Vladyslav Heraskevych: There are things that are "more important than medals"

 

CORTINA D’AMPEZZO, Italy — A Ukrainian athlete who was disqualified from the Winter Olympics on Thursday over his insistence on wearing a helmet honoring people killed in his country's war with Russia said he refused to back down because there are things that are "more important than medals.”

The International Olympic Committee said in a statement early Thursday that skeleton racer Vladyslav Heraskevych, the Ukrainian flag bearer, was "not allowed to participate at Milano Cortina 2026 after refusing to adhere to the IOC athlete expression guidelines." A jury of the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation made the decision, the IOC said.

Heraskevych told NBC News that the decision was "surreal." "I feel like I was treated unfairly. I was stripped out of opportunity to compete, and I don't understand why," he said.

The decision was announced shortly before Heraskevych was due to compete in the men’s skeleton competition, in which he was considered a legitimate medal contender.

He said he was already in the venue and had set up his sled for his race when he was notified, he was being disqualified. "I believe I am right in this case," he said. "For me to back down is betraying [the people pictured on the helmet]."

Heraskevych filed an application Thursday with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, an independent body, challenging the decision by the federation jury.

The application seeks to nullify the jury's decision. He is arguing that "the exclusion is disproportionate, unsupported by any technical or safety violation and causes irreparable sporting harm to him," according to a media summary of the filing. He had said when announcing an intention to file the challenge that it would be a “miracle” to compete in these Games... 

-NBC News

Trump’s EPA repeals landmark climate finding in gift to "billionaire polluters"

 

The Trump administration has revoked the bedrock scientific determination that gives the government the ability to regulate climate-heating pollution. The move was described as a gift to “billionaire polluters” at the expense of Americans’ health.

The endangerment finding, which states that the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere endangers public health and welfare, has since 2009 allowed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to limit heat-trapping pollution from vehicles, power plants and other industrial sources.

Donald Trump called the move “the single largest deregulatory action in American history”. “This is a big one if you’re into environment,” he told reporters on Thursday. “This is about as big as it gets.” The move comes as part of Trump’s bigger anti-environment push, which has seen him roll back pollution rules and boost oil and gas.

On social media, Barack Obama said the repeal will leave Americans “less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change – all so the fossil fuel industry can make even more money”. The former secretary of state John Kerry called the new rule “un-American”.

“Repealing the Endangerment Finding takes Orwellian governance to new heights and invites enormous damage to people and property around the world,” said Kerry, who also served as Joe Biden’s climate envoy. “Ignoring warning signs will not stop the storm. It puts more Americans directly in its path.”

The final rule removes the government’s ability to impose requirements to track, report and limit climate-heating pollution from cars and trucks. Transportation is the largest source of climate pollution in the US. It does not apply to regulations on stationary sources of emissions such as power plants and fossil fuel infrastructure, which are regulated under a separate section of the Clean Air Act, but it will open the door to end those standards, too.

Trump’s EPA has separately proposed to find that emissions from power plants “do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution” and therefore should not be regulated. Joseph Goffman, who served as EPA air chief under Joe Biden, expects the agency will apply their vehicles-focused arguments to stationary polluters in order to kill the endangerment finding for all sources of greenhouse gas emissions.

“Instead of the entire house of cards of all EPA climate regulation collapsing all at once today, it’s going to be like a row of dominoes falling,” said Goffman, who helped write and implement the Clean Air Act and worked directly on the endangerment finding.

Environmental advocates have condemned the move as illegal. A slew of green groups have promised to take the EPA to court over the rollback, as has the state of California. “If this reckless decision survives legal challenges, it will lead to more deadly wildfires, more extreme heat deaths, more climate-driven floods and droughts, and greater threats to communities nationwide – all while the EPA dismisses the overwhelming science that has protected public health for decades,” Gavin Newsom, the California governor, said in a statement.

The move marks “the most aggressive, ruthless act of dismantling public health protections in the agency’s 55-year history”, said Dominique Browning, director and co-founder of environmental advocacy group Moms Clean Air Force.

