Month: May 2021

Restoring Taiwan’s Appropriate Place at the World Health Assembly

Beginning on May 24, the world will gather virtually for the 74th annual World Health Assembly (WHA). The Assembly is the decision-making body of the World Health Organization, and it sets the agenda for strengthening international cooperation to end the COVID-19 pandemic and advancing global health and global health security — issues that affect us all. And yet, unless the Organization’s leadership takes appropriate action, the Assembly will once again exclude the vital participation of Taiwan.

There is no reasonable justification for Taiwan’s continued exclusion from this forum, and the United States calls upon the WHO Director-General to invite Taiwan to participate as an observer at the WHA – as it has in previous years, prior to objections registered by the government of the People’s Republic of China.

Global health and global health security challenges do not respect borders nor recognize political disputes. Taiwan offers valuable contributions and lessons learned from its approach to these issues, and WHO leadership and all responsible nations should recognize that excluding the interests of 24 million people at the WHA serves only to imperil, not advance, our shared global health objectives.

Taiwan is a reliable partner, a vibrant democracy, and a force for good in the world, and its exclusion from the WHA would be detrimental to our collective international efforts to get the pandemic under control and prevent future health crises. We urge Taiwan’s immediate invitation to the World Health Assembly.

34th U.S.-ASEAN Dialogue

The United States and ASEAN held the 34th annual U.S.-ASEAN Dialogue on May 5 (May 6 in Southeast Asia) to discuss cooperation under our strategic partnership. Acting Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Ambassador Atul Keshap co-chaired with Lao PDR Deputy Foreign Minister Bounleua Phandanouvong. Ambassador Keshap reaffirmed the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to reinvigorating our multilateral partnerships and to ASEAN centrality. He discussed pressing regional and international issues with his ASEAN counterparts including the need to uphold a rules-based international order, support for peaceful arbitration of disputes, and the promotion of sovereignty in the Indo-Pacific. He expressed support for ASEAN’s role in returning Burma to a path to democracy, called for the junta to immediately end the violence and release those unjustly detained for exercising their human rights, including journalists detained for their work, and emphasized the need for ASEAN to hold Burma’s military accountable to the five-point consensus endorsed by ASEAN leaders on April 24.

Ambassador Keshap reiterated ASEAN’s role as a key partner and stressed that the United States stands resolutely with our friends in Southeast Asia to promote respect for human rights, the rule of law, and good governance. He underlined the U.S. commitment to increasing mutual investment, trade, and economic ties with and between ASEAN countries, highlighting ASEAN as the United States’ fourth-largest trading partner. He also underscored the U.S. government’s strong support to the region in the fight against COVID-19, highlighting the United States’ $112 million in emergency health and humanitarian assistance to ASEAN countries. He emphasized the U.S. role as the largest single donor to COVAX and U.S. collaboration with partners to expand vaccine production. He also highlighted the importance of people-to-people ties and U.S.-ASEAN efforts to create opportunities and build human capital on both sides of the Pacific.

Ambassador Keshap raised the Administration’s renewed focus that places climate change at the center of foreign policy. He stressed support for countries most vulnerable to climate change, including those within ASEAN, and for a shared effort to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

It has cheap price viagra antispasmodic, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, psychoactive, stimulant, carminative and aphrodisiac properties. Upon passing the examination, a order viagra from india DMV certificate will be mailed to the student. Another form of impotence is buy generic levitra http://appalachianmagazine.com/2017/11/24/old-time-appalachian-tradition-superstitions-in-child-birth/ the inability of women of reaching orgasm during sexual intercourse. Kamagra oral jelly pills viagra is a simpler and improved version of kamagra tabletsthe major ingredient still being the same.

Ambassador Keshap highlighted the ongoing work of the Mekong-U.S. Partnership, which promotes transparency, sovereignty, and inclusive growth and helps tackle cross-border challenges across the Mekong River Basin.

Ambassador Keshap and Deputy Foreign Minister Bounleua Phandanouvong were joined by Brunei Ministry of Foreign Affairs Permanent Secretary Emaleen Abdul Rahman Teo, Burma Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Chan Aye, Cambodia Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Secretary of State for ASEAN Eat Sophea, Indonesia Ministry of Foreign Affairs Director General for ASEAN Cooperation Sidharto Reza Suryodipuro, Malaysia Ministry of Foreign Affairs Secretary General Dato’ Sri Muhammad Shahrul Ikram Yaakob, Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs Acting Undersecretary for Bilateral Relations and ASEAN Affairs Elizabeth P. Buensuceso, Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs Second Permanent Secretary Stanley Loh, Thailand Permanent Secretary Ministry of Foreign Affairs Thani Thongphakdi, Vietnam Deputy Foreign Minister Nguyen Quoc Dung, and ASEAN Deputy Secretary General Robert Matheus Michael Tene.

