Major exhibition of Yoko Ono's works opening at Vancouver Art Gallery

Social Sharing

• Facebook

• Twitter

• Email

• Reddit

• LinkedIn

Show features collaborative projects the artist undertook with late husband John Lennon

CBC News · Posted: Oct 09, 2021 

John Lennon and Yoko Ono are flanked by journalists in Room 1742 of the Queen Elizabeth Hotel in Montreal in 1969. The couple spent two weeks in the hotel room in bed in a performance art protest to promote peace during the Vietnam War. This collaboration between the couple and others are part of a survey exhibition of Ono's works opening at the Vancouver Art Gallery on Oct. 9. (Jacques Bourdon/Le Journal de Montreal/Montreal Museum of Fine Arts)

Vancouverites can celebrate the late John Lennon's birthday this Saturday at the launch of a new art exhibition featuring collaborative works the Beatles star worked on with Yoko Ono, the world-renowned artist and love of his life.

Growing Freedom: The instructions of Yoko Ono / The art of John and Yoko opens Oct. 9 at the Vancouver Art Gallery and is a major survey exhibition celebrating the work of Ono, a conceptual and performance artist.

Organized into two parts, the first section invites viewers to participate in the creative process by following text instructions provided by Ono and, in a way, collaborate with her on some of her famed pieces.

This includes mending broken ceramics (Mend Piece,1966/2021), hammering nails into a canvas (Painting to Hammer a Nail, 1966/2021) and writing about their mothers on a sticky note and attaching it to the gallery wall (My Mommy is Beautiful, 2004/2021).

Mend Piece is one of the participatory works visitors will experience at the Vancouver Art Gallery. The image shown is from a similar show of Yoko Ono's work exhibited in Montreal in 2019. (Galerie Lelong/Art Basel)

The second part of the show features collaborative work by Ono and Lennon on the subject of peace, including Bed-ins for Peace, which were filmed non-violent protests against war undertaken by the couple in 1969.

As the Vietnam War raged, the duo held two week-long performances where they sat in bed together. Derived from the idea of peaceful sit-in protests, the first was held in Amsterdam and the second in Montreal.

"The one thing that brought them together ... was to work for peace," said co-curator Cheryl Sim.

The exhibition is a dream come true for Sim, who contacted Ono with a written note in 2017 asking if the artist would be interested in having such a show staged in Vancouver. She was game.

"It's just all come together in a beautiful way," said Sim.

Two other installations connected to the exhibition include Arising and Water Event.

The former is an invitation from Ono to women to submit a picture of their eyes and a written testament about harm they have endured because of their gender.

• Long-lost John Lennon interviews from Winnipeg-born journalist go up for auction

The latter involves a number of local Indigenous artists invited by Ono to create a vessel that can hold water. According to Sim, Ono requested to work with these artists to reflect the significance of water to these communities.

Growing Freedom: The instructions of Yoko Ono / The art of John and Yoko   runs until May 1.

Photos of John Lennon, Yoko Ono's Bed-in

 for Peace protest part of Vancouver gallery

 exhibit


Nafeesa KarimAnchor / Multi-skilled Journalist, CTV News Vancouver

Anthony Vasquez-PeddieCTVNews.ca writer

Saturday, October 9, 2021

CTV National News: John Lennon's Bed-in for Peace

VANCOUVER -- On the eve of what would have been John Lennon's 81st birthday, the Vancouver Art Gallery will be opening a major exhibition of works by his wife, Yoko Ono.

Among the pieces on display Sunday will be a collection of photographs, owned by a Victoria woman, that document an iconic week in pop culture history.

In 1969, as the Vietnam War was raging, newlyweds Lennon and Ono spent eight days in Montreal's Queen Elizabeth Hotel as part of a peaceful protest against the conflict, which they labelled "Bed-in for Peace."

Related Stories
Canadian journalist's interview recordings with John Lennon and Yoko Ono sell at auction

Recording of 'unheard' John Lennon song up for auction

Only one photographer was in the room during the protest, Brooklyn-born Gerry Deiter, who was on assignment for Life Magazine.

"The love, the intimacy in those photos..." Joan Athey, owner of the photos, told to CTV News. "Even though there were always at least 20 people in the room."

The photos never ended up being published. Deiter packed them away and eventually settled in Victoria where he made a friend in Athey, whom he showed the pictures.

"They were in love," she described of Lennon and Ono in the photos. "They were inspired."

After the 9/11 attacks, Deiter decided the world needed to see the photos and their message of peace.

"He wanted to rekindle the spirit of 'Give Peace a Chance,'" Athey said, referring to one of Lennon and Ono's most prominent music tracks.

Five days after the photos went on display at the Royal BC Museum, however, Deiter died of a heart attack. Athey bought his collection and has taken it upon herself to tell the story of the Bed-in for Peace, which she said carries a message that still resonates.

