General

Costly and Continuous Kars4Kids Ads Disguise Charity’s Real Purpose

/1 Comment/in /by

When I was living in southern California (I escaped), it was impossible to avoid Kars4Kids commercials on the radio , and I even fell for it once (now on TV too)  As the article says, very catchy. But just another scam to hide the real beneficiaries.

Described by many as annoying and by SFGate.com as the subject of “widespread, ubiquitous hate,” the catchy advertising jingle for the charity known as Kars4Kids can now be heard not only on radio stations nationwide, but also on major TV networks. Kars4Kids debuted a TV commercial in November 2014 that features a “specially spruced up” version of the “1-877-Kars4Kids” jingle and “some real kuties jamming away in Kars4Kids’ brand color Hot Pink,” according to a Kars4Kids press release. The TV spot has aired on popular networks such as ESPN and Fox News and has been viewed over 880,000 times on YouTube, with each play of its earworm jingle lightheartedly encouraging people to “donate your car today.” By now, you are probably (begrudgingly) familiar with the Kars4Kids jingle, but just how familiar are you with how Kars4Kids spends the money it makes from all those “kars” that get donated “4” kids?

The Kars4Kids commercials claim that the charity provides for “quick and easy” pick up of car donations, and that the car donations will in some way be used for the benefit of kids. An important question potential donors should ask, though, is: Just how much do kids benefit from the cars donated to Kars4Kids? Also, with hundreds of millions of kids in the world, exactly which kids will benefit, and how are those kids helped?

Cars for… an Orthodox Jewish Cause

Nowhere in the Kars4Kids ads (in most states) does the charity inform potential donors of how their car donations will help kids. A visit to the “kars4kids.org/howtohelp” website displayed at the end of the TV commercial is similarly vague as to how kids will benefit, simply encouraging people to “take action” for the “1.2 million kids [that] leave school without a diploma each year” by volunteering to “mentor, fundraise, advocate or run an awareness campaign.” (This “take action” message likely is a strategic one designed for Kars4Kids to take advantage of an accounting rule that allows charities to report a portion of advertising costs as program instead of fundraising expenses.) When going to the website address shown in the TV commercial, only by scrolling all the way down to the fine print that includes Kars4Kids’ copyright notation at the bottom of the page will donors eventually learn what activities their donated cars support: “Your donation will benefit Kars4Kids, a national organization dedicated to addressing the educational, material, emotional and spiritual needs of Jewish children and their families [emphasis added].”

In CharityWatch’s view, the Kars4Kids ads deceive potential donors by failing to inform them that donated cars will benefit a Jewish organization and kids of Jewish faith. Furthermore, the youth programs Kars4Kids supports promote an Orthodox Jewish lifestyle, which CharityWatch believes compounds the deception perpetrated by the Kars4Kids ads. Oorah, Kars4Kids’ “sister charity,” is the organization that actually runs the “educational, developmental, and recreational programs for Jewish youth and their families” described in Kars4Kids’ mission statement. Kars4Kids and Oorah share a principal officer, Eliyohu Mintz, the son of their founder, Rabbi Chaim Mintz, and both organizations are located at the same address in the heavily-Orthodox Jewish town of Lakewood, New Jersey. Oorah, which means “awaken” in Hebrew, “specializes in outreach to non-observant Jews, operating summer camps and other programs that seek to make non-Orthodox Jews more observant,” according to an October 2016 article in the Forward, which covers news for a Jewish-American audience.

While supporting Orthodox Jewish organizations is a worthy endeavor for those donors who are intending to do so, many donors of other faiths may not be pleased to learn that the car they donated to Kars4Kids may have funded religious teachings that are in conflict with their own faith or personal beliefs. Orthodox Jews, who follow the traditional interpretations of Jewish law with strict observance of Jewish ritual, make up only about 10% of Jewish adults in the U.S., according to a 2013 survey published by the Pew Research Center in August 2015. Moreover, many secular Jews are not enthusiastic about funding Orthodox organizations, as suggested by an official of The Jewish Agency for Israel, a nonprofit that inspires Jews throughout the world to connect with their People, heritage, and homeland. The official said: “The Jewish mainstream, certainly in North America but in other places as well, is not Orthodox and isn’t interested in organizations that proselytize to non-religious Jews,” according to an August 2016 article in Haaretz, Israel’s daily newspaper.

