•

by Reid Fitzsimons

On August 25, 2026, PA Governor Shapiro traveled to Lancaster to melodramatically announce the “first two measles-associated deaths in PA in 35 years,” specifically noting that both of these deaths were in unvaccinated people. One might ask, “why measles?” when there are so many diseases people die from. He answered this later in his press conference when he attacked the Trump administration for its “rhetoric.” The background is that the Trump administration has been revising the recommendations for routine childhood vaccinations, and this has become another anti-Trump bandwagon to jump on. As a point of reference, in 1986 (the year my son was born) the schedule consisted of 11 total vaccinations against 7 diseases, whereas at present 50-54 doses covering 16-18 illnesses.

Josh Shapiro press conference announcing two "measles-associated" deaths in PA in "unvaccinated" people

My career was as a medical practitioner (PA) and I am supportive of vaccines. Nevertheless, I question the wisdom of routinely interrupting natural immunity in less severe illnesses, such as chickenpox. I’ve been around long enough to speak politico-medical jargon and am weary when qualifying words such as “associated” are used: a subtle means of transforming medical science into political science, as Gov. Shapiro egregiously did. Keeping in mind that not a single authority has advocated against the measles vaccine and the Trump administration fully continues the measles recommendation, Shapiro used these two tragic deaths to establish a false narrative, possibly to bolster his Trump-hating credentials as the Democrat party moves to increasing extremism.

Pages: 1 2

• 1 Comment

•

An older relative I grew up with had a troubled adolescence, which included a flirtation with national socialism. Thankfully he never became a Nazi per se, but he had some friends who were actual Nazis, like in the 1980 Blues Brothers movie. One day, perhaps in 1971, one of them came to the house while I was watching cartoons and asked if I noticed they were of lesser quality than before. I said not really, but he enlightened me by declaring "It's the Jews!" Apparently he was referring to the animation quality measure of frames per second FPS), and that somehow "the Jews" decreased the FPS to save money. I doubt he had no actual knowledge of this.

Scenes from the Blues Brothers movie- funny Nazis

People under 55 or so probably don't realize that long before anyone who disagreed with progressives was a Nazi there were actual Nazis, notably the National Socialist Party of America (forming in 1970 and dissolving in 1981). They paraded around in Brown-Shirt type uniforms and wore swastika armbands, and were most famous for the pro-Nazi demonstration planned for Skokie, IL (a suburb of Chicago with a large Jewish population including Holocaust survivors) in 1977. Ultimately the demonstration was held in Chicago in the following year, with a whopping 25 Nazis showing up.

Real American Nazis from the 1970s
1978 Nazi rally in Chicago
Pages: 1 2

• 2 Comments

•

by Reid Fitzsimons

100 years ago racism was threaded throughout America’s institutions. Most of it was patronizing and condescending: the view held by many whites that black people were simply not up to snuff as a race, but like a family pet were treated with kindness as long as they knew their place. It wasn’t white supremacy, per se, but more of a white superiority. This type of racism persists and is entrenched in the modern progressive movement.

(Above) Racism and segregation in the past (Below) the racism of present day progressives: perpetual victimhood and general incompetence of blacks- they can't be independent and think objectively

There was, of course, a much more vile- and too often murderous- level of racism, well documented by lynchings and supported in degrees by local, state, and Federal political power. An integral characteristic of this was a two-tiered justice and law enforcement, a generic belief that white people were to be believed and presumed innocent and an assumption of guilt for blacks.

Pages: 1 2

•

by Reid Fitzsimons

The Hebrew Bible contains plenty of enlightened ideas, such as charity for the poor (Deuteronomy 15:11 among others). It also contains some concerning words: “Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey (1 Samuel 15:3).” Similarly Hebrew law, stemming from perhaps 1,500 BC, can be harsh, including execution for homosexuality. It all became irrelevant, however, following the destruction of the second temple around 70 AD and the scattering of Jews throughout the Roman Empire- the Diaspora. The Law evolved into shared customs and traditions that held the Jewish identity and people together over the next 2,000 years.

The Hebrew Bible, referred to as the Old Testament by Christians and, of course, the New Testament

The Christian Bible- New Testament- is pretty much devoid of exhortations to violence and oppressive laws, in fact quite the opposite: Jesus’ radical admonition to love your enemy, for example. It’s a tough standard and rarely achieved; maybe not hating our enemies would be a starting point. It should be noted that in Paul’s epistle 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 there is a troublesome and disingenuous claim: “(The Jews), who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone.” While it does not directly advocate for violence, it gave evil people with power a justification to oppress and slaughter Jews when it helped advance their political and personal agendas. “The Jews Killed Jesus!” they shouted, which is kind of ironic because the whole basis of Christianity is the birth, life, Crucifixion, death, and Resurrection of Christ.