"You just have to look around," she said. "You can see the world is still in terrible turmoil."

Twenty-four of the photos will be displayed as part of Ono's "Growing Freedom" exhibit, which will run until May 1, 2022.

In this April 18, 1972 file photo, John Lennon and Yoko Ono, leave a U.S. Immigration hearing in New York City. (AP Photo, FIle)

China’s power crisis: Outrage over power outages may affect Xi’s green initiatives

• KALPIT A MANKIKAR

If China continues to undergo a major energy crunch, its green policy might be under jeopardy

The recent restrictions on power consumption in China disrupted manufacturing activities, and a cloud hangs over technology supply chains. In addition to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) efforts to rein in the real estate sector, electricity woes pose a new challenge to the country’s fledgling economic growth and CCP’s ambitions in the field of global climate governance.

In addition to 20 provinces, China’s showcase cities—Beijing and Shanghai—that are home to nearly 22 million and 26 million inhabitants respectively, have experienced power outages. On average, mercury dips till -6°C in the capital, this increases demand for heating, and worries are abound about whether the power crunch will extend into winter.

A part of the problem stems from the steadily climbing coal prices. Around September 2020, coal prices hovered around US $50 per tonne, but it soared to US $177.5 last month—the highest it has climbed to in more than a decade (see graphic).

Source: Asia Nikkei

Coal imports have also been hampered by geopolitical tussles. China uses more than 3 billion tonnes of thermal coal each year; nearly 2 percent of China’s total consumed thermal coal came from Australia due to its reasonable price and superior quality. But the People’s Republic prohibited import of coal from Australia after it sought for an international inquiry into the origins of the coronavirus.

Usually, power generation groups fill their coal stocks in September ahead of the winter months. However, according to Sinolink Securities, this year’s September stockpile of thermal coal by six major power-generation groups was only enough to meet a fortnight’s requirement. With the price of coal rising, power generation firms are reluctant to produce sufficient electricity to meet demand; since tariffs are capped, the revenue accrued is not enough to cover costs. In China, more than half of all power is generated from coal. Coal is the single biggest contributor to climate change. The burning of coal accounts for 46 percent of carbon dioxide emissions globally, and over 70 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions are from the electricity sector. China tops the chart of polluters accounting for nearly 27 percent of global emissions. Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, a landmark international treaty on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, China agreed to achieve the peaking of carbon dioxide emissions around 2030, and to increase the proportion of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20 percent.

How nations fare on pollution
RANK NATION GLOBAL EMISSIONS (% in ’17)
1 China 27.2 %
2 US 14.6%
3 India 6.8%
4 Russia 4.7%
5 Japan 3.3%
Source: World Economic Forum

Climate change has been influenced not just by the vagaries of rising emissions, but also partisan politics. The Paris deal, which was seen as then US President Barack Obama’s political legacy, was reviewed by his successor. Within months of Donald Trump’s inauguration as US President in 2017, his administration rolled back the previous ban on mining coal in the nation. He later announced that the US was pulling out of the covenant, citing that permitting China and India to use fossil fuels under the treaty while America had to curb its carbon was unfair. Coincidentally, the withdrawal came into effect amidst the counting of votes in the contentious 2020 Presidential election, which Trump lost. Under incumbent President Joe Biden, climate governance is a top priority. In February, America re-joined the Paris Agreement. The appointment of a heavyweight like former Secretary of State, John Kerry, as special envoy on climate change signals the new American administration’s aim of reasserting its lead in the fight to combat global warming.

The significance of the US walking out of the Paris deal has not been lost on China. The Trump interlude gave China a good opening to pose as a responsible stakeholder in the effort to tackle climate change and pollution. At the United Nations Summit on Biodiversity in September 2020, Xi announced his ‘green’ plan for China to become carbon neutral by 2060.

The significance of the US walking out of the Paris deal has not been lost on China. The Trump interlude gave China a good opening to pose as a responsible stakeholder in the effort to tackle climate change and pollution. At the United Nations Summit on Biodiversity in September 2020, Xi announced his ‘green’ plan for China to become carbon neutral by 2060.

In April, Biden called the heads of nations responsible for nearly 80 percent of global emissions to a virtual summit, seeking pledges to lowering emissions. State-run media in China portrayed this move as an effort to establish a climate-cooperation clique centred around the US to boost its leadership on international issues. In turn, China invited Kerry to discuss climate issues, around the same time it began vociferously opposing Japan’s plan to release radioactive water from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean. It slammed the US for supporting Japan and accused it of double standards on the issue of environmental protection. Through this episode, China demonstrated its ambition to steer international climate governance, and not be an adjunct to an American-led initiative.

