Saturday, August 31, 2024
Home Blog Page 123

Border travel restrictions may be extended to August 21

Leisure travel would continue to be prohibited

 

by Mexico News Daily

 

Mexico’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that it has proposed extending restrictions on non-essential travel between Mexico and the United States until Aug. 21.

The restrictions, which apply to the land border only and do not affect air travel between the countries, have been in force for nearly four months.

On its official Twitter page, the Foreign Ministry proposed that “the restrictions will remain in the same terms in which they have been developed since their implementation on March 21. Both countries will continue to seek to coordinate health measures in the border region.”

The United States has yet to announce an extension of border restrictions; the decision lies in the hands of officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

People who have temporary work visas, emergency personnel, students, government officials, flight crews and those involved in cross-border trade are still allowed entry under the terms of the current restrictions. Travel for leisure, tourism or recreation is prohibited.

According to the most recent data available, the border states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas have a combined total of 764,996 confirmed cases of the coronavirus. On the south side of the border, the Mexican states of Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León and Tamaulipas have a total of 55,083 cases.

On July 2, United States Ambassador Christopher Landau asked U.S. citizens to respect the restrictions put in place.

“Attention U.S. citizens on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border! We’re still in the midst of a pandemic, but hundreds of thousands of people PER DAY are crossing the land border — and fully 90 percent are U.S. citizens or green card holders,” he posted to Twitter. “Whichever side of the border you live on, this is NOT the time to cross to shop, eat, or visit family on the other side. Only ‘essential’ travel is permitted over the land border.”

Source: La Jornada (sp)

President Lopez Obrador puts ports under military protection

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador announced on Friday that he decided to put the country’s ports and customs under military protection, and he communicated it to the concerned secretariats.

The usual morning press briefing and the citizen security meeting were held on Friday at the Sixth Naval Region of Manzanillo, in Colima state. This was an opportunity to publicly settle discrepancies between that government and the federal executive.

About the port issue, Lopez Obrador assured that all kind of contraband such as goods and drugs are introduced through Manzanillo, especially chemicals that are the most destructive and harmful modern drugs because they can destroy young people.

For this reason, we have decided that the land and maritime customs are in charge of the Secretariat of Defense and the Secretariat of the Navy, and the same happens in ports for security and to avoid that those drugs enter the country, the head of State said.

The president considered that the serious problems in the country’s ports are fundamentally due to corruption and port mismanagement, and this explains why so many attacks and murders occur in Colima and the country’s other regions.

Governor Ignacio Peralta Sánchez, of the opposition Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), agreed that Manzanillo port is part of the federal strategy and promised to support the national executive in its fight to clean up ports and customs.

US, Canada and Mexico to maintain border closure until August

The United States, Canada and Mexico will maintain a partial closure of borders until late August due to the SARS-Cov-2 coronavirus pandemic, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf informed.

The official, who made the announcement on his Twitter account on Thursday, said that the decision was a joint agreement among the three countries with the aim of curbing the spread of the pathogen, causing the Covid-19 disease.

According to Wolf, the partial closure occurs as of the ‘success of the current restrictions’ and the close collaboration with the Canadian and Mexican governments.

The United States, Canada and Mexico have agreed on March 20 to limit all non-essential travel across borders facing the danger of the pandemic. Since then the measure has been extended.

The media is lying about the “second wave”

by Ron Paul

 

For months, the Washington Post and the rest of the mainstream media kept a morbid Covid-19 “death count” on their front pages and at the top of their news broadcasts. The coronavirus outbreak was all about the number of dead. The narrative was intended to boost governors like Cuomo in New York and Whitmer in Michigan, who turned their states authoritarian under the false notion that destroying people’s jobs, freedom, and lives would somehow keep a virus from doing what viruses always do: spread through a population until eventually losing strength and dying out.

The “death count” was always the headline.

But then all of a sudden early in June the mainstream media did a George Orwell and lectured us that it is all about “cases” and has always been all about “cases.” Death, and especially infection fatality rate, were irrelevant. Why? Because from the peak in April, deaths had decreased by 90 percent and were continuing to crash. That was not terrifying enough so the media pretended this good news did not exist.

With massive increases in testing, the “case” numbers climbed. This is not rocket science: the more people you test the more “cases” you discover.

Unfortunately our mainstream media is only interested in pushing the “party line.” So the good news that millions more have been exposed while the fatality rate continues to decline — meaning the virus is getting weaker — is buried under hysterical false reporting of “new cases.”

Unfortunately many governors, including our own here in Texas, are incapable of resisting the endless lies of the mainstream media. They are putting Americans again through the nightmare of forced business closures, mandated face masks, and restrictions of Constitutional liberties based on false propaganda.