U.S.-Europe Communiqué on the Afghan Peace Process

The following is the text of a communiqué issued by the United States of America, European Union, France, Germany, Italy, NATO, Norway, and the United Kingdom on the Afghan Peace Process.

Begin Text:

Special Envoys and Special Representatives of the United States of America, European Union, France, Germany, Italy, NATO, Norway, and the United Kingdom met in Berlin on May 6th, 2021.

Respectful of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Afghanistan, participants exchanged views on the current status of the Afghanistan peace process and discussed ways to support the Afghan people’s desire for a just and lasting peace. To that end, participants:

1. Acknowledged the widespread and sincere demand of the Afghan people for an end to the war and a fair and lasting peace, and confirmed that such a peace can only be achieved through an inclusive, negotiated political settlement among Afghans. Participants affirmed their commitment to UNSC resolution 2513 (2020) and emphasized that they oppose the establishment in Afghanistan of any government by force which would constitute a threat to regional stability.
2. Highlighted the need to accelerate the pace of the Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace negotiations and committed to work with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the Taliban, and other Afghan political and civil society leaders to reach a comprehensive and sustainable peace agreement and political compromise that ends the war for the benefit of all Afghans and that contributes to regional stability and global security.
3. Expressed appreciation to the Government of Qatar for its long-standing contribution to facilitate the peace process, including hosting and supporting Afghanistan Peace Negotiations since September 12th, 2020, and underlined their support for the continuation of discussions between the parties’ negotiating teams in Doha. Appreciated the offer from the Republic of Turkey, the United Nations, and the State of Qatar to co-convene a senior-level peace conference in Istanbul and welcomed plans for related events to channel civil society voices into the process. Urged the immediate resumption, without pre-conditions, of substantive negotiations on the future of Afghanistan with the aim to develop and negotiate realistic compromise positions on power sharing that can lead to an inclusive and legitimate government and a just and durable settlement.
4. Welcomed an expanded role for the United Nations in contributing to the Afghanistan peace and reconciliation process, including by leveraging its considerable experience and expertise in supporting other peace processes.
5. Strongly condemned the continued violence in Afghanistan for which the Taliban are largely responsible and demanded all parties to take immediate and necessary steps to reduce violence and in particular, to avoid civilian casualties in order to create an environment conducive to reaching a political settlement. Participants further called on all parties to respect their obligations under international humanitarian law in all circumstances, including those related to protection of civilians, and urged all sides to immediately agree on steps that enable the successful implementation of a permanent and comprehensive ceasefire.
6. In this regard, participants called upon the Taliban to stop their undeclared spring offensive, to refrain from attacks against civilians, and to stop immediately all attacks in the vicinity of hospitals, schools, universities, mosques and other civilian areas. In particular, participants demanded an immediate end to the campaign of targeted assassinations against civil society leaders, the clergy, journalists and other media workers, human rights defenders, healthcare personnel, judicial employees and other civilians.
7. Following the April 14 announcement by the United States and NATO that U.S. and Resolute Support Mission forces will conduct an orderly, coordinated, and deliberate withdrawal from Afghanistan, to be concluded by September 11, 2021 participants reiterated that during the withdrawal, the safety of international troops must be ensured and that any Taliban attacks on our troops during this period will be met with a forceful response. Participants stressed that the process of the troop withdrawal must not serve as an excuse for the Taliban to suspend the peace process and that good-faith political negotiations must proceed in earnest.
8. In light of this withdrawal of forces, the participants recommitted to a strong and enduring partnership with Afghanistan, its governing and security institutions and its people. Participants also agreed that substantial international development assistance will be needed for Afghanistan’s stability during peace negotiations and reaffirmed their commitment to mobilize international support for reconstruction following a peace agreement, based on the conditions as laid out in the outcome documents of the 2020 Geneva Conference, including the preservation and respect for the rights of all Afghans, including women and minorities. Participants underscored their commitment to conditional civilian assistance to Afghanistan beyond a military withdrawal with the aim of ensuring a better future for the Afghan people.
9. Reaffirmed that any peace agreement must protect the rights of all Afghans, including women, youth, and minorities, and must respond to the strong desire of Afghans to sustain and build on the economic, social, political, and development gains achieved since 2001, including greater adherence to the rule of law, respect for Afghanistan’s international obligations, and improvements in inclusive and accountable governance. Highlighted that the Afghan parties’ ownership and leadership of intra-Afghan negotiations is important for a successful outcome. Reiterated that a stable, safe and prosperous Afghanistan is dependent on women playing full and meaningful roles in the peace negotiations and all parts of society, including in government.
10. Underscored that the Taliban and the Government of the Islamic Republic must fulfill their counterterrorism commitments including to prevent al-Qaida, Daesh, or other terrorist groups and individuals from using Afghan soil to threaten or violate the security of any other country; not to host members of these groups; and to prevent them from recruiting, training, or fundraising.
11. Reiterated that diplomatic personnel and property are inviolable, and that the perpetrators of any attack or threat on foreign diplomatic personnel and properties in Afghanistan must be held accountable.
12. Underscored that – while fully respecting the right of the Afghan people to self-determination – the countries and organizations represented at this meeting strongly advocate a durable and just political resolution that will result in the formation of a sovereign, unified, peaceful and democratic Afghanistan, free of terrorism and an illicit drug industry, which contributes to regional stability and global security.
13. Reaffirmed that current and future support to any Afghan government relies on the adherence to the principles set out in the Afghanistan Partnership Framework and progress towards the outcomes in the Afghanistan National Peace and Development Framework II as decided upon at the November 2020 Geneva donor’s conference.
14. Participants called upon the Government of the Islamic Republic to effectively fight corruption and promote good governance, and to implement anti-corruption legislation. Participants stressed their conviction that widespread corruption undermines the foundations of the Republic as well as the ability of the international community to continue to support Afghan institutions.
15. Urged the Taliban to facilitate access for delivery of humanitarian aid, without preconditions and in accordance with international humanitarian law, to the parts of the country under their effective control.
16. Stressed the importance of fighting illegal drug production and trafficking and urged both sides to eliminate the drug threat in and from Afghanistan.
17. Agreed that continued international support to the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces will be necessary to ensure Afghanistan can defend itself against internal and external threats.
18. Encouraged all concerned countries, in particular Afghanistan’s neighbors and countries of the region, to continue to support the Afghan people and constructively contribute to a lasting peace settlement and sustainable economic development in the interest of all.
19. Thanked the negotiating team of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the negotiating team of the Taliban for their important contributions to today’s meeting via video and for the frank and open discussion on challenging issues.
20. Expressed their appreciation to the German government for organizing these consultations and agreed to set the date and venue of the next meeting through diplomatic channels.

