Former President Donald Trump handily won the Nevada Republican Party’s presidential caucuses Thursday‚ marking his fourth win of the GOP primary cycle over former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley. With 1% of vote tallied‚ Trump had 98% of the vote to virtually unknown candidate Ryan Binkley’s 2%‚ securing Silver State’s 26 delegates in a landslide victory. The Associated Press called the race for Trump at 11:05 p.m. EST‚ shortly after the first results came in....

An abstract ode to the apocalypse. The post What is the R.E.M. song ‘It’s The End of the World As We Know It’ about? first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Smokey Robinson was the founder and frontman of which Motown group? Take our quiz and find out!

It’s the end of another week‚ one in which the Republican Party was presented with oodles of opportunities to miss opportunities … and took full advantage. One day‚ some day‚ the GOP will be led by people who are competent‚ committed‚ and backed by suitable resources to do a good job. When that day comes‚ we can begin talking about dusting America off and standing her back on her feet. But we are unfortunately not at that day. To wit… 1. Buck‚ Gallagher‚ and McClintock Have Adam Kinzinger’s Disease‚ and Maybe They Need to Go the Way Of Kinzinger The GOP had the votes to impeach Alejandro Mayorkas this week. It didn’t happen. The House of Representatives let Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas off the hook for the border crisis created under his watch in a historic 216-214 vote against impeachment. Reps. Ken Buck (R-CO) and Tom McClintock (R-CA) announced before the vote they would vote against impeachment. They were joined by Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) in voting with unified Democrats. After the vote was decided‚ Rep. Blake Moore (R-UT) voted nay‚ but only for procedural reasons so that the House may vote on the measure again at some point. I could give you the reasons that Buck‚ McClintock‚ and Gallagher gave for failing to vote for the impeachment. Those reasons are crap. They don’t matter. Oh‚ sure‚ there are some finer debate-society points we could discuss about the standard for impeachment‚ blah blah blah. Those points were surely aired in the House GOP caucus meetings‚ and they were not convincing. The Mayorkas impeachment was the best‚ most realistic opportunity House Republicans have had to hold the Biden administration responsible for the border invasion that Mayorkas has been the instrument of. And it was derailed by these three prima donna jake legs. Donald Trump was impeached for asking the Ukrainians to participate in a criminal investigation of something we now know is a — in Joe Biden’s words — big f’ing deal. Then he was impeached‚ post-presidency‚ over a protest that turned violent in significant part due to the actions of people under the direction or pay of the federal government. So don’t tell me that Alejandro Mayorkas‚ who‚ as the federal bureaucrat put in charge of the agencies tasked with keeping a secure border and controlling who comes into the country‚ has overseen some 10 million foreign trespassers‚ many of whom from countries that are hostile to us‚ can’t be impeached. Ken Buck says he has interest in becoming a talking head on MSNBC. Perhaps he ought to go and do that now so the people of Colorado can replace him with somebody who isn’t working out his emotional problems on the floor of the House of Representatives. As for McClintock‚ maybe it’s time to start pointing fingers at him as a reason the GOP in California is kaput. And Gallagher? It seems like he needs to learn when to lecture others and when to keep his mouth shut. I’m not Mike Johnson. I don’t expect that he’ll take my advice. But if I was Johnson‚ I would strip these three clowns of all their committee assignments‚ and I would fund primary challengers to them through the NRCC. When all you have is a 219-vote majority‚ performative histrionics from members of that majority at the expense of the herd simply cannot be tolerated. 2. Bye‚ Ronna A good thing happened this week… BREAKING: RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has told Donald Trump she will be resigning after the South Carolina primary. Good Here is what Vivek Ramaswamy had to say about McDaniel during the primary debates. "We've become a party of losers… Since Ronna McDaniel took over as… pic.twitter.com/MvnuidPjdH — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) February 7‚ 2024 …except now we’re really going to do this? Rep. Matt Gaetz‚ R-Fla.‚ turned heads Tuesday with an out-of-character post on social media after news broke of Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel’s plans to step down from her post. The Sunshine State congressman appeared to announce his endorsement of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to take over as chair of the Republican National Committee. Rep. McCarthy‚ he said‚ would make a “terrific” leader for the party. “I fully endorse Kevin McCarthy for RNC Chair‚” Rep. Gaetz wrote. “Kevin is well organized and a very high-revenue fundraiser. He will also be well-liked by the RNC Committee. The RNC Chair doesn’t make any policy decisions‚ set any agenda‚ or negotiate against Democrats‚ ever. Kevin would be terrific.” No‚ of course not. Gaetz was joking. But why? How is that helpful? McCarthy is gone from Congress‚ while Matt Gaetz is still around. It is of zero value to attempt to skin him again when the party and the GOP House delegation are attempting to rebuild from the damage that the triumvirate of McCarthy‚ McConnell‚ and McDaniel have done. Do better‚ Matt. Do much better. Actually‚ Collin Rugg might have stumbled on the answer for fixing the mess Ronna McDaniel has made: get Ramaswamy to take that job for a year or two. He’s a financial guy‚ he understands the need for a reformed Republican Party that attracts votes from middle-class and working-class Americans‚ and he’s a successful businessman who knows how to run things. The chances are pretty good that Ramaswamy would have the energy to fight back against what the Democrats have done to American elections. 3. This. My Lord‚ This. …which Mollie Hemingway absolutely nailed earlier this week. WATCH: In four minutes of testimony before Congress‚ @MZHemingway sums up everything wrong with America's elections from mail in ballots‚ to Zuckerbucks‚ to censorship‚ to Big Tech censorship‚ to Democrats trying to put Trump in jail. pic.twitter.com/lXAJJxFp7n — Greg Price (@greg_price11) February 7‚ 2024 Why did the Republican Party allow this to happen? And why isn’t the party organization being tasked to push back with all the political force in the world against it? There are “voters” in Michigan‚ still on the rolls‚ who have been dead for 16 federal election cycles. Nothing is done about it. All the money Ronna McDaniel spent on flowers could have bought a whole lot of TV ads in her own state to inflame the voters over getting the stiffs off the voter rolls. But of course‚ there are no bigger stiffs than the people in charge of the GOP. Just when it’s clearly time for a change‚ you have these people in the way. 4. The National Guard Heads to the Border This is a positive‚ as Louisiana is the latest state to commit to standing at our border to attempt to stop Biden’s flood of trespassers. But we need far more clarity‚ especially from a party that can’t even get a consensus for throwing ammo downrange at Mayorkas‚ the most egregious failure (almost certainly intentionally so‚ given his chronic lies to Congress about the border) in the history of the U.S. federal bureaucracy. One day‚ I’d like to hear someone in the political class say something like this: The Democrat Party has made a conscious decision to change the demographics of America to make it look more like the unstable democracies‚ communist dictatorships and rank kleptocracies these people are fleeing from. That isn’t to say people from Venezuela or Nigeria or Iraq can’t succeed as Americans. Of course they can. But coming in a wave of 10 million‚ which is the current estimate of migrants who have crossed our borders during Joe Biden’s time in office‚ it’s virtually impossible to assimilate these people. And that assimilation becomes even more difficult when they’re immediately put on welfare. What they’re assimilated into‚ therefore‚ is the American underclass/dependency culture‚ and all the behavioral pathologies that involves. None of which is an accident‚ of course. This is being done intentionally. It’s meant to change America from an exceptional country whose citizens will stand and fight for freedom to something much less‚ unexceptional and comfortable in the dysfunction and betrayal of its ruling class. Biden and the people handling him know that stopping the flood of migrants is a 3-to-1 issue not in their favor with the American people. But they think that ultimately they can get amnesty for this horde of illegals which ultimately leads to citizenship and voter registration. And where they control the mechanisms of state government‚ like in New York and California and Oregon and other places‚ they’ll register them to vote in local elections which will almost assuredly bleed into federal elections. And if they can’t get that‚ they know the children of this flood born here will be American citizens – they’ll be born and raised in a government-dependent underclass‚ radicalized in left-dominated public schools using indoctrination into concepts like “equity” and critical race theory and intersectionalist feminism and transgenderism. They’ll have been stripped of whatever Christianity or other great religion their parents carried from the Old Country and taught the catechisms of the woke religion‚ and then they’ll be set upon the electorate as hard-core Marxists‚ miserable‚ alone and desperate for meaning and belonging in a country to which they are alien and alienated. In short‚ they’re the perfect Democrat voters. Rather than argue with cretins like Jamie Raskin and Chris Murphy about useless pieces of legislation‚ which is a classic wrestling-with-pigs analogy‚ the GOP needs to learn to play over the top of the Democrats and make them answer for what they’re actually doing. If I was advising Donald Trump‚ I would not even talk about anything else. I would have him bring every single campaign issue back to the border and press the fact that the Democrat Party‚ Barack Obama‚ proprietor‚ is actively and unmistakably perpetuating the replacement of our current electorate with something from the Third World because it likes the idea of governing as Third World kleptocrats and dictators do. And when they bellyache about the rudeness of the accusation‚ I would suggest that Trump bring up the current state of the big blue cities they’ve run into the ground. There is no comeback to that point. 