In Texas the “second wave” propaganda has gotten so bad that the leaders of the four major hospitals in Houston took the extraordinary step late last week of holding a joint press conference to clarify that the scare stories of Houston hospitals being overwhelmed with Covid cases are simply untrue. Dr. Marc Boom of Houston Methodist said the reporting on hospital capacity is misleading. He said, “quite frankly, we’re concerned that there is a level of alarm in the community that is unwarranted right now.”

In fact, there has been much reporting that the “spike” in Texas cases is not due to a resurgence of the virus but to hospital practices of Covid-testing every patient coming in for any procedure at all. If it’s a positive, well that counts as a “Covid hospitalization.” Why would hospitals be so dishonest in their diagnoses? Billions of appropriated Federal dollars are being funneled to facilities based on the number of “Covid cases” they can produce. As I’ve always said, if you subsidize something you get more of it. And that’s why we are getting more Covid cases.

Let’s go back to the original measurements used to scare Americans into giving up their Constitutional liberties: the daily death numbers. Even though we know hospitals have falsely attributed countless deaths to “Covid-19” that were deaths WITH instead of FROM the virus, we are seeing actual deaths steadily declining over the past month and a half. Declining deaths are not a great way to push the “second wave” propaganda, so the media and politicians have moved the goal posts and decided that only “cases” are important. It’s another big lie.

Resist propaganda and defend your liberty. That is the only way we’ll get through this.

(Ron Paul is a former U.S. congressman from Texas. This article originally appeared at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity and is reprinted here with permission).

UN declares world peace!

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR:

 

Dear readers:

 

With the title: “Stalled Security Council resolution adopted, backing UN’s global humanitarian ceasefire call,” the beloved leaders of the World Government pretend to ‘appease us,’ the ‘world citizens,’ in the middle of a pandemia (war) – believed to be part of the World War III. I’ll leave investigative reporter James Corbett to expand on this subject in the interesting article below. – Marvin

 

by James Corbett

corbettreport.com

July 04, 2020

 

Kumbaya and pass the bubbly! World peace has been achieved!

What, haven’t you heard? The UN Security Council just passed a resolution that calls for a global ceasefire as a type of “humanitarian pause” while the world deals with the coronavirus pandemic that (we are told) is wreaking such havoc on the human population.

Or, as the UN puts it:

The Security Council on Wednesday echoed the Secretary-General’s call for a worldwide ceasefire, to combat the coronavirus pandemic that has already claimed more than half a million lives. The UN chief welcomed the long-awaited move, calling for countries to “redouble their efforts for peace”.

This tells us three things:

  1. Our noble leaders love us and care for us and want to protect us during this time of crisis.
  2. The pandemic must be real and it must be supremely grave, because why else would the Security Council be acting like this?
  3. We can expect the next 90 days to be a heaven on earth where the nations of the world lay down their arms and live in peace and harmony.

Right?

Well, not exactly. You see, the resolution asks member nations to cease all of their military operations except “military operations against Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh), Al-Qaida and Al-Nusra Front, and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida or ISIL, and other Council-designated terrorist groups.” But other than that wee little asterisk, that’s it. War is done-zo! . . . For three months, anyway.

So, wait, why did the Saudis just launch a fresh military campaign against the Yemenis? Didn’t they get the memo? What on earth is going on here?

Let’s start by examining the idea of a global 90-day ceasefire (except if you’re fighting the really bad guys). Is this supposed to signal to the rest of the world that bombing and violence and bloodshed is OK as long as it doesn’t distract people from panicking about the Official Bogeyman du Jour (i.e., coronavirus)? If, 90 days from now, the coronavirus is no longer being promoted as an existential threat to humanity, then will war and wholesale slaughter become “humanitarian” again?

Of course such a pronouncement doesn’t bear the slightest scrutiny. Sure, it’s a nice sentiment that everyone can get behind (“Yes, we should stop war for an arbitrarily defined period of time!”) but that’s precisely the point; it’s a PR move that is designed to swirl the Security Council and “humanitarian pause” and “world peace” around in our head so that we all end up with warm, fuzzy feelings about the UN and come to believe that there is some sort of global governmental body that can stop war at the snap of its fingers.

(Did I mention the Saudis just carried out an airstrike against a Yemeni village?)

As usual, there is a modicum of truth to the sentiment; without our misleaders constantly conspiring to whip up public anger against perceived enemies and purchasing billions of dollars of military equipment, it’s highly doubtful that there would be very much large-scale international warfare at all. Do you really think the average Saudi would be motivated to help fund and equip an Air Force, and then volunteer to jump in a fighter jet and conduct bombing raids on Yemeni villages, slaughtering men, women and children they’ve never met and who never caused them offense, all on their own? Without a government (or, in this case, a spoiled crown prince) deciding that it is in “the Kingdom’s” interests to carry out such strikes (and then spending ungodly amounts of that self-same Kingdom’s money to make it happen), would such warfare be taking place at all?

