Missouri Teachers, CRT Advocate Plotted to Hide Social Justice Curriculum from ‘Trump Country’ Parents.

Teachers questioned how they could teach history and social studies through a social justice lens without rankling parents in the ‘highly conservative county … in the middle of Trump country.’

The curriculum-writing team in a suburban St. Louis school district plotted with a critical race theory advocate on how to keep parents in the dark about their efforts to inject leftwing social justice advocacy into their classrooms, according to a video of their meeting leaked online.

The video, posted on rumble.com in early July, is alleged to be a condensed version of a September 2020 webinar that members of the Francis Howell School District’s curriculum-writing team participated in. The webinar was hosted by their equity consultant, LaGarrett J. King, an associate professor of social studies education at the University of Missouri. He was described on the call as a specialist in the study of “race, critical theories and knowledge.”

It’s unclear who edited the video, which appears to have been posted anonymously by someone with the online moniker “wokeatfhsd.”

During the webinar, King told the predominantly white team members that “This is not a safe space,” but rather a “racialized space,” because “In many ways a safe space is a space where white people tell us how not racist they are. And this is not that space.”

King said “the first thing we have to understand is that our social studies and our history curriculum is political and racist,” and “there is no such thing as neutral history.” He then asked the team members to question whether they are developing black history curriculums through the historical lens of the oppressor. “We have made those who have oppressed people, the oppressor, we have humanized them,” he said.

The nation’s founding “means nothing to black people,” he said, calling history “psychologically violent” but one-sided. He also seemed to justify violence in the name of racial justice.

“All of our wars was about freedom, violence,” King said. “But yet, when black people say, ‘Hey … we need to take over, man. We need to burn this place down, we need to do this, we need to do that.’ ‘Oh no, you should do non-violence to achieve freedom.’ It’s silly. It’s prejudice.”

During a question-and-answer portion of the webinar, teachers and staff on the call questioned how they could reframe their classes to look at history and social studies through a more racialized social justice lens without rankling parents in the “highly conservative” community, which one teacher described as “the middle of Trump country.” King agreed that teachers could do away with verbiage like “white privilege,” while still getting the progressive message across to students.

“Kids are way more open,” she said, “but then they go home and they tell their parents, and then their parents get upset. I don’t advertise to my students when I’m teaching U.S. history that sometimes I would consider myself the anti-U.S. history teacher.”

Another white teacher said because they teach in a conservative county, “Sometimes I think we have deferred to letting that stop progress. We let noise keep progress from moving forward.”

In a paper he co-authored in 2018, King acknowledged that critical theory was developed in the 1920s by German thinkers who “sought to extend Marxist theory into the changing social, political, and economic landscape of the twentieth century by talking about how culture and ideology encourage and sustain social inequality.” In order to “remain true to critical pedagogy,” the authors wrote, “teachers should work to identify questions that are important to students’ lives and that encourage them to reflect on the ways that they are either privileged or oppressed by social dynamics.”

Continue reading “”

Gainesville Spree Shooter Used Stolen Guns

The media tells us mass shootings are on the rise, that such shootings are happening several times a day. We just can’t keep up with all of these shootings. This, we’re told, is evidence that we need more gun control. However, what about the number of these shooters using stolen guns?

See, I ask because I wrote about a shooting in Tucson over the weekend where the shooter was a felon and couldn’t legally own a firearm. That weapon was most likely a stolen firearm bought off the black market. We don’t know for certain about that yet.

We do know about a shooting in Gainesville, Florida, though.

Shortly after five teens were shot during a party at Gainesville’s American Legion hall June 24, the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office recovered a gun used in the shooting.
It had been stolen in Alachua, yet another filched weapon to be used in the ongoing gun violence committed by teens or young adults.
“These kids can’t go into a gun dealer, put their ID on a table and say ‘I want to buy that gun.’ And felons cannot possess guns. Because of that, they have to get them illegitimately,” Gainesville Police Chief Tony Jones said. “We know several guns were used (in the American Legion shooting). They could be out on the street now.”……..…
Everytown For Gun Safety, a nonprofit gun control advocacy group, reports on its website that theft does play a sizable role. It cites several studies.
“Gun thefts often divert guns into an underground market where people with dangerous histories are easily able to obtain firearms without restriction,” Everytown states. “That is why stolen guns are often recovered at crime scenes, including at the scenes of homicides and other violent crimes.”
Gainesville attorney Robert Rush, who is representing one of the children wounded at the American Legion, said his experience shows that stolen guns are often used in crimes and often get resold or passed around to be used in other crimes — an observation backed up by police.
Rush said he has found data that a stolen gun will be used in a homicide within a year — which has been borne out in cases he has taken on.

