Why Should We Believe Biden?

 Free Beacon  "Before leaving for the Middle East, President Biden sat down for an interview with Israel's Channel 12 News. Anchor Yonit Levi asked the president if he would use force to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. "As a last resort, yes," Biden said.

"I'd like to think that Biden is sincere. I hope that he understands the dangers a nuclear Iran would pose to the Greater Middle East, to Europe, and indeed to the world. A nuclear Iran would launch a cycle of proliferation and escalation in the region. Iran's nuclear missiles would be in range not only of America's Persian Gulf allies but also of NATO. Iran would intensify its malign activities, from terrorism to proxy war to hostage-taking, knowing that the bomb gives it cover. A nuclear Iran means a world more dangerous, more violent, more flammable than the world is even today.

Which is why Biden is the latest American president to suggest that the use of force remains an option. An air and naval campaign to destroy the nuclear sites known to Western intelligence and to degrade the Islamic Republic's capacity to retaliate is the best means of delaying and potentially foreclosing the possibility of an Iranian bomb. The objective of such an operation wouldn't be regime change. The goal would be prevention. Israel and the Gulf States would support us. And Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping would pay attention. They would be put on notice: The American president means what he says.

"Does he? In the spring of 2021, President Biden was asked about the record numbers of illegal immigrants who began crossing the southern border after he reversed his predecessor's asylum policies. Biden dismissed the question. The migrant surge was "seasonal," he said. It happens "every single solitary year." Not like this, it doesn't. The season ended long ago. The migration has continued for a year and a half. Last month saw the largest number of illegal crossings on record. Biden's flippant answer was grossly mistaken, to say the least. He doesn't seem to care. In fact, if he's successful in ending Title 42 protocols allowing for the swift repatriation of illegal migrants, he will continue to make the problem worse.". . .

If Parents Don't Get A Grip On Their Kids' Social Media, Trans Activists Will

 The Federalist

Parents need to regulate their children’s online use as transgender influencers continue to thrive on social media apps like Tik Tok.

"An elementary school in Indiana must allow a 10-year-old boy who identifies as transgender to play on its all-girls softball team despite a new state law preventing males from competing on female sports teams, a judge ruled Tuesday. This is just the most recent example of how the trans movement is affecting our kids: an elementary school’s all-girls softball team. What is behind all these stories of young children gender bending? Social media could have something to do with it. 

"Social media and smartphones are harmful to kids. This is increasingly recognized and reported on by the media and has become a growing area of national, bipartisan concern in Congress. And parents already seem to realize that screens are addictive for kids, so they limit screen time and put boundaries in place around when and how often they can use devices. However, many parents aren’t aware of just how full of harmful content and dangerous voices many of today’s popular apps are. Time limits won’t cut it since even a small amount of time on the wrong apps can be extremely damaging. 

"The truth is that social media apps today are full of pornography, sexual images, and radical LGBT content directly opposed to conservative values and Christian beliefs. Kids are following and listening to complete strangers, many of them grown adults, whose voices bombard them on social media. And some of the loudest voices recently are those of transgender influencers.". . .

A veteran in England is taken away in handcuffs for 'causing anxiety'

  American Thinker   "To the extent the Founders believed free speech to be a necessity—so much so that it got first place in the Bill of Rights—it was because they claimed that right as Englishmen. Because the Bill of Rights of 1689 enshrined freedom of speech and debate in Parliament as well as the right to petition the king, 90 years later, America-based Englishmen considered that speech to be their birthright. That makes it unutterably tragic that, on Friday in England, Darren Brady, an army veteran, was arrested and cuffed for “causing anxiety” to an anonymous complainant because he retweeted a Pride flag shaped into a swastika.

You’ve probably seen this Pride flag swastika, which actor turned activist Laurence Fox tweeted out during “Pride” month:

"This reworking of the now omnipresent Pride flag is not a threat that Nazis will round up the LGBTQ++ crowd and stick them into concentration camps. Instead, the point of the reworked flag is to show that the LGBTQ++ crowd has become so ascendent and powerful in Western society that it has Nazi-like control over others in society. As all who live in totalitarian societies know, criticizing those in power is dangerous.". . .