Biden-Trump rematch‚ they might wonder whether democracy is such a great thing in the first place. Was it all a mistake to ditch George III for this? The U.K. has free elections just as we do. But when a prime minister is as unpopular as‚ say‚ Rishi Sunak is right now‚ nobody worries that Britain is in a cultural civil war. Prime ministers come and go‚ but the head of state‚ the king or queen‚ can be consistent for decades — and‚ in the case of a monarch like Elizabeth II‚ can be consistently beloved. Our citizens are only slightly less fascinated by the royal family than their subjects are. The plight of the missing princess has certainly captured Americans’ attention. The former Kate Middleton — now Catherine‚ Princess of Wales — has hardly been seen since Christmas. She went under the knife in January for "planned abdominal surgery‚" and spokesmen said she wouldn’t resume public duties until Easter. This was vague enough to pique rather than allay concerns. They intensified when her husband — the heir to the throne‚ Prince William — backed out of attending the funeral of his godfather‚ King Constantine of Greece‚ because of a sudden "personal matter." What could stop gossip about the princess’s health? Publicists at Kensington Palace‚ and evidently Kate and William‚ hit on the idea of releasing a photograph of the princess‚ smiling and surrounded by her children‚ for the U.K.’s Mothering Sunday on March 10. Only the photo they released was faked — badly‚ boldly and baldly. Little Princess Charlotte’s sweater sleeve disappeared on her wrist. The pattern on Prince Louis’ sweater was off-kilter‚ as were tiles on the ground behind him‚ among a plethora of other oddities. On closer look‚ it even seemed Kate’s head had been stitched in from another source. The Associated Press‚ Reuters and other agencies pulled the pic from circulation. Statements under the unseen princess’s name asserted‚ "like many amateur photographers‚ I do occasionally experiment with editing." That’s as charming as it is implausible. The manipulation was more than a touch-up‚ and releasing the image was calculated to quell conspiracy theories — which‚ of course‚ it only fueled. But the ineptitude of the whole thing emphasized how low the stakes really are. There’s a prurient‚ tabloid interest in prying into the princess’s health‚ but there’s also genuine sympathy on the part of many Brits‚ who see the royal family as the nation’s family‚ too. That’s not the way we Americans do‚ or should‚ think about our elected leaders. The monarchy is more a focus of reverence for the British than the Church of England is. It’s a reminder of something in common above politics and away from ideology — a family spirit. Of course‚ royal families are as flawed as every other kind. Yet in democratic times‚ public awareness of royal scandals can make the family seem more representative — even relatable. It certainly adds a soap-opera emotional investment to figures whose social status would otherwise make them feel remote. This does have a parallel in American politics: Bill Clinton and Donald Trump both mastered the art of involving the public in their passions. That helps a politician hog the headlines and keeps him going even when those headlines are outraged. Tabloid attention can get a royal killed‚ in the extreme case of an earlier Princess of Wales — Diana‚ William’s mother‚ the betrayed first wife of the now-King Charles‚ harried to death by paparazzi in a Paris tunnel. Yet Diana’s death ultimately reaffirmed the British public’s sympathy for the monarchy. When presidents or prime ministers encounter life-or-death circumstances‚ on the other hand‚ the lives on the line are usually others’‚ and on a large scale. Questions of war and peace often produce a nation’s deepest divisions. The British monarchy no longer decides such questions — which is one reason it remains loved; it is innocent of the most serious choices. American presidents‚ by contrast‚ bear the reputational cost for the power they wield at home and abroad. Does this mean America has no unifying figurehead untainted by polarizing choices? The closest thing we have to a constitutional monarch is the Constitution itself‚ which like a modern king or queen makes no policy and disinterestedly stands above those who do. But it’s hard to make the Constitution as exciting as a flesh-and-blood royal family — it has nothing like the Princess of Wales‚ so the human drama of our democracy comes from the men who also make its deadliest decisions. Daniel McCarthy is the editor of Modern Age: A Conservative Review. To read more by Daniel McCarthy‚ visit www.creators.com.

