'Endorsing Biden is endorsing genocide'

'allowing second amendment rights to be limited'

A video shared on Facebook claims to show a recent explosion in Salam City, Egypt. Verdict: Misleading The video was taken in Egypt, but it is from 2020, not 2024. Fact Check: Two Arab diplomats said that over 300 Egyptian pilgrims died during a Hajj pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia, according to Agence France-Presse. The diplomats said […]

The talented sumo wrestler and actor is being fondly remembered by loved ones

This claim stems from a satirical account.

'Completely unprecedented'

Our Top 10 Rock Songs You Never Get Sick Of list is probably one of the most subjective lists we have ever compiled. But that’s okay because one of the main goals of these lists is to start a conversation, and we think this one will be easy to get started with. There are so many classic rock songs that we all fell in love with dramatically at first but just became so overplayed on the radio that we just got tired of listening to them. Remember how you felt the first time you heard “Stairway To Heaven” or “Bohemian The post Top 10 Rock Songs You Never Get Sick Of appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

Millions of people who suffer back pain can ease their symptoms simply by walking more, claims new research. Adults with a history of lower backache went nearly twice as long without a recurrence if they walked regularly, according to the findings of the first-ever study of its kind. Around 800 million people worldwide suffer low […] The post Millions Who Suffer Back Pain Can Ease Symptoms Simply by Walking More–For ‘Huge Benefits’ appeared first on Good News Network.

The Supreme Court upheld the federal law banning gun ownership by those under domestic violence restraining orders on Friday morning. In its U.S. v. Rahimi ruling, the court rejected Zackey Rahimi’s claim that the statue that prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic violence restraining orders violates the Second Amendment. The court issued an 8-1 ruling, with Justice Clarence Thomas as the only dissenting vote. “Since the Founding, the Nation’s firearm laws have included regulations to stop individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “As applied to the facts here, Section 922(g)(8) fits within this tradition.” US-v-RahimiDownload In April 2021, Rahimi was indicted for possessing a gun while subject to a domestic violence protective order for alleged assault against his ex-girlfriend, which explicitly prohibited him from possessing firearms. Between December 2020 and January 2021, Rahimi was involved in a series of violent incidents in Arlington, Texas, including multiple shootings and a hit-and-run. Police searched the defendant’s home and found a rifle and a pistol, leading to Rahimi’s indictment for violating federal law by possessing firearms while under a domestic violence restraining order to possess firearms.  Rahimi challenged the law as a violation of the Second Amendment right to bear arms. The court found Friday that Rahimi posed a “credible threat to the physical safety of others,” adding that the “government offers ample evidence that the Second Amendment permits such individuals to be disarmed.” Courts routinely upheld the 30-year-old law Rahimi challenged as unconstitutional. But a 2022 Supreme Court case, New York Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, significantly changed the way courts evaluate Second Amendment cases. Before the Bruen case, lower courts evaluated gun laws using historical research and looking at how well-tailored the laws were in achieving a valuable government interest, like public safety. But in Bruen, the Supreme Court decided public safety can only be considered for gun violence if comparable historical laws did so as well.  Unlike the regulation struck down in Bruen, the law at issue “does not broadly restrict arms use by the public generally,” Roberts wrote. The Second Amendment is not limited to arms in existence at the Founding, Roberts wrote, but it “extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that werenot [yet] in existence,” citing the decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. “By that same logic, the Second Amendment permits more than just regulations identical to those existing in 1791,” the justice wrote. In his dissent, Thomas wrote that the decision threatens Americans’ Second Amendment liberties. He said the case does not concern the issue of whether someone like Rahimi can be disarmed, but if the government has the right to disarm any person only subject to a protective order, whether or not that person has been convicted of a crime. “The Framers and ratifying public understood ‘that the right to keep and bear arms was essential to the preservation of liberty,’” he wrote, citing McDonald v. City of Chicago. “Yet, in the interest of ensuring the Government can regulate one subset of society, today’s decision puts at risk the Second Amendment rights of many more.” This is the Supreme Court’s second gun-related case this term. Last week, the court decided the federal government cannot use a decades-old ban on machine guns to ban so-called bump stocks. The post BREAKING: Supreme Court Upholds Restriction on Gun Ownership for Domestic Abusers appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Hours after Hamas-backed fighters broke out of the fence surrounding Gaza and embarked on a crusade of rape, killing, and kidnapping throughout southern Israel, some American corporate activists began their crusade to legitimize all of it. Notably among their ranks were advocates of the boycott, divest, and sanction (BDS) movement. “Oppression is the root cause of violence,” wrote the BDS movement in a statement released on Oct. 7, offering praise to the “powerful armed reaction of the oppressed Palestinians in Gaza” and making no mention of the deaths of nearly 1,200 innocent Israelis, or Hamas, the group that made it all happen. As Israel’s political enemies swept across the battlefield, its corporate enemies in the Environmental, Social and Governance movement went to the boardroom to make good on their promises. The push for divestment was afoot. As an analyst at a proxy consulting firm, part of my job is to read corporate proposals at publicly traded companies from Boeing to BlackRock, and sit through hundreds of annual meetings a year. In doing so, I see incredible levels of politically charged rhetoric and partisan solutions, ranging from the absurd (like Starbucks’ oat milk pricing policies) to the truly destructive (like Disney destroying billions of dollars’ worth of brand value to appease woke ESG activists). But maybe the most disturbing trend I’ve seen concerns Israel—specifically, the push from anti-Israel radicals to not only defund the Israeli military, but also cripple the businesses of innocent Israeli civilians. This crusade isn’t limited to companies such as Ben & Jerry’s that try to treat their entire business model as a stand-in for their political preferences (although that’s concerning, too, and has created a significant obstacle to the company’s corporate perception). This time around, Israel’s enemies are taking their demands directly to corporate entities with outsized influence: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Amazon Web Services for starters. Activist shareholders put these proposals on the corporate ballots disguised in the polite, euphemistic language of social justice (think “human rights”) to hide their true intent. Their asks are far more sinister. In April, a proposal at Lockheed Martin called for the weapons company to sever its multimillion-dollar contract with Israel, including the sale of F-35 stealth fighters, and claiming that the company would be complicit in “war crimes” for doing business with the Israeli military. Similarly, activists accused Raytheon of propping up a “system of apartheid” by selling weapons used to defend Israeli civilians. And at Amazon last month, a shareholder proposal claimed that Amazon Web Services was, in fact, the architect of an “apartheid system” of surveillance against Palestinians. Many of these proposals, far from being merely sponsored by expressly anti-Israeli entities, are being pushed by the representatives of mainstream American Christianity. I’m talking about institutions from the American Baptist Home Mission Society to the Episcopal Church. Both have sponsored proposals aimed at defunding Israel. The good news is that, since Oct. 7, many of their demands are increasingly falling on deaf ears. A year ago, a proposal at Amazon aimed at curtailing business with Israel garnered 33% support—this year, the “apartheid” proposal drew less than 16%. American shareholders are realizing that such proposals not only offer horrific “solutions,” but fail to create value for companies. And yet, I’m still seeing indications that some brands are willing to make deals with anti-Israel entities. On June 11, I attended Tripadvisor’s meeting to inquire about a proposal (sponsored by the Episcopal Church) that would have pressured the company to boycott “Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine territories,” cutting Israeli business owners out of revenue in the name of politics. I was then told that the proponents withdrew the proposal—but this isn’t cause for celebration. It’s an indication that Tripadvisor made a backroom deal with the proponents to keep the proposal off the ballot. The battle to stop the politicization of American businesses never stops. It goes on, for many reasons—but American shareholders are waking up to the reality of just how radical ESG activist “solutions” truly are. None of the anti-Israel proposals I’ve seen offered an angle of benefit to shareholders or made a serious case for how divestment benefits American companies. They’re purely ideological, borrowing their language and talking points from a truly repudiable school of thought that brands Israel an illegitimate state, considers the physical and financial well-being of Jewish civilians an acceptable sacrifice for political point-scoring, and deems any American company willing to do business with Israel complicit in genocide. The BDS radicalism of yesteryear didn’t die, but thanks to the sanity of American shareholders, it’s slowly fading away. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Inside BDS Left’s Sneaky Targeting of Israel Via Corporate Boardrooms appeared first on The Daily Signal.