5. The Bloomberg–Rockefeller Anti-American Alliance Normally‚ we conclude the 5QT with something light. This week‚ I can’t. You know by now about the atrocious decision — Sen. John Kennedy called it “energy suicide” in a great speech this week — by the Obama Redux Biden administration to slap a moratorium on construction of new liquefied natural gas terminals. There’s a Wall Street Journal article on this subject that will almost certainly infuriate you beyond measure: Charities controlled by members of the Rockefeller family and billionaire donors were key funders of a successful campaign to pressure President Biden to pause new approvals of liquefied natural gas exports from the U.S. The Rockefellers‚ along with other wealthy donors including the philanthropy of Michael Bloomberg‚ have provided millions of dollars in recent years to front-line environmental groups that are campaigning against fossil-fuel projects‚ including LNG terminals that have been proposed on the Gulf Coast‚ according to people familiar with the effort. Some green funders hadn’t given much attention to the LNG exports until recently‚ in part because of ambivalence about the role natural gas should play in the energy transition. Plus‚ some previous campaigns to kill LNG terminals had been unsuccessful‚ damping some donors’ and large environmental organizations’ appetite for taking on the industry. Mega-rich white leftists — the Rockefellers’ money came from oil and gas‚ for crying out loud! — trying desperately to kill middle-class jobs by ginning up poor people against economic development is one of the most evil‚ atrocious things politics can offer. Be prepared‚ because this will piss you off: The initiative dispatched scouts to the Gulf Coast‚ where several facilities crank out LNG‚ and developers plan to build at least a dozen more. They met with front-line leaders opposed to the projects‚ and started making grants to their organizations. Among them was Roishetta Ozane‚ a single mom of six from Sulphur‚ La.‚ who has emerged as one of the campaign’s foremost voices. The environmental-justice activist had for years been trying to alert large environmental groups about a fossil-fuel expansion in southwestern Louisiana‚ largely in vain‚ she said. Emphasis mine. A single mom of six? So she’s inflicted six fatherless children on society and Michael Bloomberg and the Rockefellers want to send her forth to lecture the rest of us on public policy with an eye toward killing middle-class jobs in the energy sector? How interested are you in listening to Roishetta Ozane’s bromides on economic development and ecological science? And how do you think John D. Rockefeller would feel about his descendants’ treatment of his legacy and fortune? If it weren’t for the fact that the government is capable of doing more damage than any other entity‚ this is enough to make one open to the ideas of Bernie Sanders and others in the radical Left about breaking up the massive family fortunes of our titans of industry. If there is a single Rockefeller left in America who isn’t a net negative on society‚ I’m not aware of him or her (but open to the possibility). As for Bloomberg‚ he’s a James Bond villain almost on the order of George Soros and his disgusting son. READ MORE: The Enemy Within: Corrupt DOJ Will Not Charge Biden — Only Trump Trump Is the Front-Runner and Biden Is Drifting to Disaster The post Five Quick Things: The GOP’s Kinzinger Syndrome appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Oct. 7 pulled back a veil on global politics. Not only did it demonstrate the vitriol Israelis face in their own country‚ but it also revealed the ugly head of anti-Semitism in the United States. On today’s episode of The Spectacle podcast‚ New York lawyer and free speech advocate Ron Coleman joins hosts Melissa Mackenzie and Scott McKay to discuss the war in Israel and the path forward for both Israel and the U.S. They address anti-Semitism‚ especially as it appears on the left‚ and the loss of faith and identity among many American Jews today. (READ MORE: The Palestinian State of Jordan) You won’t want to miss this conversation! Order Scott’s new book‚ Racism‚ Revenge and Ruin: It’s All Obama‚ here. Read Scott’s and Melissa’s writing here and here. Listen to The Spectacle with Melissa Mackenzie and Scott McKay on Spotify. Watch The Spectacle with Melissa Mackenzie and Scott McKay on Rumble.        READ MORE of The American Spectator’s coverage of Israel: The ‘Two-State Solution’ Echoes Hitler’s ‘Final Solution’ Israel Should Reject the Palestinian State Snake Oil The post <;i>;The Spectacle<;/i>; Ep. 60: What Is Next in Israel? Nobody Knows. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

People always ask me: “So what’s the solution?” What do I know? Surely‚ however‚ it’s time to forget the eight two-state solutions that have never worked. What about a three-state solution: Gaza to Egypt‚ West Bank to Jordan (the 1967 borders)? Then they say: “But they don’t want them back!” The answer is Churchill’s idea of the only things that work in the Middle East: “force and bribery.” Whatever it costs us to bribe them is less than a war‚ and we back the deal with air power. Better yet (in the words of an old friend in a ’70s panel discussion on the woes of the British car industry): “Go back to 1945 and start all over again.” ***** Editor’s Note: The following account of U.K. Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s perspective on Israel and Palestine‚ written by Richard M. Langworth‚ was originally published in two parts‚ “Timeline: Winston Churchill on Palestine‚ 1945-46” and “Timeline: Winston Churchill and the Road to Israel‚ 1947-49‚” by the Hillsdale College Churchill Project on Nov. 27‚ 2023‚ and Dec. 5‚ 2023‚ respectively. The original pieces can be found here and here. Both have been republished with permission by the author and publisher‚ with small edits made by the request of the author. In 1906‚ attributing the remark to “a witty Irishman‚” young Winston Churchill told Parliament: “There are a terrible lot of lies going about the world‚ and the worst of it is that half of them are true.” Has anything changed 120 years later? Recent events prompt a review of events in Palestine after the Second World War. What did Churchill say about them? Is there is anything to learn from him? READ MORE: The Secret to Winston Churchill’s Greatness Churchill’s responsibility for British policy ended with the election of July 1945. He was‚ however‚ by no means silent about Palestine (West and East)‚ and Britain’s role in it. He had had a great deal to do with it over the past quarter century. His thoughts and proposals in the early postwar years illustrate how the region became what it is today. West Palestine simmered from 1945 to early 1947. Events came thick and fast toward the end of 1947. A year later‚ a war had been fought‚ and the State of Israel had been founded. The United States and Soviet Union immediately recognized the new nation. Britain did not‚ and indeed nearly went to war with Israel during its 1948 war with Egypt‚ Jordan‚ Syria‚ and Lebanon. Because of length I have divided this timeline into two parts. This first installment covers the period of “simmering”: Juxtaposed with events are Churchill’s comments. I have avoided personal opinions‚ leaving conclusions to the reader. “History with its flickering lamp stumbles along the trail of the past‚ trying to reconstruct its scenes‚ to revive its echoes‚ and kindle with pale gleams the passion of former days.” —RML Prelude “As 1945 began‚ three independent Arab States—Saudi Arabia‚ Egypt and Iraq—wanted to know what Britain and the United States intended with regard to the Jewish future in Palestine. Churchill continued to seek a Zionist solution whereby the 517‚000 Jews then in West Palestine‚ just under a third of the Arab population‚ would have their own State in which they would not be at the mercy of a hostile Arab majority‚ but able to govern themselves‚ albeit in only about a third of the area they had hoped for.   “In February‚ off the coast of Egypt‚ Churchill called on Roosevelt on board the American warship Quincy. Roosevelt was gravely ill. Churchill had already been shocked at his pallor at the Yalta Conference a week earlier and felt that he did not have long to live. He had in fact only two months. “Shortly before Churchill called on him on Quincy‚ Roosevelt had spent several hours with the Saudi monarch‚ Abdulaziz bin Abdul Rahman‚ known as Ibn Saud. It was Churchill who had urged Ibn Saud to meet Roosevelt. FDR‚ Churchill told the Saudi monarch‚ was ‘one of my most cherished friends.’ The President’s meeting with Ibn Saud on 14 February was not encouraging for Churchill’s hopes of a future Jewish State in Palestine.” —Martin Gilbert The Arab Case‚ 1945    February 14th. King Ibn Saud to President Roosevelt‚ USS Quincy: “Arabs and Jews can never cooperate‚ neither in Palestine nor in any other country….  [What] changed the whole picture was the immigration from Eastern Europe of people who were technically and culturally on a higher level than the Arabs [who] had greater difficulty in surviving economically. [That these] energetic Europeans are Jewish is not the cause of the trouble. It is their superior skills and culture.” 17th. King Ibn Saud to Winston S. Churchill‚ Lake Faiyum‚ Egypt: “The Jews in Palestine are continuously increasing in number; they are even forming a sort of Government of their own‚ with a prime minister‚ a foreign minister and a minister of defence. They also had formed a military force of 30‚000 men with modern arms and equipment. They have thus become a great danger to the Arabs…. The Arabs would fight the Jews‚ and‚ even if they were not victorious‚ they would not mind because they would go to Paradise. I have continually advised moderation to the Arabs with regard to Palestine‚ but fear that a clash might come….” Churchill‚ 27 February‚ House of Commons (HofC): “[King Saud’s] aid will be needed…. I have hopes that when the war is over good arrangements can be made for securing the peace and progress of the Arab world‚ and generally of the Middle East‚ and that Great Britain and the United States‚ which is taking an increasing interest in these regions‚ will be able to play a valuable part in proving that well-known maxim of the old Free Trader‚ ‘All legitimate interests are in harmony.’” March  2nd. Emir Abdullah to WSC: “The inhabitants of the Arab world are in a ferment over the future of Palestine. The Arabs believe at present that the Jews want to have Palestine only as a means of their future domination of the whole Arab world economically as well as politically.” 10th. King Ibn Saud to WSC (paraphrased): “The ambitions of the Jews are not confined to Palestine alone. The preparations they have made show that they intend to take hostile action against neighbouring Arab countries…. to create a form of Nazi-Fascism within sight of the democracies and in the midst of the Arab countries…. “Joshua captured the land of the Canaanites—an Arab tribe—with great cruelty and barbarity. The Arabs have been in Palestine since 3500 years before Christ. They have ruled it‚ alone or with the Turks‚ for 1300 years. The disjointed rule of the Jews did not exceed 380 confused and sporadic years‚ ending in 332 BC. For 2200 years there have been few Jews there and they have had no influence…. [They were] aliens who had come to Palestine at intervals and had then been turned out over two thousand years ago.” The Jewish Case‚ 1945    May  22nd. Chaim Weizmann to WSC: “The Jewish people have waited till the end of the German war‚ not only for their deliverance from Hitler‚ but also from the injustice of the White Paper of 1939‚ which has so intensely aggravated both their sufferings and the loss of human life. We remember with gratitude how‚ in the debate on May 23rd‚ 1939‚ the voice of British conscience spoke through you. We have noted how‚ during the years of war‚ you have never let yourself be drawn into saying anything which could be interpreted as an acceptance of the White Paper.   “This has enabled me to urge upon my people patience. But now the German war is over. Under your leadership victory has come. Your word could never carry greater weight than it does now. The White Paper still stands. It is prolonging the agony of the Jewish survivors. Will you not say the word which is to right wrongs and set the people free?” Churchill to Weizmann‚ 9 June: “I have received your letter of 22 May‚ enclosing a Memorandum on behalf of the Jewish Agency for Palestine. There can I fear be no possibility of the question being effectively considered until the victorious Allies are definitely seated at the Peace table.” June   15th. Weizmann to WSC: “[Your message] came as a great shock to me. I had always understood from our conversations that our problem would be considered as soon as the German war was over. But your phrase‚ ‘until the victorious Allies are definitely seated at the Peace table‚’ substitutes some indefinite date in the future. I can hardly believe this to have been your intention…. [T]he continuation of the White Paper means confinement to a territorial ghetto consisting of five percent of the area of Western Palestine. They could hardly put up with this during the war; now it becomes unbearable.” Churchill to Weizmann‚ 29 June: “I am afraid I can add nothing to my letter of June 9 except to explain that the Peace table means the Peace table…. I do not know what course the Great Powers will take about this. But I trust that after the July [Potsdam] Conference‚ before the end of the year‚ there will be some coherent attempt on the part of the major Allies to settle the various outstanding territorial questions‚ and that would be the time when the Jewish position in Palestine would rightly fall to be considered….   “It has occurred to me for some time… that it might be a solution of your difficulties if the Mandate were transferred from Britain to the United States who‚ with her great wealth and strength and strong Jewish elements‚ might be able to do more for the Zionist cause than Great Britain. I need scarcely say I shall continue to do my best for it. But‚ as you will know‚ it has very few supporters in the Conservative Party‚ and even the Labour Party now seem to have lost all zeal.” 1945 Timeline April   12th: Franklin Roosevelt dies at Warm Springs‚ Georgia; Harry Truman becomes U.S. President. 18th: Allied armies encounter horrific scenes while liberating the concentration camp at Ohrdruf‚ near Gotha‚ with Buchenwald: “the acme of atrocity.”   Churchill‚ 19 April‚ HofC: “No words can express the horror which is felt by His Majesty’s Government and their principal Allies at the proofs of these frightful crimes now daily coming into view…. I have this morning received an informal message from General Eisenhower saying that the new discoveries‚ particularly at Weimar‚ far surpass anything previously exposed.” May  8th: V-E Day: Germany surrenders; the war in Europe is over.  31st: Churchill calls for cease-fire in French-Syrian hostilities after France attempts to reassert its authority in Syria and Lebanon. Franco-Syrian negotiations begin.  Churchill‚ 14 June‚ HofC: “We have no wish to steal anybody’s property in any portion of the globe…. We are very glad if France can manage for herself in discussions with the Syrians and the Lebanese‚ so that a satisfactory treaty will be arrived at‚ and we have said that the moment that that treaty has been reached we will withdraw our troops from the country.” July  25th: Labour landslide in British general election. Clement Attlee becomes Prime Minister‚ Ernest Bevin Foreign Minister. Churchill becomes Leader of the Opposition. 27th: Bevin denies entry into Palestine of 100‚000 Holocaust survivors. He rejects Churchill’s assurances to the 1937 Peel Commission “that the British Government contemplated‚ in due course‚ a Jewish majority and a Jewish State in Palestine.”  November   13th: Bevin announces that 1939 White Paper restrictions on Jewish immigration to Western Palestine will continue; that Britain favors a Jewish homeland but not a state. President Truman counters that the 100‚000 survivors had been authorized by the Anglo-American Inquiry Committee. Riots follow in Tel Aviv‚ with attacks on police‚ British military and government buildings.  1946 Timeline January–March  12 January: Jewish paramilitary Irgun derails a British payroll train‚ stealing £35‚000 and injuring three constables.  25 February: Irgun and Lehi paramilitaries attack RAF airfields at Lydda‚ Qastina‚ and Kfar Sirkin.   March: Jerusalem Arab Office submits “The Arab Case for Palestine” to the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry: “Arabs of Palestine are descendants of the indigenous inhabitants who have been in occupation of it since the beginning of history. [The Jewish] claim is based upon a historical connection which ceased effectively many centuries ago.”  April–June  17 April: Lebanon and Syria achieve independence as French forces are withdrawn.  25 May: Jordan (East Palestine) achieves independence as British Mandate ends.  29 June: “Black Sabbath”: British Operation Shark searches for arms and makes 787 arrests in Jerusalem‚ Tel Aviv‚ Haifa and several dozen Jewish settlements.    July–September  22 July: Retaliating for “Black Sabbath‚” Irgun bombs the King David Hotel‚ Jerusalem‚ killing ninety-one Arabs‚ Britons and Jews.  25 July: First meeting of London conference on the future of Palestine‚ with Arab and Jewish representatives‚ invited by Prime Minister Attlee.  1 August: Sir Stafford Cripps‚ President of the Board of Trade‚ tells Parliament: “The future of Palestine shall not be decided by terrorism and by violence….”  Churchill‚ 1 August‚ HofC: “[Cripps] spoke of the past 25 years as being the most unkind or unhappy Palestine has known. I imagine that it would hardly be possible to state the opposite of the truth more compendiously. The years during which we have accepted the Mandate have been the brightest that Palestine has known and were full of hope.   “Of course‚ there was always friction‚ because the Jew was‚ in many cases‚ allowed to go far beyond the strict limits of the interpretation which was placed upon the Mandate….  “Meanwhile‚ how did we treat the Arabs? We have treated them very well. The House of Hussein reigns in Iraq. Faisal was placed on the throne‚ his grandson is there today. The Emir Abdullah‚ whom I remember appointing at Jerusalem‚ in 1921 to be in charge of Transjordania‚ is there today…. Syria and the Lebanon owe their independence to the great exertions made by the British Government….  *** “In fact‚ all sorts of hopes were raised among the Jews of Palestine‚ just as other hopes were raised elsewhere. However‚ when the months slipped by and no decided policy or declaration was made by the present Government‚ a deep and bitter resentment spread throughout the Palestine Jewish community….   “The disappointment and disillusionment of the Jews at the procrastination and indecision of the British Labour Government are no excuse‚ as we have repeatedly affirmed here‚ for the dark and deadly crimes which have been committed by the fanatical extremists‚ and these miscreants and murderers should be rooted out and punished with the full severity of the law.  “It is quite clear‚ however‚ that this crude idea of letting all the Jews of Europe go into Palestine has no relation either to the problem of Europe or to the problem which arises in Palestine.”   *** Mr. Sidney Silverman: “The Rt. Hon. Gentleman is not suggesting‚ is he‚ that any Jew who regarded a country in Europe as nothing but the graveyard and cemetery of all his relatives‚ friends and hopes should be compelled to stay there if he did not want to do so?”  Mr. Churchill: “I am against preventing Jews from doing anything which other people are allowed to do. I am against that‚ and I have the strongest abhorrence of the idea of anti-Semitic lines of prejudice.   “We have never sought or got anything out of Palestine. We have discharged a thankless‚ painful‚ costly‚ laborious‚ inconvenient task for more than a quarter of a century with a very great measure of success…. It is Great Britain‚ and Great Britain alone‚ which has steadfastly carried that cause forward across a whole generation to its present actual position‚ and the Jews all over the world ought not to be in a hurry to forget that.  “I had always intended to put it to our friends in America‚ from the very beginning of the postwar discussions‚ that either they should come in and help us in this Zionist problem‚ about which they feel so strongly….  “We declare ourselves ready to abandon the mighty Empire and Continent of India with all the work we have done in the last 200 years‚ territory over which we possess unimpeachable sovereignty. The Government are‚ apparently‚ ready to leave the 400 million Indians to fall into all the horrors of sanguinary civil war—civil war compared to which anything that could happen in Palestine would be microscopic; wars of elephants compared with wars of mice.   *** “Here is the action—action this day. I think the Government should say that if the United States will not come and share the burden of the Zionist cause‚ as defined or as agreed‚ we should now give notice that we will return our Mandate to U.N.O. and that we will evacuate Palestine within a specified period. At the same time‚ we should inform Egypt that we stand by our treaty rights and will‚ by all means‚ maintain our position in the Canal Zone.   “Those are the two positive proposals which I submit‚ most respectfully‚ to the House. In so far as the Government may have hampered themselves in any way from adopting these simple policies‚ they are culpable in the last degree‚ and the whole Empire and the Commonwealth will be the sufferers from their mismanagement.” October–December  4 October: President Truman supports Jewish Agency proposal for separate Arab and Jewish states‚ angering British Foreign Minister Bevin‚ who believes this ends any chance of agreement.  8 October: London Conference on Palestine adjourns‚ having rejected the Morrison-Grady Plan for Anglo-American Trusteeship of Western Palestine with autonomous Arab and Jewish areas. Churchill and Truman had both supported Morrison-Grady.  November: Arabs propose an Arab state in West Palestine with minority protection and citizenship for the Jewish population. Jewish Agency rejects any plan that does not include an independent Jewish State.   Churchill‚ 12 November‚ HofC: “[I]t is impossible to avoid expressing deep regret at the many changes of tactics and method‚ at the needless disappointment created throughout world Jewry by the failure to fulfill the hopes which the party opposite excited by their promises and convictions at the General Election‚ and above all‚ at the lack of any policy worthy of the name. This absence of any policy or decision on these matters‚ which have become more complicated as they proceed‚ has allowed havoc and hatred to flare and run rife throughout Palestine for more than a year and no one knows where we are today.   *** “I cannot‚ in any way‚ recede from the advice which I have ventured to give‚ namely‚ that if we cannot fulfill our promises to the Zionists‚ we should without delay place our mandate for Palestine at the feet of the United Nations‚ and give due notice of our impending evacuation of that country. If this offer is accepted‚ a burden‚ which has become too heavy and too invidious for us to bear alone‚ will have been lifted from our shoulders and placed in international safe-keeping….  “I am not at all deterred in recommending this course by the fact that it has been demanded by the Soviet Government. I was rather glad to find that our minds are flowing in the same direction in one aspect of international affairs….  “To abandon India‚ with all the dire consequences that would follow therefrom‚ but to have a war with the Jews in order to give Palestine to the Arabs amid the execration of the world‚ appears to carry incongruity of thought and policy to levels which have rarely been attained in human history.” Sequel  On 14 February 1947 the London Conference on Palestine adjourned for the last time with no decisions reached. Arab delegates denied any form of partition or the renewal of Jewish immigration. The Jewish Agency‚ whose attendance had been sporadic‚ rejected any solution other than partition into two separate states.   On 17 February‚ Ernest Bevin announced that Britain was unable to solve the problem. It would therefore pass it to the United Nations. Prime Minister Attlee announced that Britain would terminate the Mandate of Western Palestine on 15 May 1948. The stage was set for a definite British departure date‚ as it would be for India. As in India‚ this also set the stage for violence.  Churchill‚ 12 March 1947: “Then there is Palestine: £82 million since the Socialist Government came into power squandered in Palestine‚ and 100‚000 Englishmen now kept away from their homes and work‚ for the sake of a senseless squalid war with the Jews in order to give Palestine to the Arabs‚ or God knows who. ‘Scuttle‚’ everywhere‚ is the order of the day—Egypt‚ India‚ Burma. One thing at all costs we must preserve: the right to get ourselves world-mocked and world-hated over Palestine‚ at a cost of £82 million.” ***** We now turn to crux of the story—the stark events of 1947-49. Britain’s Mandate of East Palestine ended in May 1946‚ when that territory became the independent‚ Arab state of Jordan. West Palestine (today’s Israel‚ West Bank and Gaza) proved a much thornier problem. Violence broke out among Jews and Arabs as the British Government hesitated‚ unable to decide what to do. Finally‚ with local populations arming for battle‚ they decided to abdicate‚ referring the dispute to the United Nations. The UN-proposed “two-state solution‚” with contiguous Arab territory‚ was rejected by the Arabs‚ and civil war ensued.  —RML Retrospective: 1941 Churchill‚ 19 May 1941 (Cabinet Papers 120/10): “I have for some time past thought that we should try to raise Ibn Saud to a general overlordship of Iraq and Transjordania. I do not know whether this is possible‚ but the Islamic authorities should report. He is certainly the greatest living Arab‚ and has given long and solid proofs of fidelity. As the custodian of Mecca‚ his authority might well be acceptable. There would‚ therefore‚ be perhaps an Arab King in Syria and an Arab Caliph or other suitable title over Saudi Arabia‚ Iraq and Transjordania. “At the time of giving these very great advancements to the Arab world‚ we should‚ of course‚ negotiate with Ibn Saud a satisfactory settlement of the Jewish problem; and‚ if such a basis were reached‚ it is possible that the Jewish State of Western Palestine might form an independent Federal Unit in the Arab Caliphate. This Jewish State would have to have the fullest rights of self­ government‚ including immigration and development‚ and provision for expansion in the desert regions to the southward‚ which they would gradually reclaim.” This may be Churchill’s first mention of a Jewish State rather than a Homeland‚ although he had rejected the 1937 Peel Commission‚ the original “two-state solution.” The area of “Western Palestine‚” in Churchill’s view‚ extended from the River Jordan to the Sea. He always favored offering the Jews the Negev‚ arguing that they had a unique ability to “make the desert bloom.” 1947 Timeline January–July   30 January: British government announces that in 1946 Jewish terrorists killed forty-five British soldiers‚ twenty-nine British police and 137 civilians‚ Jewish‚ Arab and British.  Churchill 31 January‚ HofC: “The idea that general reprisals upon the civil population…would be consonant with our whole outlook upon the world [is] one which should never be accepted in any way. We have‚ therefore‚ very great difficulties in conducting squalid warfare with terrorists…. [E]very effort should be made to avoid getting into warfare with terrorists; and if a warfare with terrorists has broken out‚ every effort should be made—I exclude no reasonable proposal—to bring it to an end….  “All my Hon. Friends on this side of the House do not agree with the views which I have held for so many years about the Zionist cause. But promises were made far beyond those to which responsible Governments should have committed themselves. What has been the performance? The performance has been a vacuum‚ a gaping void‚ a senseless‚ dumb abyss—nothing.  *** “We are told that there are a handful of terrorists on one side and 100‚000 British troops on the other. How much does it cost?… Between £30 and £40 million a year—which is being poured out and which would do much to help to find employment in these islands‚ or could be allowed to fructify in the pockets of the people….How much longer are [British troops] to stay there? And stay for what? In order that on a threat to kill hostages we show ourselves unable to execute a sentence duly pronounced by a competent tribunal. It is not good enough. I never saw anything less recompensive for the efforts now employed than what is going on in Palestine….  I earnestly trust that the Government will‚ if they have to fight this squalid war‚ make perfectly certain that the willpower of the British State is not conquered by brigands and bandits‚ and that unless we are to have the aid of the United States‚ they will at the earliest possible moment‚ give due notice to divest us of a responsibility which we are failing to discharge and which in the process is covering us with blood and shame.” 31 January (announced mid-February): Labour Government announces that Britain will return the West Palestine Mandate to the United Nations and leave as soon as possible.  21 July: President Harry Truman Diary: “’The Jews‚ I find‚ are very‚ very selfish. They care not how many Estonians‚ Latvians‚ Finns‚ Poles‚ Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as Displaced Persons‚ as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power‚ physical‚ financial or political‚ neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the underdog.” August–December 3 September: United Nations Special Committee on Palestine delivers new partition plan dividing West Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab States.  October: Azzam Pasha‚ General Secretary of the Arab League: “Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be a war of elimination and it will be a dangerous massacre which history will record similarly to the Mongol massacre or the wars of the Crusades…. We will sweep them into the sea.”   29 November: United Nations General Assembly votes 33-13 with ten abstentions to adopt non-binding resolution recommending partition of West Palestine into Arab and Jewish states‚ and an internationally administered city of Jerusalem.   30 November: Jewish Agency accepts UN partition plan. Arab League unanimously rejects UN plan.  6 December: United States begins arms embargo to Middle East‚ primarily affecting Jews‚ since Arab states have arms agreements with Britain. 12 December: Jewish Paramilitary force Haganah mobilizes.  13 December: Irgun militants bomb Arab shoppers at Damascus Gate‚ killing six and wounding forty.  15 December: Arabs blow up water pipes supplying Jerusalem‚ subsequently repaired by the British. Jewish contingency plan aims to prevent reoccurrence.  30 December: Irgun bombs crowd of Arab job-seekers at Haifa‚ killing six and wounding forty-two.  31 December: Arabs block bus route into and commence siege of the Jewish Quarter‚ Jerusalem. Jews smuggle men and supplies in British convoy.  1948 Timeline  January–March   4 January: Haganah demolishes Semiramis Hotel in Katamon‚ mistaking it for Arab militant headquarters‚ killing 26 including a Spanish diplomat.  7 January: Irgun uses stolen British armored car to bomb Arab crowd at Jaffa Gate‚ killing seventeen.   9 January: Two hundred volunteers of Arab Liberation Army (ALA) cross into West Palestine from Syria‚ attacking Jewish settlements of Dan and Kfar Szold in upper Galilee. British armored cars drive Arabs off.  12 January: Britain confirms alliances with and military aid for Egypt‚ Iraq‚ and Jordan. Baghdad Arabs riot in protest; Anglo-Iraqi agreement subsequently cancelled.  14 January: Abdel Kader el-Husseini leads 1000 Arabs attacking Jewish Etzion Bloc‚ Jerusalem‚ defended by 280 settlers and a reserve company of Haganah strike force Palmalch.   21 January: Syrian trucks carrying 700 ALA fighters cross into West Palestine. 7 February: Britain supports Jordan’s annexation of West Bank in West Palestine.   14 February: Moshe Kelman leads Haganah raid on Arab village Sasa‚ near Lebanon‚ blowing up thirty-five houses and killing 60 before retreating.   16 February: UN Palestine Commission reports to Security Council that Arabs in and out of West Palestine are defying General Assembly settlement plans.  1 March: Jerusalem British Officers Club bombed‚ fourteen killed‚ highest British daily death toll to date.  12 March: Jewish Agency bombed by Arab using car from American Consulate. Jews ambush and destroy Arab arms convoy from Lebanon‚ one of 11‚ of which nine were destroyed.  31 March: Forty-truck convoy from Tel Aviv ambushed and 16 trucks destroyed by Arabs besieging Jerusalem.  April–June   1-20 April: Jewish Operation Nachshon attempts to open Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road‚ failing when Arabs take the heights above Bab el-Wad.  22 April-17 May: Operation Ben-Ami seizes Arab strongholds around Acre and links with Jewish settlements in Western Galilee. Acre falls on 17 May. 26-27 April: Jewish forces begin to consolidate Jewish areas of Jerusalem.  1 May: RAF Spitfires strafe Irgun positions in Jaffa; Britain lands troops and tanks at Jaffa. Despite Irgun losses‚ British forces ultimately admit defeat.  4 May: First clash between Jewish and Arab regulars at Etzion Bloc; Arabs withdraw with 42 casualties.  8 May: Arab League declares truce in Jerusalem through 14 May.  12 May: Arabs shut off water supply to Jerusalem.  13 May: First Jewish offensive against Lebanese army occupies Kalkieh army camp. Lebanese counterattack forces Jews to retreat with 120 casualties.  13-15 May: Jewish secure Jerusalem up to the old city as British withdraw. Haganah seizes Jaffa. 14 May: Last day of the British Mandate in West Palestine. David Ben-Gurion of Jewish Agency issues Declaration of Independence establishing the State of Israel. Jewish forces occupy former British positions. Arabs drive Jews from Zion Gate‚ blockading Jewish Quarter.  *** Churchill‚ 14 May‚ London: “When I became convinced that all chance of making and enforcing a settlement by partition was lost‚ I advised the Government in the House of Commons on August 1‚ 1946‚ nearly two years ago‚ to return the Mandate to the United Nations Organisation and quit the country at the earliest moment. More than another year passed before this decision was taken by His Majesty’s Government‚ and during all this period the situation grew steadily worse…. “The renunciation of our responsibilities was in any case a most grave decision. I never conceived it possible that the Government‚ in carrying it out‚ would not show the strictest impartiality between Jew and Arab. Instead of this it appears that the Arab Legion‚ led by forty British officers‚ armed with British equipment and financed by a British subsidy‚ has fired on the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem…. This is a violation of the impartiality which at the least we were bound to observe.” 15 May: Iraq‚ Egypt‚ Jordan and Syria invade Israel.  16 May: Arabs attack Jerusalem Jewish Quarter from all sides; Jews hold out.  20 May: Azzam Pasha: “We are fighting for an Arab Palestine. Whatever the outcome the Arabs will stick to their offer of equal citizenship for Jews in Arab Palestine and let them be as Jewish as they like. In areas where they predominate‚ they will have complete autonomy.” 22 May: Arabs capture one-third of the remaining area of the Jewish Quarter.  23 May: U.S. Consul General Thomas C. Wasson assassinated in Jerusalem.  24 May: Arab Legion unsuccessfully attempts to drive Israel forces from Hospice of Notre Dame of France‚ a turning point in the battle of Jerusalem‚ defining the postwar border between Israel and Jordan.  *** 28 May: Israel armed forces (Haganah‚ Palmach‚ Irgun‚ Stern Gang) become the Israel Defense Force (IDF). British officers in the Arab Legion withdraw from its attack on Jerusalem.  Churchill‚ 28 May‚ Perth‚ Scotland: “’It would be amazing‚ in any Government but this‚ that the danger of allowing British officers to be compromised in this way was not seen beforehand.” 29 May: Egyptians converging on Ashdod via coastal roads turned back by Israel Defense Force.  30 May: Arab Legion driven from village of Latron.  2 June: Egyptian tanks and infantry driven off by IDF from attack on Kibbutz Negba. “Chips” Channon writes: “I think that the Party resents both [Churchill’s] unimpaired criticism of Munich‚ recently published‚ and his alleged prop-Zionist leanings.” 6 June: Syrians repulsed after attempting to cross to West Bank at Mishmar Hayarden.  Churchill‚ 7 June‚ London: “I do not think events would have taken this particular course if they had not been wrested from my hands in the moment of our general victory. Then there was a chance of a good solution‚ now I can do no more.” 10 June: Arab Legion counterattack loots village of Gezer. First Tel Aviv convoy arrives in Jerusalem.  20 July: Second truce declared.  *** Churchill‚ 28 September‚ Aix-en-Provence‚ France: “I could put the case for the Jews in ten minutes. We have treated them shamefully. I will never forgive the Irgun terrorists. But we should never have stopped immigration before the war.” Churchill‚ 1 October‚ Lladudno‚ Wales: “The Socialists‚ more than any other Party in the State‚ have broken their word in Palestine and by indescribable mismanagement have brought us into widespread hatred and disrepute there and in many parts of the world.” Churchill‚ 10 December (HofC): “[In 1945] we had the power and the chance to impose and enforce—I must use that word—a partition settlement in Palestine by which the Jews would have secured the National Home which has been the declared object and policy of every British Government for a quarter of a century. Such a scheme would‚ of course‚ have taken into account the legitimate rights of the Arabs‚ who‚ I may say‚ had not been ill used in the settlements made in Iraq‚ in Transjordania and in regard to Syria.   “I always had in my mind the hope that the whole question of the Middle East might have been settled on the largest scale on the morrow of victory and that an Arab Confederation‚ comprising three or four Arab States—Saudi-Arabia‚ Iraq‚ Transjordania‚ Syria and the Lebanon—however grouped‚ possibly united amongst themselves‚ and one Jewish State—might have been set up‚ which would have given peace and unity throughout the whole vast scene of the Middle East….   *** “[A] settlement of the Palestine question on the basis of partition would certainly have been attempted‚ in the closest possible association with the United States and in personal contact with the President‚ by any Government of which I had been the head. But all this opportunity was lost.  “The Socialist Party gained votes at the Election by promising greater concessions and advantages to the Jews than anything to which Britain had formerly been committed. Then‚ when they came into office‚ they turned their backs on it all‚ raising bitter feelings of disappointment and anger. Their whole treatment of the Palestine problem has been a lamentable tale of prejudice and incapacity….  “We now have a new situation. The Palestine problem is not a party question. Both parties are divided upon it. Both parties have their own views about it and it is natural‚ at any rate while we are in opposition‚ that there should be a certain latitude of opinion upon it. But whatever party we belong to‚ and whatever view we take‚ we must surely face the facts. The Jews have driven the Arabs out of a larger area than was contemplated in our partition schemes.” 1949 Timeline  January    25th. Israel national assembly elections. Ben-Gurion’s center-left Mapai wins plurality.   Churchill‚ 26th (HofC): “De facto recognition has never depended upon an exact definition of territorial frontiers. There are half a dozen countries in Europe which are recognized today whose territorial frontiers are not finally settled….   “[T]he coming into being of a Jewish State in Palestine is an event in world history to be viewed in the perspective‚ not of a generation or a century‚ but in the perspective of a thousand two thousand or even three thousand years….  “[W]e ought not to grudge a fair share of the deserts of the Negev to the Jews…. [They] have a way of making the desert bloom. Those who have seen it can testify.  The Arabs‚ with all their dignity and grace‚ are primarily the children of the desert [and] the desert lands do not become reclaimed while the Arab control is complete over them…. Hon. Gentlemen do not seem to realize that Jew and Arab have always been there. They say‚ ‘How would you like to have a piece of Scotland taken away and to have a lot of other races put in?’ The two races have always been there‚ and I trust always will be there‚ happily….  “The idea that only a limited number of people can live in a country is a profound illusion; it all depends on their co-operative and inventive power. There are more people today living twenty storeys above the ground in New York than were living on the ground in New York 100 years ago. There is no limit to the ingenuity of man if it is properly and vigorously applied under conditions of peace and justice.” 31st. Great Britain recognizes Israel. February–July   24 February: Armistice signed between Israel and Egypt retaining the prewar border‚ except that Egypt gains control of the Gaza Strip.  8 March: Ben-Gurion forms first (coalition) government of Israel.  23 March: Armistice signed between Israel and Lebanon. Israeli forces withdraw from thirteen occupied Lebanese villages.  Churchill‚ 29 March‚ New York City: “Remember‚ I was for a free and independent Israel all through the dark years when many of my most distinguished countrymen took a different view. So do not imagine for a moment that I have the slightest idea of deserting you now in your hour of glory.” 3 April: Armistice signed between Israel and Jordan with Jordan retaining East Jerusalem and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria).  11 May: United Nations General Assembly admits Israel to membership.  11 June: First UN-brokered truce. Jerusalem resupplied. The truce would last less than a month.  10-12 July: Egypt breaks truce; Egyptian light tanks and infantry pushed back from Negba.  20 June: Second armistice between Israel and Jordan.  20 July: Second UN truce declared.  Afterword  At the end of 1949‚ David Ben-Gurion proclaimed Jerusalem the capital of Israel. Six months later‚ the Knesset passed the Law of Return‚ granting all Jews the right to migrate to and settle in Israel and to obtain citizenship.  Churchill‚ 30 June 1951 (HofC): “The decline of our influence and power throughout the Middle East is due to several causes. First‚ the loss of our Oriental Empire and of the well-placed and formidable Imperial armies in India. Second‚ it is due to the impression which has become widespread throughout the Middle East that Great Britain has only to be pressed sufficiently by one method or another to abandon her rights or interests in that‚ or indeed any other‚ part of the world. A third cause is the mistakes and miscalculations in policy which led to the winding up of our affairs in Palestine in such a way as to earn almost in equal degree the hatred of the Arabs and the Jews.” Richard M. Langworth‚ CBE‚ is the author or editor of 10 books on Winston Churchill‚ including the quotations book Churchill by Himself‚ an expanded edition of which will appear in 2024. The post ‘A Terrible Lot of Lies’: Winston Churchill on Palestine and Israel appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk‚ who took office in December‚ has introduced a bill that would significantly liberalize Poland’s abortion laws — even though the right to life is constitutionally protected there.  From Communist Control to Pro-Life Constitution Following the fall of the Soviet Union‚ which had facilitated a permissive abortion regime within Poland‚ the new Polish government passed a law in 1993 prohibiting abortion. This commitment to the right to life is explicit in Poland’s 1997 Constitution‚ which states that the “Republic of Poland shall ensure the legal protection of the life of every human being.”  But Poland continued to allow mothers to obtain abortions in the case of “severe and irreversible fatal defects” and in the case of a “risk to the mother’s life and in cases of rape or incest.” In 2020‚ the nation’s Constitutional Tribunal declared that exceptions for fatal defects are unconstitutional‚ though they did not touch exceptions for the mother’s life‚ rape‚ or incest.  The conservative Law and Justice Party‚ then in power‚ supported the Constitutional Tribunal’s decision. Party leader JarosÅ‚aw KaczyÅ„ski had stated four years earlier that his party would “strive to ensure that even in very difficult pregnancies‚ when the child is condemned to death [or] is severely deformed‚ will end in birth‚ so that the child can be christened‚ buried‚ given a name.”  KaczyÅ„ski is right: If a child is to die in infancy‚ far better for that child to be welcomed into the world‚ baptized‚ named‚ and mourned rather than to be brutally murdered and vacuumed out of the womb only to be discarded in a receptacle for medical waste. And at the very least‚ the 2020 ruling simply affirmed that Poland’s Constitution does not apply disparately according to an individual’s health or disability. At the very least‚ the ruling clarifies that mothers do not have the right to kill their children for eugenic reasons. Predictably‚ Polish liberals lost their minds. Liberals Push for Abortion Access This past week‚ New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg engaged in typical pearl-clutching when she described protests in opposition to the 2020 ruling as the “largest protests since the fall of Communism‚ which in turn were met with a violent crackdown by authorities.” Of course‚ Goldberg neglected to mention that the pro-abortion protestors particularly targeted the Catholic Church‚ disrupting Masses and vandalizing both Church property and statues of Pope John Paul II. Archbishop Stanislaw Gadecki of Poznan detailed the attacks as including “profanity‚ violence‚ abusive inscriptions‚ and the disturbance of services and profanations.”  The 2020 ruling galvanized Poland’s political Left‚ and pro-abortion voters set their sights on the 2023 election. Though the Law and Justice Party earned the most support of any party in October’s election‚ the opposing coalition — composed of the Civic Coalition party and two smaller centrist and leftist parties — took control of Poland’s Parliament. Donald Tusk‚ a member of the Civic Coalition‚ became prime minister in December and set about undoing the work of the Law and Justice Party‚ which had governed since 2015.  The New York Times couldn’t be happier with these recent developments. Goldberg described the election as a “rare bright spot” where voters “rebelled against a punishing religious nationalism.” After the democratically elected Law and Justice Party carried out their governing mandate from the Polish people and‚ in doing so‚ apparently undermined democracy and spurred an “eight-year slide toward authoritarianism‚” Tusk’s leadership means that democracy is back. (RELATED: Poland’s Liberal-Democracy Has Adopted Martial Law) And democracy means abortion‚ according to liberal logic. Actually‚ in Goldberg’s mind‚ democracy depends on abortion. She writes that “public revulsion toward a far-reaching abortion ban” played a role in “saving Polish democracy.”  