Tech mogul Elon Musk unloaded about the importance of free speech and the challenges he has faced dealing with the prior regime at X‚ the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.  During a live conversation with Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey on March 18‚ Musk stressed that Americans have an unparalleled right to freedom of speech that must be protected on social media. “No country has the protection of speech that the United States does‚ not even Canada‚” he said on X Spaces (formerly Twitter Spaces). “So that’s something we should really take pride in and seek to preserve. I think that the bedrock of democracy is freedom of speech.”  Going live with @elonmusk in just over an hour. You won’t want to miss this conversation. https://t.co/eQ7FyGEanz — Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) March 18‚ 2024 Musk emphasized the importance of free speech by discussing what motivated the Founding Fathers to write the First Amendment. “[The First Amendment] exists because people came from countries where they could not speak freely‚ where if they did speak their mind they would be imprisoned or killed‚” Musk explained. “That’s why they were so concerned about freedom of speech. It's because they didn’t have it in the countries they came from. In many places of the world‚ maybe most places‚ you don’t have freedom of speech.” Musk warned about political “constraints on speech” before calling out Twitter’s extreme bias under its former CEO Parag Agrawal. Musk said that there were roughly “ten voices on the right suppressed for every one on the left” on Twitter before he took over the company. Musk described the past regime as having a “very big thumb on the political scale.”  Although Musk’s influence has appeared to decrease overt censorship on the platform‚ there are still outside entities that try to sabotage free speech on X. Musk discussed some of his struggles with advertisers being pressured to pull their ads from X. He explained that “pressure groups” and various organizations “will get together” to “attack advertisers‚ who advertise on the X platform or some other platform‚ in order to starve the companies of revenue.” He later added that this kind of pressure campaign effectively “ becomes a boycott.” Musk stated that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg had resisted this pressure for a while before ultimately giving in when it had cost him billions of dollars. Musk said that these pressure groups have so much power because “household name brands” like Facebook want to avoid any “strife” and many advertisers would rather make concessions than deal with bad press.  Musk said that these advertiser boycotts had cost X two-thirds of its American advertising revenue and that the company would not have survived without significantly reducing costs. “If we had not been able to reduce our costs dramatically‚ X‚ formerly Twitter‚ would have gone bankrupt. And that’s fully what they were trying to do. They were trying to drive the company into bankruptcy‚ which obviously is major suppression of free speech.”  The X Space unfolded two days after Bailey‚ who hosted the interview‚ had his landmark free speech case heard by the Supreme Court. The Murphy v. Missouri case pitted Americans’ free speech on social media against collusion between Big Tech and the federal government.  Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Judge Scott McAfee decided last week against disqualifying Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from former President Donald Trump's election interference case in Georgia. Dissatisfied with the result — even though it led to Willis' lover resigning his post as special prosecutor — attorney Steve Sadow filed a motion Monday on behalf of Trump and several of his codefendants‚ requesting that McAfee grant a certificate of immediate review of the order to the Georgia Court of Appeals. Agreeing that the defendants' motions to dismiss and disqualify the Democratic DA "is of such importance to the case that immediate review should be had‚" McAfee granted the motion Wednesday. The initial ruling After multiple motions were filed on behalf of Trump and his codefendants accusing Willis of misconduct — beginning with attorney Ashleigh Merchant's opening salvo on Jan. 8 — Judge McAfee of the Fulton County Superior Court spent days hearing testimony concerning the Democratic DA's affair with Nathan Wade. Despite some indications that Willis and Wade may have misled the court about the timeline of their affair‚ McAfee‚ who is up for re-election‚ opted not to disqualify Willis. Instead‚ he required either the Democrat or her lover to step away from the case. Wade resigned hours after McAfee issued his March 15 ruling. The judge did‚ however‚ note that when confronted with the details