So, yes, if the global elistists truly wanted to bring about world peace, it wouldn’t just be possible, it would be fairly straightforward. They would just have to dismantle the war machine they created, renounce the warmaking powers they bestowed on themselves, and get behind the movement to criminalize war.

But of course that’s not what they’re doing. Instead we’re treated to a mere Security Council publicity stunt, passing a resolution calling for “humanitarian pauses” in our regularly scheduled warfare . . . that will naturally resume in 90 days (or less). One presumes this cessation of hostilities also applies to any Palestinians thinking of defending their homeland from impending Israeli annexation.

No, this latest resolution means nothing of importance for those seeking actual world peace. What it does do is confirm yet again that—exactly as I have had cause to point out time and again since this coronavirus crisis started—the REAL threat to world peace is the war that these same misleaders are waging against their own populations.

The signs of this warfare are everywhere apparent.

It can be seen in the European Commission’s “roadmap” for implementing a common vaccination card / passport for all EU citizens by 2022.

It can be seen in the UN’s own “Verified” initiative, which threatens to “counter the spread of COVID-19 misinformation by sharing fact-based advice with their communities.” (And I think we all know what that means.)

It can be seen in the deliberate targeting of the elderly in care homes to artificially inflate the death rates during this crisis.

It can be seen in the mandatory vaccinations, lockdowns, closures, and all of the other laws, rules and regulations that are seeking to restrict the basic rights and freedoms in this dawning Age of Biosecurity.

In each and every case, these actions—actions that are being taken by governments of the world against their own people, mind you—are themselves threats to peace and stability (not to mention the economic livelihood) to the majority of humanity. Far from delivering world peace, these misleaders are themselves waging war on the very people they claim to be ruling over.

But of course the UN Security Council is not interested in ending (or even “humanitarian pausing”) these threats to humanity. No, the very idea that the clowns and puppets at the Security Council can deliver world peace (or a “humanitarian pause” in armed conflict) via a simple resolution (with a 90-day expiry date) is absurd on its face; thinking that they actually desire world peace is even more absurd.

The world misleaders are not interested in actual world peace. They do not want the peace that comes when humanity is free from the clutches of the governments that seek to track, trace, control and sanction their every movement. That is the vision of world peace that is never presented in these cheap publicity stunts at the UN.

Now let’s all set the clock before this “world ceasefire” is broken . . . oh, wait. Too late.

5 hidden dangers of hand sanitizers

Hand sanitizer has been used during the coronavirus outbreak to battle the spread. Like anything, use in moderation.

Here are 5 hidden dangers

 

by Kurumi Fukushima

 

Hand sanitizer. You squirt it, feel the cool tingling sensation, and spread it all over your hands. Then, you feel clean.

It sounds pretty simple as an alternative to washing your hands with soap and water. It’s quick, portable, and convenient, especially when you don’t have running water nearby. Hand sanitizer or hand antiseptic is a supplement that comes in gel, foam, or liquid solutions.

Hand sanitizer often has a form of alcohol, such as ethyl alcohol, as an active ingredient and works as an antiseptic. Other ingredients could include water, fragrance, and glycerin.

Other non-alcohol based hand sanitizers contain an antibiotic compound called triclosan or triclocarban. This ingredient can also be found in soaps and even toothpaste. These products are often labeled antibacterial, antimicrobial, or antiseptic soaps.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration says triclosan could carry unnecessary risks, including some on this list, given that their benefits have yet to be proved.

Recent studies have raised questions about whether triclosan might be hazardous to human health, as studies on the compound are ongoing.

If you are a cleanliness-obsessed germophobe who has made a habit of frequently using hand sanitizer like lotion, you will want to know the dangers we’ve dug up.

Here are five hidden dangers of hand sanitizer that you may not know about, but should…

  1. Antibiotic Resistance

Antibiotics are effective against bacteria. But what happens if your body builds up resistance to antibiotics, and in turn promotes resistance to bacteria?

Triclosan contributes to making bacteria resistant to antibiotics. Using hand sanitizers may actually lower your resistance to diseases by killing good bacteria, which helps protect against bad bacteria.

In a 2011 study by the Epidemic Intelligence Service at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, researchers found that health care employees who were most likely to use hand sanitizers over soap and water for routine hand washing were nearly six times more at risk for outbreaks of norovirus, which causes most cases of acute gastroenteritis.

Overexposure to antibiotics or improper antibiotic use can lead to bacterial resistance, making it more difficult or even impossible to treat.

  1. Alcohol Poisoning

Just because it doesn’t have triclosan, doesn’t mean it’s completely safe.

The active ingredient in some hand sanitizers is usually a type of alcohol that acts as an antimicrobial that kills bacteria. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control recommend ethyl alcohol, isopropyl alcohol, or a mix of both in a concentration of 60 percent to 95 percent.