In a press release, the EPA said the move will save the US $1.3tn, while Trump said Thursday that the move “will save American consumers trillions of dollars”. The EPA administrator, Lee Zeldin, said the Obama and Biden administrations used the endangerment finding “to steamroll into existence a leftwing wish list of costly climate policies”.

“Who paid the biggest price? Hardworking families, small businesses, millions of Americans who just want a reliable, affordable car to get to work or take their kids to school or go to church on Sunday,” he said. But though the rollback could save some corporations money, experts note it could take a massive toll on ordinary Americans’ wellbeing and pocketbooks.

One analysis from green group Environmental Defense Fund found the full repeal of the endangerment finding combined with Trump’s proposal to roll back motor vehicle standards would result in as much as 18bn more tons of planet-warming pollution by 2055 – the same as the annual emissions of China, the world’s top polluter – and would impose up to $4.7tn in additional expenses tied to harmful climate and air pollution by that time.

Zeldin submitted the repeal of the legal determination for White House review last month. In July, he officially announced plans to repeal the finding, justifying the proposal with a widely criticized energy department report questioning climate science. The agency received half a million comments on the proposal. Last month, a federal judge said the July energy department report was created unlawfully.

In the repeal of the endangerment finding, the EPA is claiming that the Clean Air Act is only meant to regulate pollution “that harms health or the environment through local and regional exposure”. But there is scientific consensus that by trapping heat in the atmosphere, greenhouse gas emissions are intensifying dangerous extreme weather events, allowing diseases to spread faster, and worsening illnesses from allergies to lung disease.

Trump described the finding as “the legal foundation for the green new scam”, which he claimed “the Obama and Biden administration used to destroy countless jobs”. But the new rule will have ruinous consequences for working-class Americans, said Jason Walsh, executive director of BlueGreen Alliance, a coalition of labor unions and environmental groups. “Billionaires like Donald Trump don’t suffer the devastation of climate change,” he said. “Working people do.”

The rollback comes one month after the Trump administration announced it will pull the US from the foundational UN agreement to address the climate crisis, as well as the world’s leading body of climate scientists. Over the past year, Zeldin has also launched an all-out assault on climate, air, water and chemical protections. The EPA has also removed crucial climate-focused science and data from its webpages.

“This is all part of the Trump administration’s authoritarian playbook to replace facts with propaganda, to enrich a few while harming the rest of us,” said Rachel Cleetus, senior policy director for the climate and energy program at the science advocacy group the Union of Concerned Scientists. “Administrator Zeldin has fully abdicated EPA’s responsibility to protect our health and the environment.”

The EPA has said that it determined the US would save billions annually by revoking the endangerment determination. But the agency’s analysis did not account for the money and lives saved by the environmental and public-health protections that the change would eliminate, experts say.

Alex Witt, senior adviser at green advocacy group Climate Power, said: “Zeldin and Trump are telling our families: we’ll let you get sicker and watch your healthcare costs skyrocket as long as oil and gas CEOs can profit.” “This decision makes it abundantly clear that Trump is willing to make our families sicker and less safe, all to benefit a few billionaire polluters,” said Witt.

Some industry groups have been reluctant to support the full rollback of the endangerment finding. The American Petroleum Institute, the top US oil lobby group, last month said it backed a repeal of the endangerment finding for vehicles, but not for stationary sources of pollution like power plants.

-Dharna Noor, The Guardian

The Epstein Cover-up Must End: Trump Knows More than He Has Ever Let On

Trump has continually downplayed his relationship with child rapist and trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. He has denied knowing anything about the pedophile operation preying on hundreds of girls and women, despite telling New York magazine in 2002, “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” By 2019, Trump had changed his tune. “I was not a fan of his, that I can tell you.”

Trump and his lackeys in the Justice Department have done everything possible to hinder the release of the files. Despite a law passed and signed by him, the Justice Department has not released all the files, has redacted names of conspirators and perpetrators, and has improperly released names and nude images of the victims.