With America back in the game, China increased its stakes in this one-upmanship. Due to Xi’s focus to claim the green mantle, the National Energy Administration (NEA) sought to cut coal use to 56 percent of total energy consumption in 2021, down from 57 percent. In line with Xi’s commitment to reach a peak in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, the guidelines issued in April laid emphasis on meeting nearly 11 percent of the country’s electricity consumption through wind and solar power. Xi was betting big on e-vehicles, but charging stations for new energy vehicles suspended operations in parts of China in the wake of the outages. These developments may in future put the brakes on the decisions of some buyers to switch to new energy vehicles.

China is feeling the pinch with factory activity contracting in September due to curbs on electricity use and increased input prices. The manufacturing Purchasing Manager’s Index—an indicator of business activity—plummeted to 49.6 in September from 50.1 in the previous month. While the crisis was unfolding, Xi visited a ‘green’ industrial unit in Shaanxi that uses coal to produce chemical products like methanol to polyolefins without generating much waste water. In his address there, he highlighted the need for environmental protection. Grandstanding notwithstanding, he faces tough choices. First, loosening controls on electricity tariffs may have a bearing on production costs that will ultimately hit Chinese buyers and affect national competitiveness. Second, lifting the ban on Australian coal may cause Xi to lose face ahead of the key 2022 National Congress. The bumpy ride to clean energy may thus force Xi to put his green policy on the backburner.

In a World Fighting Climate Change, Fossil Fuels Take Revenge

Javier Blas
Sun., October 10, 2021









(Bloomberg) -- With its chimneys towering 200 meters above the industrial heartland of England, West Burton A power station is a relic of the fossil fuel age. When fired up, its boilers burn thousands of tonnes of coal each day, spewing out the carbon dioxide that’s warming up the planet.

After more than 50 years of operation, it will close next year, part of a global transition into green energy sources like wind and solar. It’s only rarely used, but for several days in September, it was this old, polluting facility that kept the lights on in the U.K.

West Burton isn’t an oddity. Across the world, fossil fuels are making a remarkable comeback as a super-charged recovery from the pandemic boosts demand. For all the green energy promises and plans, that transition is in its infancy, and the world still leans heavily on fossils. It’s an addiction built up over two and a half centuries, and it runs deep.

In Europe, where electric vehicles are becoming ever more popular, gasoline sales are booming, reaching a 10-year high in some countries. In the developing world, from Brazil to China, natural gas consumption is stronger than ever. The global hunger for energy has collided with constrained supply, itself the result of a tangle of factors, sending power prices surging in many countries.

Adding it all up, fossil fuel demand is already flirting with pre-pandemic levels, which means emissions are on the rise too. On current trends, the combined consumption of coal, natural gas and oil is likely to hit an all-time high by mid-2022.

“This is the revenge of the fossil fuels,” said Thierry Bros, an energy expert and professor at Sciences Po in Paris.

The situation points to a daunting new phase for the energy transition, with growing tensions among the disparate policy objectives of simultaneously reducing emissions, keeping prices low, and guaranteeing security of supply. The pace of the effort could even be at risk if soaring prices dent public support for climate policies.

It’s a dark backdrop just days ahead of the start of a United Nations summit in Glasgow, COP26, which many believe is the last opportunity to avert catastrophic climate change.

“The climate crisis is real, and energy transition is a necessity, and we must accelerate it — but it’s not a flick of a switch,” said Amos Hochstein, U.S.’s top energy diplomat. “If we want to solve climate change we need to do so while at the same time insulating the global economy from extreme energy shocks.”

Governments can’t ignore the price squeeze, and many have stepped in to cushion the impact with subsidies and tax cuts. But with constant warnings about irreparable damage to the planet, few see officials rolling back from their emissions commitments.

More than 70% of people around the world are worried that climate change will harm them personally at some point, according to the Pew Research Center. The figure is lower in the U.S., though still at 60%. In Germany, the Green party just had its best ever result in an election, and is likely to form part of the next government.

For several years, the world has grown complacent about fossil fuel consumption. From oil to coal, peak demand has been the buzzword, always about to happen, but never actually materializing. Then many assumed that some of the drop in consumption during the pandemic was structural, driven by social changes like work-from-home and the hope of a greener recovery.

But outside jet-fuel, still hamstrung by travel restrictions, oil demand is today higher than it was in 2019. The car has returned to city centers as people avoid public transport. Many countries are desperate for gas as it’s become the swing fuel that offsets the ups-and-downs of solar and wind in electricity generation. Coal is on the up too, even if the medium-term outlook for the dirtiest fossil fuels remains decidedly somber.

Under the short-term cyclical factors — the super-fast rebound and supply constraints — a bigger longer-trend is also shaping the market. As governments work to reduce emissions, investors are pulling out of dirty businesses, and companies are cutting spending and closing facilities. With cleaner energies not fully ready to take up the slack, that’s created an imbalance, as well as volatile prices.