Illustration: Pixabay

When the Soviet Union collapsed three decades ago 15 independent states were born in a 1991 Christmas surprise parade of sovereignties. The Russian tri-color flag first flown as an ensign above merchant ships in 1696 was raised over the Kremlin late that Christmas evening. Thirty-nine days later, on February 3, 1992, the newly independent Central Asian states were admitted to the United Nations. Two years later, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) was formed to stabilize the Central Asian economies, give them a needed boost in trade and expand the free flow of goods across the region. The world heard little more from the EAEU, however, until China officials and entrepreneurs arrived in the region handing out cash in exchange for rights to energy resources and valuable transit routes linking Europe with Asia.

In June 2001, leaders from China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan gathered quietly in Shanghai, China to launch the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Its mission: to serve as a Eurasian political, economic and security alliance. In reality is also covers up human rights and other abuses by member states. One of the SCO member states’  primary goals is to ensure that liberal democracies do not make political, economic, or military inroads in the Central Asian region. Unfortunately, western nations paid little attention to the SCO for several years, or to China’s expanding trade relationships in the energy-rich region.

The aggregate territory of the SCO member countries makes it geographically the largest regional security organization in the world, covering most of the Eurasian landmass and a large percentage of the world’s population. SCO member countries hold almost 10% of the world’s proven oil reserves, along with large amounts of gas. When Iran is added to the mix, SCO energy resources increase to more than 18% of the world’s total proven oil and gas reserves. 

American military analysts who did pay attention to this “land bridge” between Europe and Asia were convinced Putin was intent on creating an SCO energy club to deprive democratic nations of needed power resources by coordinating investment, developing energy-related construction projects, joint ventures, and technology exchanges for select Russian-friendly countries. 

Although the EAEU has not developed into as economically powerful an organization as the European Union, it remains an important source of gas and oil reserves for the world. Russia and China today collude, cooperate, and compete on the Central Asian grasslands for natural resources. It is an increasingly asymmetrical relationship with Russia facing China’s rising economic power and global political-military ambitions in the EAEU nations and elsewhere. The territory has the potential to devolve into a complex, nuanced, geopolitical “great power game” being played out across the Central Asian steppes by two nuclear-armed communist giants. 