Now we learn — to nobody’s surprise — that Trump apparently knew much more about Epstein far earlier than he has let on. ABC News reports: A former Palm Beach, Florida, police chief who investigated Jeffrey Epstein in the mid-2000s told the FBI he had received a call from Donald Trump at the time to say “thank goodness you’re stopping him, everyone has known he’s been doing this,” according to an FBI account of an interview with the ex-police chief in 2019. . . .

President Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and has said that he cut off contact with his former friend more than 20 years ago.

The report contradicts his (and other famous men’s) professed ignorance of any wrongdoing: “TRUMP told him people in New York knew EPSTEIN was disgusting. TRUMP said [GHISLAINE] MAXWELL was EPSTEIN’s operative, ‘she is evil and to focus on her,’ the report continues. “TRUMP told [Reiter] that he was around EPSTEIN once when teenagers were present and TRUMP ‘got the hell out of there.’ TRUMP was one of the very first people to call when people found out that they were investigating EPSTEIN,” the report of Reiter’s statement said.

This should trigger an onslaught of elevated public alarm, with serious legacy media covering Trump’s involvement with the worst pedophile in history. There should be incessant calls for Trump to testify under oath about what he knew, when he knew it, and who else knew what was going on. (Just one example: if he knew Maxwell was “evil” for over a decade, why did he say in 2019 he “wished her well”?) In any normal timeline, Trump, along with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche (who has facilitated the cover-up and coddled Maxwell), would be facing demands for impeachment.

Trump is not the only one who misled the public about his connection to Epstein. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, as recently as last year, denied having any contact with Epstein after 2005. Under questioning from Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) on Tuesday, however, Lutnick admitted that in 2012, he went to Epstein’s island (with his wife, kids, and nannies).

It did not end there, as the New York Times reports: The files also contain documents showing that Mr. Epstein expressed an interest in 2013 in meeting Mr. Lutnick’s nanny and had her résumé sent to him. Mr. Lutnick said Tuesday that he did not know if the nanny had met Mr. Epstein, or if she was one of the nannies Mr. Lutnick had brought to the island, adding he “had no idea what that was about.”

Van Hollen wasted no time in rightly accusing Lutnick of “totally misrepresent[ing]” his contact with Epstein. “The information recently revealed shows that you had interactions with Epstein over 13 years, including long after he was convicted of soliciting the prostitution of a minor,” Van Hollen added. “That does call into question your credibility and fitness for the job.” Democrats including Sens. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Jacky Rosen (D-NV), and a single Republican, Rep. Tom Massie (KY), have called on Lutnick to quit or be fired.

Congress must get more serious about pursuing the truth. Andrew Weissmann makes the case in Just Security that Congress should take Maxwell’s bogus 5^th Amendment claim off the table with a grant of immunity and compel her to testify. In addition, Weissmann argues: Congress can use its subpoena power to track down all known email accounts of Epstein, Maxwell and their staff, for starters. It can then turn to the numerous people who enabled his crimes, wittingly or unwittingly. That investigation may reveal wrongdoing or complicity by Democrats and Republicans. That is what apolitical investigations do. …

When law enforcement obtains the contents of an email account, the emails won’t discriminate by party affiliation, unless the participants did. And we know with Epstein, he didn’t. Steve Bannon and Larry Summers, for instance, were both in his orbit. The DOJ investigation may be intended to be partisan, but it could result in revelation of bipartisan incrimination.

Fortunately, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) went to the floor on Tuesday to reveal the names of co-conspirators whose names have been redacted. It’s time for all the names of those associated with Epstein to be made public, as the law requires.

The appalling lack of action and outrage over the elite men involved with Epstein (whether they committed crimes or knew of crimes or normalized him after his plea deal) stands in dramatic contrast to European governments, which have booted out of office one politician after another. (The British government teeters on the brink of a severe crisis over the ongoing relationship between Epstein and Peter Mandelson, the former U.K. ambassador to the United States.)

Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) observed earlier this week, “People are losing their jobs in England right now, it is a huge political scandal there.” He added: “I’m just afraid that the general coarsening and degradation of American life has somehow conditioned people not to take this as seriously as we should be taking it.”

Given the MAGA protection racket, the sloth of the media, and the catatonic Congress, we may not get all the facts out until there are Democratic majorities in the House and Senate willing to use their power to uncover every bit of available evidence.

In the meantime, Bondi and Blanche should not be practicing law, let alone serving in the highest ranks of a now thoroughly discredited department. Moreover, a party unwilling to pursue justice for Epstein’s survivors and boot out predators, those who facilitated or normalized his crimes, and those who lied or covered up for them, does not deserve to hold power — now or ever.

-Jennifer Rubin, The Contrarian is community-supported. To receive new posts, enable our work, help with litigation, and keep this opposition movement informed and engaged, join the fight by becoming a paid subscriber.

 

Republicans Approve ‘Dystopian’ Voter Suppression Bill That Would Force States to Give Info to DHS

Doing President Donald Trump’s bidding, the Republican-controlled US House on Wednesday approved legislation that would potentially prevent millions of Americans from participating in federal elections by instituting draconian voter ID requirements, mandating documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, and requiring states to share voter information with the Department of Homeland Security.

The White House-backed legislation, an updated version of the so-called SAVE Act that the House approved in 2024, passed with the support of every Republican who took part in the vote and one Democrat, Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas—notably the recipient of a pardon from the president.

Election experts and watchdog groups said the bill represents a massive assault on the right to vote, with many of its provisions directly in line with what Trump has demanded ahead of the 2026 midterms.

“Congressional Republicans are attempting to commandeer the midterm election cycle and increase voting margins in President Trump’s favor by putting a finger on the scale of our elections and pushing nonsensical, anti-democratic laws to stop voters from casting a ballot,” said Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert. “This overreaching, un-American bill tacks on unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles to vote, all of which would harm voters across the political spectrum.”

The bill is likely dead-on arrival in the narrowly divided Senate, with every Democrat and at least one Republican, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, expected to oppose it.

But its passage through the House with unanimous support from the Republican caucus—whose members claim to be driven by a desire to prevent noncitizens from voting, which is already unlawful, and combat voter fraud, which is virtually nonexistent—alarmed rights advocates.

“This obvious attack on our voting rights is based on completely unfounded claims,” said Alison Gill, director of nominations and democracy at the National Women’s Law Center. “The lawmakers supporting this measure clearly aim to suppress the votes of women, people of color, and LGBTQ+ people in order to rig elections and remain in power.”

“It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, which means that the SAVE Act 2.0 creates a convoluted and dystopian solution to a problem that does not actually exist,” Gill added. “Americans strongly opposed legislation when Congress considered this issue last year, and yet the congressional Republicans are trying to double down on this deceptive policy.”

“The forces that are driving the Trump administration’s anti-voter agenda are also pressuring Congress to pass legislation that would silence millions of Americans.”

Analysts estimate that more than 21 million Americans lack ready access to the documents the Republican legislation would require people to furnish in order to register to vote, such as a passport and a birth certificate. 

The Brennan Center for Justice notes that the measure “would disenfranchise Americans of all ages and races, but younger voters and voters of color would suffer disproportionately. Likewise, millions of women whose married names aren’t on their birth certificates or passports would face extra steps just to make their voices heard.”

In addition to strict documentary requirements for registration and voting, the bill would force states to conduct frequent purges of their voter rolls and share information with the Department of Homeland Security in a purported effort to verify voters’ citizenship—changes that could disenfranchise many eligible voters. The legislation would also establish criminal penalties for election workers who register voters without the required documentary proof of citizenship.

Bruce Spiva, senior vice president at Campaign Legal Center, noted that the GOP’s renewed voter suppression push “comes as the FBI is seizing ballots from the 2020 election, President Trump is calling for our elections to be ‘nationalized,’ and the US Department of Justice is suing more than 20 states to get access to voters’ private data.”

