Why is the Biden administration continuing to negotiate with the mullahs of Iran to revive the nuclear deal and lift sanctions placed against them -- an act that would hugely strengthen their regime -- after the country, during nuclear talks, was caught plotting to kidnap a US citizen in Brooklyn, New York?

The message for the Biden administration, which has frequently proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents, is that a diet of US groveling and appeasement evidently will not deter Iran and other foreign dictatorships from launching increasingly hostile acts.

The Americans, it seems, want to reward the mullahs for taking over Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq, the Gaza Strip and soon possibly Jordan -- so, what incentive is there for the mullahs to stop?

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Tehran appears to have been attempting to become the dominant hegemon not only in the Middle East.... but around the world. At the same time, it is sending a warning to its population that any opposition to the political establishment will be dealt with harshly.

Will the Biden administration ever see that, to bring peace to the region and, by expansion, to the rest of the world, negotiations, concessions and offering incentive packages to the mullahs simply will not work?

The good news from all this is that [Peter] Daszak finally recused himself from a COVID-19 commission that was established by the medical journal The Lancet after his conflicts of interest with the WIV came to light. The bad news is that up until then, Daszak had been functioning as an apologist for the Beijing regime, parroting its nonsense that the SARS-CoV-2 originated somewhere else and somehow made its way to China.

Worse still, Daszak was the only representative of the U.S. appointed to a 10-person panel convened by the World Health Organization (WHO). That panel's report, which was released in February, was dismissed even by the Biden administration as superficial and unpersuasive. The joint WHO-China team's report asserted strong conclusions about how the pandemic started based on very little supporting evidence. Nor did Chinese authorities fully cooperate with its investigation.

For public confidence, however, the worst part may be that we only learned of Daszak's conflict of interest because of the FOIA request of Anthony Fauci's email archive. This means that no one at WHO seemed to think that Daszak's direct financial ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which he had funded with $600,000 of grant money to perform research on bat coronaviruses, might make him unsuitable to participate in thoroughly scrutinizing its procedures, record-keeping, anti-contamination habits, and other practices.

Rutgers University professor of chemical biology Richard H. Ebright, who is frequently quoted in media reports as an expert on coronaviruses and public health, said in April it "would be hard to imagine a more brazen lie" that Daszak has no conflict of interest with the WIV.

For US President Joe Biden, the recent unrest in Cuba should persuade his administration not to repeat the mistakes of the Obama era and attempt some form of rapprochement with Havana.

The US, as it is apparently able to do, should also immediately restore the ability of the Cuban people to use their internet.

One of the reasons Cuba's communist regime is struggling to survive is the impact the hard-hitting sanctions that the previous administration imposed on Cuba is having on the Cuban economy.

Any attempt now by the Biden administration to lift the sanctions would simply be to reward the regime for its brutal repression of the Cuban people.

To keep the sanctions in place would further increase the pressure on the Cuban regime, pressure that could ultimately result in its collapse and the liberation of the Cuban people from their communist oppressors.

Taken together, the administration's efforts paint a picture of an emerging, out-of-control police state. Those of us who disagree with the administration are no longer citizens, we have become "enemies of the state."

Just in the last few days, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the administration was coordinating with Big Tech on correcting "misinformation." This is censorship. They are doing this with increasing frequency....

When individuals engage with social media, the federal government, in coordination with Big Tech, will, at best, have planned responses that will move them to sites designed to give them the "right" answer. Sound far-fetched? On its webpage, Moonshot CVE, a company already doing work for the Pentagon, says it uses "targeted advertising to connect people searching the internet for violent extremist content with constructive alternative messages."

Rather than the federal government using its massive power to facilitate our access to knowledge and information, thus enhancing our individual freedom and decision making, the Biden administration appears to be seeking to become a behemoth propaganda machine targeting its perceived enemies.

And yet, one could ask, what constitutes a monarchy? Must it be the traditional construct of a single individual holding court with scepter and crown.... Or could a monarchy take a far more sinister, stealth-like form? Could there be those who abdicate their oaths of office and thereby secretly pursue policies and actions that avoid the sunlight of public scrutiny?

Or could a monarchy be the abdication of authority to those who were never elected to serve in that position? Or maybe they have left office but still exert enormous influence – even control – over foreign and domestic decisions made by the executive branch?