If the truth about Kars4Kids’ mission as a Jewish organization and its funding of Oorah’s Orthodox Jewish outreach is an unwelcome surprise to some donors, perhaps they will be comforted to learn that since 2010, Kars4Kids also has conducted various charity events and giveaways for the benefit of needy children, regardless of their religious affiliation. These events have included several backpack giveaways and coat distributions in parts of New Jersey and New York. Kars4Kids also released a free smartphone app in mid-2014 designed as a safety alert for parents to remind them not to leave young children in the backseat of hot cars. Nonetheless, Kars4Kids’ grants to Oorah still represented more than 91% of its program spending over the two-year period from 2014-2015, thereby making Jewish children the primary “kids” that benefit from its car donation proceeds – a fact that many Kars4Kids donors likely never end up knowing.

Donors should also be aware that even though the Kars4Kids ads are broadcast across the country, the vast majority of the children that benefit from the cars donated to Kars4Kids live in the Northeast, particularly in New York and New Jersey. According to a 2017 compliance review conducted by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Minnesota (OAG), over 99.9% of the $90 million raised by Kars4Kids from 2012-2014 was spent on charitable programs under the direction or control of Kars4Kids’ “sister charity,” Oorah. Oorah’s two largest programs are its summer camps and tuition assistance programs for Jewish children, according to the OAG, with the camps being operated at two New York locations. The OAG reports that of the total number of children that benefitted from Oorah’s summer camps and tuition assistance programs from 2012-2014, 67% and 65%, respectively, were from either New York or New Jersey. The OAG compliance review also provides a broader geographical breakdown by region (Northeast, South, Midwest and West) showing that 79% of the children that benefitted from Oorah’s summer camps and tuition assistance programs lived in the Northeast; less than 10% lived in the Midwest and West combined. Furthermore, CharityWatch noted that even the backpack giveaway and coat distribution events run by Kars4Kids for the benefit of needy children, regardless of their religion, seem to be highly concentrated in the Northeast, based on the information available on the Kars4Kids website.

How Many Seconds Does It Take to Say “Kars4Kids Supports Jewish Youth”?

CharityWatch thinks it is highly unlikely that Kars4Kids would be enjoying the same level of success as it has, averaging over $30 million a year in donated car proceeds from 2010-2015, if its ads disclosed that donated cars are used to fund Orthodox outreach programs for children of Jewish faith. Kars4Kids reportedly has insisted that it is not trying to mislead anyone with its ads, claiming that a 60-second spot does not allow for time to inform people of its mission and that Kars4Kids does not hide that it is a Jewish organization if donors visit its website. After describing how car donations to Kars4Kids work, the kars4kids.org homepage does state that Kars4Kids is “a registered nonprofit Jewish organization who, together with Oorah, our sister charity, help thousands of children develop into productive members of the community.” But should donors have to go online to find out which kids are supported by Kars4Kids and its unforgettable advertising jingle? CharityWatch doesn’t think so, and we question Kars4Kids’ claim that there is not enough time in its 60-second ads to let donors know that car donations will benefit Jewish children. In our opinion, Kars4Kids should be disclosing the religious nature of its organization in all of its ads, something that Kars4Kids already has been under legal scrutiny for not doing in the past.

In connection with Kars4Kids’ failure to disclose in its ads that donated cars are used to benefit children of a specific religion, and not needy children in general, Kars4Kids paid tens of thousands of dollars in settlements to the states of Oregon and Pennsylvania in 2009. (CharityWatch informed donors of these fines in our Catchy Jingle Not a Green Light to Donate article published in 2010.) Under the settlements, Kars4Kids was also required to change its solicitations in those states to include adequate disclosure of the religious purpose of its programs. “It is unacceptable for charities to deceive Oregon consumers,” the Attorney General said in an April 15th, 2009 press release announcing the Kars4Kids settlement, which also involved claims that Kars4Kids misled donors with its offer to provide a “free vacation” with every car donation. Apparently, however, the Oregon and Pennsylvania settlements did not convince Kars4Kids to add a disclosure related to the religious nature of its organization to its ads being run in other states – most likely, in CharityWatch’s view, because Kars4Kids does not want to risk losing potential donors who may not want to support Jewish youth outreach programs.

High Fundraising Costs Signal a Red Light

The religious affiliation of the kids that benefit from the cars donated to Kars4Kids may not matter to some donors, but what should concern all donors is what portion of the car donation proceeds get spent on bona fide charitable programs versus fundraising and other overhead costs. Unlike many car donation charities, Kars4Kids claims to do all of the car donation processing “in house” rather than through middlemen. Processing the donated cars in-house theoretically cuts down on the related overhead costs, leaving a larger portion of the car proceeds to be used on programs. Kars4Kids’ total fundraising costs, however, are still relatively high. For example, about one-half of the average resale value of each donated car in 2015 went to pay for Kars4Kids’ fundraising and advertising expenses that year. Therefore, although Kars4Kids may have cheaper processing costs than many other car donation charities, it still spent more on overhead than it did on programs in 2015, when just 47% of its cash budget went to programs – an unsatisfactory level by CharityWatch’s standards. Moreover, at almost 51%, the amount that Kars4Kids spent on fundraising and advertising relative to its donated car proceeds in 2015 has increased considerably since 2010 when less than 33% of donated car proceeds were used for fundraising and advertising.