of her affair with Wade‚ as alleged by the defendants‚ "a prima facie argument arises of financial enrichment and improper motivations which inevitably and unsurprisingly invites a motion such as this." Blaze News previously reported that McAfee also dragged Willis for the "unprofessional manner of [her] testimony during the evidentiary hearing‚" her "bad choices‚" her "tremendous lapse in judgment‚" and her "legally improper" remarks at an Atlanta-area church in January. The push for an appeal Sadow‚ lead counsel for Trump‚ filed a joint motion Monday requesting that the Fulton County Superior Court grant a certificate of immediate review of its order‚ stating that McAfee's disqualification ruling "is of exceptionally great importance to this case‚ substantially impacting Defendants' rights to due process." Sadow highlighted McAfee's stated sense that Willis' conduct "had created an appearance of impropriety and an 'odor of mendacity' that lingers in this case‚ as well as the continuing possibility that 'an outsider could reasonably think that District Attorney Willis is not exercising her independent professional judgment totally free of any compromising influences.'" The Trump attorney further suggested that the Georgia appellate courts would likely also recognize Willis' Jan. 14 speech‚ which McAfee recognized as "legally improper‚" as a contributing instance of forensic misconduct requiring the Democrat's disqualification. Off to the races McAfee agreed Wednesday that "the Order on the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss and Disqualify the Fulton County District Attorney issued March 15‚ 2024‚ 'is of such importance to the case that immediate review should be had.'" The judge wrote that his "challenged order is not one of final judgment‚ and the State has informed the Court that it has complied with the order's demands. Thus‚ unless directed otherwise by an appellate court‚ supersedeas shall only apply to the order being appealed." — (@) Accordingly‚ it is now up to the Georgia Court of Appeals to decide whether or not to take up the matter of Willis' disqualification. McAfee signaled that he will proceed with unrelated pretrial matters in the meantime. Sadow mocked those who suggested it would not be possible‚ writing‚ "So much for the so-called 'expert' naysayers who said Judge McAfee would not grant the certificate. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE!!!!" So that others would similarly know who he was referring to‚ Sadow shared an image of a post from Georgia State assistant law professor Anthony Michael Kreis who wrote‚ "I am increasingly skeptical that Judge McAfee will grant the certificate for immediate review. He essentially applied the defendants' preferred standard for disqualification and crafted a cure that the DA took within hours. I think there's reason to believe he's ready to move on." Sadow suggested Kreis might "need a new crystal ball or Ouija board." Trump's lead counsel also dunked on former Georgia state prosecutor and jury trial expert Chris Timmons‚ who cast doubt on whether McAfee would allow the defendants to appeal the order. From the USA Today article by Josh Meyer - quote from Chris Timmons \u2014 "I doubt McAfee is issuing the certificate‚" said Chris Timmons‚ a former Georgia state prosecutor and RICO and jury trial expert. "If you look in the order dismissing the six counts‚ he put in a footnote that\u2026 — (@) Sadow said in a statement obtained by USA Today‚ "The defense is optimistic that appellate review will lead to the case being dismissed and the DA being disqualified." Keith Johnson‚ a Georgia-based defense attorney and former prosecutor‚ told the New York Post that McAfee's pretrial decision to permit the appeal is rare and will effectively arrest the progress of the trial. "Practically speaking‚ the trial will not proceed until the Georgia Court of Appeals makes a ruling on Judge McAfee's order to allow District Attorney Willis to remain as a prosecutor on the case‚" said Johnson. The Post indicated Willis did not respond to its request for comment. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Asmeret Asefaw Berhe‚ a top official with the United States Department of Energy‚ who injected the department's science office with diversity‚ equity‚ and inclusion initiatives during her tenure‚ will step down from her position at the end of the month‚ Fox News Digital reported.Berhe‚ a professor of soil biogeochemistry‚ was nominated in April 2021 by President Biden to serve as the director of the Office of Science within the DOE. She was confirmed by the Senate in a 54-45 vote.According to the DOE's website‚ Berhe's areas of expertise include "soil science‚ global change science‚ and political ecology with an emphasis on how the soil system regulates the earth's climate and the dynamic two-way relationship between the natural environment and human communities."During her time as the head of science‚ Berhe has pushed her office to adopt "equity and inclusion" initiatives. In October 2022‚ Berhe implemented a policy requiring grant applicants "to submit a Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research (PIER) Plan as an appendix to their proposal narrative‚" according to the Office of Science's website. The plan mandated applicants to describe how they would "incorporate to promote diversity‚ equity‚ inclusion‚ and accessibility in their research projects.""The Office of Science (SC) is deeply committed to supporting diverse‚ equitable‚ inclusive‚ and accessible work‚ research‚ and funding environments that value mutual respect and personal integrity‚ and SC is committed to promoting people of all backgrounds‚ including individuals from groups and communities historically underrepresented in STEM fields and SC activities in recognition of our responsibility to serve the public‚" the website read.Berhe also oversaw the adoption of two workforce diversity programs: Funding for Accelerated‚ Inclusive Research and Reaching a New Energy Sciences Workforce.The FAIR program provided $35 million in fiscal year 2023 to advance a "diverse‚ vibrant‚ and excellent scientific workforce‚" Fox News Digital reported. In August‚ the DOE announced $37 million to "build research capacity in historically underrepresented institutions."The RENEW program provided $56 million to "institutions historically underrepresented in the SC research portfolio." When the initiative was announced‚ Berhe stated‚ "Science needs to hear from all American voices and the RENEW initiative will provide more opportunities to bring diverse perspectives into our disciplines.""These new and innovative ideas will help solve the big science challenges we are facing now and in the future‚" she said.In a statement to Fox News Digital regarding Berhe's upcoming exit‚ DOE Chief of Staff Christopher Davis said‚ "Under Dr. Berhe's leadership‚ the Office saw historic increases in funding‚ particularly for critical new technologies like artificial intelligence and fusion energy.""Programs she oversaw have made critical contributions to climate science‚ energy breakthroughs‚ and the advancement of emerging technologies‚ all while infusing the principles of equity‚ inclusivity‚ and accessibility. The Secretary and I are grateful for Dr. Berhe's willingness to serve the American people and wish her the very best as she returns to academia‚" Davis remarked.Berhe plans to return to the University of California to continue her professorship career. In her departure letter‚ Berhe called the role "the honor of my lifetime‚" Science reported. She noted that she is leaving the position with "pride in what we have accomplished‚ and a heavy heart filled with profound sadness and gratitude."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Super Bowl Champion Antonio Brown had a post on X labeled with a warning about "hateful content" after calling Joe Biden the "cracker of the day" alongside pictures of the president and different women.Brown's post had its visibility limited‚ which means that X won't show the post in trends‚ search results‚ or notifications. It can also exclude it from being near ads and restrict certain features.The seven-time Pro Bowl player has become increasingly political in his social media posts‚ with a series of recent commentary on the president.Aside from referring to Biden as the "cracker of the day‚" he also stated that "Biden cant find a door 3 feet from him" in response to an image of President Trump winning a golf tournament.As well‚ he has stated that Biden's stock has been going down and even alluded to the fact that the president's account had blocked him on the X platform. Cracker of the Day #CTESPN \n\n@JoeBiden — (@) "Other guy said we not black if we dont vote for him‚" Brown commented in response to rapper Kodak Black saying that Trump should be in office for 20 years. This was in reference to remarks Biden made in a 2020 interview‚ when he said "if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump‚ then you ain’t black."This‚ in addition to saying "legacy media lies" regarding recent Trump stories‚ only add to Brown's mystique as a controversial character.The last time Brown was seen on an NFL field‚ he stripped his jersey off and threw his gloves into the crowd following an argument with his coaching staff on the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Brown went on to explain on the "Full Send Podcast" that he suffered an ankle injury and told his coaching staff that he was unable to continue playing due to his poor health. He claimed that he was told to go back on the field or "get the f**k out‚" so he chose to leave instead. Biden cant find a door 3 feet from him #CTESPN — (@) Since then‚ Brown has appeared in select shows and events‚ often garnering media attention simply due to his attendance.Brown has recently been promoting his own sports channel called CTESPN‚ a play on words related to Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy — brain injury from concussions — which critics have accused him of having in an effort to explain his eccentric behavior.