Friday, November 29, 2024

Western Europe’s Muslim Problem


Radical Muslim gangs who harbor hatred for Western culture and believe that Islam is the answer for all bear a visceral and violent antisemitic hatred for Israel and Jews.  The pogrom perpetrated by Arab and Turkish Muslims earlier this month on Israeli and Jewish fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv, a leading Israeli soccer team, in the streets of Amsterdam illustrates the point.  The local (Amsterdam) authorities feigned efforts to contain the Muslim horde, which did not prevent the beating of scores of Israelis and Jews and the hospitalization of six.  For many, it conjured up images of the evil perpetrated by the SS of Nazi Germany and the Kristallnacht pogrom of 1938.  Attacks on Jews and Israel are now widely evident in other major western European cities, including Berlin, Brussels, London, Madrid, and Paris.

Referring to the recent pogrom, there were kind words from the king of the Netherlands, Willem-Alexander, who told Israel’s President Isaac Herzog, “We failed the Jewish community of the Netherlands during World War II, and last night we failed again.”  Geert Wilders, leader of the largest party in the Dutch parliament, blamed Moroccan Muslims for the attack on the Israeli Maccabi Tel Aviv fans.  He noted that the Muslims do not hide the fact that they want to destroy Jews and recommended the deportation of those people convicted of involvement in the pogrom if they have dual nationality.

Muslim migrants arrived at the industrialized Western European states after WWII, many from the countries that were their former colonial possessions.  Thus, Algerian, Moroccan, and Tunisian Muslims landed in France and in Belgium (since French was also widely spoken there).  Turkish Muslim temporary laborers were brought to Germany and never left.  The Netherlands became home to Indonesian Muslims.  South Asian Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims settled in Britain.  Many of those early Muslim settlers sought a quiet life, economic betterment, and freedom.

The revival of Islamic sense of power, with Saudi Arabia accumulating unimaginable oil riches and power in the 1970s, created an initial stirring, followed by the 1979 Islamic (Shiite) revolution in Iran and the defiance against the Western world and its culture.  The mayhem in Iraq and the endless terror in the aftermath of the Bush Jr. administration’s 2003 war that deposed Saddam Hussein eliminated the secular Sunni-Muslim rule in Iraq and led to Shia Muslim supremacy and Iran’s stranglehold on Iraq.

Then came the civil war in Syria a decade later, which created millions of refugees.  The guilt-ridden European and former colonial powers opened their doors to hordes of Muslims from Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan.  Angela Merkel’s misplaced guilt about the Holocaust invited over a million Syrian and Iraqi Arabs and Afghan Muslims to Germany.  Most of these had been brought up to hate Jews and Israel.

For the new arrivals in particular, the Western practice of separation of church and state is unfamiliar and unacceptable.  Islam is the state religion in most Arab states and, especially, in Iran.  The majority of recent Muslim immigrants express less attachment to their western European host countries and greater loyalty and attachment to their country of origin.  This situation is exacerbated by the fact that the host countries do not promote assimilation into the culture.  The Muslims have separate communities, separate schools, and separate rules of law.

Europe used to have a “Jewish problem” and still does, but not for the same reasons as their “Muslim problem.”  The Jews integrated well and enriched European culture in multiple ways.  Many European Nobel laureates were Jews.  Today’s Muslim immigrants commit a large percentage of the violent crimes, whereas crime coming out of the Jewish communities was virtually nonexistent.  In most cases, Jews spoke the native tongue better than the Christian natives.  The problem, until the late 18th Century, was religious animus and discrimination, which later transformed into antisemitic racism.  In Europe, Jews became the scapegoats for the ills of their societies.

The late Oriana Fallaci, famed Italian journalist and author, who later in life became a staunch defender of Israel and Jews, famously stated, “I stand with Israel, I stand with the Jews.”  “I defend their right to exist, to defend themselves, and not to allow themselves to be exterminated a second time.”

While earlier in her career Fallaci defended the Palestinians and Muslims, she was subsequently quoted as saying, “The Muslims refuse our culture and try to impose their culture on us.  I reject them, and this is not only my duty toward my culture — it is toward my values, my principles, my civilization.” 

Fallaci made no secret of her hatred of the way Islam enforced passivity and submission of women through sharia law.  She famously ended an interview with Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini by ripping off the chador she had been obliged to wear — yelling about “these medieval rags!”  She wrote of “the monstrous darkness of a religion which produces nothing but religion .. secretly envious of us, confessedly jealous of our way of life. ... [I]n Europe the mosques literally swarm with terrorists or candidate terrorists.”

In Europe today, Islamists and the radical left have allied themselves in the Green-Red alliance with a common antisemitic agenda under the guise of anti-Israelism.  Their vocal demonstrations in the streets of Amsterdam, Berlin, Brussels, London, and Paris have intimidated the governments, who have done little to stem the gushing hate displayed and the violence accompanying such events, as demonstrated earlier this month in Amsterdam.  Whereas peaceful demonstrations are a given in western democracies, incitement to violence is proscribed.

With the Muslim population in Europe swelling into double-digit percentages, and stagnant native European birthrates, it is only a matter of a generation or two before radical Islam truly becomes dominant in Europe.  In her 2005 book titled Eurabia: The EuroArab Axis, Bat Yeor, the pen name for Gisèle Littman, pointed out that Europe has surrendered to Islam and is in a state of submission (described as dhimmitude) in which Europe is forced to deny its own culture, stand silently by in the face of Muslim atrocities, accept Muslim immigration, and pay tribute through various types of economic assistance.

Incoming U.S. president Donald Trump, by acting on his unintimidated commitment to deport illegals and criminal aliens from the U.S., may just show the Europeans how to save their culture.  It is time for the European elites to consider acting aggressively on behalf of their survival.



X22, And we Know, and more- Nov 29

 




Journalists Mourn That Jack Smith's Probes Are Dead


Democratic attorneys waged legal war on former President Donald Trump on every level of government: federal, state, county and city. Now that he's been reelected, all that legal wrangling is going to be curtailed. Biden-appointed special counsel Jack Smith had to fold his tent, and on Nov. 25, the networks offered live "breaking news" that just sounded like they were the broken ones.

Start with ABC's Jonathan Karl, whose third anti-Trump book was aggressively titled "Tired of Winning: Donald Trump and the End of the Grand Old Party." That's a little embarrassing for Karl and his publishers now that the GOP controls the White House, Congress and 55% of state legislative seats.

Karl decried the death of accountability for Trump: "He ultimately will not be held to account in the criminal court system for his actions to overturn the presidential election of 2020." Karl is upset that the Orange Man isn't in an orange jumpsuit. No jail, no justice!

CBS reporter Scott MacFarlane, whose primary beat for almost four years now has been treating Jan. 6 as worse than 9/11, was also upset: "The historic case against Donald Trump for allegations he tried to conspire to overturn an election and the ties to that horrific attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, that case is dying with a whimper today."

This pro-prosecutor tone was not the MacFarlane spin when the Bidens were the ones being investigated. He overused the adverb "allegedly" to describe pictures of Hunter Biden's rampant drug use when he was on trial. He lamented special counsel Robert Hur "controversially" stated President Joe Biden would appear too doddering to be convicted in his classified-documents case. Who was whimpering instead of holding politicians accountable then?

NBC's Ken Dilanian, notorious for pushing the fake-news Steele dossier and associated Russian collusion conspiracies against Trump, lamented, "If the lesson of Watergate was that no one was above the law, the lesson of the Trump era is that a majority of Americans have decided that this principle no longer applies."

One "lesson of Watergate" that TV "news" people teach is that Republicans will eternally be slammed as the corrupt sleazeballs who need to resign, while the Clintons and the Kennedys can rape women or leave them to drown, and they're still hailed by the Old Media as America's royal families and the conscience of the country.

Then there was the wailing on "The View" on ABC. Joy Behar tried to joke about Jack Smith closing up shop: "It shows you there's no such thing as karma, doesn't it? It's like the Easter Bunny and affordable housing. It doesn't exist!"

It's all very sad after they treated Smith like he was Eliot Ness (and Trump was Al Capone). In July 2023, CNN made a big deal out of Smith walking into Subway for lunch. Anchorman John King found deep meaning: "Donald Trump tries to intimidate people, he tries to bully people, he tries to scare you away. That was Jack Smith with no words and a simple $5 sub in his hand saying, 'I'm not going anywhere.'"

Now Smith is taking his lunch bag home, and all CNN anchor Paula Reid could do is express grave concern that Trump Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi "will try to weaponize the Justice Department." After all this lawfare, that's a sick joke.

Ever since Watergate, the media's coverage of scandals has underlined the most egregious double standards in political coverage. One side is presumed guilty until proven innocent, and the other side is eternally not guilty. There are no consistent media ethics when the topic is ethics.



Do We Still Have to Pretend the 2020 Election Was ‘Free and Fair’?


The 2020 Presidential election shared a problem with the 1998 MLB home run race: the winning candidate did too well. In 1998, steroid juicer Mark McGwire broke Roger Maris’s home run record by nine home runs or roughly 15 percent.

In 2020, Joe Biden’s 81 million votes broke Barack Obama’s 2008 record 69 million votes by 12 million votes or roughly 17 percent. Obama’s 2008 numbers were anomalous. Hillary Clinton’s 2016 numbers were closer to the norm, and Biden got nearly 25 percent more votes than she did, a cool 16 million additional votes when finally counted.

Campaigning from his basement, this cognitively-challenged, charisma-free codger did much too well in 2020, and now even the Left is noticing. With virtually all the 2024 presidential election votes counted, Kamala Harris’s vote total remains roughly seven million votes shy of Biden’s ballot box-busting performance in 2020.

In trying to explain the differential, Michael Bender of the New York Timeshinted at the truth. Wrote Bender, “[S]ome backsliding could be expected after the record turnout in 2020, which was aided by pandemic rule changes that increased mail voting.” You think?

As should be expected, Bender chose not to pursue this line of thinking to its natural end. If he had, he might have asked why only the Democrats seemed to have been aided in 2020 “by pandemic rule changes.” President-elect Donald Trump did not “backslide” in 2024. He upped his 2020 vote total by about two million.

In 2024, with life back to something like normal, Harris was denied the performance-enhancing juice that propelled Biden in 2020. That juice was formidable. The convenient arrival of COVID gave the Democrats a rationale for dismantling the safeguards against voter fraud in state after state.

Some 39 states changed their election laws prior to the 2020 election. That was unprecedented. What was unconstitutional was that many of them did so without legislative approval. In several states, the courts, electoral officials, and health honchos exploited the media-driven COVID panic to assume this right for themselves. The Republicans responded with lawsuits, but the courts could not or would not respond in a timely fashion.   

The mail-in process, much of it improvised, was subject to considerable mischief. In 2005, co-chair of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, former president Jimmy Carter made this very clear, Fraud occurs in several ways,” Carter and his colleagues concluded. Absentee ballots remain the largest source of voter fraud.”

These problems were not theoretical. The commission cited case after case in which these practices had occurred and even affected outcomes.

Blank ballots got intercepted. Citizens at group sites like nursing homes were intimidated. Vote buying schemes escaped detection. Early ballots went unsecured. Third party” registration drives enlisted noncitizens and other ineligible people.

In a lengthy 2012 article in the New York Times, Adam Liptak affirmed the liberal case against mail-in ballots. Votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted,” he argued, more likely to be compromised and more likely to be contested than those cast in a voting booth, statistics show.” In addition to innocent errors, fraud was vastly more prevalent” in mail-in voting than voting in person.

In 2020, past concerns were shoved down the memory hole. Federalist editor-in-chief Mollie Hemingway marveled at the shift in party line along the length of the leftist front. At the drop of a hat,” Hemingway wrote in her excellent book, Rigged,  “Americas electoral system went from irredeemably corrupt and broken in 2016 to unquestionably safe in 2020.”

Hewing to the new party line, the media chose not to notice that the postal unions were totally in the tank for Joe Biden. The unions werent even subtle about it. Just months before the election, the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) told its 300,000 members that Donald Trump threatened the very survival of USPS.”

While praising Biden as a fierce ally and defender,” the NALC claimed a Trump victory meant the revocation of collective bargaining rights by Americas postal unions, massive cuts to services, and the potential privatization of the agency.” The NALC was the less radical of the two unions. The American Postal Workers Union (APWU) also endorsed Biden. Biden repaid the unions for their successful delivery of some 60 million ballots -- and their silencing of whistleblowers -- with a (very quiet) exemption from the vaccine mandate for their workers.

Moving in lockstep as was their norm, the Democrats and their media allies quickly settled on a smear to describe any protest against the elections legitimacy. Among the thousands of falsehoods Trump has uttered during his presidency,” claimed Melissa Block of NPR, this one in particular has earned the distinction of being called the big lie.’” In fact, this label wasnearned.” It was bestowed.

The gaslighting was epidemic. As one example out of the many, the once-reputable Brennan Center for Justice declared the 2020 election one of the most secure elections in our history.” To suggest otherwise was to be an “election denier,” the “denier,” of course, being a word first applied to Holocaust revisionists.

What helped make the election secure, claimed the Brennan Center, was that the votes were counted in a timely manner.” Abraham Lincoln knew the election results before he went to bed on election night 1860. One hundred and sixty years later, votes were still being counted (and manufactured) weeks after the election. Lest the public catch on, the major social media companies conspired with the authorities to keep the “deniers” -- and their evidence -- off their platforms.

America’s sports media have had less tolerance for those who boosted their numbers artificially than have the political media. Mark McGwire remained on the MLB Hall of Fame ballot for the full ten years of his eligibility, but he never got more than 24 percent of the sportswriters’ vote, well shy of the 75 percent needed for election.

Like Lance Armstrong, Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, and other juicers, McGwire lives his life under a shadow. He and they have all had their reputations trashed, their honors stripped, their records forever tainted by asterisks. In these athletes’ defense, no one has gone to jail for exposing their fraud. As the hundreds still in prison for their protest on January 6 can attest, the same cannot be said for Joe Biden. An asterisk will not be justice enough.



Fani Willis’s Case Against Trump Is Nearly Unpardonable — Raising Possibility of a State Prosecution of a Sitting President

 The case brought by the district attorney of Fulton County could stretch past Trump’s inauguration, auguring a constitutional clash.


When President-elect Trump takes the oath of office on January 20, the Constitution ordains that he “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States.” 

That has been taken to cover federal crimes, but not state ones — like the ones brought by the district attorney of Fulton County, Fani Willis. She charged Trump and 18 others with racketeering and other crimes against the Peach State in connection to efforts to reverse the result of the 2020 presidential election.

The prosecutions of Ms. Willis and of the district attorney of Manhattan, Alvin Bragg, have, alongside Trump’s victory in November, opened up hitherto unexplored constitutional terrain: Can a president be prosecuted for state crimes while in office? The answer to that question could determine the fate of Ms. Willis and Mr. Bragg’s cases — and the scope of the protections of the presidency. 

Pardons for state crimes usually reside within the purview of the highest executive authority in the state — the governor. Georgia is led by Governor Kemp, a prominent Republican who has had a fraught — to put it mildly — relationship with the 45th president, now the 47th president-elect.

Mr. Kemp opposed President Trump’s efforts in 2020 to overturn President Biden’s win in Georgia, and the president-elect backed his opponent two years later. He also called Mr. Kemp a “disloyal guy” and a “very average governor. … Little Brian, little Brian Kemp, bad guy.” The two let bygones be bygones this year, when Mr. Kemp endorsed Trump — and Georgia swung Republican.

Even if Mr. Kemp was moved to pardon Trump with respect to Ms. Willis’s prosecution, Georgia law ties his hands. The state is one of only six where pardons are granted by an independent board — the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles. Unlike the presidential pardon power, where a conviction is not necessary, Georgia requires not only a “guilty” verdict or plea but also a five-year waiting period before a pardon can be issued.

If criminals want to bypass that half-decade waiting period, they must submit “substantial evidence” showing “that the sentence is either excessive, illegal, unconstitutional or void,” and that “such action would be in the best interests of society and the inmate.” The members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles are appointed by the governor but serve seven-year terms in an effort to insulate them from political pressure. 

Georgie tightened its pardon process after a report in Time Magazine in 1941 — “Georgia: Pardoner’s Tale” — that relayed how the then-governor’s “smart, ingratiating, gold-toothed” chauffeur was charged with going to “prison camps of Fulton County with pardons already signed and asked to see prisoners whom he did not know and who did not know him.”

There could be another path beside the pardon for Mr. Kemp to derail Ms. Willis’s possible pursuit of a sitting president. In March the governor signed a law that empowers a state commission to discipline and remove prosecutors. Before putting pen to paper he declared that the legislation “will help us ensure rogue and incompetent prosecutors are held accountable if they refuse to uphold the law.”

This is Mr. Kemp’s second attempt to establish such a body — an earlier version of the law required the approval of Georgia’s supreme court, which demurred on account of harboring “grave doubts” about the law’s constitutionality.

Ms. Willis, who like Trump won re-election last month, has decried the law, which could result in increased scrutiny of her office. She asserts: “This bill was never deemed necessary until an historic thing happened in 2020, and let’s just talk about it and tell the truth … in 2020, we went from having five district attorneys that are minorities to 14 that are minorities.”

The effort to convict Trump for election interference now falls solely to Ms. Willis, as Special Counsel Jack Smith, who spearheaded two federal cases against Trump, has already bowed to the insurmountability of prosecuting a sitting president. Both his Mar-a-Lago and January 6 prosecutions have been dismissed — albeit without prejudice, meaning they could be refiled during Trump’s post-presidency period. 

The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel reckons that there is a “categorical” prohibition on prosecuting a sitting president. Ms. Willis is under no such restriction, largely because the vulnerability of a sitting president to state prosecution has never arisen — until now. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. United States that all official presidential acts are presumptively immune would appear to apply to state as well as federal prosecutors. 

In Trump’s other state criminal case, at Manhattan, Mr. Bragg has asked Judge Juan Merchan to explore “various non-dismissal options” to freeze the 34 hush money convictions “in abeyance” for the pendency of Trump’s presidency. Trump wants the verdicts dismissed on account of his electoral victory and imminent swearing in as president for a second time. 

A similar debate could soon break out in Georgia, where Ms. Willis’s case has been on hold for months while first Judge Scott McAfee and now the Georgia Court of Appeals have heard arguments over whether Ms. Willis ought to be disqualified for accusing her defendants of “playing the race card” — and for conducting a secret romantic affair with her hand-picked special prosecutor, Nathan Wade. 

The court of appeals mysteriously canceled a hearing set for December 5 to hear oral arguments over whether what Judge McAfee called Ms. Willis’s “odor of mendacity” and “significant appearance of impropriety” are enough to dismiss her from the case. The appellate jurists could be weighing the impact of Trump’s electoral win — or could have determined that the already-completed briefing is sufficient to determine the question.

https://www.nysun.com/article/fani-williss-case-against-trump-is-nearly-unpardonable-raising-possibility-of-a-state-prosecution-of-a-sitting-president

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 


Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


Joe Rogan Interviews Marc Andreessen – Interesting Discussion on Current Events


In this episode of Joe Rogan, Marc Andreessen discusses some very important topics in the world of politics.

Marc Andreessen is a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, investor, and software engineer. He is co-creator of the world’s first widely used internet browser, Mosaic, cofounder and general partner at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, and cohost of “The Ben & Marc Show” podcast.

Andreessen was also a life-long democrat, and the details of the subject matter he outlines is really quite remarkable. It’s a long discussion; however, if you do not have time use the chapter reference points. Andreessen talks rather fast, and the conversation is being widely discussed.



Chapters:

00:00:00 – Podcast Introduction
00:05:55 – Media Influence on Elections
00:14:22 – Celebrity Endorsements
00:20:00 – AI Sentience in 2025
00:34:53 – Cultural Change and AI
00:40:02 – Colonialism Sensitivity
00:48:20 – Cicero’s Warnings
00:58:00 – Political Predictions

01:04:01 – Trump’s Economic Approach

01:11:41 – Changing Perspectives
01:19:15 – AI and Deep Fakes
01:26:44 – Democratic Party Civil War
01:32:45 – Government Efficiency Proposals
01:39:24 – Impact of Debanking on Lives
01:46:01 – Totalitarianism Explained
01:52:30 – Addiction and Medication Effects
01:59:30 – Cultural Shift in Nutrition
02:04:41 – Government’s Food Role
02:11:20 – Government Oversight Issues
02:16:21 – Remote Work Challenges
02:21:05 – Government Debt Explained
02:26:05 – Shift in Political Alliances
02:31:50 – Consolidation in Banking
02:36:46 – Censorship in AI Systems
02:43:00 – US Military Drone Use
02:50:40 – Philanthropy and Politics
02:57:35 – Cultural Shifts in Tech
03:03:21 – Political Realignment Discussion
03:08:04 – Ending Thoughts & Future Outlook



How Corporations Rob Americans Of The Joys Of Fixing Their Own Property


At the heart of the Right to Repair movement is human agency — the agency to use your property as you see fit.



I recently built a coffee table. This was my first foray into woodworking, so the table is far from perfect — with slight asymmetries and an uneven finish. A level would tell me it misses the mark of an IKEA table’s engineered flatness. But if you’ve ever built something with your hands as a hobbyist, you would know my reaction looking at this table in satisfactory triumph — “Who cares?”

Unfortunately, when it comes to trying your hand at repairing your personal property, certain manufacturers do care, and they’re getting in the way of consumers and hobbyists who just want to get their own electronics, appliances, and vehicles up and running again. This assault on our property rights and agency is at the core of the national push for legislation that secures the “Right to Repair” our personal property and explains why a half dozen states have already codified such a law.

There are innumerable legal and philosophical arguments that support the right to repair, which the Texas Public Policy Foundation addresses in a recent research paper. But I want to return to the coffee table illustration for a moment and pull on the thread of tinkering.

In simple terms, tinkering is the playful relative of engineering. This is where children learn firsthand how things work — what tools can do and the properties of different materials. Tinkering usually starts small with LEGO bricks, but in the case of almost every successful inventor and builder — people like Elon MuskSteve JobsJeff Bezos, etc. — it quickly graduates into taking tech apart and putting it back together, deconstructing a car engine, and other engineering-like activities.

The problem is that many large corporations simply don’t want us to tinker.

Your iPhone? You void the warranty the second you crack it open instead of bringing it to the Genius Bar. A John Deere tractor you want to repair with your grandson? You can’t — John Deere requires that customers bring it into the shop on grounds of copyright law. Your dishwasher? Chances are it’s made by one of 86 percent of appliance companies that do not provide service manuals to customers as they do not recommend self-service (which is code for forcing you to work with one of their partnered technicians they get a kickback from).

Increasingly, the pastime of fathers and sons working on car repairs together is becoming untenable, with automakers withholding diagnostic information in a way that precludes car owners from repairing or tinkering with their own cars and forces them to bring the vehicles into the dealer for even the quickest of fixes.

To make matters worse, more and more personal anecdotes and reports confirm that manufacturers of our fridges, phones, and cars just “don’t make ‘em like they used to.” So the problem compounds due to the need to replace or fix our products far more frequently than in the past. They even have a term for it: “planned obsolescence.”

If you think it is asinine that we are barred from fixing our personal property or from bringing items we own into a third-party repair shop of our choosing, then welcome to the Right to Repair movement! Simply, the Right to Repair ensures that manufacturers provide owners and independent repair businesses with fair access to service information and affordable replacement parts. Based on the current corporate regime, legislation is required in Texas to afford Texans the right to repair their own stuff as they see fit.

Recently, I sat down with the chairman of the Texas Innovation and Technology Caucus, Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, and when I asked him about some of the major tech legislation they’re looking at in our home state next session, he led with Right to Repair. In his own words, “Sometimes you have to pass a law to give people certain rights … that you would think would come by default … something like the Right to Repair. Should you be able to take your phone and do anything you want with it? Of course you should.”

At the heart of the Right to Repair movement is human agency — the agency to use your property as you see fit; the agency for small businesses and repair shops to compete with huge incumbents by providing better, cheaper services; and the agency for the next innovators of the world to tinker, free of constraints, as they develop the skills needed to realize the vision for that next great product.

It’s almost unthinkable that we would let corporations tell us how and when we can use our property. And it is certainly un-American to capitulate to forces that seek to rob us of our dignity.

It’s high time Texas and other freedom-loving states passed robust Right to Repair laws to take back our agency and dignity.



First glimpse inside restored Notre-Dame cathedral five years after devastating fire

 Notre-Dame is due to reopen officially to visitors on December 8, though there is expected to long queues to see the cathedral's restored interior.    


As the world-famous Notre-Dame cathedral burned in a devastating 2019 fire, Parisians watched on in tears.

Now, after more than five years of frenetic reconstruction work, the world has been given a first glimpse inside the revived 12th-century landmark.

Today, President Emmanuel Macron is visiting the site to see the restored interiors for himself before the Gothic cathedral reopens for its first worship next month.

The televised visit is set to usher a series of events leading up to the reopening of the cathedral - the reconstruction of which has been hailed as a symbol of national unity and French can-do spirit.   



https://news.sky.com/story/world-given-first-glimpse-inside-restored-notre-dame-cathedral-more-than-five-years-after-devastating-fire-13262830