In March of 2012, six California teenagers were hospitalized with alcohol poisoning from drinking hand sanitizer, making it the latest in a string of household products used to induce intoxication, ABC News reported. A few squirts of hand sanitizer could equal a couple of shots of hard liquor.

And it’s not just teenagers. Younger children have accidentally ingested it in the past, according to the LA Times.

  1. Hormone Disruption

Another effect of triclosan is hormone problems.

The FDA says research shows triclosan may lead to hormonal disruptions and cause bacteria to adapt to its antimicrobial properties, which creates more antibiotic-resistant strains. Animal studies have shown that the compound could change the way hormones work in the body, raising concerns and warranting further investigation to better understand how they might affect humans.

  1. Weaker Immune System

Studies have shown that triclosan can also harm the immune system, which protects your body against disease.

Researchers at the University of Michigan School of Public Health found that triclosan may negatively affect human immune function. Compromising the immune system can make people more susceptible to allergies, and more vulnerable to the toxic chemical Bisphenol A, which is found in plastics. In the study, children and teens with higher levels of triclosan were more likely to be diagnosed with hay fever and other allergies.

  1. Toxic Chemicals

If your hand sanitizer is scented, then it’s likely loaded with toxic chemicals. Companies aren’t required to disclose the ingredients that make up their secret scents, and therefore generally are made from dozens of chemicals.

Synthetic fragrances contain phthalates, which are endocrine disrupters that mimic hormones and could alter genital development.

You should also look out for parabens, which are in many skincare products. They are used to preserve other ingredients and extend a product’s shelf life.

Insults to Black History

by Walter E. Williams

 

Many whites are ashamed, saddened and feel guilty about our history of slavery, Jim Crow and gross racial discrimination. Many black people remain angry over the injustices of the past and what they see as injustices of the present. Both blacks and whites can benefit from a better appreciation of black history.

Often overlooked or ignored is the fact that, as a group, black Americans have made the greatest gains, over some of the highest hurdles, and in a shorter span of time than any other racial group in history.

For example, if one totaled up the earnings and spending of black Americans and considered us as a separate nation with our own gross domestic product, we would rank well within the top 20 richest nations. A black American, Gen. Colin Powell, once headed the world’s mightiest military.

Black Americans are among the world’s most famous personalities, and a few black Americans are among the world’s richest people such as investor Robert F. Smith, IT service provider David Steward, Oprah Winfrey, and basketball star Michael Jordan. Plus, there was a black U.S. president.

The significance of these achievements cannot be overstated. When the Civil War ended, neither a slave nor a slave owner would have believed such progress would be possible in less than a century and a half — if ever. As such, it speaks to the intestinal fortitude of a people. Just as important, it speaks to the greatness of a nation in which such gains were possible. Nowhere else on earth could such progress have been achieved except in the United States of America.

The issue that confronts us is how these gains can be extended to about one-quarter of the black population for whom they have proven elusive. The first step is to acknowledge that the civil rights struggle is over and won. At one time, black Americans did not enjoy the constitutional guarantees as everyone else. Now we do. While no one can deny the existence of residual racial discrimination, racial discrimination is not the major problem confronting a large segment of the black community.

A major problem is that some public and private policies reward dependency and irresponsibility. Chief among these policies is the welfare state that has fostered a 75 percent rate of out of wedlock births and decimated the black family that had survived Jim Crow and racism. Keep in mind that in 1940 the black illegitimacy rate was 11 percent and most black children were raised in two-parent families. Most poverty, about 25 percent, is found in female-headed households. The poverty rate among husband-and-wife black families has been in the single digits for more than two decades.

Black people can be thankful that double standards and public and private policies rewarding inferiority and irresponsibility were not a part of the 1920s, ’30s, ’40s and ’50s. If there were, then there would not have been the kind of intellectual excellence and spiritual courage that created the world’s most successful civil rights movement.

From the late 1800s to 1950, some black schools were models of academic achievement. Black students at Washington’s Dunbar High School often outscored white students as early as 1899. Schools such as Frederick Douglass (Baltimore), Booker T. Washington (Atlanta), P.S. 91 (Brooklyn), McDonogh 35 (New Orleans) and others operated at a similar level of excellence.

Self-destructive behavior that has become acceptable, particularly that in predominantly black schools, is nothing less than a gross betrayal of a struggle, paid with blood, sweat and tears by previous generations, to make possible today’s educational opportunities that are being routinely squandered. I guarantee that blacks who lived through that struggle and are no longer with us would not have believed such a betrayal possible.

Government should do its job of protecting constitutional rights.

After that, black people should be simply left alone as opposed to being smothered by the paternalism inspired by white guilt. On that note, I just cannot resist the temptation to refer readers to my “Proclamation of Amnesty and Pardon,” which grants Americans of European ancestry amnesty and pardon for their own grievances and those of their forebears against my people so that they stop feeling guilty and stop acting like fools in their relationship with Americans of African ancestry.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

Millions in the world have lost a source of life from remittances

Remittances, farmers markets, migration flows collapse – developing world reels from pandemic fallout

 

by Sunita Sohrabji

EMS Contributing editor

 

SAN FRANCISCO — More than 265 million around the world currently face food insecurity in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic, and several million have lost their life-line of remittances, according to experts speaking at an ethnic media conference May 8 on the pandemic’s impact on the developing world.

“COVID-19 is expected to double the number of people facing food insecurity. The world has never seen a pandemic like this,” said Dulce Gamboa, associate for Latino relations at Bread for the World.

Remittances — money sent from people working abroad to their families back home — have taken a huge hit, said Demetrios Papademetriou, who co-founded the Migration Policy Institute and is currently a Distinguished Transatlantic Fellow at the Washington DC-based think tank. The World Bank has estimated that $142 billion has been lost in remittances, as foreign workers lose their jobs to the coronavirus crisis.

“Remittances are an essential lifeline for people who receive that money. They will be thinner and more precarious,” said Papademetriou.

He equated the COVID-19 crisis to the decade-long Great Depression in the U.S. in the 1930s, and characterized it as an “economic abyss.”

Daniel Nepstad, President and Founder of Earth Innovation Institute, discussed the impact of the pandemic on the Amazon rainforest, the largest tropical rainforest in the world. The summer months are typically burning season in the forest, as villagers burn patches to use for agricultural purposes.

In a normal year, thousands of people would get respiratory illnesses as forests burn. This year, however, Nepstad predicted an increased number of deaths as the COVID-19 virus attacks people whose immune systems are already compromised.

In Manaus, Brazil, deep in the Amazon rainforest, Nepstad reported that mass graves have been erected for those succumbing to the virus. In Loreto, Peru, a lack of oxygen bottles has contributed to a high mortality rate from COVID.

The biggest threat to the rain forest comes from people fleeing there as a last resort, Nepstad said. Farmers can no longer bring their products to markets, which have shuttered in the wake of the pandemic. More than 200,000 migrants have left Lima, Peru by foot, walking through deserts and up into the highlands and from there to the rainforest for some measure of food security.

Nepstad urged the global community to support farmers in the Amazon — providing them with seed capital to grow tree crops which have a longer life-span — and also advocated for the formalizing of supply chains and for fair price support.

“Now is the time for solidarity, listening to local leaders and understanding what they need,” said Nepstad. “We tend to demonize the people that are clearing forests, but I think it’s important to have more nuance there.”

“Lots of people are extracting food by clearing the rain forests. We eat that food around the world.”

Even if there is no surge in food prices, the global hunger pandemic will continue, said Gamboa, noting that the situation will deteriorate most rapidly in countries where a large percentage of the labor force works in the informal economy.

Yemen currently faces the worst food insecurity crisis, said Gamboa, with 53 percent of its population — almost 16 million people — facing starvation.

Sudan and Nigeria are likely to be hit by famines, she said. Zimbabwe, South Africa, the Congo, and the Horn of Africa are also facing massive food insecurity issues due to high inflation, poor harvests and drought.

“Malnourished people have less effective immune systems,” said Gamboa, adding that a child who is malnourished during his first 1,000 days of life will face a lifetime of stunted growth, both physically and intellectually.

“People are saying ‘we’re going to die of hunger before we die of coronavirus.’”

“The U.S. needs to have strong leadership to help millions of people around the world, including women and children,” stated Gamboa.

Global migration has ground to a halt as countries close their borders and restrict incoming travel, said Papademetriou. However, there has been a significant amount of labor migration as people in developing countries return home, he said.

“There has been an elite consensus that has allowed migration to continue to be large and to thrive because of the demography of many of the rich countries,” said Papademetriou. “We will have to see if that elite consensus continues to hold as this pandemic continues,” he said, adding that countries will have to reassess afresh the number of immigrant workers they need, especially in the agricultural sector.

Papademetriou said it was too early to assess whether the U.S. would grant legal status to undocumented immigrants, many of whom are now considered essential workers.

“I have spent 14 years of attempting to come up with compromises that legislators on both sides were able to support. We have failed every single time.”

“The last time we failed big was in 2013 under President Obama. So it’s difficult for me to be optimistic,” said Papademetriou.­

Supreme Court: Nearly half of Oklahoma is Indian reservation

1.8 million people now live in “Indian Country”

 

by ZeroHedge

 

July 9, 2020 – The decision, authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, holds the United States to an 1866 treaty that the Muscogee (Creek) Nation signed with the United States after the Civil War over land which was home to the “Five Civilized Tribes”; the Creek, Cherokee Nation, the Seminole, the Chickasaw Nation, and the Choctaw Nation, according to The New Republic.

“Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law,” wrote Gorsuch, a Trump appointee. “Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word.”

Joining Gorsuch in the majority were Justices Sonya Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, while Justices Alito, Kavanaugh, Roberts and Clarence Thomas argued in the minority – siding with the state of Oklahoma.

“A century of practice confirms that the Five Tribes’ prior domains were extinguished,” wrote Roberts. “The State has maintained unquestioned jurisdiction for more than 100 years. Tribe members make up less than 10%–15% of the population of their former domain, and until a few years ago the Creek Nation itself acknowledged that it no longer possessed the reservation the Court discovers today.”

Roberts added that “The State’s ability to prosecute serious crimes will be hobbled and decades of past convictions could well be thrown out,” and that “The decision today creates significant uncertainty for the State’s continuing authority over any area that touches Indian affairs, ranging from zoning and taxation to family and environmental law.”

The original case (via the New York Times):

The case concerned Jimcy McGirt, a member of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation who was convicted of sex crimes against a child by state authorities in the Nation’s historical boundaries. He said that only federal authorities were entitled to prosecute him.

Mr. McGirt argued that Congress had never clearly destroyed the sovereignty of the Creek Nation over the area, covering about half the state. The solicitor general of Oklahoma took the opposite view, saying the area had never been reservation land.

McGirt v. Oklahoma, No. 18-9526, an appeal from a state court’s decision, was the Supreme Court’s second attempt to resolve the status of eastern Oklahoma.

In November 2018, the justices heard arguments in Sharp v. Murphy, No. 17-1107, which arose from the prosecution in state court of Patrick Murphy, a Creek Indian, for murdering George Jacobs in rural McIntosh County, east of Oklahoma City.

After he was sentenced to death, it emerged that the murder had taken place on what had once been Indian land. Mr. Murphy argued that only the federal government could prosecute him and that a federal law barred the imposition of the death penalty because he was an Indian.

Mr. Murphy convinced the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, in Denver. But when the case was argued before an eight-member Supreme Court, the justices seemed divided and troubled. (Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who had served on the 10th Circuit when it ruled on the case, recused himself.)

Instead of issuing a decision before the term ended in June 2019, the court announced it would hear another set of arguments in its current term, which started in October. That was a sign the court had deadlocked, 4 to 4.

But there was no new argument in the Murphy case, probably because it was not clear another hearing would break the deadlock. Instead, the court heard Mr. McGirt’s case, allowing the overarching issue to be settled by a nine-member court.

Muscogee tribal leaders cheered the ruling, vowing to work with state and federal law-enforcement authorities to ensure public safety within the reservation, according to the Times.

“This is a historic day,” said Principal Chief David Hill. “This is amazing. It’s never too late to make things right.”

Thousands of immigrant kids are detained, far from their parents from COVID-19, too

An immigrant child looks out from a U.S. Border Patrol bus leaving as protesters block the street outside the U.S. Border Patrol Central Processing Center Saturday, June 23, 2018, in McAllen, Texas. Additional law enforcement officials were called in to help control the crowd and allow the bus to move. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip)

They need protection from covid-19, too

 

by Katie Peeler

 

– As a pediatric intensive care physician, I like to think I have an unusually strong stomach for heart-wrenching scenarios. While they impact me deeply, I am not easily rattled.

But COVID-19 has rattled me. Everyone I run into is experiencing extreme anxiety over the uncertainty of what lies ahead. How many people will get sick? Will our local hospital run out of ventilators? Will my parents die? Will I die?

Imagine these questions not between adults, but between two school-aged siblings. Perhaps their parents overhear them and can quell some of their anxieties. My own son, only 5-years-old, could not fall asleep last night because at school last week he heard that “billions of people were going to die.”

Now imagine these questions, as asked by immigrant children detained in crowded shelters thousands of miles away from their parents. They are terrified, and the people they worry about most — and who they most need to love and comfort them — aren’t there.

While we are all justifiably concerned for our own children in these fraught times, we must not forget this particularly vulnerable group of children in the United States. They are just as deserving of protection during this pandemic.

Children younger than 18, who arrive at the U.S. border without a parent or guardian, are first held in border cells run by the Department of Homeland Security. Federal law requires that they be transferred within 72 hours to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which is under the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The number of such children arriving annually is growing — almost 70,000 in 2019. Some ORR facilities are foster homes, which may offer better care, but others are group homes or large shelters that may house more than 1,000 children at a time.

The vast majority of these children come from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador — countries notorious for rampant gang violence and governments unable or unwilling to intervene. After often long and extremely dangerous journeys, they arrive at the Mexico-U.S. border already severely mentally and physically traumatized — a fact I can testify to as a medical expert with Physicians for Human Rights.

The devastating impact of COVID-19 globally has made starkly clear how critical it is to take preventative action. The current system of detaining children in ever larger groups, and for longer periods of time, increases their severe health risks and the likelihood of human rights violations.

In crowded settings, how is ORR able to follow the CDC’s guidance about social distancing and appropriate personal hygiene? Have they reviewed these guidelines with their staff or with the children? Attorneys with Kids in Need of Defense (KIND), a nonprofit organization that provides legal services to children in ORR custody, visited a shelter within the last week. There, they found diluted soap in the bathrooms, large groups of children crowded in a room for their legal screenings and no evidence of sanitizing the room before or after.

We’re in the middle of a global pandemic — none of this is acceptable.

We all want to protect our children and those we love. We cannot forget about the ones we cannot see.

New data from more than 2,000 pediatric cases in China indicates that young children are vulnerable to COVID-19, with severe and critical cases of children particularly noted in infants. While this is lower than adult rates, it still may represent a significant number of vulnerable and sick children. Unfortunately, there has been a history of delayed recognition of both underlying medical disorders and acute illness in detained children. ORR must take every precaution and implement creative solutions to shield children and staff from unnecessary harm.

Also of paramount importance to these children’s well-being is protecting their caregivers.

Reports from China and Italy indicate that many otherwise well children who contract this new virus are frequently asymptomatic or present with symptoms of the common cold. In the context of a crowded shelter or detention center, it is not uncommon for children to have minor colds. Without ready access to testing, it is impossible to know which virus a child has. Spread of COVID-19 will be quick. Caregivers in the shelters could also fall ill. What is the back-up plan for caring for these children if the shelter workforce is quickly depleted?

Policy change is slow, but pandemics wait for no one.

Migrant children also have significant mental health needs, given the trauma they endured at home, during their journeys, and in becoming a ward of our government. Their lives are already filled with anxiety and uncertainty.

A recent report from the Office of the Inspector General showed that despite specific guidelines that dictate the type and frequency of mental health services required for each child to receive, the actual mental health resources available in ORR shelters is far below the requirement. This need will increase exponentially in these children as their anxiety heightens with the pandemic.

Policy change is slow, but pandemics wait for no one.

DHHS must step-up high-level screening for safe sponsors of children immediately upon arrival to the border. They must expeditiously place children with such sponsors, thereby avoiding feeding into an already overcrowded shelter system.

Further, ORR must ensure all staff and children understand the CDC guidance surrounding social distancing and personal hygiene and robustly stock their shelters with soap, hand sanitizer, cleaning supplies and food. Medical triage guidelines must be clear and practiced, and mental health support should be provided for all.

Immigration court proceedings for detained children should be halted for now, and flexibility should be given to legal services organizations so they can utilize videoconferencing or individual meetings when possible.

The ORR facilities are spread out across the U.S., and there may be one or more in your state. You can encourage your local, state or national representatives to exercise oversight of ORR to ensure they are acting in the best interest of children, as well as their families and caregivers.

We all want to protect our children and those we love. We cannot forget about the ones we cannot see.

Listening to the coronavirus “experts” has led to death and despair

by Ron Paul

 

On April 21st the Washington Post savaged Georgia governor Brian Kemp’s decision to begin opening his state after locking down for weeks. “Georgia leads the race to become America’s No. 1 Death Destination,” sneered the headline.

The author, liberal pundit Dana Milbank, actually found the possibility of Georgians dying to be hilarious, suggesting that, “as a promotion, Georgia could offer ventilators to the first 100 hotel guests to register.”

Milbank, who is obviously still getting paid while millions are out of work, sees his job as pushing the mainstream narrative that we must remain in fear and never question what “experts” like Dr. Fauci tell us.

Well, it’s been three weeks since Milbank’s attack on Georgia and its governor, predicting widespread death which he found humorous. His predictions are about as worthless as his character. Not only has Georgia not seen “coronavirus … burn through Georgia like nothing has since William Tecumseh Sherman,” as Milbank laughed, but Covid cases, hospitalizations, and deaths have seen a steep decline since the governor began opening the state.

Maybe getting out in the fresh air and sunshine should not have been prohibited in the first place!

In fact, as we now have much more data, it is becoming increasingly clear that the US states and the countries that locked down the tightest also suffered the highest death rates. Ultra locked-down Italy suffered 495 Covid deaths per million while relatively non-locked down South Korea suffered only five deaths per million. The same is true in the US, where non lockdown states like South Dakota were relatively untouched by the virus while authoritarian-led Michigan, New York, and California have been hardest hit.

In those hardest hit states, we are now seeing that most of the deaths occurred in senior care facilities — after the governors ordered patients sick with Covid to leave the hospitals and return to their facilities. There, they infected their fellow residents who were most likely to have the multiple co-morbidities and advanced age that turned the virus into a death sentence. Will these governors be made to answer for this callous disregard for life?

Yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar admitted the obvious: “We are seeing that in places that are opening, we’re not seeing this spike in cases.” So why not open everything? Because these petty tyrants cannot stand the idea of losing the ability to push people around.

Shutting down the entire United States over a virus that looks to be less deadly than an average flu virus — particularly among those under 80 who are not already sick — has resulted in mass unemployment and economic destruction. More Americans may die from the wrong-headed efforts to fight the virus than from the virus itself.

Americans should pause and reflect on the lies they are being sold. Masks are just a form of psychological manipulation. Many reputable physicians and scientists have said they are worthless and potentially harmful. Lockdowns are meant to condition people to obey without question. A nation of people who just do what they are told by the “experts” without question is a nation ripe for a descent into total tyranny. This is no empty warning — it’s backed up by history. Time to stand up to all the petty tyrants from our hometowns to Washington DC. It is time to reclaim our freedom.

(Ron Paul is a former U.S. congressman from Texas. This article originally appeared at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity).

Will depression II dictate Trump’s fate?  

by Patrick J. Buchanan

 

As of April 30, the coronavirus pandemic has killed 61,500 Americans in two months and induced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression.

And if history is our guide, the economic crisis, which has produced 30 million unemployed Americans in six weeks, may prove more enduring, ruinous and historic than the still-rising and tragic death toll.

The Spanish flu of 1918-1919, the deadliest pandemic in modern history, infected an estimated 500 million people worldwide, a third of the planet’s population, and killed an estimated 20 million to 50 million victims, including 675,000 Americans.

“Adjusting for the difference in the size of the American population then and now,” writes Chronicles columnist Roger McGrath, “that number will be equivalent to two million deaths today.”

Yet, the Spanish flu did not shut America down.

As the Spanish flu hit and spread in 1918, the U.S. raised, trained and equipped an army of 4 million men, sent 2 million soldiers to France, broke Gen. Erich Ludendorff’s army, and turned the tide in favor of the Allies.

By December 1918, Doughboys were arriving in New York harbor — having sailed home from Europe’s battlefields on flu-infested transports.

As the scourge continued to take its toll, Woodrow Wilson sailed to Europe, participated for months in the Paris Peace Conference, returned, went on a national train tour to sell his Paris treaty and League of Nations, and suffered a stroke.

In September 1919, Gen. Pershing led his victorious troops in victory parades in New York City and Washington. This writer’s father, a teenager then, was in the D.C. crowd.

In the history books of the 1950s, World War I, Wilson and the Senate battle over the treaty he brought home and U.S. membership in the League of Nations loomed far larger than the Spanish flu that had killed as many U.S. soldiers as the Kaiser’s armies.

But the Great Depression, to which our current crash is now being compared, did not last for just a year like the Spanish flu. The Depression lasted from the stock market crash in October 1929 to the eve of World War II.

Economically, it was devastating. Unemployment during the 1930s never fell below 14 percent. In 1937, it was back up to 17 percent.

At the bottom of the Depression, the stock market had lost 90 percent of its value, and the GDP had fallen 50 percent. Not until the end of FDR’s second term, in 1940, when the U.S. began to gear up for the war, did America really begin to pull out of it.

FDR’s New Deal, however, while it did not cure the Depression, was a historic political triumph for both the president and his party.

From 1930 through 1946, Democrats controlled both houses of the Congress every year, elected and reelected FDR four times and gave him a 46-state landslide in 1936, losing only Maine and Vermont.

What this suggests is that the economic devastation we have brought upon ourselves to battle the pandemic may prove more lasting and historic in its impact than the terrible losses of human life to COVID-19.

Politically, the Depression worked for the Democratic Party like no other event in history. After the Crash of 1929 under Herbert Hoover, the GOP held the House and Senate for only four of the next 50 years.

From 1932 to 1968, the GOP lost the presidency in seven of nine elections. Only Dwight Eisenhower’s two terms in the 1950s interrupted a 36-year reign of the Democratic Party in the White House.

Richard Nixon broke the Democratic dominance and took back the White House for the Republicans in 1968. But it would still take another dozen years before the GOP won control of either house of Congress.

President Trump predicts a V-shaped recovery, the greatest boom in U.S. history. But it is well to recall what happened to the GOP when it failed to deliver in the last Depression.

Just as the Civil War was the defining event of the 19th century, giving us 13 Republican presidents from Lincoln to Hoover and only two Democrats — Grover Cleveland and Wilson — how and when we emerge from this new Depression may tell us which party not only wins 2020 but also dominates the new era.

And as one sees the growing divisions along political lines, with conservatives and populists calling for the country to be opened up, and liberals and Democrats calling for continued sheltering in place, both seem to realize the stakes.

Democrats may proclaim that they are eager to see the pandemic come to a swift and early end and the economy to return quickly to the robust state it was in last February.

But the cold political interests of the Democratic Party today are what they were in Hoover’s time, to pray that the president fails, and fails badly, so that they inherit the estate

(Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever).