At NYT above, and CBS News 2 Los Angeles at the video below.
"Sanctuary cities" should wear the label proudly https://t.co/ficPkrQCxw— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) March 7, 2017
Commentary and analysis on American politics, culture, and national identity, U.S. foreign policy and international relations, and the state of education - from a neoconservative perspective! - Keeping an eye on the communist-left so you don't have to!
"Sanctuary cities" should wear the label proudly https://t.co/ficPkrQCxw— NYT Opinion (@nytopinion) March 7, 2017
There are no A Day Without a Woman events planned for Wednesday amid charges of “white privilege.” What may be the only Puget Sound area event is a free yoga open house in Kirkland.Keep reading.
So maybe it wasn’t the best thought-out event, A Day Without a Woman general strike this Wednesday, on International Women’s Day.
“Stupid. That’s what I first thought,” says Angie Beem, the state director of the Women’s March that in Seattle drew tens of thousands of participants on Jan. 21.
“What’s the purpose of a strike when you can’t afford a day to not work? Women who could possibly do this are in an executive-type position. Life will go on for them. Their career is more stable. This screamed …”
Guess the next two words.
“White privilege,” concludes Beem.
Her group is not sponsoring any events associated with A Day Without a Woman, which also coincides with International Women’s Day.
There are strike events promised in New York, Washington, D. C., Boston and even Fairbanks.
Beem remembers a tweet coming a month or so ago from the national Women’s March group.
“It was just two women who decided it was going to happen. They put this out on social media without discussing it,” says Beem.
“Facebook blew up. There were a lot of people like myself saying, ‘This isn’t right.’ ”
She says she had the same misgivings about “A Day Without Immigrants” that took place Feb. 16 — that there’s too much risk. News reports said a number of protesters were fired for not showing up for work that day.
“People are desperate to take some action and some control over their lives,” says Beem. “Then they make the horrible choice of not going to work and their whole career is over.”
While Beem doesn’t agree with the strike, the event was later expanded to include avoiding shopping that day — except for at small women-and-minority owned businesses — and wearing red in solidarity.
About the color red, says the national group, “We have chosen red as a color of signifying revolutionary love and sacrifice. Red is the color of energy and action associated with our will to survive. It signifies a pioneering spirit and leadership qualities, promoting ambition and determination.”
Beem says she will wear red on Wednesday...
By her own account, Vielka McFarlane was an immigrant success story. She had escaped a childhood of poverty in Panama, made her way to Los Angeles and founded a nonprofit network of publicly funded charter schools called the Celerity Educational Group.Well, nice work if you can get it. And a "black car service"? Must be nice.
In 2013, she earned $471,842, about 35% more than Michelle King, the superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District, makes today.
McFarlane was prospering, and it showed. She wore Armani suits, ate at expensive restaurants and used a black car service.
Financial records obtained by The Times show that, as Celerity’s CEO, she paid for many of these expenses with a credit card belonging to her charter schools, which receive the bulk of their funding from the state.
It could not be determined whether McFarlane, 54, ever reimbursed the charter schools for her credit card purchases. Neither she nor a lawyer hired by Celerity responded to requests for comment about the transactions.
At a time when charter school advocates are determined to increase the number of such schools in L.A., the story of McFarlane and the Celerity schools offers a case study of the growing difficulty of regulating them. The task of spotting and stamping out risky financial practices in charters largely falls to the school district’s charter schools division, which employs about a dozen people dedicated to monitoring the schools’ fiscal health.
But as the number of L.A. charter schools has grown to more than 220, enrolling about 111,000 students, oversight has become a challenge for district officials, who are at once competitors and regulators...
In a global ranking of "best countries," the United States drops to No. 7 https://t.co/Pnd8rB70xp— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) March 7, 2017
There is one bright spot for the United States: It is still perceived as the most powerful nation on earth, running ahead of Russia, China, the United Kingdom and Germany.You see, all those countries that are ranked as "better" than us, are also free-riding on the security we're providing. And honestly, Canada, Sweden, and Germany are already gone, turned over to leftists and Islamists. Switzerland's a nice place for a vacation, but why would it be ranked the best country in the world? And Japan! California's better than Japan, and we're a Democrat Party hell-hole, heh.
When the event ended, and it was time to leave the building, I breathed a sigh of relief. We had made it. I was ready for dinner and conversation with faculty and students in a tranquil setting. What transpired instead felt like a scene from Homeland rather than an evening at an institution of higher learning. We confronted an angry mob as we tried to exit the building. Most of the hatred was focused on Dr. Murray, but when I took his right arm both to shield him from attack and to make sure we stayed together so I could reach the car too, that’s when the hatred turned on me. One thug grabbed me by the hair and another shoved me in a different direction. I noticed signs with expletives and my name on them. There was also an angry human on crutches, and I remember thinking to myself, “What are you doing? That’s so dangerous!” For those of you who marched in Washington the day after the inauguration, imagine being in a crowd like that, only being surrounded by hatred rather than love. I feared for my life...RTWT.
Harvard Confronts the Deep Ties to Slavery in Academia.
— Michiko Kakutani (@michikokakutani) March 6, 2017
by @jennyschuessler via @nytimes https://t.co/S71XPsrxt5
"Separating fact from fake news has never been more essential," writes columnist @mgoodwin_nypost https://t.co/zIegHBFQP0
— New York Post (@nypost) March 5, 2017
Here a Russian story, there a Russian story, everywhere a Russian story — all based on leaks from anonymous sources. You don’t have to be a spook to spot the plan: Destroy Donald Trump by putting him in a bear hug.Keep reading.
To judge by their scattershot approach, the conspirators are fishing for a bombshell. The fallback goal is to inflict death by a thousand cuts.
Already they’ve gotten one scalp and part of another. Gen. Mike Flynn is gone, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions is wounded. Each made a mistake that obscured a larger truth: Somebody in the government has been spying on Trump’s team and giving top secret information to anti-Trump media outlets.
Our president is many things, but dumb he’s not. He recognized the stakes, so yesterday he struck back in a way that dramatically upped the ante in the war over his presidency.
Trump’s early-morning tweets accusing President Barack Obama of having wiretapped him at Trump Tower startled the world. It is a sensational claim, but in light of the tsunami of leaks from intelligence agencies, the president is right to suspect that he’s the target of a dirty game.
To start with, the unprecedented alliance against him clearly includes remnants of the Obama administration, and probably the former president himself. The recent New York Times report that Obama and his team dropped intelligence findings like bread crumbs so they would get wide readership and to prevent the Trump administration from burying them reveals an attempt to undermine if not subvert a legally elected president.
The Times report conveys suspicions that Trump would deep-six the findings if he could while giving a free pass to Obama’s leakers who may have committed crimes. The Times knows who in the Obama camp was involved and what they did. The paper has an ethical obligation to report it.
Yet here’s the rub: What exactly was in those findings? All the public knows is that intelligence officials said they investigated whether the Trump campaign had ties to Russia, and we only know that because it was leaked by anonymous sources.
But that knowledge, while sounding suspicious, raises more questions than it answers.
For example, did investigators looking at Trump’s campaign find anything substantive? The Times has said no but keeps suggesting the probes continue. Publicly, the FBI won’t confirm or deny anything and even Congress is frustrated by the bureau’s behavior.
Yet the fact that there are leaks reveals something important: The investigation involved monitoring phone calls and maybe computers and maybe physical surveillance...
The invaluable legal analysis of Andrew M. McCarthy, checking the work of the NYT.And see the roundup at Maggie's Farm, "The Political Warfare Continues."
The arrest so shook the school, a public charter called Academia Avance, that administrators held an assembly Tuesday afternoon to discuss what happened and to ease fears. The school’s executive director, Ricardo Mireles, has since ordered his teachers to talk to students whose parents are here illegally about creating a family plan in case they are detained or deported.It's "unfortunate" that illegal immigrant children now have to "deal with reality"?
“It’s unfortunate that we have to have minors now deal with reality,” he said. “You need to be ready. ‘Have you talked to your parents? Do you have power of attorney?’ ”
The true story of the Louisiana Purchase is one of shameful plunder of native lands: https://t.co/EcbSMdAACk pic.twitter.com/jhv0qzuKzT
— Slate (@Slate) March 5, 2017
RETWEET if @realDonaldTrump is YOUR president! #TeamTrump pic.twitter.com/5sT0KV9ekD
— Eric Spracklen (@EricSpracklen) March 5, 2017
The single most devastating statistic in American life is this: The average black high school senior reads at the level of the average white eighth-grader. This, more than anything else, explains why race remains such an overwhelmingly salient fact in American life. It explains why affirmative action is, or at least appears to be, necessary. It explains to a very large degree why blacks continue to lag so far behind whites in income and socioeconomic status.Keep reading.
And, as Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom demonstrate with remorseless lucidity in "No Excuses," their latest exploration of the causes and consequences of persistent black failure, the gap cannot be explained away by racism, testing bias, inequitable resources or even by poverty itself. The gap is not only an incontrovertible fact but a fact rooted in black experience and behavior. The Thernstroms do not believe that school is the cause of black failure, but they insist that, given the right innovations, school can be the solution to black failure. Readers may find it hard to believe that a problem so deeply rooted can be cured with such a straightforward and inexpensive application of reform.
The Thernstroms have been accused in the past of relishing, rather than ruing, the bad news they deliver on, say, affirmative action or welfare. In their previous book, "America in Black and White," they seemed to take great pleasure in putting liberal noses out of joint. But they deserve at least equal credit for venturing fearlessly where more cautious scholars fear to tread and taking the considerable flak that comes with it. "No Excuses" is also not likely to be welcomed in the hallways of our great foundations or in graduate schools of education.
The essential piece of bad news the Thernstroms deliver here is that none of the conventional explanations for the academic gap hold much water, and thus neither do the conventional solutions. They challenge the view, most fervently advanced by Jonathan Kozol in "Savage Inequalities," that schools with large minority populations are systematically denied resources. This is one of those common-sense perceptions that turns out on close examination, they say, to be false...
I just published “Feminism 2017: ‘Shut Up, White Women’” https://t.co/X4XsGm17ZB— The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) March 3, 2017
Whoa! A woman in Florida captured this crazy sight of a gator carrying a fish across a golf course. https://t.co/Kj4cZjWEVg pic.twitter.com/yeMPoZs6gI
— Fox News (@FoxNews) March 3, 2017
Fan mail pic.twitter.com/5lU2DG2YVg
— Mark Z. Barabak (@markzbarabak) March 3, 2017
Leftist Students Physically Assault Conservative Scholar, Professor Over Speech https://t.co/gRj8zpjMvS
— Scott Greer (@ScottMGreer) March 3, 2017
#MiddleburyCollege students shout down lecture by Charles Murray https://t.co/l7umGvRozk #highered pic.twitter.com/1pM4QbPpQ5
— Inside Higher Ed (@insidehighered) March 3, 2017
OMG.This happened after Charles Murray lecture. Female prof assaulted--car mobbed. @splcenter helped incite the hate pic.twitter.com/a6VMclPjxU
— Christina Sommers (@CHSommers) March 3, 2017
This is gratuitously cruel. She was brought here when she was 7. They're making an example of her. https://t.co/mu4VMoIZiT
— Radley Balko (@radleybalko) March 3, 2017
The utter lack of empathy in some of the responses to this story is depressing. https://t.co/b8vDsZkFnn
— Radley Balko (@radleybalko) March 3, 2017
Revenge of Obama’s ‘Former Officials’ - by @noahcrothman https://t.co/d8z9pZGl8i pic.twitter.com/Fhh6SywFeo
— Commentary Magazine (@Commentary) March 3, 2017
For a president who has a uniquely hostile relationship with the press, positive news cycles are both rare and fleeting. The Trump team displayed remarkable discipline by refusing to step on the president’s well-received address to a joint session of Congress. A lot of good discipline did them. Just 24 hours after Trump’s address, a series of troubling reports involving links among those in Trump’s orbit to Russian officials reset the national discourse. Those stories make for a trend, though, that has little to do with Trump and a lot to do with his predecessor. The Obama administration’s foreign-policy team seems to be campaigning to rehabilitate itself one leak at a time, and the press is helping.Democrats are treasonous scum.
The frenzy on Wednesday night began with a revelation in the New York Times that members of Barack Obama’s administration had left a trail of breadcrumbs for investigators who happen to be looking into the Trump campaign’s contacts with the Russian government. The report revealed that intelligence officials intercepted communications between Russian officials and “Trump associates,” and that the administration worked frantically in the final days to ensure those revelations could not be buried and forgotten after they left office.
More than six “former officials” described efforts to reduce the classification on some reports relating to Trump associates’ contact with Russians so they would be widely distributed. They also revealed their efforts to raise the classification level of some information related to Russia that was so sensitive they feared the Trump administration might leak it to Moscow. Some officials apparently even touted their efforts to ask leading questions during intelligence briefings so their questions would be transcribed and archived, leaving clues for congressional investigators should they ever come looking for them.
The Times report revealed that a “former senior American official” disclosed that Jeff Sessions had met with “Russian officials.” The Washington Post confirmed that Sessions took a private meeting with Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak, appearing to contradict testimony Sessions provided to the Senate. The controversy whipped up around the discrepancy between Sessions’ confirmation-hearing testimony, and these reports have resulted in Democrats calling for his resignation and Republicans running for cover.
Though it received less attention amid the flurry of reports involving Team Trump’s connections to the Kremlin, the Washington Post published another story involving the decision-making process that led up to the Yemen raid. That raid, in which Navy SEAL William “Ryan” Owens was killed, an Osprey helicopter was lost, and up to 31 Yemeni civilians died, cannot be said to have gone according to plan. This report alleges that the plan might have been the problem.
The report quoted former advisor to Vice President Joe Biden on national security, Colin Kahl, who averred that the raid was the result of an Obama administration-era initiative expediting the approval of partnered ground operations. Yet, this raid was greenlit as a result of “a more abbreviated White House process.” Kahl took particular issue with the revelation that a sub-Cabinet level meeting on the raid—a meeting scheduled after the raid had been approved by the president and following a variety of briefings on the mission—lasted less than an hour. “You can’t cover the complexity of a topic like that in 23 minutes,” he declared. Other “former officials” quoted in that piece criticized the raid for straining relations with the Yemeni government. In sum, the Obama administration deserves all the credit for what went right in Yemen and none of the blame for what went wrong.
At least a few of these “former officials” who so freely offer reporters at the Times and the Post intimate details about the Obama administration’s approach to foreign policy are members of the infamous gang of nine. These officials within the Obama administration’s intelligence apparatus confirmed to the Post that former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn had misled Mike Pence when he said he did not discuss the Obama-era sanctions regime in his phone conversations with Kislyak. As the Times revealed last night, federal officials monitored those calls, transcribed the conversations, and related the substance to the press.
There is an assumption permeating these reports: that those unnamed Obama-era officials are selflessly sacrificing in the effort to prevent the Trump administration from undermining American national security. Some have even dedicated themselves to creating an elaborate Da Vinci Code for future scavenger hunters to decipher. More likely, the Obama administration’s foreign policy professionals are doing their best to retroactively vindicate themselves after leaving office under a cloud of mistrust. In their effort to self-aggrandize at the expense of the current administration, these rogue officials have found willing partners in the press.
The Obama administration was engaged in narrative manipulation surrounding Russia’s intervention into the election process even in its final hours...
Was former Secretary of labor and assistant attorney-general Tom Perez’s victory over Congressman Keith Ellison over the weekend in the race to serve as the new chairman of the Democratic National Committee a victory of centrist Democrats over radical leftists in the party? That is how the mainstream media is portraying Perez’s victory.Keep reading.
Along these lines, Prof. Allen Dershowitz, a lifelong Democrat who promised to quit the party if Ellison was elected due to his documented history of antisemitism and hostility toward Israel, hailed Perez’s election. Speaking to Fox News, Dershowitz said that Perez’s election over Ellison “is a victory in the war against bigotry, antisemitism, the anti-Israel push of the hard Left within the Democratic Party.”
There are two problems with Dershowitz’s view. First, Perez barely won. Ellison received nearly half the votes in two rounds of voting.
Tipping his hat to Ellison’s massive popularity among the party’s leadership and grassroots, Perez appointed the former Nation of Islam spokesman to serve as deputy DNC chairman as soon as his own victory was announced.
There is a good reason that Perez is so willing to cooperate with Ellison in running the DNC. And this points to the second problem with the claim that Perez’s election signals a move toward the center by Democratic leaders.
Perez is ready to cooperate with Ellison because the two men have the same ideological worldview and the same vision for the Democratic Party. As Mother Jones explained, “There’s truly not much ideological distance between the two.”
Far from being a victory for the centrist forces in the party, Perez’s win marks the solidification of the far Left’s control over the party of Harry Truman. Only hard leftists participated in a meaningful way in the race for leadership of the second largest party in America – a party that less than a decade ago controlled the White House and both houses of Congress.
The implications of this state of affairs are disastrous for the US generally. It is inherently destabilizing for a nation when one of the parties in a two-party political system is taken over by people who have a negative view of the country.
While America as a whole will suffer from the radicalization of the Democratic Party, perhaps no group will suffer more from the far Left’s takeover of the party than the American Jewish community. The vast majority of American Jews give their partisan allegiance to the Democratic Party and their ideological allegiance to the Left.
While Perez made a name for himself by fighting the enforcement of US immigration and naturalization laws against illegal immigrants, and Ellison rose to prominence for his activism in radical African American and Islamic circles, thanks to the so-called intersectionality of the far Left, that makes the cause of one faction the cause of all factions, today Perez is as much an apologist for Israel bashers as Ellison.
Perhaps in response to the danger that the far Left’s takeover of the Democratic Party represents, Malcolm Hoenlein, the long-serving professional head of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations called on Sunday for the convening of a global conference on antisemitism. In a meeting with The Jerusalem Post’s editorial board, Hoenlein said that one of the goals of the proposed conference would be to reach a universally accepted definition of antisemitism...
Why Were the 7,000 Antisemitic Incidents Under Obama Largely Ignored? by Seth Frantzman https://t.co/vjFkrkBDTd— Algemeiner (@Algemeiner) March 1, 2017
Pat Benatar
Heartbreaker
7:59 AM
Same Old Song and Dance
Aerosmith
7:55 AM
BURNIN' FOR YOU
B.O.C.
7:51 AM
Let's Go
The Cars
7:47 AM
Stairway to Heaven
Led Zeppelin
7:39 AM
Wanted Dead or Alive
Bon Jovi
7:34 AM
Long Cool Woman
the Hollies
7:31 AM
Jungle Love
Steve Miller Band
7:28 AM
Your Love
The Outfield
7:24 AM
Suffragette City
David Bowie
7:21 AM
All Right Now
Free
7:04 AM
That address was spectacular. Best #JointAddress I can remember. #PresidentTrump— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) March 1, 2017
Feminist icon Emma Watson couldn't care less if she wins an Oscar https://t.co/9cqTM2hpIn— Daily Mail Celebrity (@DailyMailCeleb) March 1, 2017
.@MichelleMalkin The Immigration Debate We Need: #NoAmnesty #StopAmnesty #MAGA https://t.co/ycKkrIXoGT— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
Despite a dramatic ending, the Oscars got fewer viewers than last year https://t.co/6BEX8k1EYk pic.twitter.com/zkKR5Zp8Ga— Bloomberg (@business) February 27, 2017
That's because the #Oscars are out of touch with everyday, lunch-bucket Americans and traditional values. #BoycottOSCARS #AcademyAwards https://t.co/YyfGVaYd8K— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
"Trump, in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News in the Oval Office” https://t.co/BsRDltlILh
— Jon Passantino (@passantino) February 27, 2017
the logistical gymnastics of #WomenInCombat trolls trying to discredit #Ranger women is blowing my mind. Band of Bros is over. Get over it.
— Megan H. MacKenzie (@MeganhMackenzie) January 20, 2017
Spoiled brat leftist #MerylStreep slams righteous #KarlLagerfeld. #Oscars #AcademyAwards https://t.co/cPIP7TMbzT
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
I'm not watching the #Oscars. #AcademyAwards https://t.co/qdoRqvXUbL
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
Not watching, for precisely this reason. But thank you Dana. #Oscars #AcademyAwards https://t.co/jp9lYL5ogg
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
Not for me. Not watching: "5 ways politics could steal the show at #Oscars." #AcademyAwards https://t.co/LqWwl9Yy8D
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
Lolz. So glad I tuned out the #Oscars. Looks like I was right: Totally FUBAR. #AcademyAwards https://t.co/Hm2jOUB887
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
The most politically correct movie won for best picture. Who'd have thunk it? #Oscars #AcademyAwards https://t.co/WZWnj8aGdX
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
'You had one job!': #Oscars flub engulfs accounting firm: #PwC https://t.co/BXmQooc1RC
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
#PricewaterhouseCoopers apologizes for #Oscars fail: #PwC https://t.co/IhHvopMkmr
— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) February 27, 2017
This image sums up the end of the 89th Academy Awards pretty well https://t.co/g03MyJxRHT pic.twitter.com/XeQuQ4LuhB
— kcranews (@kcranews) February 27, 2017
'Refugees were the ideal citizens for a republic." @KathleenADuVal _When America Opened its Doors_ #vastearlyamerica https://t.co/i0QVknRb9J pic.twitter.com/O69zu1svUq
— Karin Wulf (@kawulf) February 18, 2017
America’s founders—both its leaders and those protesting in the streets and fighting the British Army—saw immigrants as vital to the mission of the fledgling nation. The Declaration of Independence accused King George III of “obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners” and refusing “to encourage their migrations” into the colonies. To the Founders, the king’s restrictions on immigration were evidence of his desire to keep the colonies backward and under his thumb. In the newly independent United States, they firmly believed, immigration would accelerate economic development and help the country become a player among the powerful empires of Europe.Keep reading.
As A. Roger Ekirch’s deeply researched and elegantly written “American Sanctuary” reveals, early Americans saw the United States as a sanctuary for people oppressed by the old tyrannical governments of Europe. Refugees were the ideal citizens for a republic: Having fled tyranny, they would be a bulwark against it. And they came. Nearly 100,000 Europeans immigrated to the United States in the 1790s, a dramatic addition to a population that was just under four million at the start of the decade.
But when the French Revolution turned radical in the 1790s, some Americans began to worry. They feared that French as well as Irish immigrants would drag the new, still-fragile country into anarchy. Harrison Otis, a congressman from Massachusetts, gave a speech in which he railed that he did “not wish to invite hoards of wild Irishmen, nor the turbulent and disorderly of all parts of the world, to come here with a view to disturb our tranquility.” South Carolina Rep. Robert Goodloe Harper proposed getting rid of naturalized citizenship altogether. And from the beginning Congress limited naturalized citizenship to any “free white person.”
The war that broke out in 1793 between Britain and revolutionary France sparked the first great divide in American politics. Thomas Jefferson and others supported France, grateful for its help in defeating Britain in the American Revolution and for following the United States into revolution itself. But other Americans, including John Adams and George Washington, were aghast at French revolutionaries’ use of the guillotine and the Bastille. After Washington’s administration negotiated a treaty with the British in 1794 that struck supporters of France as too cozy, New Yorkers threw rocks at Alexander Hamilton. Some congressmen even talked of impeaching Washington.
Into this fractious debate about the place of the United States in the world came the bloodiest mutiny in the history of the British navy—a mutiny that forced Americans to decide if the country was truly a haven for lovers of liberty, even those who had killed for its sake.
Probably half of the HMS Hermione’s diverse crew had been “impressed”—meaning that the British navy had forced them from non-British private merchant ships into British service. On one day alone in 1795, sailors from the Hermione boarded 20 American ships, took nearly 70 crewmen (most of whom claimed American citizenship) and forced them into the British navy. On most ships of the era, impressed sailors grumbled but did not mutiny, but circumstances combined with the revolutionary times and a particularly cruel captain to push the Hermione’s crew over the edge. On the night of Sept. 21, 1797, off the coast of Puerto Rico, several of the crew charged into the captain’s cabin, brandishing swords and axes. After killing him, crew members searched the ship and killed all 10 officers.
Mr. Ekirch’s gripping and timely book both conveys the drama of this long-forgotten mutiny and reveals its importance to the early American republic. The first part of “American Sanctuary” tells the story of the mutiny, and the rest of the book traces the crisis it prompted—specifically when some of the mutineers from the HMS Hermione fled to the United States. Would Americans side with rebels against British tyranny, or with the rule of law on the high seas? Would the United States turn its back on Thomas Paine’s charge in “Common Sense” to be “an asylum for mankind” by extraditing mutineers to Britain?
The man that put all of these questions to the test called himself Jonathan Robbins. A little over a year after the mutiny, an American schooner docked at the port of Charleston with Robbins aboard. He had reportedly bragged to his shipmates that he had been one of the mutineers on the now-infamous Hermione. Charleston officials put him in jail, where an officer who had served on the Hermione prior to the mutiny visited him and declared that the man in the cell was in fact Thomas Nash, one of the mutiny’s leaders. After the British consul in Charleston requested the man’s extradition for court-martial, U.S. Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams determined that this was a simple case of mutiny and murder on a British ship. With their approval, the man calling himself Robbins was handed over to British justice.
It was a huge political mistake...
— George Ciccariello (@ciccmaher) February 26, 2017
"Feel It Still"
Flopping Aces, "Communist Defectors Warn About Four Stages Of Subversion — And America Is On The Last One ..."..."
View From the Beach, "‘Hail To Thee, My Alma Mater ..."