Kars4Kids’ low rate of program spending is also particularly concerning given that the vast majority of Kars4Kids’ program expenses consist of grants to its “sister charity,” Oorah, which runs the “educational, developmental, and recreational programs for Jewish youth and their families” funded by Kars4Kids, per its mission. About 93% of Kars4Kids’ cash-based program spending in 2015 was in the form of a grant to Oorah in the amount of approximately $16.9 million. By comparison, Kars4Kids reported spending about $17.1 million on advertising and promotion in 2015 – about $150,000 more than its cash grant to Oorah. Furthermore, as a percentage of the funds Kars4Kids generated from donated vehicles (including boats & planes) in 2015, its grant to Oorah represented only about 46% of those total funds raised.

Additionally, as the car donation proceeds get passed along from Kars4Kids to Oorah, Oorah itself has fundraising and general administrative costs to pay for, which it does primarily with the grant money it receives from Kars4Kids. Therefore, the proceeds Kars4Kids generates from car donations get another “hair cut” when they make their way to Oorah. Fortunately, Oorah’s cash-based program spending percentage was 74% in 2015, which is above CharityWatch’s reasonableness benchmark of 60%. Even with Oorah’s very reasonable rate of program spending, though, once Oorah’s and Kars4Kids’ overhead expenses are considered in aggregate, only about 38% of Kars4Kids’ donated car proceeds were spent on bona fide programs in 2015. In other words, based on the average resale value of about $365 for a car donated to Kars4Kids in 2015, less than $139 actually went towards benefitting “kids,” who, as a reminder, are mostly Jewish youth that participate in Oorah’s Orthodox Jewish outreach programs.

Pulled Over for Misreporting Donated Car Receipts

The findings reported in a 2017 compliance review regarding Kars4Kids conducted by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Minnesota (OAG) show that Kars4Kids has been misreporting its car donation proceeds and understating its fundraising costs on its annual IRS Form 990 tax filings. The IRS Form 990 instructions state that car donation receipts should be reported at the fair market value at the time of donation, without deducting for any costs or expenses. Kars4Kids, however, has been reporting its car donation receipts net of the associated vehicle processing expenses (i.e., the costs to tow, scrap and auction the donated vehicles). Furthermore, Kars4Kids does not otherwise disclose the amount of these related processing costs. By incorrectly reporting its car donation proceeds on a net instead of a gross basis, which Kars4Kids also does on its audited financial statements, Kars4Kids is giving the false impression that it is more financially efficient than it truly is. “The effect of this misreporting is significant,” according to the OAG compliance review, “[i]t makes it appear that Kars4Kids spends more of its revenue on charitable programming and less on fundraising expenses than is actually the case.”

The OAG found that Kars4Kids failed to include approximately $9.7 million of vehicle processing expenses in total from 2012-2014 on its IRS Form 990 filings. If Kars4Kids had reported this $9.7 million as part of its gross receipts, the overall share of revenue it reportedly spent on charitable programs in 2012-2014 would have decreased from 63% to 56%, according to the OAG. Additionally, since the vehicle processing expenses should be considered fundraising costs for Kars4Kids, if Kars4Kids had included the approximately $9.7 million in vehicle processing expenses in its reported fundraising costs for 2012-2014, the OAG notes that Kars4Kids’ overall fundraising and other overhead costs would have increased by more than 30%. As summarized by the OAG: “Kars4Kids’s Form 990 thus makes its vehicle donation program appear more efficient than it is in reality, presenting the donating public with a misleading financial picture of its operations.”

Other Bumps in the Road

Since 2010 when CharityWatch last wrote about Kars4Kids and the more than $100,000 it paid related to misleading advertising claims in Oregon and Pennsylvania, news reports have identified Kars4Kids and/or Oorah in connection with additional cases involving legal accusations or other questionable financial dealings. These include getting caught up as victims in an alleged Ponzi scheme related to speculating on real estate development; Oorah losing a federal lawsuit over more than $300,000 in allegedly unpaid scholarship funds; an ongoing payment dispute with the Young Israel of Eltingville synagogue that includes tax fraud allegations against Oorah; and Kars4Kids paying to settle claims of trademark infringement.

Especially costly were Kars4Kids’ and Oorah’s real estate investments in an alleged Ponzi scheme in which they were victimized and lost more than a combined $7.6 million in 2009 and 2010. To put the $7.6 million in context, Oorah’s total cash spending on Jewish youth programs was approximately $12.2 million over that same period. The real estate developer behind the alleged investment scheme, which reportedly caused $200 million in total losses, was sentenced to 22 years in prison. Even though Kars4Kids and Oorah were victims, some donors may seriously question the judgment of Eliyohu Mintz, the principal officer of Kars4Kids and Oorah, and their other respective board members in deciding to risk donated charitable funds on real estate speculation.

Given all of these issues, it is no surprise that Kars4Kids and Oorah together have averaged almost $500,000 a year in legal fees from 2009-2015. Kars4Kids alone reported spending over $670,000 in legal fees in 2015, which is when it “reached an agreement under the terms of a trademark infringement settlement in which Kars 4 Kids Inc. was required to make certain payments in exchange for specific trademark rights,” according to its audited financial statements. Such legal expenses take a bite out of the charitable funds available “4” the kids – or, in other words, for Oorah’s Orthodox Jewish youth outreach programs.

Backed by memorable TV and radio ads or not, car donations are notorious for being one of the most costly ways to give to charity. Kars4Kids certainly has a catchy advertising jingle and may be among the more financially efficient charities when it comes to processing donated cars, but ultimately it, together with Oorah, still only spent about 38% of car donation proceeds on charitable programs in 2015. Donors should also be aware that the vast majority of those programs are for Orthodox Jewish youth outreach, and do not benefit needy “kids” in general. Before deciding to donate your car to any charity, see CharityWatch’s Tips for Donating a Car to Charity.

UK Father Whose Daughter Was Gang-Raped: “Police Told Me To Let It Go” or he would “get arrested for being racist.”

/4 Comments/in /by

As the pedophile Muslim gang scandal has exploded into the mainstream this week in the UK, horrible accounts are being shared by fathers of some of the victims, with one relating how the police did nothing when he told them his daughter had been raped and advised him to “let it go” or he would “get arrested for being racist.”

UK Father Whose Daughter Was Gang-Raped: “Police Told Me To Let It Go”

The following account was shared on X by Elon Musk, who continues to blast the left wing Labour government and Prime Minister Kier Starmer as complicit.

The man tells Talk TV anchor Jeremy Kyle that Pakistani Muslims from the Oldham area travelled 18 miles to get to his daughter after grooming her online, and then gang raped her.

The man notes that police told him that his then 13-year-old daughter could choose whatever boyfriend she liked, despite the main suspect being 20.

He then recalls how police did nothing even when “four guys came up in a van to look for me, to do me.”

He states that this occurred many years ago, a reminder of how deep and systemic this issue is.

In another account, a father of a Rotherham grooming gang victim recounts how he was arrested twice when trying to rescue his daughter from a gang of rapists.

Just these two accounts alone are appalling, but sadly only the tip of the iceberg.

On Wednesday evening, MPs voted 364-111 against an effort to to set up a national inquiry into the situation, after The Labour Party ordered ministers to vote it down.

Starmer himself abstained from the vote, but only after imposing a three-line whip against it.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch earlier accused Starmer of blocking a national inquiry to prevent Labour politicians “who may be complicit” being implicated.

‘Big Brother is watching you’ – 150 EU officials expected to monitor Elon Musk conversation with Alice Weidel, possible ban on the table

/15 Comments/in /by

The EU is pulling out all the stops to monitor the Alice Weidel and Elon Musk interview, all while French officials put forward the idea of an EU-wide ban on X

ByRemix News Staff
6 Min Read

The European Union’s outrage is only growing over a planned interview hosted by Elon Musk later today with Alternative for Germany (AfD) party co-chair Alice Weidel. Now, Politico is reporting that 150 EU officials are expected to attend the conversation between Musk and Weidel for the purpose of learning whether X is complying with EU rules. In addition, French politicians are already talking about an EU-wide ban.

The claim is that there are fears that Musk’s team will manipulate the algorithm to provide the interview more attention. However, Musk has over 200 million followers and nearly all of his posts receive millions and often tens of millions of views, which makes it certain that the interview, which has also been widely advertised, will receive significant attention.

Weidel has also taken to X about the surveillance of the upcoming interview.

“Big Brother is watching you: 150 EU officials are supposed to monitor my conversation with @elonmusk. An EU that uses its bureaucracy to exercise censorship on social media is instilling the spirit of unfreedom. The #dsa threatens democracy!” she wrote

The officials overseeing the interview are “given relatively extensive power,” according to Politico. They will be able to use, among other things, the Digital Services Act (DSA) to monitor how the algorithm works and how content is being displayed to users.

Politico writes that Musk allegedly pushed certain posts in the past, including one about the Super Bowl in the past. The alleged reason was that Musk was mad that one of President Biden’s posts were getting more attention.

The EU officials are working with experts from the European Center for Algorithmic Transparency” in Seville to determine if such an action will occur once again. However, they will not release this information immediately. Instead, it will like be added to a general procedure against X.

A wide range of EU leaders fear losing power due to shifting public sentiment, and Musk’s X represents their top threat. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, on Wednesday, called for a decisive stand against political influence. When asked whether a ban on X, in the same style as Brazil, was possible, he responded: “That is possible under our laws.”

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez also claimed Musk was pushing “hate” and warned against the rise of fascism in Europe.

SPD General-Secretary Matthias Miersch said that Musk’s influence on Germany’s elections now “call into question the foundations of democracy.”

However, Musk is unlikely to manipulate the algorithm in favor of Weidel especially when enough people are already likely to watch the interview without any interference. Absent some overt manipulation, it is unclear what could possibly be illegal about such an interview. Musk is allowed to interview Weidel. That is his right and her right. The bigger problem would be if he censored anyone who criticized such an interview or manipulated the algorithm to suppress this criticism, which is undoubtedly what the old Twitter regime did before his purchase — all of which the EU actively supported

The head of Germany’s Federal Network Agency, Klaus Müller, appeared to take a more measured approach to the issue.

“Not everything that you get upset about is also illegal,” said Müller on Thursday morning on Deutschlandfunk. “In election campaigns, you also have to put up with things that you personally find inappropriate, indecent or unacceptable.” Freedom of expression always means “the freedom of those whose opinion you do not share.”

He said that the excitement over the Musk interview was “understandable” but it must first be observed whether any laws are actually broken during the process. He noted, however, that people could choose simply not to listen to the interview.

The Indian Immigration Kerfuffle—Part One 

/1 Comment/in /by

Over the course of the Christmas holidays, while reading posts from immigration proponents zealously defending the right (and imperative!) for Indians to be hired in the American tech sector, I have seen confirmed from Indians themselves many of the observations I make on a daily basis in the much humbler labor sector of manufacturing. I’d already encountered a rather accurate description of the Indian character as I experience it in Jayant Bhandari’s essay “IIndia: It’s Worse Than You Think, by Jayant Bhandari – The Unz Review,” posted on American Renaissance December 19th. I am a daily witness to some of Bhandari’s most damning conclusions about the nature of the Indian character and personality, most especially the precedence they accord their own over all others whenever possible. Add to this their disdain for their White co-workers, and you have an idea what the work atmosphere is like for blue-collar Americans.   

One wonders, of course, as many have over the past week, what supports this arrogance. I mean, it’s not like they’re French or anything, with a long history of creating a many-faceted culture the entire world has envied—and attempted to copy—for centuries. It’s India—hot, stinking, over-populated, feces-strewn India.  

Many participants in this social media kerfuffle have nailed the problems inherent in a liberal policy of Indian migration with deadly accuracy, even as ignorant detractors label them racists and xenophobes. The crux of the problem is that Indians don’t know where they are and do not have the capacity to understand the value of this place called America beyond what can be materially extracted from it. That’s a matter of values and sensibility, which many Americans, expressing themselves energetically on X, see clearly.  

It’s also worth reminding ourselves at this point of what Milo Yiannopoulos and Allum Bokhari had to say in their now famous essay on the alt-right, published in 2019. They wrote, 

For natural conservatives, culture, not economic efficiency, is the paramount value. More specifically, they value the greatest cultural expressions of their tribe. Their perfect society does not necessarily produce a soaring GDP, but it does produce symphonies, basilicas and Old Masters. The natural conservative tendency within the alt-right points to these apotheoses of western European culture and declares them valuable and worth preserving and protecting.

That was one of the clearest and most important descriptions of conservative values I’ve ever read, and those on social media decrying Indian immigration to the US have precisely those values in mind. The coarse, shallow, soulless interests of a people focused exclusively on their material prosperity, but who are at the same time incapable of reaching cultural heights themselves, will not allow the characteristics that underpinned Western cultural triumphs to flourish where their people have settled en masse. Americans instinctually know this, and are rising to the defense of these uniquely Western attributes, lest in time we find them buried under piles of putrid refuse. 

Elder Rape Is a Strength!

/2 Comments/in /by

Elder Rape Is a Strength!

As part of the Biden administration’s push to make everything worse and more expensive, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) — not to be confused with Congress, which writes the laws because we live in a democracy ha ha ha — issued a prospective rule requiring nursing homes to hire more staff.

Because who better to determine the staffing needs of the country’s 15,000 nursing homes than Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, Biden’s CMS administrator? Also supporting the new rule are “patient advocates,” i.e. the Service Employees International Union, looking to increase its membership rolls.

Fortunately, The New York Times reports, President-elect Donald Trump is expected to repeal the Biden staffing mandates.

Also fortunately, I have a much better idea! Like Brooks-LaSure, my expertise does not come from running nursing homes. It comes from reading the news.

Such as …

In 2018, hardworking Kenyan immigrant Billy Chemirmir enriched elderly nursing home patients in Texas by allegedly murdering at least 22 of them and stealing their jewelry. (Who will care for the elderly without mass third world immigration?) He was convicted in the first two trials and then killed in prison.

The year prior, Ethiopian immigrant Adeladilew A. Mekonen got 25 years after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting two patients at Providence St. Vincent Medical Center in Portland, Oregon, women aged 89 and 94. (By the way, why is an Ethiopian living in Portland?)

Third world immigrants are hard workers, though. Liberian George Kpingbah was a ripe old 77, but still managed to rape an elderly Alzheimer’s patient at the Walker Methodist Health Center in Minneapolis. This guy is a walking TV commercial for Cialis.

At the 2015 sentencing hearing, Kpingbah’s lawyer sought leniency on the grounds that the perp had “devoted much of his life to ensuring that his three daughters migrated to America,” as The Minnesota Star Tribune put it.

How can we ever thank you, Mr. Kpingbah?

In 2017, Parkpoom Seesangrit — you’ll never believe it, but yup, another immigrant — was convicted of raping a 69-year-old dementia patient at the East Longmeadow Skilled Nursing Center in Massachusetts. When the Thai national was caught by a nurse, he said, “I know I’m in trouble. This looks bad.”

Like so many immigrants, Seesangrit created another job right here in America: He needed a Thai interpreter at his trial. (Turns out our country is fairly bristling with Thais.)

In 2013, nursing assistant Antonio Nieto was convicted of sexually assaulting three female patients, aged 59, 73 and 93, in a Broomfield, Colorado, nursing home. In accordance with the Times Style Guide, the media refused to reveal where Nieto was from, but his lawyer said English was his second language and he needed a Spanish-language interpreter in court, so: Latin America.

In 2018, Ghanaian immigrant Fode Doukoure pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 74-year-old woman after placing an anesthesia-soaked rag over her mouth.

May I speak with the people who hired these guys? The ones who thought cheap labor was worth placing men from raging rape cultures in charge of weak, elderly Alzheimer’s patients?

Why are you crying, Grandma? Hey! Where’s your diamond-encrusted brooch?

The media would sooner praise MAGA than admit that most of the world outside of the West is a cesspool of child rape, gang rape, elder rape, torture rape, goat rape, AIDS, multidrug-resistant gonorrhea and so on. But it’s not an impenetrable mystery, and when you’re hiring employees to work with helpless dementia patients, it’s kind of important to understand this aspect of non-Western culture.

I will briefly mention some suggestive facts about only the countries mentioned here, a subject I cover in detail in “Adios, America!”

Mass rape was a regular feature of Liberia’s 14-year civil war, as it is in most wars on the Dark Continent — also in response to minor skirmishes, celebrations, election seasons and filming a music video.

Kenya’s three-month election season, for example, features mass rapes committed by police, ordinary Kenyans and militia groups. (And you thought our elections were bad.)

During the two-year conflict in Tigray, Ethiopia, government forces raped hundreds of women, in front of friends and family, holding some as sex slaves for repeated gang rapes, sometimes inserting large nails, gravel, metal and plastic shrapnel into their victims’ vaginas, among other things. (On the plus side, none of them were fat-shamed or made to feel unheard.)

Thailand is ranked among the top 10 countries for violence against women and girls. Last year, 11 Thai police officers were charged with gang-raping a 14-year-old girl.

The Inter-American Children’s Institute reports that Latin America is second only to Asia in the sexual exploitation of women and children, who are “seen as objects instead of human beings with rights and freedoms.”

In 2018, naive British teenagers paid 1,200 pounds apiece to go on a class trip to “volunteer” in … Ghana. Whereupon armed Ghanaian and Nigerian men broke into their compound, beat and robbed the males and raped the girls and their female teacher for three hours, finally leaving at around 4 a.m.

Contra Brooks-LaSure, the last thing nursing homes need is more Kenyans, Ethiopians, Liberians, Thais and Latin Americans. What’s really needed is fewer rapes.