“We’re at a fairly critical junction,” said Russell Hardy, the head of Vitol Group, the world’s largest independent oil trader. “The hydrocarbon industry is going to suffer a bit of under-investment as we go forward as people focus their capital on greener projects.’’

The market is already flashing red. The cost of coal has surged above $200 a tonne, surpassing the 2008 peak during the last commodity boom, and natural gas in Europe and Asia is at an all time high. U.K. benchmark electricity prices last month surged at one point to more than 400 pounds per megawatt hour, about 10 times normal, prompting West Burton A to come into action.

The demand surge has challenged many assumptions about how quickly the world would decabornize. Faced with an energy crisis, many consuming nations zoned in on older fuels. The White House urged the OPEC cartel to increase oil production fast, and the International Energy Agency asked Russia to pump more gas. China ordered banks to prioritize loans to coal miners to boost supplies.

“I’m concerned hydrocarbon demand is not falling fast enough to match the potential under investment in fossil fuels,” said Jason Bordoff, dean of the Columbia Climate School and a former senior energy official in the Obama administration.

Coal is paradigmatic. For nearly a decade, it appeared in terminal decline as investors shunned miners and European countries shut down coal-fired power plants.

And yet, the world’s dirtiest fossil fuel won’t go away. Global consumption peaked in 2014, but rather than fall rapidly, as many expected, it stabilized in a gentle plateau. And now, just as the fight against climate change intensifies, it’s growing again, with the resurgence largely driven by China.

Oil is another case where hopes of an early peak in demand are quickly fading. In 2020, Bernard Looney, the head of British oil giant BP Plc, said it was possible that Covid marked the moment of peak oil. That view has since shifted, with BP predicting in August that demand will reach pre-Covid levels in the second half of 2022.

All of this means carbon dioxide emissions are rising too. The IEA estimates that they’ll post their second largest annual increase ever this year, reversing most of the decline during the lockdowns of 2020. On current trends, emissions will hit a fresh record in 2022 despite all government pledges bring them down, and quickly.

According to the IEA, about $750 billion will be spent on clean energy and efficiency worldwide in 2021, “far below what is required” to meet decarbonization targets. Total energy investment, including green and fossil fuels sources, will hit $1.9 trillion.

As political leaders prepare for COP26, the energy price spike has polarized views about the green transition, already an enormous challenge that involves rewiring the whole global economy. Climate change deniers and fossil fuel industry lobbyist have seized on it to campaign against green energy. On the other side, some climate activists say it shows the need to go even faster.

“Inevitably, it wasn’t going to be a transition without tension,” said Morgan Bazilian, an energy expert and professor of public policy at the Colorado School of Mines. “The balancing act politically is becoming a lot harder.”

We’re not in Kansas anymore Toto

Why is Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall obsessed with the origin of COVID-19?




Daniel Desrochers
Sat, October 9, 2021

Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall likes people to know he’s a doctor. His staff call him “Doc.” He petitioned, when running for U.S. Senate in 2020, to get the nickname on the ballot. The state board of elections ruled against him. He won the race anyway.

He’s vaccinated. His wife is vaccinated. Both his parents are vaccinated and he says they’ll be getting booster shots.

But Doc Marshall is also a politician and a significant chunk of his base doesn’t feel so certain about the pandemic.

Many Kansas Republicans have refused to get vaccinated — Marshall says he thinks vaccines are a personal choice and has tried to fight against federal vaccine mandates. Many Kansas Republicans don’t like mask mandates either — Marshall has publicly said he doesn’t think mask mandates work and doesn’t wear a mask around the Capitol, despite the Capitol physician’s recommendation.

Republicans are less likely to have received a shot of the vaccine than Democrats, a divide that has only grown over time and has led to a higher per-capita death toll in counties that voted for former President Donald Trump than President Joe Biden.

So how does a physician turned first-term senator navigate the politics around a polarized global pandemic while drawing attention for being tough on China and carrying the torch of a relatively popular issue Trump once championed?

He focuses on how it even happened in the first place.

In August, after raising the issue for months, Doc Marshall put on his white lab coat and scrubs and stood in front of a green screen. He spent 12 minutes and 49 seconds trying to explain the uncertain origins of COVID-19 on YouTube.

“There are many reasons why we need to get to the bottom of this virus’ origin,” Marshall says as a picture of the coronavirus looms behind him. “As a physician, I think we always need to know what, where, how and perhaps why whenever any infectious disease outbreak occurs.”

Politicians often gain credibility based on whatever they did before entering politics, regardless of whether it’s outside of their professional area of expertise. Military veterans have it on foreign policy issues. Doctors, like Marshall, get credibility on issues like healthcare.

As other members of the Congress have focused on different areas of the pandemic like vaccine mandates, eviction moratoriums and the economy, Marshall has pursued COVID’s origins obsessively, issuing an 8-point plan to excavate how COVID came to exist.

He smiled when he was asked whether there was a political advantage to continuing to focus on the origins of COVID-19.

“I’m sure there is, but until you mentioned it right now, the thought never really crossed my mind,” Marshall said.

Checking the boxes

First, a quick refresher course.

There are three theories about how COVID-19 came to be.

The first is that the virus was caused naturally. It came from a bat, which gave it to an animal sold at a market, which gave it to humans.

The second theory says scientists were studying the virus at the Wuhan Institute of Virology when some sort of accident occurred that infected scientists, who then spread it to the community.

The third theory is basically the second theory. But instead of a natural virus, it’s a virus scientists changed to make it slightly more transmissible for research purposes that leaked from the lab.

Scientists have not yet been able to definitively say which theory is correct. Most think the virus spread from animals to humans naturally, the one they’ve pointed to all along. But, because they have not been able to pinpoint the exact path the virus took, they haven’t ruled out the possibility that it came from the virology lab.

While global politics could make it more difficult to get a definitive answer on the origins of COVID-19, the national politics appear to be in Marshall’s favor.

Taking a popular stand? Check. Loyalty to Trump? Check. Looking tough on China? Check. Getting the attention of national conservative media? Check. Looking tough on the CDC, the agency some Republicans fault for upending their world? Check.

Few people took the lab leak theory seriously in the beginning of the pandemic, but it had two major proponents — Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Both went on television and claimed the U.S. had evidence the virus leaked from a lab, part of the “tough on China” posture the Trump administration had taken on during his term.

Public opinion has shifted over time. A slight majority of Americans, 52%, now believe that the virus leaked from a lab in China, according to a recent poll by Politico and the Harvard T. Chan School of Public Health. The shift came after Biden said the intelligence committee would look into whether the virus leaked from the lab and Dr. Fauci said scientists shouldn’t rule out the possibility.

The same poll also showed that 82% of Americans think it’s important for the U.S. government to investigate the origins of COVID-19, with Democrats and Republicans both thinking its important.

“I think the broader public interest is… if it’s preventable, they don’t want this to happen again,” Robert Blendon, a professor of public health and policy at Harvard T. Chan School of Public Health.

‘America deserves to know’

Marshall is most focused on the theory that the virus was created in a lab.

That would bolster his argument to stop something called “gain-of-function” studies. These are experiments in which scientists change a biological agent (like a virus) to either give it new or enhanced abilities.

Often, the point of these experiments is so scientists can be better prepared to stop future outbreaks. But they can be very dangerous. If something goes wrong in the lab and the scientists are infected, it could trigger a pandemic.

In 2011, there was controversy over this type of research because of its potential danger. The National Institutes of Health created a committee to weigh whether or not these experiments should be funded. Some scientists have criticized the process for a lack of transparency.

Meanwhile, politicians have latched onto the idea that gain-of-function research could have led to COVID-19. In a Senate hearing earlier this year, Sen. Rand Paul, accused the NIH of funding a gain-of-function experiment at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

“Senator Paul, with all due respect, you are entirely and completely incorrect, that the N.I.H. has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute,” Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, responded.

Marshall said he doesn’t trust the CDC or scientists to review proposed gain-of-function research. He thinks Congress should step in to block it.

“I am really, in my heart, am worried that viral gain-of-function with studies that started here in the United States and then with United States funding led to this virus,” Marshall said. “So I think America deserves to know.”

It is unlikely that Marshall, or the Senate, will be able to answer that question. It’s also uncertain that scientists studying the virus will be able to quickly answer the question.

It took until the 1930s for scientists to figure out that the influenza pandemic that spread across the world in 1918 was a virus and not bacteria. HIV spread silently through the 1970s and then, once discovered, it took years before researchers could figure out a way to reliably test for the virus.

“We’re in a very recent moment in terms of the ability of an interconnected, international scientific community to be able to even pursue options that have the potential to be satisfactory,” said Richard McKay, a historian at the University of Cambridge who studies epidemics.

The involvement of politicians like Marshall is likely not helping. As the U.S. and other countries have questioned whether the virus was leaked by a lab it has created a standoff with China, where it’s difficult to get the information necessary to rule out the scenario.
Causation and blame

For as long as we have known about diseases, there have been people trying to figure out where they came from. It was as true in 430 BC, when Athenians thought their enemies in the Peloponnesian war, the Spartans, were spreading a poison, as it was in the 14th century, when Jews were falsely blamed for the Black Death and massacred, as it was in the 1980s and 1990s when a French-Canadian flight attendant was falsely accused of being the person who introduced HIV to North America.

“It’s nothing new,” McKay said. “I think it touches on how we as human beings think about causation.”

And, McKay points out, there is a fine line between looking at causation and placing blame.

Right now, Marshall is blaming China.

Not necessarily for starting the pandemic, at least not yet. His argument is that China has not provided as much information as he thinks scientists need in order to find out where the virus came from.

“I think this is one more piece of that puzzle of why we have to be tough on China,” Marshall said.

Last week, Marshall filed a bill called the Chinese Communist Party Accountability Act of 2021, which would impose sanctions on China’s minister of the National Health Commission and the director of the China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

It’s unlikely his bill will pass, as Democrats control Congress. But it’s part of his eight steps for investigating the origins of COVID-19. Other potential steps include holding up nominations to posts in the Biden Administration and forming bipartisan investigations across multiple committees.

The broader public interest has also enabled Marshall to get bipartisan support for a deeper investigation into the origins of the virus. In August, he worked with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat from New York, to pass a resolution calling for an inquiry into the outbreak.

And it has helped him get on Fox News.

“It really does help if you appear and you’re a conservative on Fox News,” Blendon said. “You have a very broad constituency who at least lean that way and you get an incredible amount of recognition for that.”

Marshall, when asked if getting on Fox News was important to his base, said it’s important for him to communicate to “all the people of Kansas.”

WHITE POWER IN  THE STREETS OF AMERIKA

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene encouraged her Twitter followers to donate to a fundraiser for Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse


Yelena Dzhanova
Sat, October 9, 2021, 9:08 AM·2 min read

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted a fundraising link for Kyle Rittenhouse.

Rittenhouse is accused of killing two people during a Black Lives Matter protest in August 2020.

He has since become a symbol for right-wing gun-rights advocates.

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on Saturday tweeted a fundraiser link for Kenosha, Wisconsin, shooter Kyle Rittenhouse, encouraging her followers to donate to his legal defense.

Rittenhouse, at 17 years old, was accused of killing two people during a Black Lives Matter protest in August 2020.

On August 25 last year, Rittenhouse, a Trump supporter from Illinois, crossed state lines to get to demonstrations over the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha. Rittenhouse, who was armed with an AR-15-style rifle, fired at people at close range, police said, killing two and injuring one. Rittenhouse has since become a symbol for right-wing gun-rights advocates.


"This is where Kyle Rittenhouse's donations should be made so this young man can afford his legal defense when jury selection starts in just a few weeks," Greene wrote in the tweet.


Earlier Friday, the GOP lawmaker asked her followers to "remember" Rittenhouse.

"Democrats seeded chaos and stoked violence in cities all over the country for a year," she wrote on Twitter. "Billions in damage, devastating communities, lawlessness & the media cheered it on. A boy stepped forward when most grown men stayed home."


That post was flagged by Twitter as one "glorifying violence." The tweet, however, is still up because "Twitter has determined that it may be in the public's interest for the Tweet to remain accessible."

Greene's office did not immediately return a request for comment.

Rittenhouse, now 18, is charged with fatally shooting Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, injuring Gaige Grosskreutz, and being a minor in possession of a dangerous weapon. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges. His trial is set for November.

Rittenhouse’s defense argues weapon used to kill BLM protesters justified by hunting laws


Ny Magee

THE GRIO
Fri, October 8, 2021, 

Teen’s legal team claims he shot two individuals and wounded another in self-defense

Attorneys for Kyle Rittenhouse, the Illinois teenager who fatally shot two people during a protest in Wisconsin last year, are trying to get the misdemeanor charge for possession of a deadly weapon dismissed by invoking hunting laws.

Rittenhouse’s murder trial begins in less than a month. On Tuesday, his attorneys tried to get the misdemeanor charge dismissed. They cited a Wisconsin hunting statute that allowed the teen to carry an assault rifle on the night he traveled from Illinois to Kenosha where he fatally shot two people and injured a third, NBC News reports.

“There appears to be an exception for 17-year-olds,” defense attorney Corey Chirafisi said, per the Chicago Tribune.

Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger encouraged the defense to tell a jury that Rittenhouse was hunting on the night he shot two Black Lives Matter demonstrators.

“They can submit evidence that the defendant had a certificate to hunt and he was engaged in legal hunting on the streets of Kenosha that night,” Binger said, according to the newspaper.

Kyle Rittenhouse (Photo: ABC News 18)

As previously reported by theGrio, the teenager from Antioch, Illinois traveled across state lines, armed with what has been described as a “long gun,” purportedly to help support law enforcement and protect public property amid protests over Jacob Blake. Blake was an unarmed Black man who was shot in the back by police.

Rittenhouse was charged with first-degree murder for the deaths of two men during the protest. Despite the allegations against him, a Christian crowdfunding website hosted a fundraising campaign that raised almost $500K for Rittenhouse.

Several other popular crowdfunding sites like GoFundMe and Fundly opted to deactivate campaigns attempting to raise money for the teen following his arrest last August, according to Newsweek.

Rittenhouse’s legal team claims he shot two individuals in self-defense as they were trying to disarm him. Witnesses have alleged that he was stalking the city and threatening people with his weapon.

As reported by The Associated Press, prosecutors say they have infrared video from an FBI surveillance plane that shows Rittenhouse followed and confronted the first man he shot.

A judge ruled last month that prosecutors can’t argue that Rittenhouse is affiliated with the Proud Boys or that he attacked a woman months before the shootings, bolstering his position as he prepares for a politically charged trial.

Rittenhouse shot Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, Anthony Huber, 26, and Gaige Grosskreutz, 26, with an AR-style semiautomatic rifle, killing Rosenbaum and Huber and wounding Grosskreutz. Conservatives across the country have rallied around Rittenhouse, raising $2M to cover his bail. Black Lives Matter supporters have painted him as a trigger-happy racist.

Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder refused to dismiss the misdemeanor weapons charge on Tuesday, stating that a review of the state statutes was necessary, according to the report.

“I don’t feel comfortable making a ruling,” he said. “The basic concept is the rule … has to be clear to ordinary people.”

Jury selection is set to begin Nov. 1 and the trial is expected to last up to two weeks.

"BAT SHIT CRAZY"

Trump Supporters at Iowa Rally See 'Civil War Coming,' Say He Will 'Save the World'

Fatma Khaled 4 hrs ago

© Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images As Trump supporters rally in Iowa to back the former president, some attendees believe that Republicans are the same as Democrats, while other see violence will escalate in the country. Above, Trump stands at a campaign rally at Dubuque Regional Airport on November 1, 2020 in Dubuque, Iowa.

Donald Trump supporters at the Iowa rally on Saturday, waiting for the ex-president to speak, worried about "a civil war coming" and said he "will save the world."

Trump will address today's rally, being held at the Iowa State Fairground in Des Moines, at about 8 p.m. ET. Polls show he's more popular in the state than President Joe Biden. Trump had a 53 percent approval rating, according to a recent a Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll, the highest he's ever received in Iowa. Biden languished at 31 percent.

Attendee Lori Levi told MSNBC that Republicans are about "as weak as they possibly could be in Congress." She said that in her mind GOP lawmakers are like Democrats, except for senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul and few others.

Thousands in line for this evening’s Trump Rally in Iowa pic.twitter.com/1n6oE2MMi1— Benny (@bennyjohnson) October 9, 2021

"They're establishment. They don't care about the American people because they're in their elite little tower," she said. "So we're just sick of it, you know, and we're not going to take it anymore. I see a civil war coming. I do. I see civil war coming."

Another attendee said that her entire family "turned liberal" and that they hate Trump. But, she hoped that this would turn around, adding that she has "complete faith that this man [Trump] is going to basically save the world. Not just us. Everyone."


Woman at Trump rally today says her whole family has “turned liberal” and they hate Trump. Then breaks down crying and says, “I have complete faith that this man is going to basically save the world. Not just us, everyone.” pic.twitter.com/Z5g0YXC54m— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) October 9, 2021

Meanwhile, one Trump supporter said that she decided to move from Alaska to Iowa after she learned that the former president will be holding a rally in Des Moines.

"He tells everything straight as it is, no BS, and that's what this country needs. No lies," she said of Trump.


Des Moines Iowa!!!

Trump Rally Today!!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Making America Great Again Again‼‼‼‼ pic.twitter.com/wSi3GI4onP— JamieLynn_TrumpGrl💋 (@2jamielynn) October 9, 2021

Rich Thomas, another rally attendee, said that he came to the rally to give "documents" to Trump's legal team. "Our king, Jesus Christ, has spoken to put you back in your office at the White House now," he said.

A video circulating on Twitter showed flags and "Trump won" banners installed along the route leading up to the rally, with one supporter saying "Iowa is Trump country."


IOWA IS TRUMP COUNTRY!🇺🇸

Patriots in Des Moines, Iowa

line an overpass with TRUMP WON flags along the route to President Trump’s rally at the Iowa State Fairgrounds.pic.twitter.com/SuIVcv7BOQ— DrConservaMom🇺🇸🐸🌐 (@ConservaMomUSA) October 9, 2021

In another clip, three Trump supporters said that they were at the rally because "he is the greatest president, best we have ever had" and described Biden as "dead."

"I support him, he supports us," one attendee said of Trump.

Rally organizers told We Are Iowa they expect tens of thousands of attendees on Saturday. Though doors didn't open until the afternoon, some attendees were seen camping out overnight on Thursday and Friday.

Related Articles
C-SPAN Promotes Trump Iowa Rally as 'Campaign 2024,' Despite Lack of Formal Announcement

Donald Trump accuses Democrats of supporting 'killing babies after birth' in misleading Iowa rally speech about the reconciliation bill, video shows

Joshua Zitser

Sun, October 10, 2021, 

Former President Donald Trump speaks to supporters during a rally at the Iowa State Fairgrounds on October 09, 2021 in Des Moines, Iowa Scott Olson/Getty Images

• Former President Donald Trump inaccurately accused Democrats of killing babies "up until the moment of birth" at a rally in Iowa.

• He also falsely claimed that Virginia's governor supports executing babies "after birth."

• Fact-checkers have noted that both of these assertions are false.

Speaking to thousands of supporters at a rally in Des Moines, Iowa, former President Donald Trump baselessly accused the "far-left" of aborting babies right up until the moment of birth and misleadingly alleged that one Democrat governor supports infanticide.

Trump told the crowd that the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill, officially known as the Build Back Better Act, would force "taxpayers to fund the far left's extreme abortion agenda."

The bill, he said, would abolish the Hyde amendment. This controversial provision bars federal funds from being used for most abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the pregnant person's life is in danger.

There is a lack of consensus among Democrats about including the Hyde amendment in the reconciliation bill. Some moderates, including Sen. Joe Manchin, demand that it be a part of the package.

Progressive Democrats, like Rep. Pramila Jayapal, have said that they would not support a bill that includes the Hyde amendment, and President Joe Biden told reporters that he would sign it either way.

The abolition of the Hyde amendment, Trump claimed at the rally, would see Democrats "ripping babies from their mother's womb, right up until the moment of birth."

The amendment's focus is on funding and accessibility to abortions and does not refer extreme late-term abortions.

Trump has repeated the claim several times at campaign rallies that Democrats "rip" babies from the womb at the "moment of birth," and fact-checkers have consistently noted this as false.

Most abortions are performed in the earlier stages of pregnancy, with a minuscule percentage (about one percent) happening after the fetus reaches the point of viability. "The president is describing something that rarely happens and that no Democrat is calling for anyway," said The Washington Post.

At the Iowa rally, the former president went on to make an even wilder assertion about Democrats and their abortion positions. He said that some Democrats are "killing babies after birth," and falsely alleged that Virginia Governor Ralph Northam supports infanticide.

"You saw that?" In Virginia, the governor of Virginia, after birth," Trump told the crowd.

The former president previously made the misleading assertion during his State of Union address in 2019 and at a 2019 rally in El Paso, Texas, but fact-checkers have repeatedly debunked it then.

The accusation refers to Northam's comments on "third-trimester abortions" that are done in cases "where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that's nonviable," Reuters said.

Northam, a physician, never said he would sanction the execution of newborns, according to Politifact. The fact-checkers said: "What he did say is that in rare, late-pregnancy cases when fetuses are nonviable, doctors deliver the baby, keep it comfortable, resuscitate it if the mother wishes, and then have a 'discussion' with the mother."

During the rally, Insider reported that Trump also spread misinformation about widely disproved claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election.

Almost a Year Since Trump Was Soundly Defeated, Republican Leader Still Won’t Admit the Truth

Peter Wade
Sun, October 10, 2021, 


Steve Scalise - Credit: FoxNews/Screencap

Appearing on Fox News Sunday, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) refused to say whether he believed the election was “stolen” from former President Donald Trump, who resurrected those claims at an Iowa rally Saturday night.

“I want to ask you a specific question,” host Chris Wallace said. “Do you think the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump [who is] continuing to make that charge?”

Wallace added, “Not having states do election reforms, but specifically making this charge that the election was stolen? Do you think that that hurts undermines American democracy?”

Scalise replied but did not answer the question, claiming states violated the constitution when they made changes to election law due to the pandemic. “Well Chris, I’ve been very clear from the beginning,” he said. “If you look at a number of states, they didn’t follow their state passed laws that govern the election for president. That is what the United States Constitution says. They don’t say that the states determine what the rules are, they say the state legislature determined that.”

Wallace interjected, “So you think the election was stolen?”

Scalise continued to evade — even though it’s clear where he stands since he voted against certifying Biden’s win in January — and essentially repeated what he had just said about states not following their own rules, the same thing he said in January.

Wallace tried for a third and final time to get Scalise to give a straight answer: “Do you think the election was stolen or not? I understand you think there were irregularities and things that need to be fixed. Do you think the election was stolen?”

But Scalise refused to budge and replied as if Wallace hadn’t even asked a question and instead talked about how he doesn’t like that Democrats refer to Georgia’s new election law as being similar to Jim Crow era laws.

It was at that point that Wallace likely realized he will never get a straight answer, so he gave up and ended the interview.