In other words, even Everytown agrees that stolen guns represent the lion’s share of the problem. However, as I noted with the Tuscon story on Tuesday, the media uses statistics like those found at the Gun Violence Archive and presents those uncritically, as if they tell the whole story. However, many of those so-called mass shootings aren’t. They’re criminal shootings like this and they use stolen guns.

Meanwhile, some will try and use those statistics to justify more gun control when even Everytown admits that many of these firearms are stolen from lawful and law-abiding gun owners.

Remember that when the subject comes up.

The truth of the matter is that the majority of crimes are committed with firearms that were obtained illegally. That’s why so many of us are skeptical of the idea that gun control will somehow impact criminals rather than us, the law-abiding gun owners and gun buyers. After all, it never has before, so why would it now?

Even when talking about the supposed hundreds of mass shootings reported in the media, gun control didn’t stop many of those, as we can see here.

Remember; he has the launch codes.

How does he not know this is completely untrue?
He’s brain dead, that’s how.


Question:
When will children under 12 be able to get ‘vaccinated’?
Answer:
Duuuuuuuhhhh

 

McCarthy Pulls His Five Republicans From Riot Commission After Pelosi Rejects Conservative Reps

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected two of Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s five choices to sit on the select committee that will investigate the riot at the Capitol on January 6.

Pelosi said that Ranking Judiciary Committee Member Jim Jordan — a close ally of Donald Trump — and Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Banks cannot be on the committee because they might jeopardize “the integrity of the investigation.”

She said it with a straight face so I guess she thinks it’s true.

For his part, McCarthy threatened to pull all the GOP members from the Committee unless Pelosi changed her mind.

“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee,” Pelosi said in a statement. “The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision.”

The appointment of Trump supporters would ruin everything. No one is supposed to defend Trump or the Republicans. The GOP members will be present in order to give a patina of “bipartisanship” to the proceedings.

As CNN points out, because there is one Republican who has agreed to be on the committee — Liz Cheney — it will still be “bipartisan.” McCarthy won’t be able to pull her off the committee.

The committee will still have Republican representation from one member: Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, an outspoken critic of former President Donald Trump who was one of Pelosi’s eight choices to serve on the committee. Cheney’s participation keeps the committee bipartisan even without anyone appointed by McCarthy.

It’s still bipartisan even though no real Republicans will be there because CNN says so.

So there.

McCarthy issued his own statement, taking the high ground and saying, “We will not participate.”

“Denying the voices of members who have served in the military and law enforcement, as well as leaders of standing committees, has made it undeniable that this panel has lost all legitimacy and credibility,” he said. “Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts.”

Washington Post:

A senior Democratic aide familiar with caucus deliberations said many Democratic members were concerned about Banks and Jordan sitting on the committee, based on their past actions and statements. Particularly, members expressed outrage with Banks’s statement in which he blamed “the Left’s authoritarian agenda” for politicizing the committee’s scope. Reports that Jordan had aided then-President Donald Trump in strategizing about how to overturn the election, and the possibility of him testifying before the committee because he spoke to Trump on Jan. 6, made him an unreliable panelist, according to the aide.

Like CNN, the media will claim the proceedings are still “bipartisan” because Cheney — who was appointed to the committee by Pelosi, not McCarthy — will continue to serve. It’s one thing to stand up for your beliefs but quite another to actively seek to undermine your own political party.

This is not about impeachment. It’s about the integrity of Congress, which is threatened by this partisan attempt to destroy Trump and the Republican Party. That Cheney can’t or won’t see that should result in her being kicked out of the Republican caucus.