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Republican National Committee is suing Nevada state officials over alleged inconsistencies in the state's voter rolls.On Friday‚ the RNC and the Nevada Republican Party filed a lawsuit in federal court against Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar (D) and five county clerks‚ alleging they have violated the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 by not maintaining clean and accurate voter rolls.The lawsuit claimed that five Nevada counties‚ including Clark County‚ have "inordinately high voter registration rates" as reflected by their voter rolls."At least three Nevada counties have more registered voters than they have adult citizens who are over the age of 18. That number of voters is impossibly high‚" the lawsuit says. "An additional two counties have voter registration rates that exceed 90% of adult citizens over the age of 18. That figure far eclipses the national and statewide voter registration rate in recent elections."Moreover‚ the lawsuit claims‚ "Several Nevada counties have inordinately high inactive registration rates‚ indicating that Defendants do not make a reasonable effort to remove outdated registrations."By not maintaining clean and accurate voter rolls in compliance with federal law‚ the RNC said that "Aguilar is imperiling election integrity in the 2024 elections and sending a clear message to Nevada voters that he does not care about clean and accurate voter rolls."In a statement‚ RNC Chairman Michael Whatley explained why this is a critical election integrity issue. He said:Election integrity starts with clean voter rolls‚ and that’s why the National Voter Registration Act requires state officials to keep their rolls accurate and up-to-date. Nevada has universal mail voting and no voter ID requirement‚ which makes Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar’s failure to comply with the NVRA and provide accurate voter rolls all the more concerning. Securing clean voter rolls in Nevada is a critical step towards ensuring that it will be easy to vote and hard to cheat.The RNC sent Aguilar a demand letter in December threatening a lawsuit over the alleged problems.But the state attorney general's office‚ representing Aguilar‚ strongly pushed back on the RNC's claims‚ arguing the party's methodology for calculating the discrepancies is flawed. A 12-page response letter argued the RNC conflated incomparable data sets — the U.S. Census' 2022 Current Population Survey and Nevada's Citizen Voting Age Population from 2019 — to calculate the alleged discrepancies."It defies credulity that a survey conducted for an entirely different purpose‚ with a necessarily inaccurate recall-based measure of registration and a necessarily imprecise sample estimate of registration‚ forms a cornerstone of your analysis‚" the letter argued."This is comparing apples to orangutans‚" it added.The RNC filed a similar lawsuit against Michigan in federal court last week.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The executive director of an airport in Arkansas is fighting for his life after reportedly exchanging gunfire with federal agents who showed up at his residence to serve a search warrant earlier this week.At around 6 a.m. on Tuesday‚ agents with the Bureau of Alcohol‚ Tobacco‚ Firearms‚ and Explosives arrived to serve a search warrant at a residence in Little Rock owned by Bryan Malinowski‚ the 53-year-old executive director of the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport. Suddenly‚ during an execution of the warrant‚ shots rang out‚ leaving two wounded‚ including Malinowski. Neighbor Shea De Bruyn recalled hearing five or six loud bangs. "My heart was racing and the dogs were barking‚" she recalled. "I’m just really curious as to what was going on just a few houses down."An ATF statement claimed that the "subject of the investigation opened fire at ATF agents resulting in an agent-involved shooting when an agent returned fire." A statement from Arkansas State Police added that Malinowski was treated at the scene and then taken to an