Could we, in effect, be living with a monarch and not even know it?

Depending on your definition of "monarchy," the scenarios are chilling. Like the experience of George III, would those close to power seek to advance their own political agenda at the expense of anyone and everyone? Would social media, tuned to the ideology of their corporate owners, actually dictate the nation's agenda? Would a federal budget be so loaded with pork barrel deficit spending that it destroys the nation's economic future? Would control of America's nuclear arsenal actually be in the hands of a constitutionally authorized commander in chief?

The judgment is consistent with previous determinations by the Luxembourg-based court, informally known as the European Court of Justice (ECJ), that bans on religious symbols at the workplace are not inherently discriminatory — provided they apply equally to all religions.

The significance of the ECJ's decision on the headscarf — arguably the most visible symbol of political Islam in Europe — cannot be overstated: by striking a balance between religious liberty and entrepreneurial freedom, the court has effectively blocked a back-door effort to enshrine Sharia law in European labor law.

Islamic head coverings have been a recurring issue in Germany, where the Muslim population has surpassed six million to become approximately 7.2% of the overall population of 83 million.

Germany's headscarf debate — which is actively being fueled by groups promoting Islamism and Salafism — is directly linked to ongoing disputes about mass migration and the integration of immigrants into German society.

"The headscarf is not neutral. Religious freedom is important, yes. It is important to preserve it, yes. But this basic right also has its limits where a basic social order is violated, and a higher legal interest is affected." — Ahmad Mansour, a Germany-based Israeli-Arab expert on Islam.

The Arabs are saying that the Americans are mistaken if they think that the war on terrorism will end with the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan.

Adib warned that the US will pay the price for its exit from Afghanistan. "The cost of the withdrawal will be greater and more dangerous for America and the entire world," he said. "Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are preparing to establish a state whose features will be close to those of ISIS. The threat of ISIS is still there and its cells are still spread everywhere." — Mounir Adib, Egyptian expert on Islamic movements and international terrorism, Annaharar.com, June 5, 2021.

[T]he threat of terrorism will grow because of the Americans' failure to consult with their allies in the Middle East, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.... — Mounir Adib, Annaharar.com, June 5, 2021.

"The biggest catastrophe is that Afghanistan will become the capital of terrorism again, and now we have the threat of Al-Qaeda making a comeback... after America's withdrawal from Afghanistan as these groups feel proud and victorious, which will push them to continue fighting against America and the Arabs and Europeans." — Mounir Adib, Annaharar.com, June 5, 2021.

"[T]he problem is that extremist and terrorist groups and political Islam do not know how to live without rivalry, and they do not like to live in peace and without enemies. It is true that the US military force diminished Al-Qaeda and destroyed the dream of ISIS to have its own state, but it did not eliminate the terrorist ideology...." — Bahaa Al-Awam, Syrian journalist and political analyst, Al-Ain, July 12, 2021.

"What makes matters worse is that the American withdrawal from the region will mark a victory in favor of political Islamic organizations...." — Bahaa Al-Awam, Al-Ain, July 12, 2021.

These Arabs are telling the Biden administration in no uncertain terms: US policies and actions are undermining your credibility among your allies and paving the way for the return of Islamic terrorist groups.

VIEs, as they are known, evade Chinese law, which prohibits foreign ownership of Chinese tech companies. Through a series of intricate contractual arrangements, however, these structures effectively give foreigners the economic benefits of ownership.

People believe that if Beijing were to publicly declare a VIE illegal—in other words, expropriate foreign ownership—it would be like setting off a nuclear weapon, shutting off new Chinese companies from foreign equity markets. Therefore, they believe it could not happen. The last-minute cancellation of the Ant Group IPO in Hong Kong and Shanghai last November, however, shows that Xi Jinping is willing to go to great lengths to protect his system.

China's brand of communism, many forget, is inherently hostile to the private sector in general and foreigners in particular. The so-called "reform era"—the three decades following 1978 when Chinese leaders liberalized the Chinese economy and financial system and opened it to the world—is now over....

Xi Jinping believes there is already too much foreign influence in Chinese society, meaning that he would like to limit to the greatest extent possible offshore ownership of China's enterprises. He will, I think, step up a long-running campaign to harass foreign businesses and begin to force offshore investors out of his country. The questionable VIE structure gives Xi the perfect excuse to now expropriate foreign ownership of his country's successful tech businesses.

China's ruler, foreign investors often forget, is willful and will do what he wants. "What Xi Jinping says, Xi Jinping does," Bartiromo correctly pointed out. "And that's what the law is."

A large-scale and widely-noted survey, "The Conversion of Europeans to the Values of the Right," suggests that Western Europe is trending conservative. But a close look at the survey data finds that not to be the case.

In other words, the "values of the Right" mentioned in the Fondapol survey represent but an attenuated version of what a true conservative understands by the phrase. The survey focuses on economics, specifically on the extent and role of the state. It barely involves traditional values, education, individual responsibility, national independence, free markets, a single law for all, the nuclear family, criminal punishment, and freedom of speech and religion; much less do they include such culture-war topics as racism, affirmative action, income inequality, climate change, cancel culture, abortion, homosexual marriage, or trans-sexuality.

It is only among the Western European political parties deemed "far-right" that one finds even a semblance of true conservatism, such as those above. These parties, however, are delegitimized and insulted, limiting their appeal while simultaneously attracting fringe elements to them.

From this larger perspective, Western Europeans are not in the least turning to the "values of the right" but are ever-more distant from them. Fondapol has it exactly wrong: except in economics, the values of the Left are preponderant and growing, exactly as it seems to us on the outside.

"There was no free speech, you could not share values or thoughts if they were not Mao's values and thoughts...." — Lei Zhang, Carolina Journal, July 2, 2021.

"You have people who now say, 'Math is white supremacy,' or that calculus was invented by this man of this race so it is oppression. This is stupid". — Lei Zhang, Carolina Journal, July 2, 2021.

"Most of this crap originated on US campuses. I was at Stanford in the mid-1980s and watched with amazement how political correctness erupted. I had always blamed people like Stalin or Beria for censorship, but now I realized that many intellectuals want it too! Such people will always want censorship; they will always want to be oppressors because they always pretend to be oppressed". — Vladimir Bukovsky.

"When they tell kids, kindergarten, 5, 6 years old, that they are bad because they are in this race, or they are oppressed if they are in this group, and children cannot disagree, this is very bad because they cannot change their skin color or where they are from. They did not choose to be this race or that race, they are Americans, we are all Americans, and if we are fighting each other over this ideology, I agree with that when people say that this will destroy America. This is what happened under Mao and the Cultural Revolution....If you disagree or say something different they punish you.... You have no free thought". — Lei Zhang, Carolina Journal, July 2, 2021.

"As a community, we face an important choice. We can succumb to extreme left ideology and spend the rest of our lives ghost-chasing and witch-hunting, rewriting history, politicizing science, redefining elements of language, and turning STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education into a farce. Or we can uphold a key principle of democratic society—the free and uncensored exchange of ideas...." — Anna Krylov, who was born in the Soviet Union, and is now a Professor of Chemistry at the University of California, The Journal of Physical Chemistry, June 10, 2021.

Today, those who fled from Communist regimes see -- most dangerously -- the same censorship and totalitarian suppression repeated in America's democracy. They know better than we do what freedom of thought means, and the price we must pay to defend it.

....Biden's policies have proved to be little more than confused and at times contradictory gestures.

A Washington Post opinion columnist claimed that "Biden wiped the smirk off Putin's face." In reality, however, Putin left the meeting with a much broader naughty-boy smile. Biden... cancelled Trump's veto on the controversial Russian gas trunk-pipeline to Germany. He did something even more amazing; he presented a list of 16 critical infrastructure "entities" in the US which he wanted Putin not to target in cyber-attacks, or face unspecified "consequences". Does this mean that, as long as he spares those highly sensitive targets, Putin would have a free hand in doing cyber mischief across the US?

The smirking Putin returned home to intensify pressure on Ukraine, boost the Belarusian despot Viktor Lukashenko, unveil the largest nuclear submarine in history and even threaten to sink a British warship in Ukrainian waters.

With one-eighth of his tenure over, Biden has not yet revealed his strategy for dealing with either Russia or China.

One place "America is back" has taken place is in talks in Vienna about the ill-conceived "nuclear deal" with the Islamic Republic concocted by President Barack Obama and advertised as the greatest part of his legacy in foreign policy terms.

By handpicking a mass murderer to be president, the Iranian regime is sending a strong message to the Iranian people and the world that it will not respect human rights.

How could a leader of a democratic country congratulate a mass murderer?

The people of Iran, like those of Hong Kong and now Cuba, have been struggling and fighting to change their regime, while European governments and leaders of democratic countries -- including the current administration in the United States -- have basically been sending a message to the people: We do not care about your aspiration for justice, rule of law and human rights; instead we are going to partner with your authoritarian leaders.

Europe's leaders have also been totally disregarding calls by human rights organizations to investigate Iran's mass murderer mullah -- who will also most likely be the next Supreme Leader of Iran.

"That Ebrahim Raisi has risen to the presidency instead of being investigated for the crimes against humanity of murder, enforced disappearance and torture, is a grim reminder that impunity reigns supreme in Iran..... The circumstances surrounding the fate of the victims and the whereabouts of their bodies are, to this day, systematically concealed by the Iranian authorities, amounting to ongoing crimes against humanity. — Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International, June 19, 2021.

It is indeed shameful, and a blow to the people of Iran and advocates of human rights and democracy, that European governments and leaders of democracies are joining North Korea to congratulate Iran's mass murderer president -- and wishing him success!

Tatiana Stanovaya, a political analyst at Carnegie Moscow, "told CNN the law threatens not only opposition politicians but ordinary Russian citizens."

"The law is part of a larger campaign against anti-regime behavior in Russia... The battlefield has become much larger, now even a Russian citizen who participates in protests, retweets an opposition post or donates to opposition groups, face the risk of prosecution." — Tatiana Stanovaya.

Russia's decision to crush all political opposition seems a clear indication of how Putin fears Navalny and his influence over the Russian electorate....

A number of Russian opposition politicians have already been barred from taking part in elections or were persecuted for their support for Navalny or other pro-democracy groups.

"The process was held behind closed doors, and I myself did not participate in it. Even though we demanded it, I was not even invited." — Alexei Navalny, Instagram, as reported by CNN, June 10, 2021.

The Russian courts are a "laughingstock." — Alexei Navalny, Instagram, as reported by courthousenews.com, June 10, 2021.

First published in 1989, [Paul Kennedy's] book, "The Rise and Fall of Great Powers,"... should be required reading in Washington.

Against this battering from Beijing, the Biden Administration seems to be sleepwalking. In response to the CCP's military expansion journalists say our defense budget will be – in essence – flat, at best.

While these mistakes, missteps, and missed opportunities are early in Biden's term, the Chinese also know the proverb that "Truth is buoyant" – it will surface at some point and become obvious to all. When it does, will America still have the means to preserve its security and freedom?

This proposal... amounts to "abolishing the suburbs" by making them more like cities.

Apartment buildings.... could be built in the middle of any suburban neighborhood, and there is nothing you could do to stop it. A housing project could be built next door to your home. One-acre lots could be subdivided to cram in as many houses as possible.

They claim that cities are undesirable places to live because they are crowded, hot, and lack nature, so it is unfair that people have to live there. Ironically, their solution seems to be to make more of them....

Worse, local governments presumably know what is best for their communities. That is why communities have local governments rather than a federal government deciding everything for everyone. If residents desired different zoning, their officials would have already made those changes on their own.....That is probably why it is being hidden within a massive bill and not talked about.

The federal government has no power to force this change, but the president has floated withholding federal money that towns rely on for things like roads unless the towns comply.... What town can afford to lose all federal transportation dollars — funded with taxes that they pay?..,, Basically, it is not far from extortion.

Most cities, and most low-income people, vote for Democrats. For politicians, this means that if you can make the countryside into cities, in 10 years, everyone will be voting for only one party.

Many counties will find it hard to resist the temptation to take the cash. But in the long-term they are saddling themselves with a huge influx of poverty whose financial effects will outweigh any grants. Of course, they will also completely change the aesthetics and culture of the neighborhood — and irrevocably alter its political makeup.