In an effort to create a WE atmosphere, some leaders try to have low cost levitra everyone move together as if they’re in a chain gang, all clones of one another moving in the same direction. If that happens then you should not ordine cialis on line icks.org be taken lightly or ignored. The minerals in icks.org cialis price canada these capsules are in an ionic form which makes them a lot easier for you to get hard and stay hard for a longer period of time, more specifically for 4 to 6 hours, which is more than enough time to make up for the lost moments. What special precautions should I follow? Do not take this Drug cheap brand cialis in UK is not prescribed to the individuals who: Have a history of heart, liver or kidney disease.

The Russo-Chinese relationship, once filled with mistrust from earlier times, is presently tactical and highly opportunist. Controlling the flow of oil and gas means money for Russia’s failing economy and more Russian missiles and technology in support of China’s aggressive foreign policy agenda. 

The question the West needs to consider is how long will Russo-Chinese cooperation last in the region? Russia’s post-2014 pivot toward the East, to avoid Western sanctions over the annexation of the Ukraine, is providing Russia’s energy sector with valuable, long-term Chinese contracts. In return it enables Beijing to purchase military technology from Russia that it is banned from purchasing in the West. China, however, is catching up fast and may not need Russian technology much longer. It will continue to need sources of energy to run its modernizing economy. President Xi Jinping has proven he is capable of announcing one foreign policy goal on Monday and carrying out an opposing agenda on Friday. There is no uncertainty about President Putin’s willingness to use Russian armed forces to achieve his foreign policy goals.

The Russo-Chinese strategic partnership is growing, but competitive. It poses a principal challenge to the US-led international system. The Central Asia landmass may prove a significant testing ground for Russo-Chinese competition as relations between the two become more asymmetrical in the coming decade. Hopefully, the liberal democracies recognize where the two communist giants are heading and make plans while the West still has options.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Picture: Pixabay

What many have portrayed as an attack on the Second Amendment can now be seen clearly as an attack on the First.

While the debate over gun regulation has been longstanding, the current iteration involves not only an attempt to wrest legal weapons out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, but to prevent them from even speaking their mind about the issue. The assault extends from both partisan states attorneys general to the White House itself.

President Joe Biden has vowed to “defeat” the National Rifle Association. Note the language. It doesn’t talk about opposing the organization’s goal of allowing citizens to fully practice their Second Amendment rights, but to vanquish a constitutionally protected alliance of citizens from expressing their opinion. That’s a vital distinction.

New York State Attorney General Letitia James, who famously found various excuses to sue the Trump Administration, has filed a lawsuit seeking to dissolve” the NRA. The excuse, or rather the grounds, specifically charges the NRA as a whole, as well as Executive Vice-President Wayne LaPierre, former Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Wilson “Woody” Phillips, former Chief of Staff and the Executive Director of General Operations Joshua Powell, and Corporate Secretary and General Counsel John Frazer with failing to manage the NRA’s funds and failing to follow numerous state and federal laws, contributing to the loss of more than $64 million in just three years for the NRA.

The use of questionable law suits to silence those opposing leftist policies is a growing trend. Dominion Voting Systems, which is part of the controversy surrounding the 2020 election, has brought an action seeking an astounding $1.3 billion defamation action against “My Pillow” founder Mike Lindell, who has publicly stated his belief that Dominion’s machines were biased against the then-incumbent president.  Donald Trump and Rudolph Giuliani have been similarly assaulted.

For its part, the NRA has countersued Letitia James, on the grounds that she is weaponizing her position to silence and intimidate those with differing views. The pro-Second Amendment group states that the NY Attorney General lacks not only the authority to take the action, but is engaging in an action simply out of political partisanship.

This sounds too good to be true…is it? We need to sildenafil cost sit and pray. Is this another name for sildenafil in usa medicines? For some people Kamagra is just another name for the same medication and it has been approved by the FDA, so is safe to consume if you follow the dosage instructions and precautions. Fertility gains for female: For female beleaguered with menopausal and menstrual problems, taking maca tablets or pills or maca supplements on a online viagra sales frequent basis can assist them to get rid of such pain. In both Western and Traditional Chinese Medicine (where it is known as “gobo”) burdock has been long purchase sildenafil used to increase the sexual capacity and promote vitality and vigour in men and women, thereby forming part of Sfoorti capsules.

Daniel Payne, writing for The Federalist, notes that “For quite some time the American Left has been busy turning American law into a partisan political weapon. Various progressive factions have undertaken a disparate and uncoordinated but still ideologically homogeneous effort to criminalize dissent using the courts and statutory law.”