area hospital.The situation appears grave. Malinowski's older brother‚ Matthew Malinowski‚ claimed that Bryan had sustained a shot to the head and was on life support. "We don’t know if he’s going to make it in the next 24 hours‚" Matthew said.An unidentified ATF agent was likewise wounded during the shooting‚ but the injury is considered "non-life-threatening‚" police said.The ASP Criminal Investigation Division has been tasked with investigating the incident. "An investigative case file will be presented to the prosecuting attorney‚ who will determine whether the use of deadly force was consistent with Arkansas law‚" ASP's statement said. Details about the search warrant for Malinowski's home have not been released‚ though NBC News reported that Malinowski has no prior arrest record. Friends told the Arkansas Times that he enjoys buying and trading firearms‚ and witnesses did report seeing agents remove guns and tools from Malinowski's home and placing them in a U-Haul truck.Malinowski has been working at the Clinton National Airport for more than 15 years. He makes more than $250‚000 a year and regularly comes in contact with powerful people‚ including U.S. senators‚ Matthew Malinowski said. Matthew added that his brother has "much to lose" and "no incentive to do anything wrong."Airport Commission Chairman Bill Walker issued a statement about the shooting as well. "Today’s incident saddens us‚ and we pray for everyone involved‚" he wrote. Walker added that deputy executive director Tom Clarke will take over Malinowski's duties at the airport but that otherwise "the airport’s day-to-day operations continue as normal."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

More than 1‚000 Jews working in Hollywood signed an open letter denouncing director Jonathan Glazer's "occupation" speech focused on the Israel-Hamas war at the Academy Awards ceremony‚ Variety reported.What's the background?After his Holocaust film “The Zone of Interest” won the Oscar for Best International Film earlier this month‚ Glazer said in his acceptance speech — with producer James Wilson and financier Len Blavatnik on stage with him — that "we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people ... whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel or the ongoing attack on Gaza‚ all the victims of this dehumanization‚ how do we resist?”Variety said the open letter fired back with‚ “We refute our Jewishness being hijacked for the purpose of drawing a moral equivalence between a Nazi regime that sought to exterminate a race of people‚ and an Israeli nation that seeks to avert its own extermination.”The letter also said‚ “The use of words like ‘occupation’ to describe an indigenous Jewish people defending a homeland that dates back thousands of years‚ and has been recognized as a state by the United Nations‚ distorts history. It gives credence to the modern blood libel that fuels a growing anti-Jewish hatred around the world‚ in the United States‚ and in Hollywood‚" according to the magazine.Variety said the list of co-signees includes actress Debra Messing‚ director Eli Roth‚ and producers Lawrence Bender‚ Amy Pascal‚ and Sherry Lansing. The magazine added that nearly 500 Jewish individuals initially signed the letter — and that about 500 more have added their names to the letter since it was first published.Glazer declined to comment‚ according to Variety.“There was no concern for how Jewish people are going to react to a speech like that‚ to that applause to those red pins‚ when not even our hostages are being mentioned‚ and it’s just incredibly hurtful‚ incredibly painful‚” actor Brett Gelman told the magazine. “It’s truly baffling to me that people were choosing to be silent that night.” Variety said several Oscar attendees including actor Mark Ruffalo and singer Billie Eilish wore Artists4Ceasefire pins.Gelman is on a book tour for his literary debut‚ “The Terrifying Realm of the Possible: Nearly True Stories‚” which has seen four stores cancel signings‚ the magazine said. Gelman's agent told Variety that venues cited security concerns due to pro-Palestinian protestors who've targeted his client over his vocal support for Israel.Rabbi Marvin Hier — a two-time Oscar winner who founded the Simon Wiesenthal Center — added to the magazine that the reaction to Glazer's speech in the Dolby Theatre appalled him: “I couldn’t believe it. If I didn’t know better‚ I would think that this was a Hamas rally. Where was the audience? People should have gotten up and booed because he left the Academy Awards [TV audience] thinking this was fine.” Open Letter Condemns Jonathan Glazer's 'Zone of Interest' Oscars Speech | THR News youtu.be Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!