“This is not a coincidence,” said Spiva. “The forces that are driving the Trump administration’s anti-voter agenda are also pressuring Congress to pass legislation that would silence millions of Americans by making it harder to participate in our elections.” In an op-ed for the New York Times on Thursday, the Brennan Center’s Sean Morales-Doyle warned that “the campaign to rig our elections is well underway.”

“It will be incumbent on all of us—election officials, advocates, state law enforcement, and voters—to see the administration’s efforts for what they are and to fight back,” wrote Morales-Doyle.

-Jake Johnson, Common Dreams

"Even without knowing what’s behind the redactions in the released files, there is plenty to investigate"

 

Mimi Rocah and I dug into the Epstein Files to explain, in advance of Pam Bondi's appearance on Capitol Hill today, just how clear it is that there are leads that have never been investigated—and that it's wrong to claim there is no one to prosecute, when you haven't investigated first.

In September 2025, FBI Director Kash Patel testified to Congress that there was “no credible information” that the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein trafficked underage girls to anyone besides himself. “There is no credible information. None. If there were, I would bring the case yesterday.”

On July 7, 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi stated publicly, “We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

Things changed in November of 2025. When Donald Trump “asked,” Bondi completely reversed course and agreed DOJ would investigate Democrats’ “connections to Epstein” (but not Trump’s). We never learned what changed in the available evidence between the time Bondi made her original statement and the opening of a new investigation into his selected targets.

Then, in early February, CNN’s Dana Bash asked Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche whether DOJ was investigating anybody for crimes related to Epstein. Blanche replied: “I can’t talk about any investigations, but I will say the following, which is that in July, the Department of Justice said that we had reviewed the files, the Epstein files, and there was nothing in there that allowed us to prosecute anybody.” Notice what he does not say — that there is nothing for DOJ to investigate; only that they cannot prosecute anybody. It’s hard to prosecute when you don’t investigate.

Blanche was asked again last week on Fox News if DOJ is investigating anyone for potential crimes relating to Epstein. Blanche gave the non-answer every man associated with Epstein wanted to hear: “The American people need to understand that it isn’t a crime to party with Mr. Epstein.”

Maybe it is a crime. Maybe it isn’t. You don’t know until you investigate. People whose definition of partying included paying for, transporting, grooming, or arranging sexual acts with minors (even if at a party) could certainly have violated the law. Blanche’s dismissive party-bro response is far from the reasonable tone one would expect a senior Justice Department official to use when talking about such serious possible crimes, and called into serious doubt whether this Justice Department takes the Epstein Files or their contents seriously.

With Bondi testifying before the House Judiciary Committee today, it is critical that legislators demand better answers. They may well be the survivors’ last hope for justice. While it is impossible to determine whether additional prosecutions are warranted based on what is publicly known at this point, there are obvious leads that our combined forty-five years of experience as prosecutors lead us to conclude must be pursued before Bondi and Blanche can be permitted to proclaim “case closed.”

Even without knowing what’s behind the redactions in the released files, there is plenty to investigate. As Julie K. Brown, the Miami Herald reporter, put it:

There is more than enough evidence that Epstein was operating a global network, with recruiters and scouts on his payroll, for almost a decade after he was given his walking papers from federal prosecutors in South Florida. It’s clear from his emails that he was also lending these girls to others, including world leaders and businessmen who are mentioned throughout the latest tranche of documents released by the Justice Department.

One thread prosecutors might pull involves a search term that crops up repeatedly in the files: “Brazilian.” It starts with an email that mentions a girl from Brazil — stating, “New Brazilian just arrived, sexy and cute, =19yo.” Good investigators would want to know more. Searching for that term, they would find an entire series of emails and other documents. Some of them seem coded (talking about Brazilian blowouts, e.g.), while others make explicit references to Brazilian “girls.”

For example:

12/1/2011

Subject: Alarm - Brazilian blowout conditioner Babysitters

2/27/2012

Subject: Alarm - Order Brazilian blowout shampoo and conditioner

1/30/2013

Subject: Alert - Brazilian blowout conditioner

On January 30, 2013, there was also a heavily redacted calendar invite bearing a reminder about the” Brazilian blowout conditioner.”

Similarly, on April 25, there is both an email and a redacted calendar invite.

4/25/2013

Subject: Alert - Brazilian blowout shampoo and straightening balm

An older email in the files, dated July 10, 2011, is addressed to Epstein. The sender, Peter Mandelson, is likely the British Ambassador to the U.S. under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Mandelson was forced out of his role as ambassador after his relationship with Epstein came to light. The email we reviewed came in response to one from Epstein asking if Mandelson had formed “the Brazilian structure,” and if he was having fun. Mandelson responded that same day that he had formed it, was dissolving it, and that the “Party was ok.”

Then, there is an email between Epstein and Jean Luc Brunel from October 22, 2012. It simply states: “Brazilian have booked.”

Years later, in July of 2016, Ramsey Elkholy sent Epstein a lengthy email.

It is possible these emails and discussions were about a legitimate Brazilian modeling agency. Or not. The point is, even a casual perusal of the files exposes Bondi and Blanche’s claims — that there is nothing to investigate — as untrue.

FBI agents are directed to open a full investigation if facts exist that reasonably indicate a federal crime has been committed. They do so irrespective of who is being investigated. Not doing it when powerful, wealthy men and vulnerable girls and women are involved is an abdication of responsibility and a violation of the oath of office every federal prosecutor takes. No top DOJ official should be party to that abdication of responsibility and duty.

The “Brazilian” thread is one of many that must be pulled. There are more, including those in the now 3 million items DOJ is trying to withhold from the public, even though the Epstein Files Transparency Act requires their release.

And then there is the newest revelation that Donald Trump spoke to a former member of the Palm Beach Police (the “PO”) in the early 2000s. According to an FBI 302 from 2020, which records an FBI interview with the PO, Trump told them that he threw Epstein out of his club and that “everyone has known he’s been doing this” and that people in New York knew Epstein was “disgusting. Trump said, “Maxwell was Epstein’s operative, ‘she is evil and to focus on her.’” This demands follow up. What was “this” Epstein was doing? Who is “everyone”? How did they know he was “disgusting” and what does that mean? And what and how did Trump know about Maxwell (who he has since claimed not to know much about) to make him call her “evil.” What caused Trump to call the PO in the first place? Why has he never disclosed any of this publicly?

Much is unclear, but two things are certain. First, DOJ has the tools to help provide at least some answers for the survivors, and it should use them. That is its job. Second, if this DOJ leadership is not willing to act on the survivors’ behalf and in the public interest, as they should, then Congress must seize the reins and demand answers from Bondi and hold public hearings to answer outstanding questions.

The survivors have kept Epstein and his circle from walking away from all of this with impunity. Now it’s Congress’s turn to use the tools that it has to make sure Epstein’s decades-long course of criminal conduct and victimization of girls and women is exposed and laid bare, and that the people involved, no matter who and how powerful they are, are held accountable in the court of public opinion, even if the Justice Department refuses to investigate.

The Contrarian is reader-supported. To enable our work, assist with litigation efforts, and continue making public these fearless and essential revelations, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Share

 

Affirmations of Secular Humanism

     

We are committed to the application of reason and science to the understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems.

We believe that scientific discovery and technology can contribute to the betterment of human life.

We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.

We are committed to the principle of the separation of church and state.

We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.

We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance.

We believe in supporting the disadvantaged and the handicapped so that they will be able to help themselves.

We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together for the common good of humanity.

We want to protect and enhance the earth, to preserve it for future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other species.

We believe in enjoying life here and now and in developing our creative talents to their fullest.

We believe in the cultivation of moral excellence.

We respect the right to privacy. Mature adults should be allowed to fulfill their aspirations, to express their sexual preferences, to exercise reproductive freedom, to have access to comprehensive and informed healthcare, and to die with dignity.

We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.