Here’s something useful Dr. Mehmet Oz could do at CMS that would create no additional paperwork or regulatory burden for nursing homes: Investigate every one of these monstrous crimes and widely publish the names and incomes of the facility owners and operators who thought the abuse of elderly Americans was a small price to pay for all that cheap foreign labor.

COPYRIGHT 2024 ANN COULTER

Constantin von Hoffmeister: Jean-Marie Le Pen and Joan of Arc

/7 Comments/in /by
Constantin von Hoffmeister

Jean-Marie Le Pen, gone at 96, will not rest in peace because peace never suited him. France, that twisted lover, a nation forever at war with her own skin, has buried him, the man who refused to bow to the new gods of “progress” and sameness. He snarled at the polite lies of modernity, tore through the lies like a wolf through silk. “We do not hate the Turks; we love them, but in their country,” he said, pulling the ghosts of old Europe out of their graves, his words a jagged blade. And Joan of Arc, centuries dead, heard him. She rose from her pyre, her armor scorched but shining. Joan loved the English — but only in their country. “I do love them,” she told her judges, her enemies, “but I love France more.” This is where Le Pen and Joan meet: in their refusal to kneel, in their love for something greater than themselves.

Joan, sixteen and feral, heard voices in the fields of Domrémy, herding sheep under a sky that bled holy light. Saints spoke to her — Michael, Catherine, Margaret — telling her to save France, to drive the English out, to crown Charles at Reims. She was not polite about it. She demanded an army, and she got one. Imagine her, a girl dressed as a boy, cutting through soldiers with a sword she claimed was from God. The enemy called her a witch, a whore, an abomination. France called her a savior. Le Pen was not guided by angels. He had his own visions. France, to him, was a woman bleeding out, her body pierced by the swords of globalization, immigration, and cultural decay. He was not gentle about it either. He did not save his France with a sword but with words — sharp, direct, unapologetic words.

Le Pen came out of the rubble of post-war France, a country broken and ashamed. Born in Brittany in 1928, he grew up with the humiliation of Vichy and the weight of a France that had lost her way. He joined the Foreign Legion, fought in Indochina and Algeria, wars that burned into him the belief that France was under siege. Not just by armies but by ideologies, by the creeping shadows of global homogenization. He was a soldier without a battlefield, so he made his own. The National Front, founded in 1972, became his weapon, his crusade. He spoke for the forgotten, the silenced, the angry. He called out the elites, the “colonizers of Brussels,” and the technocrats who, he believed, sold France’s soul for a seat at the globalist table. He wanted a pure France, a France of villages and cathedrals, not mosques and shopping malls. Joan would have understood.

Joan’s trial was hell, a circus of enemies eager to break her. The English hated her because she had humiliated them on the battlefield. The French Church hated her because she bypassed its authority. Her gender, her visions, her victories — they were too much for her time. She stood before her judges, unbroken, answering their traps with sharp, unyielding logic. They burned her anyway. Her ashes were scattered in the Seine, as if her fire could be extinguished. Le Pen was not burned, but he was tried again and again — in the courts, in the media, in the salons of Paris. They called him a racist, a xenophobe, a fascist. His words scorched; his sentences turned to fire. He never recanted. Like Joan, he refused to betray his mission.

Joan’s France was sacred, a kingdom ordained by God, her rivers and fields blessed by holy blood. Le Pen’s France was cultural, historical, a land of poets and farmers, of medieval spires and stubborn pride. He did not claim divine revelations. His message carried its own fervor. France, for him, was not just a place. She was a soulful woman who needed to be defended. He fought for her as Joan had fought centuries before, although their battles were different. Joan faced the swords and arrows of the English; Le Pen faced lawsuits, protests, and the scorn of a globalized world. Both stood their ground, defiant in the face of their enemies.

Joan rode into Orléans like a storm, her banner raised high, her soldiers roaring her name. The city was liberated; the tide of the war turned. She marched to Reims and crowned Charles VII, fulfilling her divine mission. But victory made her enemies more determined. When she was captured by the Burgundians and sold to the English, they sought to destroy her body as well as her spirit. Le Pen’s victories were not on the battlefield. They were in the polls. In 2002, he shocked France by reaching the second round of the presidential election, a moment that sent shockwaves through the establishment. His enemies tried to destroy him, but each trial only strengthened his legend among his followers.

Joan was declared innocent decades after her death, her name restored, her sainthood eventually secured. The Church canonized her in 1920, making her a symbol of French unity and faith. Le Pen, of course, will never be declared a saint. His legacy is tangled, controversial, loved and loathed in equal measure. But he did not need the Church’s approval. His sainthood, if it exists, lives in the hearts of his supporters, the millions who saw in him a defender of France. His daughter, Marine Le Pen, carries his banner now, softer in tone but carrying the same message: France must remain French. “I love them in their country,” Joan said. Jean-Marie Le Pen said after her: “We do not hate them; we love them, but in their country.”

Joan and Le Pen both understood the power of symbols. Joan’s banner, painted with the names of Jesus and Mary, led soldiers into battle, a visual manifestation of her divine mission. Le Pen invoked Joan as a symbol of nationalism, a saint who fought for France against foreign domination. Critics sneered, calling it opportunistic. For Le Pen’s followers, it was a spiritual connection: the maid of Orléans and the man from Brittany, both warriors for the glory of France. One wielded a sword, the other wielded words — both were willing to fight.

Le Pen was not loved by history, and neither was Joan, at least not in their lifetimes. Joan was burned alive, her ashes scattered to the wind. Le Pen was burned metaphorically, his reputation shredded, his words twisted, his image vilified. But history has a way of changing its mind. Joan became a saint, her story rewritten into a tale of heroism and faith. Le Pen’s story is not finished; his daughter’s rise and the continuing strength of the National Rally suggest that his ideal France might yet find its place.

Le Pen’s death marks the end of an era, but his legacy is alive, restless, and defiant. The National Rally, now rebranded but carrying the same fire, continues to rise. For his supporters, Le Pen was a politician and a prophet, a man who saw the dangers of globalization and the loss of identity long before others did. For his detractors, he will always be a demagogue, a voice of “hate.” But like Joan, Le Pen will not be forgotten. Both remain symbols of a France that refuses to bow, a France that fights for her soul.

The King is dead. Long live the King!

The Jimmy Carter Magic

/7 Comments/in /by

The Jimmy Carter Magic

Carter is so often maligned for his stupidity, it tends to be forgotten that he was also self-righteous, incompetent, and backstabbing.

Out of respect for my old pal, Pat Caddell, I’ve let the encomiums to former President Jimmy Carter pollute the airwaves for the past two weeks without a peep out of me. Time’s up.

As you listen to liberals gloat about Carter’s dedication to “human rights,” recall just some of the human suffering this imbecile launched on the world.

Example No. 1: Carter went wild on the Helsinki accords, which were intended (by morons) to curb the Soviet Union’s monstrous repression of its own citizens, In fact, however, the Soviets not only ignored the accords, but actually used them to crackdown on dissidents. Anyone who attempted to monitor Soviet abuses under the agreement was arrested, imprisoned or exiled.

Paul Johnson described the policy in Modern Times:

“[T]he Helsinki process led directly to a resumption of widespread repression [in the USSR]…reaching a climax in the years after 1977. Leaders of the monitoring groups were the chief victims. In some cases the KGB followed a new policy of issuing dissenters with exit visas and driving them out of their own country. But many others got long prison sentences with forced labour.”

On the other hand, Carter got to brag about his deep commitment to human rights.

Example No 2: Carter’s gift to the world: Islamic lunacy.

Liberals had spent a quarter century bellyaching about the CIA’s role in toppling their beloved Mohammed Mossadegh and helping return the Shah of Iran to power back in 1953.

Mossadegh was the sort of authentic Third World dictator the left admires. Mossadegh may have impoverished his country, but he was lifey: He cried, fainted, and consulted his two-year-old granddaughter before making important government decisions. By contrast, the Shah was pro-Western and didn’t dress like a clown. He did not threaten to hurl Scud missiles at Israel. Liberals found him a bore.

To their delight, in 1978, Carter ostentatiously withdrew American support for the Shah, then stood idly by when, weeks later, he was deposed by a mob of Islamic fanatics.

Richard Falk of Princeton famously predicted that the incoming Ayatollah Khomeini “may yet provide us with a desperately needed model of humane governance for a third-world country.” Carter’s U.N. ambassador Andrew Young said Khomeini would “eventually be hailed as a saint.”

Like night follows day, soon after Carter allowed the pro-Western Shah to be deposed by a bloodthirsty Islamic mob, the mob seized the American embassy and took fifty-two Americans hostage. It was a living testament to liberal “diplomacy”: American citizens being held captive by angry barbarians in a frightening land.

For 444 days, the human rights of Americans suffered mightily, until the voters wisely removed Carter, and replaced him with Ronald Reagan, who preferred manly force to patient suasion when dealing with violent crazies.

The hostages were released the day Ronald Reagan was inaugurated — an event memorialized in a Jeff MacNelly cartoon showing Khomeini reading a telegram: “It’s from Ronald Reagan. It must be about one of the Americans in the Den of Spies, but I don’t recognize the name. It says ‘Remember Hiroshima.'”