Category Archives: Freedom of Religion

Posted on by

The utter idiocy of anti-Semitism Anti-Semitism has no place among real Catholics

Carrie Prejean Boller is a very attractive young lady with a very ugly soul. She claims to be a Roman Catholic, but I have to ask: is her Bible just one of those small New Testaments that the Gideons leave in hotel nightstands? Does she cover her ears during the first reading on Sunday Mass, which is normally from the Old Testament, the ancient Jewish scriptures? Does she sit there stone-faced during the responsorial psalm, the works primarily of David, King of Israel and Judah? What does she do when most American Catholic parishes sing Oh come, oh, come, Emmanuel at the beginning of Advent?

She even depicted herself as St Joan of Arc, though, amusingly enough, she had images of Jesus and Mary, who were both Jews, in the background.

I don’t know how often she attends Mass, but she at least tweeted support when the late Charlie Kirk talked about his family going to Mass every week.

But there she is, ranting about “Zionists” and “Zios”, and supporting the Palestinians who, if they actually achieved the Islamist government they want, would put her into chattel sex slavery to a much older Muslim man, assuming that they didn’t just slit her throat.

Christianity does not exist without Judaism! The majority of our Bible are the ancient Jewish scriptures, which give us the laws of God and the prophesies of the Messiah being sent to us, foretold by Jewish prophets. Jesus himself was Jewish, born into a Jewish family, and teaching in synagogues. If Miss Boller take communion, receives the Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist, she is imitating Jesus and the Apostles as they gathered together for a Passover meal!

There is, however, more than just religion involved in this. Israel is our easternmost bastion of Western civilization, of freedom, democracy, religious tolerance, and free enterprise. Miss Boller can rage and rant about the Jooooos all she wants on Twitter — I refuse to call it 𝕏 — because she enjoys the freedom of speech and of the press that the West provides. It’s not just those freedoms, but the existence of technology almost entirely developed in the West, including in Israel, that gives her the means to express her opinions beyond her physical circle of friends. From the first printing press, to the development of radio, and then television, and that internet thingy that Al Gore invented, she is benefitting from the technology developed in the West. Biz Stone, one of the four creators of Twitter, which she uses to attack Jews, is himself Jewish.

If she uses a cellular phone, she is using technology that was in significant part developed in Israel. If she has been vaccinated for polio, she has been kept safe by one of the two vaccines, both of which were developed by Jews.

Anti-Semitism has no place in the developed world, because so much of what has made us the modern world was developed by people of Jewish heritage. And anti-Semitism has no place in the Catholicism she claims.

The Israel she hates so much? I have been, all too briefly, to Jerusalem, I have gone to Mass in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, I have been to the Mount of Olives and the Garden of Gethsemane, I have walked the Via Dolorosa, all things important to Catholics, and all things protected and preserved by Israel.

The Muslims she champions? ISIS destroyed ancient relics in Syria and Iraq, because they considered them idolatrous, while the Taliban of Afghanistan destroyed several ancient sites and a library, for the same reasons. If the Islamists won in the Holy Land, if they drove the Jews into the sea, there is no particular reason to believe that they would be any less destructive of Christian sites.

But I just saw where she called Candace Owens brave, simply more proof that she hates the Jooooos.

Posted on by

A kerfuffle over Altar Girls

My Twitter — I refuse to call it 𝕏 — feed today has been filled with complaints because His Holiness Pope Leo XIV held Mass yesterday at a diocesan church in Rome with, Heaven forfend! altar girls as well as altar boys. Some of the complaints were trivial, that the altar server on the left was wearing tennis shoes, but most were that girls should not be allowed to serve at or near the altar, or anywhere in the chancel or sanctuary.

From Wikipedia:

During the Second Vatican Council. The Church discussed whether lay women could be servers at mass, although the matter would ultimately remain unchanged. Later in 1980 the Catholic Church would reaffirm the 1917 Code of Canon Law which stated: “A woman is not to be the server at Mass except when a man is unavailable and for a just reason and provided that she give the responses from a distance and in no way approach the altar.”

In 1994, Pope John Paul II changed canon law, removing the church wide ban on allowing women and girls to serve as altar servers. The decision was devolved to Bishops, who could choose whether to allow or disallow girls to serve as altar servers, but overall removed the Church wide ban.

Full disclosure: when we were parishioners at St Joseph’s Catholic Church in Hampton, Virginia, in the 1990s, both of our daughters were altar servers. They were also in parochial school for part of that time.

As we moved around for my career, we have been members at St Mary of the Assumption in Hockessin, Delaware, and, from 2002 through 2017, St Joseph’s Church in Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania. Though my daughters did not serve there, there were altar girls as well as altar boys.

St Elizabeth’s Catholic Church, where I attend Mass. Photo by D R Pico.

Now we are members at St Elizabeth of Hungary Catholic Church in Ravenna, Kentucky. St Elizabeth’s is a very small parish, with only 24 families as parishioners. We have been extremely fortunate in that we have three new, serious catechumens this year, and this is where the service of girls as altar servers has become most important. Following the shutdown of the churches due to the COVID-19 panicdemic — not a typographical error, but spelled to reflect exactly how I saw it — we lost our previous altar kids, who left the parish and never returned, and were it not for one single girl, we’d have had exactly zero altar servers for two entire years.

Since then, we have added two more altar servers: her younger brother and even younger sister. All of our altar kids come from one devout family.

How devout? The father serves as a Eucharistic Minister, meaning he offers the chalice of sacramental wine for parishioners, and the mother serves as a lector, or the person who reads the first two readings of the Mass[1]Every normal Sunday Mass has a reading from, usually, the Old Testament, followed by a Responsorial Psalm, and then a second reading, normally one of the New Testament epistles or from Acts of the … Continue reading and the Responsorial Psalm.

The numbers are pretty simple: in our small parish, we have two male lectors, myself being one of them, and two male Eucharistic ministers, though a third was added just last Sunday. The others are ladies, and they do just as fine a job as anyone else.

With the kids having been at St Mark’s in Richmond while the two younger altar kids go through their Confirmation classes, adult men in our parish, usually me, though one of the Eucharistic ministers also takes a turn, have been the altar kids.

Some kid: I’m 72¾ years old!

Perhaps some larger parishes have a sufficient number of men and boys who volunteer for these positions, and actually I was kind of voluntold, but let me be blunt about things: without the ladies, we would not have the staff we need.

The Church has this problem all across the world: a shortage of men taking the positions they once held. And part of this is something that our separated brethren — our word for Protestant Christians — suffer as well: too many men, too many fathers, not coming to church. At St Elizabeth’s, it isn’t as noticeable, but we are too small to be statistically significant. Too many fathers staying at home on Sunday, letting the mother bring the kids to church. This sends a message to boys growing up: church isn’t all that important to men, and don’t think the boys don’t get that message. To my friends who don’t believe that girls should serve in the chancel, my message is simple: get more boys, more men, to serve at Mass. Otherwise don’t complain about a problem you aren’t helping to solve.

References

References
↑1 Every normal Sunday Mass has a reading from, usually, the Old Testament, followed by a Responsorial Psalm, and then a second reading, normally one of the New Testament epistles or from Acts of the Apostles. Following that comes the reading from one of the four Gospels, by the priest, prior to his homily.
Posted on by

Is this really what he wants? Revolutions so rarely turn out the way people expect

Will Bunch, the far-left columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer, perhaps sees himself as a noble, freedom fighter, a brave partisan fighting the evil forces of fascism. In a skeet on Thursday, he told us that, “The only story w/ value is the revolution, like the MLPS general strike.”

My mind went to the scene in Dr Zhivago, in which Tom Courtenay, playing Pavel “Pasha” Antipov, meets Rod Steiger, playing Viktor Komarovsky, in a restaurant, and Pasha tells Viktor that he is committed to the Revolution. After the Soviet Revolution, Pasha becomes Strelnikov, a murderous Bolshevik Red Guard leader, galivanting around on his private train burning villages in the civil war against the Whites. Then, as the civil war is ending, he has abandoned his role there and was struggling — off camera — to where his estranged wife, Lara Antipova, has been living, pursued by the Bolsheviks who no longer had any use for him.

It’s all very Josef Stalin/Leon Trotsky in a way, and the novel by Boris Pasternak was published in 1957, long after Comrade Stalin had Comrade Trotsky murdered in Mexico City.

I am also reminded of the anti-fascist song Bella Ciao, in a video below the fold: Continue reading →

Posted on by

How to Win Friends and Influence People Don Lemon never read that book!

In 1936, Dale Carnegie published his famous self-help book, How to Win Friends and Influence People. This is clearly a book that Don Lemon, a television journolist[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading best known for being a host on CNN from 2014 until 2023 never read. He had been plagued by allegations of misogyny, something made more credible due to his homosexuality, and was eventually fired because CNN was having other trouble with him.

Well, here he goes again:

Don Lemon And Rabid Anti-ICE Loons Invade Minneapolis Church Service

by Nina Bookout | Sunday, January 18, 2026

The anti-ICE protestors are getting worse by the minute. Today, the rabid shrieking harpies and loons decided it was totally fine to invade church services in Minneapolis.

Anti-ICE protest disrupted a Sunday church service in Minneapolis after a group of activists entered a congregation and forced worship to stop, according to footage shared online.

The incident occurred at Cities Church, a Southern Baptist Convention congregation, where protesters stormed into the sanctuary chanting anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement slogans. The group alleged that one of the church’s lead pastors was affiliated with ICE, a claim the protesters repeated while interrupting the service.

So, without any genuine facts in evidence, these rabid loons decided one of the pastors is with ICE and thought it was totally fine to invade a church service and disrupt the proceedings. This as other anti-ICE goons have been stalking people for driving the wrong kind of vehicle (yes, really), or dressing the wrong way thus making it ok to be accosted while having lunch.

Conveniently, Don Lemon, former CNN hack, was prancing alongside these asshats.

There’s more at the original.

I have no idea whether one of the ministers at Cities Church supports Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or is “affiliated” with ICE. Although Hennepin County went strongly for then-Vice President Kamala Harris Emhoff, 502,710 (69.80%) to 197,244 (27.39%) for then former and now current President Donald Trump, he still had some support. Statewide, Mrs Emhoff carried the Land of 10,000 Lakes, but not by a ridiculous margin. There are clearly some people in the state who support President Trump’s immigration enforcement policies.

The congregation at Cities Church? Well, who knows, but the Southern Baptist Convention tends to be politically conservative, moreso than some other Protestant denominations. But I would imagine that Dale Carnegie would be shaking his head at the demonstration and incursion that Mr Lemon led as not being a very effective way of persuading the worshipers they interrupted and bothered. I would guess that, if anything, the protesters both strengthened the resolve of the good congregants who support the detention and deportation of the illegals, and caused those who don’t want to see the illegals deported to see the boorishness of those on their side.

The Golden Age Times tweeted:

Disgraced ex-CNN host Don Lemon & anti-ICE Leftists STORM into a Minneapolis church, shouting anti-ICE slogans.

“This is the beginning of what’s going to happen here.”

“You have to make people uncomfortable.”

I can’t speak for others, but I wouldn’t feel ‘uncomfortable,’ I’d just be pissed off. This is just another version of idiotic climate cultists trying to destroy art or blocking major roads, making people late for wherever they were headed.

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
Posted on by

A Catholic parish commits a crime Church policies on immigration do not supersede American law

That the Roman Catholic Church, of which I am a proud member, supports far less restrictive transnational immigration is well known, and His Holiness Pope Leo XIV has been pushing hard on the subject. Thus, the following article comes as no surprise to me:

UPDATE: ICE deported Minnesota church employee, surveilled parish during Mass, mayor says

ICE’s presence outside the church impedes parishioners’ free exercise of religion, said the pastor of St. Gabriel Catholic Church in Hopkins, Minnesota.

By Kathleen Murphy · DC Bureau · Friday, January 9, 2026 · 3:01 PM EST

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents surveilled St. Gabriel the Archangel Catholic Church in Hopkins, Minnesota, on Epiphany after deporting the parish’s beloved maintenance worker to Mexico five weeks earlier.

The Trump administration last year eliminated a federal policy that generally prohibited immigration enforcement in “sensitive locations” such as schools, churches, and hospitals. Attendance at St. Gabriel’s Spanish Mass has dropped by half since the solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, and parishioners have expressed fear of churchgoing about eight miles from where an ICE agent shot and killed U.S. citizen Renee Good on Jan. 7.

Father Paul Haverstock, pastor of St. Gabriel’s, said he had vested for the 1 p.m. Spanish Mass Jan. 4 when a parishioner told him about men wearing ski masks in a car outside the church. He said he was disturbed to receive the report, went to the sacristy to get his cellphone, and placed it next to his chair in the sanctuary.

“If there is an incident of agents coming in, I want to make sure that it’s recorded, and I want a clear recording of me letting the agents know that we’re in the middle of a religious service,” Haverstock said.

Two of the hyperlinks in the quoted story above were not in the original, but researched and added by me.

It has to be asked: why were Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents outside the church?

Church employee Francisco Paredes, 46, who had lived in the U.S. for 25 years with one conviction for driving under the influence, was handcuffed by ICE Dec. 4, 2025. Eight federal vehicles pulled into a large parking lot adjacent to St. Gabriel’s on 13th Avenue South after Paredes picked up coffee on his way to work, Paredes said, and he was driven to a processing facility. . . .

Until Paredes’ arrest and before ICE parked outside St. Gabriel’s, more than 400 people had usually attended the Spanish Mass, Haverstock said. Haverstock said he is considering offering a temporary Sunday Mass dispensation in his parish for those who are afraid.

So, St Gabriel’s holds well-attended Masses in Spanish, and the church previously employed an illegal immigrant; the article stated, in its mealy-mouthed way, that Mr Paredes “lacked legal permission to live in the U.S.” It is reasonable to suspect that significant numbers of illegal immigrants live in the area and attend those Masses.

Father Haverstock stated that Mr Paredes was a great employee, fully bilingual, and a tremendous help around the parish. That’s fine, but then there’s this:

Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, requirements come out of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). IRCA prohibits employers from hiring and employing an individual for employment in the U.S. knowing that the individual is not authorized with respect to such employment. Employers also are prohibited from continuing to employ an individual knowing that he or she is unauthorized for employment. This law also prohibits employers from hiring any individual, including a U.S. citizen, for employment in the U.S. without verifying his or her identity and employment authorization on Form I-9.

The IRCA was passed in 1986, which was 40 years ago; Mr Paredes has been in the United States for a stated 25 years, which means that he was hired by the parish church well after the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 became law.

Under the Handbook for Employers M-274, Section 11.8, it is specified that:

Unlawful Employment Criminal Penalties
Engaging in a Pattern or Practice of Knowingly Hiring or Continuing to Employ Unauthorized Aliens

If you or your business are convicted of having engaged in a pattern or practice of knowingly hiring unauthorized aliens (or continuing to employ aliens knowing they are or have become unauthorized to work in the United States) after Nov. 6, 1986, you may face fines and/or six months imprisonment.

Engaging in Fraud or False Statements, or Otherwise Misusing Visas, Immigration Permits, and Identity Documents

You may be fined and/or imprisoned for up to five years if you:

  • Make a false statement or attestation to satisfy the employment eligibility verification requirements;
  • Use fraudulent identification or employment authorization documents; or
  • Use documents that were lawfully issued to another person.

Other federal criminal statutes may provide higher penalties in certain fraud cases.

For Mr Paredes to have been employed by St Gabriel’s, at least one of these things had to have happened:

  • The parish hired Mr Paredes without a reasonable effort at verifying the documents provided; or
  • The parish hired Mr Paredes without checking his documents at all or filling out Form I-9; or
  • Mr Paredes presented false or fraudulent documents good enough to have passed a reasonable inspection by Pastor.

All of these are crimes!

The article provided by EWTN News does not tell us how long Mr Paredes was an employee of St Gabriel’s. The parish staff page tells us that Fr Haverstock first became Parish Administrator in 2020, and assigned as Pastor on Independence Day of 2021, so, if Mr Paredes was hired before those dates, Fr Haverstock could not have been the person who hired him. However, if he became aware that his employee was an illegal immigrant after he became Administrator, but before Mr Paredes was detained, yet continued to employ Mr Paredes, he would be in violation of the law. Fr Haverstock would not be required to report the illegal immigrant’s presence in the United States, but he would have had to discharge him.

There are no exemptions for churches or church employees under our immigration laws. Church policy, even coming from the Pope himself, does not supersede American law.

Perhaps article author Kathleen Murphy did not realize it when she wrote, but she published the report of a crime. And while this is the documentation of one crime in one parish, who would be surprised if this hasn’t happened widely throughout the thousands of parishes and hundreds of dioceses in the United States?

Posted on by

(Purported) canon lawyer is very upset that infants can be baptized without their consent

Sunday, January 11, 2026, is in the calendar of the Catholic Church, the celebration of the Baptism of the Lord, our remembrance of when Jesus chose to be baptized by his cousin, St John the Baptist. Today’s Gospel reading was from Matthew 3:13-17:

3:13 Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan, coming to John to be baptized by him.
14 But John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I have the need to be baptized by You, and yet You are coming to me?”
15 But Jesus, answering, said to him, “Allow it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he *allowed Him.
16 After He was baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and settling on Him,
17 and behold, a voice from the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Hardly an offensive passage, but naturally that was the day The Irish Times chose to print an essay from Dr Mary McAleese, who claims to be an “academic civil and canon lawyer, (and the) author of Children’s Rights and Obligations in Canon Law: the Christening Contract (Brill 2019),” to claim that the Catholic practice of infant baptism is evil, evil, evil!
n

Baptism denies babies their human rights

Rite & Reason: No one is Catholic by birth and the notion of ‘Baptismal promises’ is risible

by Dr Mary McAleese | Sunday, January 11, 2026

Throughout the world, there continues a long-standing, systemic and overlooked severe restriction on children’s rights with regard to religion. This warrants, but has yet to receive, serious examination. It impacts Ireland in a special way and contemporary circumstances make Ireland an ideal place to conduct that examination.

Let me set the scene with a couple of brief, inter-related stories. They concern the relationship between children’s rights and religion in Ireland, and certain unchallenged aspects of the canon law of Ireland’s major Christian denomination and provider of education, the Latin Catholic Church.

It restricts children’s rights as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in 1989, to which both Ireland and the Holy See – which governs the Catholic Church and is effectively the author of canon law – are State Parties.

Good heavens! Baptism “restricts children’s rights”? Which rights? It certainly does not prevent those baptized as Catholic from joining most Protestant churches, nor does it somehow drag reluctant people to Mass on Sundays. More, the Catholic Church accepts most baptisms conducted by Protestant churches as valid. Muslims do not accept baptism as valid for anything, because they have no equivalent ritual. Jews have ritual cleansing, the Tevilah, but it is not the same under Judaism as baptism is for Christians.

Atheists? Buddhists? Whateverists? Being baptized as a Catholic does not prohibit anyone from joining another religion, or deciding that they have no faith at all.

If you are a Christian, baptism means a great deal to you; if you are not Christian, baptism means nothing to you, and as either a sprinkling or an immersion in water, it has done you no harm.

The distinguished Dr McAleese is very concerned that baptism means you are irreversibly a Catholic according to canon law, and that’s true enough, but my response is: so what? The Church cannot force you to go to Mass, and cannot force you to believe anything. The Church has no gendarmerie which can arrest you if you walk into a Pentecostalist or Baptist church on Sunday, nor the authority to show up at your door on a wintry Sunday morning in which you chose to stay under the covers.

Attempts to leave the Church or change religion or challenge Church teaching or magisterial authority, constitute canonical crimes of heresy, apostasy, schism. Among the punishments attached to such acts is the much-misunderstood penalty of excommunication, which in fact leaves membership intact but subject to restrictions.

It should be obvious that, if someone does wish to change religion, to not be a Catholic any longer, the penalty of excommunication is meaningless. It means, in effect, that you can’t go to church in the church where you didn’t want to go.

I suppose that for “an academic civil and canon lawyer,” that might be of overwhelming concern, but out in the real world, it’s pretty much meaningless.

There are many things that parents can command as they rear their children, from going to church to eating their hated peas for supper, a mortal sin in my mind.

There’s more at Dr McAleese’s original, but really, it’s silliness. Baptism, and membership in the Catholic Church is voluntary, even if the Church already has someone listed in its rolls.

Posted on by

“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” ― William F. Buckley

I will admit it: there was a strong feeling of amusement among sensible people when the simpleton from Sweden was arrested for protesting in support of the British pro-terrorism group. Greta Thunberg had made a name for herself as a climate kook, but has branched out in support of Hamas, Palestinian terrorism, and against Western civilization defending ourselves from the forces of barbarism, even though it is Western civilization itself which gave her the luxury to protest against anything rather than having to spend her time and energy scratching the dirt in hopes of feeding herself and the three or so kids she’d have popped out by now in a subsistence lifestyle.

But there is a more important point which needs to be made: our British forebears and other European ancestors have been criminalizing the freedom of speech which we take for granted.

Amy Coney Barrett Issues Free Speech Warning

Wednesday, December 24, 2025 | 9:41 AM EST

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has warned about threats to free speech in the United Kingdom.

Coney made the remarks during an interview with Bishop Robert Barron for an episode of his podcast, Bishop Barron Presents, which was released on Sunday.

“Think about what’s happening with respect to free speech rights in the U.K.,” Barrett said during a discussion about the purpose of law. “Contrary opinions or opinions that are not in the mainstream are not being tolerated, and they’re even being criminalized. Because of the First Amendment, that can’t happen here.”

It can’t? it wasn’t until Associate Justice Ruth Ginsberg went to her eternal reward and Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed that the Supreme Court took freedom of religion into account when it came to the restrictions that states put on churches to fight the COVID-19 panicdemic.[1]No, that’s not a typographical error; panicdemic was exactly how I intended to spell it, because panic is exactly how governments reacted.

It was under the Administration of President Joe Biden that an FBI “Analyst” submitted a proposal to monitor traditional Catholics who prefer the Tridentine, or Traditional Latin, Mass, “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics,” or RTEs, he called them, because “Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists,” or RMVEs might be interested in using Latin Mass Catholics to spread their goals.

Someone leaked a hand-redacted, redacted by magic marker, copy of the “FBI internal use only” document, and the Bureau decided, rather quickly, that they ought to withdraw the document entirely.

FBI retracts leaked document orchestrating investigation of Catholics

By Tyler Arnold and Joe Bukuras | Thursday, February 9, 2023 | 3:15 PM EST

The FBI says it is retracting a leaked document published on the internet Feb. 8 that appears to reveal that the bureau’s Richmond division launched an investigation into “radical traditionalist” Catholics and their possible ties to “the far-right white nationalist movement.”

In response to an inquiry from CNA, the FBI said it will remove the document because “it does not meet our exacting standards.”

Really? The document is ‘sourced’ citing far-left political sources, including Salon, The Atlantic, and the Southern Poverty Law Center. If there are less biased sources, they were redacted from the document. It’s so bad that it makes me wonder: if it was a great departure from the Bureau’s “exacting standards,” why wouldn’t the document author have realized it, and the Bureau have flagged it before it was leaked? Or is the document not really that great a departure from those “exacting standards,” which calls into question just how “exacting” those standards really are.

Can we tell the truth here? The document was retracted because it was leaked, and the FBI were embarrassed. But without our First Amendment, not only would a government investigation of “radical traditionalist Catholics” be perfectly legal and not questionable at all, but the fact that the “FBI internal use only” document was leaked and published could have been illegal.

Barrett’s comments come as Britain has faced increased scrutiny over its policing of speech, including from Vice President JD Vance, in recent months.

Some critics have focused on the Online Safety Act, rolled out this year, which requires social media companies to remove illegal content on their platforms. Critics say is being implemented too broadly and has resulted in the censorship of legal content.

Even with our First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and of the press, our good friends on the left have waxed apoplectic over the freedoms which allow non-liberal, non-leftist news and opinions to be disseminated, as Michael Tomasky, editor of the New Republic blamed those freedoms for Kamala Harris Emhoff’s defeat, even as his own magazine was using those very same freedoms to publish.

The New York Times has published articles claiming that Free Speech is killing us. Noxious language online is causing real-world violence, and that Twitter’s bans on ‘deadnaming’ and ‘misgendering’ actually promotes freedom of speech. The Times told us how wonderful it was that Jeff Bezos was able to deplatform Parler, but lamented that some of those who lost their speech on Parler migrated to Gab and Rumble.

The left were predictably aghast when Mr Musk did buy Twitter and imposed a much broader freedom of speech regime. When it comes to the American left, and how the Biden Administration tried to create a Ministry of Truth Disinformation Governance Board under the Department of Fatherland Homeland Security, and that very liberal hater of free speech, Nina Jankowicz.

One thing has been made clear: our First — and Second! — Amendment rights have been under attack even here, not by sensible conservatives, but by the left. Under President Biden, himself (purportedly) a Catholic, we’ve seen attacks on the freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, and peaceable assembly, because the left absotively, posilutely hate that their great truths can be challenged.

Thus, while we can chuckle at the fact that a crackpot was arrested for demonstrating in support of the pro-Palestinian British hunger strikers — most of whom have given up their hunger strike anyway — we need to remember that the threats to our freedoms come from the left, and the Biden Administration proved that the plain words of the Constitution mean nothing more than an inconvenient impediment to their goals and them, not a absolute block. We need to support Miss Thunberg’s freedom of speech and peaceable association not because we agree with her, but because we strongly disagree, because that is how we defend ourselves.

References

References
↑1 No, that’s not a typographical error; panicdemic was exactly how I intended to spell it, because panic is exactly how governments reacted.
Posted on by

Kristallnacht in New York City? It’s not so far-fetched! As long as their protests remain peaceful, they are protected by our First Amendment, and its provisions protecting freedom of speech and peaceable assembly. But make no mistake about it: these people are total scum.

This site noted, on Friday, how self-proclaimed ‘imam’ and ‘Islamic scholar’ Abdullah Mady led a walkout of about 100 attendees at an interfaith service at the City University of New York because there was a ‘Zionist’ there.

NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch apologizes to famed synagogue’s congregants for botched response to antisemitic protest

By Rich Calder | Saturday, November 22, 2025 | 4:53 PM EST

NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch issued a heartfelt apology to the congregation of an historic Manhattan synagogue Saturday — conceding cops should have done a better job of keeping away hateful anti-Israel protesters.

Tisch told a crowd of 150 congregants attending service at Park East Synagogue that this week’s protests are legally allowed outside houses of worship — no matter how vile the topic — but said the NYPD failed to keep the front entrance clear and ensure “people could easily enter and leave shul.

“That is where we fell short, and for that, I apologize to this congregation,” the 44-year-old top cop said during a 10-minute speech which drew a standing ovation.

“Our plan didn’t include a frozen zone at the entrance. As a result, the space right outside your steps was chaotic.”

This story makes me appreciate the recently ended television series Blue Bloods and sadly fictitious Police Commissioner Frank Reagan.

Some 200 demonstrators gathered outside the Manhattan synagogue and heckled Jews attending an event by Nefesh B’nefesh, a Zionist organization that helps Jews immigrate from North America to Israel.

Many chanted “Globalize the intifada” and sinisterly urged the “resistance” to “take another settler out.”

Internal hyperlink not in the original, but added by this site.

Can someone tell me how such chant would not be seen as direct threats by the attendees? That was the direct intention of at least some of the protesters:

“It is our duty to make them think twice before holding these events,” one protest leader told the crowd.

“We need to make them scared. We need to make them scared. We need to make them scared,” the agitator repeated emphatically.

The crowd also chanted “From New York to Gaza, globalize the intifada” to the beat of a drum.

“Resistance you make us proud, take another settler out,” the hate-filled group chanted at one point, video shows.

It’s not as though the NYPD did not have advance warning about the protest, as we reported last Wednesday.

Counter protestors were also on the scene, calling the masked demonstrators “cowards” and “pussies” for not showing their faces.

Cops set up metal barricades to keep protestor at bay, but some of the barricades were left too close to the synagogue entrance – putting event attendees coming and going in potential risk.

Pal-Awda NY/NJ, the anti-Israel activist group leading the protest, said it was demonstrating against an effort to “recruit American settlers to illegally occupy stolen Palestinian land.”

Again, internal hyperlink not in the original, but added by this site.

I find it amusing that Pal-Awda is whining about “stolen Palestinian land” while living on what some of our friends on the far-left call stolen Indian indigenous land.” They don’t want American Jews to immigrate to Israel, but they also try to make life miserable for Jews who live in the United States.

Oddly enough, of the four women most visibly protesting the Jews, three looked like very white Americans.

American Jews, in the city with the largest Jewish population in the world outside of Israel, are learning the hard way, as have their brothers in the Holy Land, that such virulent anti-Semitism has to be resisted from the very beginning. The history of Nazi Germany, and of Kristallnacht, has demonstrated for Jews the dangers of hoping that anti-Semitism just disappears, just goes away.

Posted on by

How can Israel and the Arabs live next to each other in peace if an “Islamic scholar” cannot sit in the same room in NYC with a Jew?

So many good and kind Americans believe that the solution to the strife between the Israelis and their Arab neighbors is a simple one: an independent Palestinian nation, living in peace, side-by-side with Israel. What could possibly the objection to that?

Well, Yassir Arafat, then President of the so-called ‘Palestinian Authority,’ objected, because even though President Bill Clinton had gotten Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to agree to an independent Palestine in 97% of Judea and Samaria, as well as Gaza, and a land swap from Israel proper to make up for the 3% in the ‘West Bank’ which had Jewish settlements, it didn’t include the ‘right of return’ for displaced ‘Palestinians’ to return to their homes in Israel. That, at least, was his stated reason, though the real reason was that he knew he would be assassinated by the irredentists who would never agree to allow Israel a single foothold in the Levant.

In 2005, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon forced all Jewish settlers to evacuate Gaza, turning it all over to the ‘Palestinians’ to do with it what they would. What Israel and the rest of the world hoped they would do is create a peaceful enclave, the type of thing which would prove that the Arabs could and would live in peace beside Israel. Instead, Hamas took over governing control of Gaza in 2007, and what was built were tunnels from which to attack Israel.

Still, that was all seven time zones away from the United States. Arabs and Jews could live side-by-side in peace here, right?

‘Imam’ tells CUNY Muslim students to leave interfaith event because a ‘Zionist’ is present

By Carl Campanile | Wednesday, November 19, 2025 | 6:54 PM EST

So much for kumbaya.

A self-proclaimed imam speaking at a CUNY City College interfaith event went into a Jew-hating tirade, urging Muslim students to leave in protest after complaining that a “Zionist” was present.

The City University of New York said it is now investigating the shocking incident last week that targeted Ilya Bratman, an adjunct lecturer at Baruch College and the director of the Hillel Jewish campus organization.

“I came here to this event not knowing I would be sitting next to a Zionist and this is something I am not going to accept,” said the Islamic scholar Abdullah Mady, referring to Bratman, according to an audio recording obtained by The Post.

Gaza is 5,689 miles away from New York City, but Mr Mady couldn’t sit next to a Jooooo who was in no way threatening him.

“My people are being killed right now in Gaza,” he said. “If you’re a Muslim, out of strength and dignity, I ask you to exit this room immediately.”

About 100 students in attendance took up the call and walked out, leaving about 20 Christian and Jewish students who remained in the room stunned, Bratman said.

The New York Post story does not tell us how many of the 100 or so who walked out were Muslims.

Campus security then escorted the remaining attendees, as the whole thing broke up, outside, to protect them from any hostile demonstrations from the ones who had walked out.

The advertising poster for the meeting, pictured above, uses the silhouette of a Jewish menorah as one of the various religious symbols, but Mr Mady was surprised that there was a Jew there? If an “Islamic scholar” could not sit beside an adjunct lecturer from a Jewish college, a quarter of the world away from the scene of the war, how can anyone ever expect Israel and an independent ‘Palestine’ to share a border in peace?