Would-be robbers shot by armed shoppers in Los Angeles

A man armed with a handgun defended himself during an attempted robbery in Los Angeles, and left two suspects with bullet wounds to the legs, police say.

“Words were apparently exchanged, and the victim ultimately produces a handgun, apparently to defend himself and others in his group from the would-be robbery suspects. The victim fired his weapon towards the suspects and then all parties immediately fled the location,” the Los Angeles Police Department recounted in a press release Tuesday.

The attempted robbery unfolded Monday on Melrose Ave. when two men exited an idling Dodge Avenger, with one of the men producing a handgun.

Video footage shows the men confronting a man with a shopping bag and two women who were standing on the parking lot.

The male victim, who was reportedly the target of the robbery, produced his own handgun and sent the two suspects running as he opened fire.

Police arrested and identified the two suspects as Nicholas Brown and Markeil Hayes, both of Los Angeles, and said they were both booked on attempted robbery and are currently on parole.

Brown sustained a gunshot to the upper left thigh while Hayes was shot in the right calf. Police are still searching for the third suspect and asking the public for help tracking him down.

“The Los Angeles Police Department is aggressively addressing a rise in violent crime in the Melrose area over the past year and is pursuing all leads involved in this and other crimes,” police added in the press release.

Police did not immediately return Fox News’s request for additional comment on the crime.

Homicides in Los Angeles are up 25% this year, with South Los Angeles seeing a 50% increase in killings.

The LA Times Gets It Wrong on Gun Rights

The Los Angeles Times had an editorial yesterday whose title pretty much says it all: “18-Year-Olds Shouldn’t Have the Right to Buy Guns.”

So, let me see if I correctly understand the Times’s position. An 18-year-old woman is walking down a dark street at night. She is accosted by a much bigger, stronger man who violently grabs her. He is armed with a gun and threatens to kill her if she resists. She isn’t armed because of the Times‘s gun-control law that prohibits 18-year-olds, including women, from buying guns. He proceeds to tear her clothes off and rape her. Hoping that she won’t be killed, she submits to the rape. 

Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, in its editorial the Times failed to answer an important question: How is that 18-year-old woman supposed to defend herself against that rapist?  

What the Times is essentially advocating is a law that prevents people from defending themselves against rapists and murderers. That 18-year-old woman might not be physically strong enough to resist that rapist, but with one Glock 19 that she pulls out of her purse, things are now equalized. Now it doesn’t matter how much bigger and stronger her rapist is. She can stop him from raping her with just one bullet fired into his abdomen.

Why shouldn’t that 18-year-old woman have the right to defend herself against that rapist? Why should she be required to submit to the rape or else be murdered?

The Times writes:

True, the right to puff on cigarettes or drink alcohol is not written into the U.S. Constitution. But neither is a guarantee that the right to bear arms goes with being a particular age.

Lamentably, those two sentences reflect a woeful lack of understanding of people’s rights and the Constitution. Rights don’t come from the Constitution. They preexist both the Constitution and the federal government that the Constitution called into existence. 

Remember: We just celebrated the Fourth of July, the day on which the Declaration of Independence was published in 1776. That document expressed the revolutionary truth that people’s rights come from nature and God, not from government and not from some document that calls government into existence.

The Constitution never purported to establish people’s rights. It simply called into existence a government whose powers were limited to those few powers that were enumerated in the Constitution itself. If a power wasn’t enumerated, it could not be exercised.

Extremely leery about this new government, the American people demanded the enactment of the Bill of Rights, which expressly protects the citizenry from the federal government. Contrary to popular belief, however, especially in the mainstream press, people’s rights also don’t come from the Bill of Rights. The First and Second Amendments, for example, do not give people the rights of free speech, religious liberty, freedom of assembly, and the right to keep and bear arms. Instead, they prohibit the federal government from infringing on these fundamental rights. 

In fact, what many in the mainstream press fail to recognize is that if the Bill of Rights had never been enacted, people would still have the rights of free speech, religious liberty, freedom of assembly, and the right to keep and bear arms. That’s because people’s natural, God-given rights preexist government.

Oddly, in its editorial the Times didn’t advocate a minimum age of 21 for military service. Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the military permit 18-year-old men to handle guns and even orders them to use automatic weapons to kill people in faraway lands who have never committed any act of violence against the United States? Why does the Times trust those 18-year-olds with guns and not private 18-year-olds?

Finally, in its editorial the Times unfortunately failed to call for an end to the root cause of much of the violence in American society — the much-vaunted war on drugs that unfortunately much of the mainstream press continues to support, notwithstanding the massive violence it has been producing for some 50 years. Rather than prohibit 18-year-olds from defending themselves, why not end this horrific government program and then see if gun violence is still a major problem in America?

 

 

Veterans no longer required to pay fees for concealed carry

ONESBORO, Ark. (KAIT) – Veterans will now have an easier time getting their concealed carry license, thanks to a new law that goes into effect next week.

Beginning July 28, veterans and active-duty military will no longer have to pay fees to obtain their concealed carry license.

Logan Lee, the owner and head instructor at 141 Shooting Range, says he has taught several veterans over his career and believes that this decision from Arkansas lawmakers is a no-brainer.

“I feel like carrying a handgun is a God-given right protected by our Constitution,” Lee said. “And that’s what our service members do. They go out there and help preserve our government, our constitutional rights, and if we can make it a little easier for them; they already paid an awesome price for us, why not extend that olive branch out a little bit and let’s take away the fee for them.”

The law is one part of the Arkansas legislature’s effort to reinforce Second Amendment rights, paired with the new Stand Your Ground law that Governor Asa Hutchinson signed in May.

Lee also said that veterans still must go through background checks and the appropriate training but hopes it will help service members across the state.

This week’s global warming predictions.

Every single day, there is something alarming in the news about climate change.  Click on any headline about a natural disaster like a forest fire or a flood or a hurricane, and there will be dire warnings in the article about how this particular phenomenon is worse than ever before because of climate change.  Google the words “climate change,” and you can learn about how it is making poison ivy itchier, glaciers smaller, and the world generally less pleasant to live in.  It is even being theorized that there could be a connection between earthquakes and climate change.

What I don’t understand is why climate change is seen as a bad thing.  It’s normal for the climate to change.  Millions of years before the dinosaurs, the Earth was a solid ball of ice.  During the time of the dinosaurs, there was no ice at all.  The planet continued to cool off and warm up, all without human intervention, and when humans did come along, they adapted to changes in the climate.  Up until the 20th century, nobody thought that a change in the weather warranted prophesying the end of the world.

Today, there is constant alarmism.  The media trumpet melting glaciers and how the rising sea levels will wipe out whole countries, ignoring the fact that 30% of the Netherlands was once underwater.  Is it only in the Netherlands that water management can maintain human habitation?  I think not.  Polar bears are seen to be of special concern, with fears that melting ice will cause them to go extinct, yet according to the World Wildlife Fund, they still exist in their original habitat, range, and natural numbers.  Such being the case, I take leave to doubt that climate change is wiping out polar bears.

In short, not a single horror that has been predicted for the 21st century because of a changing climate has come to pass.  The human race is adapting, as it has always adapted, to new weather conditions.  The planet may warm up, as it has done in the past, and after it warms up, it will cool off, as it has done in the past.  There’s nothing frightening about that simple fact of nature.  The only thing I’ve ever found disconcerting about climate change is the number of people who accept the distressing predictions, without noticing how those predictions get pushed back several decades when they don’t come to pass.

Below The Radar: The PISTOL Act

A while back, we discussed the difference between the ideal and the achievable. It is a conundrum that many Second Amendment supporters have, whether it is legislation or candidates. Our enemies often have the same problem, so we can take some small comfort.

Just as Dianne Feinstein has introduced a fallback measure to the semiauto ban she really wants, the same approach is being taken with regards to the Biden-Harris regime’s attack on AR-15-type pistols (among others). We have discussed the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act on multiple occasions, and it is the ideal solution to address that attack.

However, as Second Amendment supporters have often learned, the ideal solution isn’t always possible.

In this case, removing short-barreled rifles from the purview of the National Firearms Act may not be possible at the present time. In fact, to be very blunt, seeing the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act become law in this Congress is a pipe dream, given who controls the committees and subcommittees.

This is not to say it’s a bad idea – introducing legislation and tracking the cosponsors is a good way to gauge what sort of support there is for efforts to restore our rights. That makes having a fall-back option a good idea. Enter HR 3823, the PISTOL Act.

What this bill, introduced by Representative Bob Good (R-VA), does is to maintain the status quo by stating that firearms like the AR-15 pistols with a stabilizing brace may not be placed under the National Firearms Act. This would end the present threat for the short term – provided that anti-Second Amendment extremists don’t increase their numbers in Congress.

This doesn’t come without trade-offs.

On the one hand, if the PISTOL Act were to be passed into law (say as an amendment to the appropriate appropriations bill), it may make it more difficult to pass the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act in the future. But given the realities that surround passing legislation, even taking a majority in the future won’t make passing the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act a given.

For one thing, the same filibuster that currently is preventing anti-Second Amendment extremists from packing the court and ramming through extreme legislation will be wielded by the likes of Chuck Schumer, Chris Murphy, Dianne Feinstein, and other anti-Second Amendment extremists to block pro-Second Amendment legislation. It cuts both ways, and before Second Amendment supporters contemplate nuking the filibuster to pass such improvements, remember that Harry Reid’s use of the “nuclear option” for nominations backfired to the tune of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett on SCOTUS.

The fact is, the PISTOL Act may be a suitable incremental measure in lieu of passing the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act, and Second Amendment supporters should contact their Senators and Representative and polite urge them to support this legislation. However, it is no substitute for defeating anti-Second Amendment extremists at the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels.

Biden launches first airstrike in Somalia targeting Al-Shabaab terrorists

  • The US military command for Africa (AFRICOM) conducted the airstrike in coordination with the Somali government
  • The airstrike was conducted n the vicinity of Galkayo, Somalia about 430 miles northeast of Mogadishu today against al-Shabaab
  • The strike is the first conducted by the U.S. military in Somalia since January 19, when AFRICOM announced it had killed three Shabaab jihadists in two strikes

Continue reading “”

House Republican Presses Biden on Removal of Military Equipment From Middle East
Rep. Steil concerned Biden admin is making concessions to Iran amid nuclear negotiations

A Republican congressman is pressing the Biden administration to brief Congress on its decision to remove U.S. military equipment from the Middle East amid concerns the decision was part of a series of concessions offered to Iran during ongoing nuclear discussions.

The Biden Defense Department ordered the removal last month of several U.S. anti-missile batteries installed across the Middle East, citing the diminished threat from Iran. At least eight Patriot anti-missile systems were erected in allied countries—including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, and Kuwait—as part of the Trump administration’s bid to deter Iranian attacks.

Rep. Bryan Steil (R., Wis.), a member of the Republican Study Committee’s foreign affairs task force, is demanding the Biden administration brief Congress about its decision, which he worries could be part of an effort to appease Iran as nuclear talks stall in Vienna. The Biden administration has already provided Iran with a limited amount of relief from American sanctions, but Iran has been clear it wants more. The removal of this military equipment, Steil says, was pushed through even though Iranian-backed militants continue to attack U.S. allies and military assets in the region, including at least 100 strikes on Saudi Arabia this year alone. Iranian militias in Iraq also have taken responsibility for strikes on American targets in the country.

Steil suspects that allied countries in the Middle East privately objected to the decision, which also included the removal of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-missile system from Saudi Arabia, a chief target for Iranian militants. The timing of the decision, which was made late last month as talks with Iran approached an impasse, is also fueling concerns the administration pulled the equipment to appease Tehran.

“We respectfully request a member of your administration provide a briefing to relevant congressional committees on all of the conversations between your administration and any countries that led to this action,” Steil wrote to President Joe Biden, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:

I keep coming back to the idea that concentrating on rounding up the worst of the worst gangbangers would be much more efficient. By anybody’s count there are far fewer violent gang members operating in this country than there are guns. Would this get rid of all gun crime? No, but it would make a heck of a dent in it.

Take care of the demand problem and the supply side will surely slow.


Seems to me, she’s come to the same conclusion Bill Whittle did
“Maybe it’s not the guns. Maybe it’s the people holding the guns.”


Are guns really the problem?

The White House is launching a new assault to bring down the crime rate. As you’ve likely heard, crime, especially homicide, has exploded in many major hotspot cities over the past year or so. President Joe Biden says he knows what to do, he’s been at this for years and he’s got a plan ready to launch that includes several definitive steps.

“The first of those that work is stemming the flow of firearms used to commit violent crimes,” Biden told a group of reporters as he was about to go into a closed-door meeting with visiting police chiefs and city officials. “It includes cracking down and holding rogue gun dealers accountable for violating federal law.”

The new plan includes five new federal strike forces, agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATFE), which will embed with local police departments in Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Their mission is to disrupt gun trafficking coming into those major cities.

The president says he wants to “supercharge” the crime fighting effort, so he’s also urging communities to invest some of their portion of the $350 billion COVID-19 relief fund in policing and to establish more support programs, such as summer jobs for young people.

I wonder if during that closed-door White House meeting anyone broached the subject of the criminals holding those illegal guns the president wants rounded up.

The cold hard fact is this: There are some 470 million guns in civilian hands in the United States right now, with new ones — including untraceable, homemade ghost guns — being manufactured every day. Legal, registered gun sales are at record highs. If by some stretch of the imagination we could magically do away with all the guns belonging to criminals, what do you think might happen? Do you believe hardcore lawbreakers would simply shrug, walk away from their criminal life and go get a nine-to-five job? No. They would find other weapons with which to inflict their terror on innocent citizens. Knives, Molotov cocktails, scissors, an ax perhaps. Criminals aren’t just violent; they are deviously creative.

Continue reading “”

Man shot dead by person he was trying to rob in downtown St. Louis

ST. LOUIS (KMOV.com) – A man was shot and killed while attempting to rob a person in downtown St. Louis late Sunday night, St. Louis police said.

The shooting took place in the 500 block of N. 14th Street, about a block south of Washington Avenue, around 11:40 p.m. Officers said the preliminary investigation suggests the man was trying to rob a victim at the location when he was shot.

Monday morning police said the attempted robbery victim left before officers arrived at the scene and has not been located. Two guns were reportedly recovered.

Homicide detectives are handling the ongoing investigation.

“Americans have never really understood ideological warfare.”


Wokeness is sabotaging the military academies.

Professor Lynne Chandler Garcia recently published an op-ed in the Washington Post in which she defended indoctrinating her students on the concepts of critical race theory, or CRT.

Normally, this wouldn’t raise any eyebrows. A member of the intelligentsia teaching her students a boutique academic theory? Hardly shocking. What did get people’s attention was Garcia’s place of employment. None other than the U.S. Air Force Academy.

CRT presents a nebulous set of beliefs that encourage people to look at every issue through the prism of race. Its next step is to sort individuals into groups of “oppressors” and “oppressed.” It’s a poisonous ideology that accuses white people of being oppressors and asserts that minorities cannot succeed in America without perpetuating white supremacy.

At its core, CRT is a race-based way of looking at the world. Which is somewhat ironic for a philosophy ostensibly about “anti-racism!” It essentially advocates burning down those basic American structures, norms, and institutions that CRT theorists deem unacceptable. The goal? Undermining and ultimately replacing these norms and institutions.

One of those institutions on which CRT theorists have set their sights is the United States military.

As my Heritage colleagues Mike Gonzalez and Dakota Wood have previously explained, the creeping influence of CRT on the military jeopardizes the health and strength of the armed forces. Introducing CRT’s racial division and resentment will erode camaraderie. CRT will undermine the instrumental unity that is essential for the U.S. military to successfully protect our national interests. But CRT theorists are not content to just push these radical concepts on the force at large. They are working to indoctrinate the next generation of officers, as Garcia makes plain.

To be clear, informing cadets about controversial concepts is not the issue. Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton echoed this sentiment at a recent Heritage event, saying that he would be surprised if a Western philosophy class did not cover Karl Marx and communism, given the impact of Marx’s ideology on world history.

The same is true of CRT. Making cadets aware of the concept is not the problem. Indoctrination and extensive academic focus is the problem. Just as professors at the service academies should not be endorsing communism in the classroom, they shouldn’t be endorsing CRT. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what is happening.

Continue reading “”

Name of biblical judge found inscribed on 3,100-year-old jug found in Israel

A rare 3,100-year-old inked inscription from the era of the Book of Judges is displayed on Monday by the Israel Antiquities Authority at the excavation site at Khirbat a Rai. Photo by Debbie Hill/UPI

Archaeologists have uncovered a small jug with a rare five-letter inscription, linking the 3,100-year-old ceramic artifact to a biblical judge mentioned in the Book of Judges.

The jug and ancient inscription — the first to feature the name ‘Jerubbaal’ — were found at a dig site in the Shahariya Forest, among Israel’s Judean Foothills, archeologists reported the discovery Monday in the Jerusalem Journal of Archaeology.

“The name of the Judge Gideon ben Yoash was Jerubbaal, but we cannot tell whether he owned the vessel on which the inscription is written in ink,” archaeologists said in a press release.

The inscribed jug, bearing the name Jerubbaal, was recovered from a subsurface storage pit lined with stones. Researchers suspect the small jug likely held a precious liquid, such as oil, perfume or medicine.

Though the jug features only five inscribed letters, close analysis suggests the original inscription was longer.

In the Book of Judges, Jerubbaal is first mentioned as a leading opponent of idolatry.

He’s also credited with leading a successful battle against the Midianites.

“According to the Bible, Gideon organized a small army of 300 soldiers and attacked the Midianites by night near Ma’ayan Harod,” said Yossef Garfinkel and Sa’ar Ganor, lead archaeologists on the project and professors at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

“In view of the geographical distance between the Shephelah and the Jezreel Valley, this inscription may refer to another Jerubbaal and not the Gideon of biblical tradition, although the possibility cannot be ruled out that the jug belonged to the judge Gideon,” Garfinkel and Ganor said.

“In any event, the name Jerubbaal was evidently in common usage at the time of the biblical Judges,” they said.

Because the jug and its inscription date to roughly 1,100 B.C., the time of biblical judges, archaeologists suggest the discovery offers proof of the historical accuracy of the Bible.

“As we know, there is considerable debate as to whether biblical tradition reflects reality and whether it is faithful to historical memories from the days of the Judges and the days of David,” according to Garfinkel and Ganor.

“The name Jerubbaal only appears in the Bible in the period of the Judges, yet now it has also been discovered in an archaeological context, in a stratum dating from this period,” Garfinkel and Ganor said.

“In a similar manner, the name Ishbaal, which is only mentioned in the Bible during the monarchy of King David, has been found in strata dated to that period at the site of Khirbat Qeiyafa,” the archaeologists said.

Identical names being mentioned in the Bible, which have been found in other previously recovered inscriptions, they said, ” shows that memories were preserved and passed down through the generations.”

Learning to Deal With the Fact That Almost Half the Country Will Soon Have Constitutional Carry.

“I live in New York,” said James Digiuseppi who was visiting downtown Nashville. “In New York, people get searched when they go into a club.” 

Some visiting downtown Saturday said they were glad to see permitless carry become law in Tennessee.  

“I’ll be honest with you, I feel safer when I go into a restaurant or public place and I see open handguns and I know that people in there are carrying,” Springfield resident JK Graves said. “It’s how we grew up and that’s what makes Tennessee so great.” 

But security consultants like JC Shegog say the new law comes with added responsibility for businesses, especially ones with alcohol.

“They’re going to believe that it’s their right to have it wherever they go and they’re going to try to enter into these facilities,” Shegog said. “Some of these facilities have security and it just depends on the level of security that they have that will make the patrons safe or not.” 

— Nikki McGee in Some say new permitless carry law means greater responsibility for bars and restaurants