The abuse of legal process has long been recognized as an offense against justice. As explained by the Stimmel law firm “The turmoil and expense of litigation can cause significant harm in and of itself and may be a weapon to injure another even if the underlying case allegedly justifying the action is not considered viable by the very party bringing it. The case, itself, becomes the tool used to harm another.”  The standard for bringing a case to court is not particularly high. Lawyers like to joke that a ham sandwich can be sued for lacking mayonnaise.

Well-funded leftist organizations have taken to the practice with true vigor. More distressingly, however, has been the enthusiasm with which elected officials have done so.  Martin Morse Wooster, writing for the Capital Research Center  notes that “Aiming to reshape society, state attorneys general wield ever-expanding powers over private corporations, foundations and nonprofits. Their activities–too often motivated by ideology and politics–frequently undermine the very institutions they are supposed to protect.” 

Direct assaults on the Second Amendment have not been particularly popular nor have the numerous attempts been effective. The misuse of the legal process to weaken those supporting the right to bear arms is an attempt to change that.

Illustration: Pixabay

The distinguished jurist John Wilson (ret.) wrote this article for the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.

What could possess presumably sane California educators to seek to teach children to, in essence, pray to such horrific ancient figures?  National Review has the answer; “the real reason that the authors of California’s Ethnic Studies Curriculum take a positive view of Aztec religion and a negative view of Christianity is because the Aztec gods lost the battle of religious orthodoxies and the New World and the Christian God won…(t)hey were a Native American, non-Christian people who were conquered by European Christian imperialists. Their defeat at the hands of Western civilization, which has had the temerity and the wickedness to last as long as it has by oppressing the downtrodden of the Earth, is enough to endow their religious practices with a nobility and a virtue that is entirely separate from its content.”

But for a more detailed explanation of the overall phenomenon of critical race theory, we turn again to Christopher Rufo.  In a detailed report for the Heritage Foundation, he writes that “critical race theory has emerged as one of the most influential—and controversial—academic theories in contemporary political discourse. The discipline’s key terms, such as ‘systemic racism,’ ‘white privilege,’ ‘white fragility,’ and ‘racial equity,’ have become part of the common vocabulary and the basis for much of progressive policymaking.”

 As Rufo points out, “(i)n simple terms, critical race theory reformulates the old Marxist dichotomy of oppressor and oppressed, replacing the class categories of bourgeoisie and proletariat with the identity categories of white and black. However, the political foundations of critical race theory maintain a clear Marxist economic orientation…(f)or critical race theory scholars, the entire foundation of American society is fundamentally illegitimate; consequently, they reject the traditions of constitutionalism and individual rights.” 

In a series of articles published here at usagovpolicy.com, we have discussed the Marxist underpinnings of progressive education initiatives, from “woke math” to the increasingly socialist positions taken by various teacher’s unions nationwide.  “Critical race theory” is but another method to teach communism to the young; “by defining every disparity between racial groups as an expression of ‘systemic racism,’ the critical race theorists lay the foundation for a political program of revolution…(a)lthough critical race theory has sought in some cases to distinguish itself from Marxism, the leading policy proposals from critical race theorists are focused on the race-based redistribution of wealth and power—a kind of identity-based rather than class-based Marxism.

“In one of the founding texts of critical race theory (Whiteness as Property), Cheryl Harris argues that property rights, enshrined in the Constitution, are in actuality a form of white racial domination. She claims that ‘whiteness, initially constructed as a form of racial identity, evolved into a form of property, historically and presently acknowledged and protected in American law,’ and that ‘the existing state of inequitable distribution is the product of institutionalized white supremacy and economic exploitation, [which] is seen by whites as part of the natural order of things that cannot legitimately be disturbed’…The solution for Harris is to replace the system of property rights and equal protection…with a system of positive discrimination tasked with ‘redistributing power and resources in order to rectify inequities and to achieve real equality.’  To achieve this goal, she advocates a large-scale wealth and property redistribution…Harris envisions a suspension of existing property rights followed by a governmental campaign to ‘address directly the distribution of property and power’ through wealth confiscation and race-based redistribution…In Harris’s formulation, if rights are a mechanism of white supremacy, they must be curtailed; the imperative of addressing race-based disparities must be given priority over the constitutional guarantees of equality, property, and neutrality.” 

As a result, men fail to respond to the sexual demands of the viagra uk online marriage, he cannot succeed if the woman just cannot respond properly. Horny Goat: As per research, this herb is commonly used for its memory cheap cialis in canada boosting properties also increases blood flow with a relatively low propensity for side effects. Some of ED medicines’ examples are Kamagra, Silagra, Lovegra, Super p Force tablets etc. 20mg tadalafil sale find out here are known as anti-impotent pills. In my previous post I discussed ‘how technology is ruining sex life sildenafil professional with your partner’.

Clearly, then, Critical Race Theory is not just an education initiative.  Recently, Oakland, California, “launched a pilot guaranteed income program geared towards helping the city’s lowest income residents. But unlike other pilot programs, Oakland’s pilot is also attempting to reduce the racial wealth gap, and will be the first to make race a qualification of the program.”  According to Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, “We have…documented three times a difference in median incomes between our white families and our Black families…we believe that we can contribute to the question of how to close the racial wealth gap, as well as designing a program that’s going to work for the families that are facing the most barriers.” 

As reported by Fox Business, “(e)ligible individuals must be low-income and identify as Black, indigenous or people of color. In order to qualify for the checks, applicants must be earning at or below 50% of the area median income, which is about $59,000 per year for a family of three…”    Thus, a black family earning $55,000 in total income is eligible for the program, but a white family making $45,000 would not be eligible.  Cheryl Harris would be proud.

But while Oakland’s program might make an ideologue like Harris happy, it is certain to be overturned when challenged as discriminatory.  “Limiting eligibility of these programs by race could well prove legally problematic, says Walter Olson, a legal expert at the Cato Institute. The U.S. and California constitutions, he notes, generally prohibit race-selective programs and public services…’(t)he structure of the program is racially discriminatory. It will probably not make it over the threshold for when government is allowed to discriminate,’ Olson says…”

Both the City of Oakland’s effort to implement a guaranteed basic income and the State of California’s Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum are clearly unconstitutional.  One discriminates on the basis of race; the other institutes religious practice in a public school classroom.  But despite the clearly illegal nature of these initiatives, the California Board of Education and the City of Oakland voted to implement these deeply unconstitutional measures.  All in the name of racial equity, not equality. I can’t pretend to speak for Martin Luther King, Jr.  But I am reasonably certain this was not what Dr. King meant by “developing students’ critical thinking and moral compass.”  Nor was it what he meant when he asked for a future where the content of his childrens’ character is more important than the color of their skin.

Illustration: Pixabay

The distinguished jurist John Wilson (ret.) wrote this article for the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.

“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” ~From the “I have a dream” speech, Martin Luther King, Jr., August 28, 1963, Washington, DC

In discussing the legacy of Dr King in February of 2018, the Atlantic made a very important notation; “In 1947, as an undergraduate at Morehouse College, King published in the campus newspaper a short treatise on the purpose of education. He argued that to benefit society, high-quality education should focus on developing students’ critical thinking and moral compass.” 

Yet, in today’s education system, the only “critical thinking” being encouraged is “critical race theory.”

Take, for example, a new initiative which has been proposed in California Public Schools; “The Board of Education in California recently voted unanimously to approve an Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum for use in all of the state’s public schools…this curriculum is ‘probably the most radical, polemical, and ideologically loaded educational document ever offered up for public consideration in the free world.’”  But, as described by the National Review, the change is more drastic than could be imagined;

“Students are to be taught that white Christian settlers committed ‘theocide’ against indigenous tribes when they arrived in the New World by murdering Native American gods and replacing them with the Christian God…students will learn that they have the power and the responsibility to build a social order…which will eventually supplant the last vestiges of colonial Christianity and pave the way for the ‘regeneration of indigenous epistemic and cultural futurity.’” 

The most prevalent facet impact is itching and dandruff by drying generic sildenafil india out the scalp. To get information on the check out possibilities and payment options available to you, it is strongly recommended that you ditch cialis professional for sale the contacts for awhile, and just wear your glasses. These diseases are potential risk factors of sexual impotence. 50mg generic viagra The study did not include patients with migraine headaches and maintain muscle http://www.midwayfire.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Approved-Minutes-1-12-16.doc viagra from usa and nerve function.

As described by Christopher Rufo, the Director of the Center on Wealth and Poverty at Discovery Institute, the proposed California Public School curriculum is engaged in teaching students the practice of an ancient religion; “The curriculum recommends that teachers lead their students in a series of indigenous songs, chants, and affirmations, including the ‘In Lak Ech Affirmation,’ which appeals directly to the Aztec gods. Students first clap and chant to the god Tezkatlipoka—whom the Aztecs traditionally worshipped with human sacrifice and cannibalism—asking him for the power to be ‘warriors’ for ‘social justice.’ Next, the students chant to the gods Quetzalcoatl, Huitzilopochtli, and Xipe Totek, seeking ‘healing epistemologies’ and ‘a revolutionary spirit.’ Huitzilopochtli, in particular, is the Aztec deity of war and inspired hundreds of thousands of human sacrifices during Aztec rule…The chants have a clear implication: the displacement of the Christian god, which is said to be an extension of white supremacist oppression, and the restoration of the indigenous gods to their rightful place in the social justice cosmology.”  

As Rufo further notes, “(t)he religious element of the ethnic studies curriculum, with direct appeals to Aztec gods, is almost certainly a violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Public schools are prohibited from leading state-sanctioned Christian prayers; they would presumably be similarly prohibited from leading state-sanctioned chants to the Aztec god of human sacrifice.” 

Much can be said against the Spanish conquistadors for their brutal destruction of the Aztec civilization.  However, let us not shed a tear for the displacement of the Atzec gods by Christianity; “The priests of Huitzilopochtli would appease their patron deity by laying out a sacrificial victim on a stone at the apex of the god’s pyramid, carving out said victim’s heart (while he or she was still alive), and then rolling the body down the side of the pyramid, at the base of which it was then dismembered and either disposed of or eaten…The priests of Tlaloc believed the tears of innocent children to be particularly pleasing to the god, and they took great care to ensure that their little victims were crying before and throughout the ceremony so that the smoke of the sacrificial fire would carry their tears up to the god above at the moment of death. The ritual began with the bones of the children being broken, their hands or their feet burned, and carvings etched into their flesh. They were then paraded before the celebrants of the ritual while crying. Insufficient tears from the children were believed to result in insufficient rains for the crops that year, so no brutality was spared. At the end of it all, the mutilated victims were burned alive.” 

The study concludes tomorrow.

Illustration: Pixabay

Why is America so close to being ripped apart, with differences that appear to be irreconcilable?

The United States, with its vast diversity in ethnic and religious groups as well as political perspectives, has not, with the exception of when the Union was divided by those who sought to preserve slavery, been so torn asunder.

The reason is twofold.

The First Amendment has allowed contentious perspectives to play out to the fullest extent. All the shouting and arguing has allowed volatile differences to be aired out and defused.

There has also been deep and widespread trust in the electoral system. Although there have been irregularities in the past and some questionable practices, overall Americans have had faith that balloting has been fair.

These attributes have been misunderstood abroad. According to one former State Department official, The Chinese government believed that during the 2000 “hanging chad” election, the nation was about to be tossed into massive disorder.

Those two unique civic virtues are now being threatened.

The censorship imposed by social media giants, and the “cancel culture” throughout academia, the media, and corporate America has prevented honest and thorough discourse in the public square. Adding to the growing crisis has been the highly partisan and thoroughly inappropriate alterations in the election system, made worse by the Supreme Court’s refusal to review the issue.

Possible side effects The sildenafil generic uk most common side effects are headache, flushing, dyspepsia, nasal congestion and impaired vision, which include photophobia and blurred vision. The World’s Strongest Acaiis also regarded as a very potent Healthy Aphrodisiac; in fact it’s being recommended by Brazilian doctors as a Healthful Alternative To commander cialis! Yes, that is correct: it’s considered a Natural Aphrodisiac! Not to mention that Acai also is a Weight Loss Product and a Hollywood secret to Beautiful skin. Let see for more viagra sildenafil 100mg us discuss some of the potential causes of erectile dysfunction in men are as follows -*Diabetes and cardiovascular diseases*Stress and depression*Clogged arteries*High blood pressure*Excessive consumption of alcohol and drug abuse*Low testosterone levels and abnormal thyroid hormone level;*Use of steroid by young men to build muscles should read this article. Hence, men that are found cialis 40 mg with diabetes experience erectile dysfunction condition.

A study in Tablet found that “Between 2017 and 2018, trust in media…dropped from 47% to 42%. Trust in government declined even more precipitously, with a 14-percentage-point drop in the number of people who said they trusted the U.S. to ‘do what is right.’ While those numbers rebounded by a few points in 2019, Americans’ overall faith in the country remained dismal: A mere 20%…And that’s the insidious thing about a culture where trust is eroding: A majority of people don’t even have to support or participate in cancel culture for it to wreak havoc on society at large…Without trust, we become fearful and desperate to exert control. Instead of terrorism or violence or a boogeyman lurking in the bushes with a gun and a roll of duct tape, we suspect the ordinary person sitting next to us, who suspects us in return. We are less charitable, more judgmental, and more likely to go to extremes—including violence…”

It is undeniable that the 2020 election has torn America further apart than at anytime since the 1860’s. The harsh divide did not end with the conclusion of the balloting and the inauguration of the new president. The reasons for that are due to both censorship and cancel culture, as well as the utter failure of the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on the combative issue.

A mere mention of the phrase “Stolen Election” may get one kicked off of YouTube and Facebook. 

Terrified editors of both print and electric media mandate that writers and newscasters preface remarks about the very real irregularities in the 2020 ballot with disclaimers that the complaints are false, despite an almost overwhelming abundance that procedures were changed without the required legislative approval.

The U.S. Supreme Court could have, at a minimum, softened the anger if it ruled on the issues, one way or the other.

However, in keeping with Chief Justice John G. Roberts’ apparent policy of keeping away from what he considers “political” issues, the Supreme Court would not hear the complaints.  It is often stated that the Trump campaign lost in its bid to have the high Court overturn the irregular changes made in various states. In reality, it never even received the opportunity for a full hearing before that august forum.

In a recent dissent to a yet another Supreme Court refusal to hear an election-related case, Justice Clarence Thomas eloquently outlined the danger fromthis abdication:

“..both before and after the 2020 election, non-legislative officials in various States took it upon themselves to set the rules instead. As a result, we received an unusually high number of petitions and emergency applications contesting those changes…unclear rules threaten to undermine this system…they sow confusion in the integrity and ultimately dampen confidence in the integrity and fairness of elections…changing the rules in the middle of the game is bad enough. Such rule changes by officials who lack authority to do so is even worse. When those changes alter election results, they can vary damage the electoral system on which our self-government so heavily depends.”

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

The Biden Administration, well-noted for hiding out, its silence on issues, and side-stepping answers to important media questions, was in historic overdrive this week at the State Department’s Daily Briefing. A reporter attempted on Monday to find out how the US voted at the UN on Iran’s election to the Commission on the Status of Women. He couldn’t get a straight answer. 

He tried again at Thursday’s Briefing to ask Ned Price, the State Department Spokesman. No luck. This columnist attempts to bring readers a summary of the week’s foreign policy events. I regret to inform to you that I am, like the reporter below, unable to discern the Biden Administration’s position. Below is the verbatim transcript from the State Department.

QUESTION: So you voted against them [Iran]?

MR PRICE: It was a private vote, but we called the vote specifically to allow countries to register their concern.

QUESTION: Okay. It was a private vote. Well, what do you think? Is it appropriate for them [Iran] to be on this commission, this council?

MR PRICE: Well, I would point you to what I just said. It is a troubling feature when countries run unopposed, countries that have —

QUESTION: Well, I’m talking about Iran specifically.

MR PRICE: Well, and I’m – and in this case —

QUESTION: Do you guys have an issue with them being on this commission?

MR PRICE: In this case, I think that Iran would qualify for much of what I just said: countries that have very troubling records, deeply disturbing records.

QUESTION: Yeah, but you said it was – but you said it was – you didn’t say that it was troubling for them to be on it; you said it was a troubling feature for these kinds of countries to run unopposed.

This generally cialis pill online varies between individuals, and depends on your taste. Please stop taking it as soon as you get older with viagra 25 mg davidfraymusic.com up to 20% of men affected. People wanting to gain cheap super viagra weight, should make It a routine to consume maximum amount of dates on a weekly basis. Physicians state that the lack of the natural light i.e. sunlight reduces the number of spermatozoa in sperm and possibility of the cheap viagra from uk navigate here egg fertilizing.

MR PRICE: Well, and it’s precisely why we called this vote.

QUESTION: So is it an issue —

MR PRICE: So countries could register their concern.

QUESTION: So is it safe to say – would someone be wrong in writing that the U.S. thinks it’s a bad idea for Iran to be on this commission?

MR PRICE: With a commission like this, we think that members should reflect the values underlying the commission.

QUESTION: And Iran doesn’t. All right. I’ll drop it there.

And, with that, the reporter gave up trying. One point for the Biden Administration’s Iran team, zero for freedom of the press.

INDIA

The United States is delivering medical supplies worth more than $100 million to provide urgent relief to India, which has been hard hit by the Covid pandemic. State governments, private companies, nongovernmental organizations, and thousands of Americans from across the country have mobilized to deliver vital oxygen, related equipment, and essential supplies for Indian hospitals to support frontline health care workers and the people of India most affected during this current outbreak. The death rate from the Covid virus is so high in India that it may delay the country’s overtaking China to become the most populous nation on earth by several years.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay