“We reject your heightened escalation of this conflict as dangerous and a provocation. We hereby declare that your escalation of this conflict as the President of the United States has not been done in our name.”

(change.org) A group of U.S. intellectuals – journalists, political advisers, and scholars –are initial signers of an open letter to President Joe Biden (see full text below), pleading with him to reject policies which lead to an “intensification of conflict with Russia” and which “could lead to the deaths of millions of innocent people.”

“We hereby declare that your escalation of this conflict as the President of the United States has not been done in our name.”

Please join us with your signature and promotion of this important petition.

Not in Our Name

Dear Mr. President,

The undersigned strongly and unambiguously express their opposition to your policy with regard to Ukraine. Your strategy is edging the world closer and closer to a nuclear war with Russia, and to another world war. Recently, you requested Congress for even more funds to be sent Ukraine in order to help them buy more weapons for the military conflict with Russia. “So we need to contribute arms, funding, ammunition … so that they continue what they are doing,” you said on April 28 when asking for some more $33 billion in taxpayer funds to support Ukraine. “Robust military assistance” for Ukraine is your expression. Reuters reported that “President Joe Biden asked Congress for $33 billion to support Ukraine” and called it “a dramatic escalation of U.S. funding for the war with Russia.” At the same time, the U.S.-led NATO April 27 meeting in Ramstein, Germany urged NATO members to provide more military support to Ukraine, with Germany promising to send 50 self-propelled Cheetah anti-aircraft weapons. We reject your heightened escalation of this conflict as dangerous and a provocation.

The response from Russia? Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on April 26 said there was a “serious” risk of nuclear war over Ukraine. “It’s real. It shouldn’t be underestimated,” he stated. 

Do we want to risk a nuclear war with Russia over a regional conflict in Eastern Europe? 

The independent journalist Glenn Greenwald just recently stated“Whatever your views on the moral dimensions of this war, it’s hard to deny this is the most dangerous moment in US foreign policy in two decades. Every week, US/NATO involvement in the war intensifies, as Russia explicitly warns of nuclear war. For what?”

We hereby declare that your escalation of this conflict as the President of the United States has not been done in our name.

Nor did you act in our name when you, as Vice-President of the United States, were involved in the 2014 coup in Ukraine that toppled the officially elected leadership of Ukraine. At that time, a telephone conversation of your collaborator Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State under President Barak Obama) revealed how she discussed which leaders should be placed into the new government in Ukraine. The transcript of that conversation also exposed your own direct involvement in this interference with a foreign nation state. This intrusion into the internal affairs of a sovereign nation was not done in our name, either.

You designated this same official, Victoria Nuland, now as the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. In that position, she has recently had to admit that Ukraine does have bio labs and that the U.S. is involved in them and is worried what Russia would do with its dangerous content should they get a hold of it. “Ukraine has biological research facilities which in fact we are now quite concerned Russian troops may be seeking to gain control of,” Nuland said. “So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach.” Some of those very same Ukraine bio labs are ones that your own son, Hunter Biden, only months after the U.S.-led political coup in Ukraine in 2014, invested money by way of the U.S. Company Metabiota which is working with the Department of Defense. Additional evidence has been recently unearthed, effectively proving the U.S.’s involvement in Ukrainian bio labs.

This strange and troubling U.S. involvement in bio labs at the border of Russia – with direct involvement of your own family –  is not done in our name, either.

And let us also remind you that the United States does not have a good moral standing when it comes to condemning unjust wars of aggression. Recent U.S. history demonstrates a pattern of multiple military invasions of sovereign states – or military and tactical support for others to do so – most prominently the unjust 2003 invasion of Iraq with hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties, but also in Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria.

At this dangerous moment in history, the U.S. must exert its power to become a force for just peace, urging Russia and Ukraine to come to the negotiation table in order to agree on compromises that would enable and ensure peace in the region.

The U.S. should not engage in a policy of intensification of conflict with Russia that could lead to the deaths of millions of innocent people. There are grave consequences of cumulative provocations.

Not in our name, Mr. President.


Dr. Chuck Baldwin, Pastor, Author, Columnist, Radio Talk Show Host, Presidential Nominee

Donna F. Bethell, Esq.

Walter E. Block, Ph.D., Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics Loyola University New Orleans

Dr. Peter Chojnowski, philosopher and director of Sister Lucy Truth 

Patrick Delaney, journalist

Matt Gaspers, Managing Editor, Catholic Family News

The Most Reverend Bishop René Gracida

Carrie Gress and Noelle Mering, TheologyofHome.com, Fellows, Ethics & Public Policy Center

Scholars, Institute for Human Ecology, CUA

Dr. Robert Hickson (USA ret.), retired professor of literature and military history

Dr. Maike Hickson, journalist

Steve Jalsevac, Co-Founder of LifeSiteNews.com

Jim Jatras, retired former U.S. diplomat, GOP Senate foreign policy adviser

Jason Scott Jones, movie producer, founder of the Vulnerable People Project, host of the Jason Jones Show

Dr. Clifford A Kiracofe

Jack Maxey, journalist and political analyst

Brian M. McCall, Editor-in-Chief, Catholic Family News

Eugene G. McGuirk, BA, MA, MBA, Deacon and Educator

Eric Metaxas

Hon. Andrew P. Napolitano, former jurist, constitutional scholar, and legal commentator

Fr. David Nix, Diocesan hermit

Jack Posobiec, Editor, Human Events

Eric Sammons, Editor-in-Chief, Crisis Magazine

Dr. Michael Sirilla, Professor of Theology, Franciscan University of Steubenville

Beverly Stevens, REGINA Magazine

Frank Walker, Editor, Canon212.com

John-Henry Westen, co-founder and editor-in-chief of LifeSiteNews.com

Sir Owen Samuel Whitman, GCS, political commentary and consultant

Michael Yon, War Correspondent/author

Elizabeth Yore, Esq., Founder, YoreChildren

John Zmirak, Ph.D., Senior Editor, The Stream

LifeSiteNews: ‘Not in our name’: Conservative journalists plead with Biden to avoid nuclear war with Russia.

Catholic Family News: NOT IN OUR NAME: Open Letter to President Biden on Russia-Ukraine Conflict 

The Stream: Not in Our Name: An Open Letter to President Biden on Ukraine & Russia  

Crisis Magazine: Not in Our Name: Open Letter to President Biden on Russia-Ukraine Conflict 

Sign this petition: https://www.change.org/p/not-in-our-name-opposition-to-u-s-war-escalation-with-russia?

The SSPX is not schismatic; do not hesitate to flee to them… and a word from St. Cajetan on the rights of laity who hold the “pope” in suspicion

By Father David Nix

Although canonically-irregular, the SSPX (Society of Pope St. Pius X) founded by Archbishop Lefebvre (above picture) in the 1970s, is not schismatic.  In traditional papal encyclicals, a “schismatic community” is a Christian community adhering to valid sacraments but without recognizing the primacy of place of Rome or the importance of the papacy.  An example of this would be the Eastern Orthodox:  The Eastern Orthodox have valid sacraments, but many do not realize the primacy of place of Rome (or believe it was transferred due to error a thousand years ago.)  In any case, the SSPX has always recognized the papacy and the primacy of Rome.  The reciprocal is also true, namely, that every Pope since foundation of the SSPX in the 1970s has recognized the validity of their sacraments.  Thus, they do not fit the classic definition of “schism.”  Not even by a long shot.

Then why is there so much confusion?

Although Pope John Paul II putatively excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre and the bishops he consecrated in 1988, this ex-communication of SSPX bishops was lifted by Pope Benedict XVI in 2009.  (I write putatively excommunicated because I think it can be seen from the 1983 Code of Canon Law that consecration of bishops without papal approval must be proved to be ex-dolo—that is, out of malice.  Malice is something the missionary to Africa, Archbishop Lefebvre, clearly did not have for the Church.  In fact, the new code of canon law heavily puts the emphasis on conscience.  Lefebvre was clearly following his conscience in consecrating bishops without the approval of Rome.)

But even if the excommunications in 1988 by Pope John Paul II were valid, the Vatican website now shows the lifting of the excommunications of the SSPX bishops in 2009.  Approved by Pope Benedict XVI and written by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the Vatican website still has the following from 2009:


In a letter of 15 December 2008 addressed to Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, Mons. Bernard Fellay writing also in the name of the other three Bishops consecrated on 30 June 1988 requested once again the removal of the excommunication latae sententiae formally declared by a Decree of the Prefect of this Congregation for Bishops on 1 July 1988. In his letter, Mons. Fellay stated, among other things, that “we continue firmly resolute in our desire to remain Catholics and to put all our strength at the service of the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is the Roman Catholic Church. We accept her teachings in a filial spirit. We firmly believe in the primacy of Peter and in his prerogatives, and for this reason the current situation causes us much suffering”.

His Holiness Benedict XVI in his paternal concern for the spiritual distress which the parties concerned have voiced as a result of the excommunication, and trusting in their commitment, expressed in the aforementioned letter, to spare no effort in exploring as yet unresolved questions through requisite discussions with the authorities of the Holy See in order to reach a prompt, full and satisfactory solution to the original problem has decided to reconsider the canonical situation of Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, resulting from their episcopal consecration.

This act signifies a desire to strengthen reciprocal relations of trust, and to deepen and stabilize the relationship of the Society of St Pius X with this Apostolic See. This gift of peace, coming at the end of the Christmas celebrations, is also meant to be a sign which promotes the Universal Church’s unity in charity, and removes the scandal of division.

It is hoped that this step will be followed by the prompt attainment of full communion with the Church on the part of the whole Society of St Pius X, which will thus bear witness to its genuine fidelity and genuine recognition of the Magisterium and authority of the Pope by the proof of visible unity.

On the basis of the powers expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, by virtue of the present Decree I remit the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae incurred by Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, and declared by this Congregation on 1 July 1988. At the same time I declare that, as of today’s date, the Decree issued at that time no longer has juridical effect.

Notice also that more recent Vatican documents on the SSPX have become only more lenient towards the SSPX since 2009 when the above document was released from the Congregation for Bishops.

On a completely and totally different topic from the above, this is also a definition you should know:  A sedevacantist is a traditional Catholic who believes there have been no valid Popes since 1958.  I am not a sedevacantist.  However, I do not believe sedevacantists are schismatic either.  This is also seen in the writings of St. Cajetan who puts an unusual emphasis on conscience for a 16th c. writer:

If someone, for a reasonable motive, holds the person of the Pope in suspicion and refuses his presence, even his jurisdiction, he does not commit the delect of schism nor any other whatsoever, provided that he be ready to accept the Pope were he not held in suspicion. It goes without saying that one has the right to avoid what is harmful and to ward off dangers. In fact, it may happen that the Pope could govern tyrannically and that is all the easier as he is the more powerful and does not fear any punishment from anyone on earth.—St. Cardinal Thomas Cajetan

(No, I am not going to join either of the two above groups.  I simply desire to clear up widespread confusion about them.)


Uniparty gonna swamp, and stick you with the bill: $40B towards WWIII plus $5 gas and 10% inflation

They hate you so much. Never forget that. Just listen to this swamp creature:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House emphatically approved a fresh $40 billion Ukraine aid package Tuesday as lawmakers beefed up President Joe Biden’s initial request, signaling a magnified, bipartisan commitment to thwart Russian President Vladimir Putin… The measure sailed to passage by a lopsided 368-57 margin, providing $7 billion more than Biden’s request from April… The measure was backed by every voting Democrat and by nearly 3 out of 4 Republicans.


Video: If you are feeling down, let Rich Strike lift your spirits and take your breath away

I have been a huge fan of the Kentucky Derby from a very young age. I don’t know why. It was not any sort of tradition in our family. But I made it a tradition when I had a family of my own, and to this day we all pick our horses the morning of the race in a giant group text spanning both coasts.

This year, something unusual happened.

One of the twenty horses was scratched on Friday morning. Rich Strike, who had missed the cut, was given the opportunity to enter the race. Owner Rick Dawson managed to complete the paperwork only 30 seconds before the deadline. Then they had to find a jockey, so they snagged Sonny Leon, who had just ridden six races the previous day in Cincinnati. Long shot was an understatement. This horse had won just once previously, finishing out of the money three times.

So Rich Strike went off at 80-1, paying $163.60 on a $2 bet to win.

But this wasn’t just the biggest upset at the Kentucky Derby in over a century (Donerail 1913, 91-1). You have to watch how he did it. In this first video, watch how Leon is barely on the whip down the stretch; he’s basically just letting him run.

Even that stunning finish doesn’t tell the whole story. To really see the ground he chewed up, we need to back up and watch the last half mile. I haven’t seen anything like this since Secretariat’s epic run at Belmont in 1973. Here is the aerial view starting at the far turn, where he sits in 17th as this video starts. I’ve watched it ten times. Enjoy!

He wins by a full length!

If you are still buying the Ukraine BS they are laying down thickly, I can’t help you

Is the adenovirus-attenuated J&J vaxx causing deadly liver failure even in kids too young to have been vaxxed? Is breastfeeding a factor?

By Brenda Goodman, CNN

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Friday that it’s investigating 109 cases of severe and unexplained hepatitis in children in 25 states and territories that may be linked to a worldwide outbreak.

Among them, 14% needed transplants, and five children have died. Nearly all the children — more than 90% — needed to be hospitalized. Dr. Jay Butler, the CDC’s deputy director of infectious diseases, stressed that the investigation — a partnership between the CDC and state health departments — is an evolving situation. 

It’s not clear what’s driving these cases in young children. Butler said some of the common causes of viral hepatitis have been considered but were not found in any of the cases.

Adenovirus has been detected in more than 50% of cases, although its role isn’t clear.

Unusually severe liver inflammation

Pediatric gastroenterologist Dr. Heli Bhatt of M Health Fairview Masonic Children’s Center in Minneapolis has treated two children who are part of the CDC’s investigation. One, a 2-year-old from South Dakota, had a liver transplant this week. Bhatt says liver failure in kids is “super rare.” And even before scientists started tracking this outbreak, half of cases were never explained.

“Even during the first case, I thought it was weird,” says Dr. Markus Buchfellner, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where staffers started seeing cases in October. And then when the second one came in, that’s when I said, ‘OK, we need to talk to someone about this.’ ” He reached out to senior physicians in his department, who contacted the state health department and the CDC.

Buchfellner says the cases stood out because the liver inflammation was so severe.

Sometimes, common viruses like Epstein-Barr or even SARS-CoV-2 will raise a child’s liver enzymes a little, indicating what Buchfellner calls “small bits of hepatitis,” but the kids typically recover as their bodies fight off the infection.

“But it’s very odd to see a child who’s healthy come in with the amount of liver injury that these kids had,” he said.

Initially, UAB saw nine kids with unexplained hepatitis, and all nine tested positive for adenovirus in their blood. None of them tested positive for Covid-19 during their hospitalization or had a documented history of Covid-19, Butler said at the news briefing…


“Several studies established probable causal relationship between the mRNA vaccines as well as adenovirus (ChAdOx1) vaccines with myocarditis, primarily in children, young and middle-age adults.”

“More recently, several studies established probable causal relationship between the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines of BNT162b2 and mRNA-127311,14,15,16 as well as adenovirus (ChAdOx1) vaccines17 with myocarditis, primarily in children, young and middle-age adults. The study by the Ministry of Health in Israel, a country with one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, assesses the risk of myocarditis after receiving the 2nd vaccine dose to be between 1 in 3000 to 1 in 6000 in men of age 16–24 and 1 in 120,000 in men under 3011,12,13. A follow up study by the US Center of Disease Control (CDC) based on the VAERS and V-Safe self-reporting systems18further confirms these findings19. The CDC has recently posted a warning regarding a vaccine-related risk of myocarditis, but still maintained their recommendation to vaccinate young individuals and children over 127. Similar concerns are reflected in the recent Food and Drug Administration approval to the Pfizer vaccine that requires several follow studies on the short and long terms effects of myocarditis in young individuals20.”