We are deeply concerned with the moral education of our children. We want to nourish reason and compassion.

We are engaged by the arts no less than by the sciences.

We are citizens of the universe and are excited by discoveries still to be made in the cosmos.

We are skeptical of untested claims to knowledge, and we are open to novel ideas and seek new departures in our thinking.

We deplore efforts to denigrate human intelligence, to seek and explain the world in supernatural terms, and to look outside nature for salvation.

We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others.

We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in the place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in the place of fear, love instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality.

We believe in the fullest realization of the best and noblest that we are capable of as human beings.

A Statement of Principles by Paul Kurtz

 

"This Is Where I Stand" - Janne Robinson

 

I’ve felt really bothered by anyone not standing up right now to be a voice for the violence, oppression and hate ripping through our planet. I’ve lost trust and respect for anyone I follow who hasn’t used their platform to say, “this is where I stand.”

Last week my privilege smacked me in the face. Because I’ve been the person who hasn’t thought it’s my “responsibility” as a poet or artist to speak about politics. For those of you who haven’t been paying attention here’s a recap of world events that happened in January:

1) On Jan 8th and 9th 30,000 people in Iran took to the streets to stand up against the incredibly oppressive Islamic regime. They were first advocating for their economy, and then it shifted into an outcry for human rights. The government instituted a near-total internet and communication blackout during this period and proceeded to kill 30,000+ people in 48 hours. The black out was to conceal the scale of the violence. The last time this many people were killed was the Babyn Yar Massacre in 1941: Over two days, September 29–30, 1941, German Einsatzgruppen and collaborators murdered over 33,000 Jews at a ravine in Kyiv, Ukraine.

2) ICE has been not only detaining “illegal” immigrants but also people here seeking asylum legally, people who are permanent residents. Extreme violence has been to happen to any non-white people — black, native, Indian. Anyone without white skin. Renee Good + Alex Pretti was killed by ICE agents protecting and standing up for what’s morally just and right.

There have been accounts of rape in these detention centers in exchange for mothers being able to see their children by ICE agents. Inhumane conditions with rotten food and people getting sick and denied medical care (war tactics also used by Hitler).

A man who was a caretaker for his son with disabilities was detained and because he was unable to communicate with the outside world — his son died, and when he asked for permission to attend the funeral it was denied. Anne Frank didn’t die in a gas chamber — she died because of the conditions of her concentration camp.

3) Innocent people are still being killed in Gaza. What is occurring in Gaza has never been justified and never will be justified. You do not hold innocent people accountable for the actions of a specific group of people inside of a country. It is not a country that gets held accountable — it is the people who have committed crimes of hate that live within a country that need to be.

4) Russia is still at war with Ukraine. They’re currently cutting out electricity because it’s winter (war tactic). And everyone’s hands are tied because if anyone acts there will be a world war. Meanwhile a completely unjustified and incomprehensible war is happening to innocent people in Ukraine.

5) 300k black women in Brazil marched against racism GBV (Gender based violence). Sexual Violence is often used as a tactic and weapon of war. Rape and sexual assault are deliberately employed by armed forces and groups to terrorize, demoralize, and humiliate civilian populations. It’s a systemic war tactic being used from Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia to contemporary conflicts in the DRC, Syria, and Ukraine.

6) The president has withdrawn from the United Nations including funding and stated that “he doesn’t believe in peace.” The Epstein Files contain not just sexual abuse, but murder and cannibalism and likely hundreds if not thousands of innocent children and lives and no one has been held accountable or put in jail.

He has also been posting racist things about the Obamas, which alone should be enough to remove him from the chat. We have felons, sociopaths and pedophiles in charge of some of the biggest choices of our country.

So — I don’t care about your morning routine. And I don’t care about your regular content.

This is a unique moment in time, and your values are showing and people are paying attention. I care about how you act when someone you will never know is treated. I care about your empathy, compassion and your courage for the people outside of your immediate community. I care about your ability to believe that humanity, equality and dignity are non-negotiable values.

-Janne Robinson