Goldberg isn’t the only one who thinks this. Liberal Poles unironically compared the election to the end of Soviet rule in 1989‚ when the Solidarity movement — led and animated by Polish Catholics — triumphed over communism.  “We lead the way of going from illiberalism to again liberal democracy‚ as we led the way in 1989‚” Polish Deputy Justice Minister Zuzanna RudziÅ„ska-Bluszcz said. “And I think those elections in 2023 could constitute the founding myth for my generation‚ like 1989 constituted the founding myth for the generation of my parents.” If only all pro-abortion zealots were as forthright as RudziÅ„ska-Bluszcz. The goal of progressive leftists is‚ after all‚ to rewrite the founding myths of democratic nations so that abortion becomes the sine qua non of self-government. Pro-life politicians‚ such as those belonging to the Law and Justice Party‚ are demonized as an unholy fusion of Donald Trump and Soviet dictators — even though the USSR presided over a permissive abortion regime that left a legacy of between 600‚000 and one million abortions in Poland in 1990. Following the 2020 Constitutional Tribunal ruling‚ the number of legal abortions in Poland fell to 107.  Tusk Introduces Bill to Liberalize Abortion Convinced that more women should be able to kill their unborn children‚ Tusk and Polish liberals are seeking to legalize abortion on demand through the first trimester and with reason after the 12th week of pregnancy. The bill submitted by Tusk’s party on Jan. 24 would also require healthcare providers to offer abortions if they receive public funding to care for pregnant women. The bill would also require healthcare supervisors to identify a different doctor willing to provide abortions in the case that a woman’s primary doctor declines to abort a child as a matter of conscience. Though Tusk’s coalition holds a majority in Polish government‚ the Law and Justice Party still holds the presidency. President Duda‚ who is pro-life‚ would veto the bill seeking to liberalize abortion. And although a three-fifths majority in Parliament could override Duda’s veto‚ “that kind of majority does not exist on abortion‚” politics professor Aleks Szczerbiak told the Pillar.  Despite pro-abortion efforts to subvert the Polish Constitution‚ Duda will be able to protect unborn life — for now. Though Catholicism was once central to the Polish cultural identity‚ Polish citizens are losing their faith at an astonishing rate. Younger generations of Poles increasingly resemble the globalized‚ irreligious hegemony of the European Union‚ and liberal political parties have seized on abortion as a motivating issue for voters.  In a sense‚ the liberal Poles who see a connection between 1989 and 2023 aren’t entirely wrong. If you asked a certain Polish pope about the two years‚ he’d likely see them as mirror images of each other. But where modern liberals see themselves as freedom fighters‚ Pope John Paul II would point out that pro-abortion activists share the same disregard for human life exemplified by Soviet communism. After all‚ the culture of death can be carried out by varied political regimes.  In 1989 or 2023‚ then‚ the enemy remains the same. What remains to be seen is whether democracy can sufficiently safeguard human dignity or whether it will simply become synonymous with “abortion rights.” Mary Frances Myler is a writer from Northern Michigan now living in Washington‚ D.C. She graduated from the University of Notre Dame in 2022.  READ MORE from Mary Frances Myler:  ‘He Did the Right Thing’: University President Fires Professor Over Abortion Doula Lecture Kamala Harris Stumps for Abortion Ahead of Election New EPA Regulations Are a Death Sentence for Small Oil and Gas Producers The post Polish Prime Minister Pushes Unconstitutional Abortion Bill appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The Madman in the White House: Sigmund Freud‚ Ambassador Bullitt‚ and the Lost Psychobiography of Woodrow Wilson By Patrick Weil (Harvard University Press‚ 378 pages‚ $35) Had you told Mattie Ross that Woodrow Wilson’s reverence for his father indicated he was mad‚ she likely would refer you to the Fifth Commandment‚ perhaps adding Matthew 7:3 for good measure‚ and note with her usual sharp tongue that if anyone is mad‚ it’s you. The fearless girl from Yell County‚ Arkansas‚ the heroine of Charles Portis’ classic novel True Grit‚ revered her father‚ a good man named Frank Ross‚ did not rest until she had hunted down his killer in Indian territory‚ present-day Oklahoma‚ assisted by a blowhard Texas ranger and a U.S. marshal who‚ though a drunk‚ had what she knew the job required: true grit. The idea that the 28th president of the U.S. lost his marbles started during the Paris Peace Conference in 1919‚ which was to produce a peace treaty formally ending World War I. It was widely acknowledged at the time that Wilson was an ineffective negotiator whose insistence that he was doing the Lord’s work undermined U.S. leadership. French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau‚ among many others‚ recognized the strain on him as he sought a “peace without winners” that would incorporate a League of Nations to maintain peace or at the least prevent another big war. (READ MORE: Imperfect Criticism‚ Great TV: Remembering Siskel &; Ebert) At least two astute observers viewed the “Wilson problem” as more than a diplomatic failure. William C. Bullitt‚ a young Wilsonian who was on the U.S. delegation‚ and Sigmund Freud‚ the Viennese doctor and philosopher who invented and popularized psychoanalysis‚ were devastated by the American rejection of the treaty and America’s resulting neglect of European affairs‚ which they (and many others) thought must lead to another war. They blamed Wilson and wrote a book together to demonstrate that he was crazy‚ the implication being that a great nation cannot afford mad leaders. However‚ Thomas Woodrow Wilson‚ A Psychological Study‚ completed in 1932‚ was not published until long after World War II‚ so whether it would have had a useful purpose was never tested. In last year’s The Madman in the White House‚ Patrick Weil‚ without explicitly endorsing neither the Bullitt-Freud diagnosis nor its implications for our own time‚ suggests the story of the long-hidden book merits attention. Mad Man or Everyday American? Freud and Bullitt thought the nexus of Wilson’s problem was his devotion to his father‚ a Presbyterian minister of some repute whose fatherhood style would have struck his contemporaries‚ as well as the next generation of Americans‚ including Mattie Ross‚ as unexceptional. The Rev. Joseph Wilson believed his sons should be raised as God-fearing Christians‚ hard-working high-achievers‚ and patriotic citizens. He was severe and affectionate‚ and relatives and others close to the family intimated he could be overbearing and even intimidating — not a recommended parenting strategy‚ but not unusual then or today. It was common knowledge that Wilson‚ for his part‚ loved his father and sought his approval. This was not unusual either and can be seen as a demonstration of the parental values-transmission that holds a society‚ and even a civilization‚ from lapsing into nihilism. Bullitt was a devout Episcopalian‚ and Freud‚ a non-believing Jew‚ appreciated the civilizational importance of religion; his politics were conservative‚ though he tried to keep them strictly separate from his psycho-medical practice and theorizing. He held pretty firmly to the view that misdirected religious fanaticism could have perverse consequences. He felt the same way about sexuality. Thus‚ Freud was not distressed by believers; quite the contrary. But he thought that when religion served as an unconscious replacement — a “sublimation” — for something else‚ it could (and often did) produce perverse behavior. (READ MORE: The Enduring Ronald Reagan) As Weil explains‚ Freud thought‚ and Bullitt agreed with him‚ Wilson was a passive (unconscious) homosexual‚ and the resulting guilty feelings‚ themselves unacknowledged‚ caused panic attacks leading to self-destructive behavior‚ brutal rejections of friends and supporters‚ and policy-wrecking mulishness. Although Wilson compromised with the Western Allies on the treaty’s provisions‚ he refused to consider the majority Republican senate’s proposed amendments to preserve U.S. sovereignty‚ which the Allies themselves accepted. Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge‚ the grandest Republican of his time‚ had once been a friend of Wilson and even a (bipartisan) ally‚ but Wilson reacted to the amendments by cutting off Lodge and ordering the Democrats to vote against the treaty‚ dooming it. Unfortunate as this may or may not be‚ it does not prove anything about Wilson’s sanity or lack thereof‚ nor does it explain the source of Wilson’s psychoneurosis identified by Freud and Bullitt. Freud himself never claimed he was making a scientific diagnosis‚ for he had never met Wilson‚ let alone listened to him on a psychoanalytic couch. He believed his speculations were sound‚ based on what he thought he had learned from studying other cases‚ and from the voluminous interviews and correspondence and diaries Bullitt collected for their study. Weil writes cautiously in describing the Freud-Bullitt thesis‚ without‚ however‚ asking whether less radical conclusions than theirs could be reached from the same information. The two authors may have thought a letter with phrases like “Dear Father‚” a perfectly ordinary American epistolary form‚ meant Wilson thought his father was God and‚ therefore‚ he was Jesus Christ‚ but who else would think this? Telling the peace conference to ask itself what Jesus would say or do was straight-up Social Gospel rhetoric‚ which Christian progressives like Wilson used routinely‚ as did believers like the English Prime Minister David Lloyd George and the pro-treaty Winston Churchill. With the Democrats returning to power and Bullitt in line for an important foreign policy position in the Roosevelt administration‚ the two authors agreed to put the book aside‚ as the time did not seem right for a controversial book about the last Democratic president. Instead‚ Bullitt went on a crusading career that can be viewed‚ if speculation is the method‚ as a mirror image of Wilson’s. (READ MORE: Biting the (Left) Hand That Feeds Him) Sent by Franklin D. Roosevelt to Moscow to open the first U.S. embassy to the Soviet Union‚ Bullitt‚ who had tried and failed to convince Wilson to work with the Bolsheviks at the peace conference — it was one of the main causes of his dismay with Wilson — was mugged by reality and became the hardest of hard-line anti-communists. He later broke with FDR over the latter’s appeasement of Stalin‚ considered Truman and Acheson‚ and then Kennedy‚ too soft on communism‚ and advocated confronting Sino-Soviet aggression everywhere. (Along the way‚ he also joined the Free French Army when Roosevelt blocked him from the U.S. military as too old and too much trouble.) His protege and admirer George Kennan‚ who served under Bullitt in Moscow and who formulated the containment doctrine after World War II‚ thought his old boss overdid it. Bullitt’s close friend Richard Nixon‚ whom he advised‚ stood by him to the very end. Bullitt‚ whose two-part 1948 Life magazine article “How We Won the War and Lost the Peace” has been a minor classic for a certain current in American foreign policy thinking for over half a century‚ felt at times‚ like Wilson‚ that he was crying in the wilderness. Weil‚ while giving an account of his dramatic and adventurous life‚ does not ask whether it may have occurred to Bullitt to compare his disappointment to Wilson’s. To be sure‚ this would have made for a different book‚ so it cannot be held against the author. Yet it seems pretty obvious they both sought to help their country win the central conflict of the 20th century (dixit Sidney Hook)‚ pitting freedom against tyranny. They both made contributions while falling short of their ultimate goal‚ but who did better? Weil allows that American failure in Paris in 1919 may have been due to factors other than Wilson’s mental problems‚ and he goes gently with Bullitt’s disappointments as well‚ without delving too deeply into their possible causes. (READ MORE: William Bullitt’s Search for Permanent World Peace) Mattie Ross‚ to return to her no-nonsense assessment of men and American men in particular‚ would have thought the whole Freud-Bullitt exercise silly‚ if not disgracefully impolite. That she is a made-up character shows that fiction sometimes gets to the heart of the matter better than theory: Thank God for the Harrison Narcotics Law. Also the Vostead Act. I know Governor Smith is “wet‚” but that is because of his race and religion‚ and he is not personally accountable for that. I think his first loyalty is to his country and not the “infallible Pope of Rome.” I am not afraid of Al Smith for a minute. He is a good Democrat‚ and when he is elected‚ I believe he will do the right thing if he is not hamstrung by the Republican gang and bullied into an early grave as was done to Woodrow Wilson‚ the greatest Presbyterian gentleman of the age. The post Woodrow Wilson: A Madman‚ or Merely Misunderstood? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Everywhere we turn‚ the country looks as though it is falling apart. Crime is out of control. Millions of illegal immigrants are pouring across our borders. Our schools are more interested in cultivating gender dysphoria and a proclivity for porn in our children than in educating them. The press routinely censors the truth at the behest of the government‚ which also increasingly prosecutes (or opts not to) based on political party affiliation. In sport after sport‚ biological males who have decided to “identify” as female are taking awards away from actual biological women‚ and we’re told that we must indulge their delusions. Americans are asking themselves: How on earth did we get here? And even more urgently: How do we turn things around? READ MORE: This Has to Be the End of the Road for Mitch McConnell Most‚ if not all the major societal problems we are confronting today are a direct result of abandoning the principles that are the underpinnings of American culture. In fact‚ we have been guilt-tripped into abandoning them‚ and we are reaping the consequences. The current immigration crisis is an example of this catastrophe. It is estimated that between 6 and 10 million people have crossed the southern border of the United States since Joe Biden took office in January 2021. One of the lynchpins of American governance has been the rule of law — the concept that laws are fairly and uniformly enforced by our government. Additionally‚ both our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution are explicit that our government was instituted for the protection of Americans and our rights. This administration has utterly abandoned both fundamental principles‚ and millions of Americans are willing to let them get away with it. But it’s worse than that. The United States is a big country; in truth‚ we could probably absorb 10 million people. It isn’t the raw numbers; it’s the policies in place when the millions of migrants arrive. There was a time when immigrants were expected to assimilate‚ to learn English‚ to support themselves and family members or other dependents via gainful employment — to abide by our laws. No more. Now they pour across the border and receive free phones‚ welfare payments‚ housing and food‚ education‚ and health care‚ all courtesy of the American taxpayer. Those who import drugs and traffic women and children do so with impunity. There are disturbingly large numbers of drunk driving instances involving illegal immigrants‚ and in most cases the perpetrators have no insurance. When they commit violent crimes — like the group that violently assaulted police officers in New York City last week — they flip America the middle finger. Migrants who commit crimes know that in the unlikely event that they are arrested‚ they will be released. If they happen to be tried and convicted‚ they won’t be deported. If they are deported‚ nothing will happen if they return. Why is this happening? Because we have been guilt-tripped into accepting that demanding integration into American society is insufficiently “multicultural‚” and that America is an exploitative nation that somehow “owes” the world’s poor billions of dollars that must‚ therefore‚ be extracted from American taxpayers. American schools provide more examples. Each week brings more amateur videos of violent behavior by students. Social media commentator Marina Medvin posted on X earlier this week a list of 53 Illinois schools at which no student — not a single one — was grade proficient in math. Most of them were in Chicago. These dismal results are not limited to Illinois by any means. Oregon recently eliminated the requirement that high school students be proficient in reading‚ English and math in order to graduate. Many colleges have eliminated entrance exams. Why is this happening? Because we have allowed ourselves to be guilt-tripped into believing that demanding appropriate behavior and insisting upon objective academic standards is “white privilege‚” and that we must expiate our collective guilt as a nation by excusing the violence and catastrophic failures permeating our schools. In states like California‚ Illinois‚ and New York‚ shoplifting has become epidemic. Flash mobs steal thousands of dollars’ worth of inventory and are not prosecuted. Retailers across the country lost $112 billion just in 2022. Homelessness has been allowed to explode in our major cities‚ contributing to crime‚ disease‚ and filth that would have been unimaginable in America just 20 or 30 years ago. Stores and other retail establishments are closing in the downtowns of major cities due to theft‚ crime‚ and generally unlivable conditions. Why is this happening? Because we have been guilt-tripped into believing that involuntary commitment of the mentally ill isn’t “compassionate‚” and that enforcing shoplifting laws protecting property is “systemic racism.” Men now insist that they can become women — and vice versa; minor children and staggering numbers of preteen and teenage girls with clear mental illness are being railroaded into chemical sterilization and surgical mutilation. Teachers think it is appropriate to discuss their sexual proclivities with grade schoolers and expose them to pornography. Why is this happening? Because Americans have been silenced by buzzwords like “cisprivilege‚” “heteronormative‚” and “transphobic.” Enough. If these crises have been facilitated by our silence and our willingness to be cowed into submission‚ then they can be addressed when we refuse to be cowed; when we refuse to be silent; when we refuse to use the nonsense lingo that activists demand be injected into everyday parlance; when we stop apologizing for the sins and imperfections of those who lived generations ago; and when we vigorously defend the principles that represent the best of America. Those principles built this country. Abandoning them will destroy it. To find out more about Laura Hollis and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists‚ visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM The post Guilt-Tripping Our Way to Self-Destruction appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Toward a Demotic Republican Party