Pages: 1 2

•

Below is a summary of the Huddud laws, followed by blasphemy laws, and far below is a review of post-WW2 religious related killing in text form:

Below is a summary of country by country blasphemy laws (and well below is a text summary of post-WW2 killing by religion):

Below is a concise incident-by-incident table (major post-WWII events) using inclusive attribution rules you approved: I include state-led mass killings when perpetrators can be plausibly identified with a religion or sect (e.g., Muslim-majority governments), insurgent/terror campaigns, sectarian (intra-religious) violence, communal riots, and major wars where religion was a salient identity marker. Death estimates are given as commonly cited ranges; sources are representative scholarly/NGO estimates (not exhaustively cited here). Totals at the bottom sum the midpoints of ranges for a rough comparative view — treat as indicative, not definitive.

Table columns: Event — Years — Estimated deaths (range) — Primary perpetrator identification — Brief note

  • Partition of India/Pakistan — 1947 — 200,000–2,000,000 — Hindus/Muslims (communal actors on both sides) — mass communal violence during partition and migration.
  • Indonesian anti-communist killings — 1965–66 — 500,000–1,000,000 — Mixed (some Muslim-majority actors among perpetrators) — anti-communist/anti-left purge; motives mainly political but perpetrators in a majority-Muslim country.
  • Algerian War (civilian deaths & reprisals) — 1954–1962 — ~200,000–300,000 — Algerian nationalists/French state (Muslim Algerian population central) — anti-colonial war with large civilian toll.
  • Bangladesh Liberation War (and associated massacres) — 1971 — 300,000–3,000,000 — Pakistani state forces (Muslim-identified Pakistan) — targeted killings including many Hindu civilians; political/ethnic drivers.
  • Iran–Iraq War (civilian+military deaths attributable to state actors) — 1980–1988 — ~500,000–1,000,000+ — Iraqi state (Sunni-dominated Ba'ath) and Iranian state (Shia theocratic state) — interstate war with sectarian overlay.
  • Cambodian genocide (Khmer Rouge) — 1975–1979 — 1,500,000–2,000,000 — Secular/communist (not religious) — included here only as contrast (ideology, not religion, primary).
  • Nigerian/Boko Haram insurgency & related violence — 2009–present — 30,000–300,000 (varies by period) — Islamist militants (Sunni) and counter-operations — terrorism, insurgency, communal displacement.
  • ISIS / ISIL campaigns (Iraq, Syria, region) — 2013–2019 (major peak) — 100,000–500,000+ (including war deaths in Iraq/Syria where ISIS was a major actor) — Islamist (Sunni) militants — mass killings, executions, terror campaigns, and battlefield deaths.
  • Taliban insurgency & associated violence (Afghanistan, including 1996–2001 regime and post‑2001 insurgency) — 1994–present — 100,000–300,000+ (decades of conflict) — Islamist (Sunni) — insurgency, terrorist attacks, and state repression.
  • Iran post-1979 state repression and Iran-backed militias (incl. Iraq/Iran tensions, sectarian proxies) — 1979–present — tens of thousands–hundreds of thousands (overlaps with Iran–Iraq War and regional proxy wars) — Shia-identified state and proxies.
  • Lebanese Civil War (sectarian) — 1975–1990 — ~120,000–150,000 — Mixed (Christian, Sunni, Shia, Druze militias) — complex sectarian/ political conflict.
  • Bosnian War (ethnic cleansing, Srebrenica genocide) — 1992–1995 — ~100,000–200,000 — Serb (mostly Orthodox Christian nationalist) and others; Bosniak victims (Muslim) targeted — ethnic/territorial conflict with religious identity salient.
  • Rwandan Genocide — 1994 — ~500,000–1,000,000 (commonly ~800,000) — Hutu extremists (ethnic, not primarily religious) — included as contrast (churches implicated in incidents; religion not primary driver).
  • Myanmar (Rohingya persecution, 2012 onward; 2017 military campaign) — 2012–present (2017 peak) — thousands–tens of thousands killed; ~700,000+ displaced — Buddhist-majority state actors and Buddhist nationalist mobs — ethnic cleansing/possible genocide against Rohingya Muslims.
  • Sri Lankan civil war & anti-Tamil violence (Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism interacting with Tamil separatism) — 1983–2009 (with 2009 final offensive) — ~80,000–100,000+ — Sri Lankan state (majority Sinhala Buddhist) vs. LTTE (Tamil) — ethnic/territorial war with religious/ethnic overlap.
  • Gujarat riots — 2002 — ~1,000–2,000 — Hindu mobs (and alleged state complicity) — communal violence targeting Muslims.
  • 1984 anti-Sikh riots (India) — 1984 — ~2,000–3,000 (estimates vary) — Hindu mobs/state actors — communal pogrom after Indira Gandhi’s assassination.
  • Central African Republic (Christian militias vs Muslim Seleka) — 2012–2014 (ongoing cycles) — ~5,000–10,000+ deaths and large displacement — mixed Christian and Muslim militias.
  • Northern Ireland (The Troubles) — 1969–1998 — ~3,500 — Protestant vs Catholic sectarian/paramilitary political conflict.
  • Other Islamist terrorism globally (al-Qaeda, regional affiliates) — 1990s–present — tens of thousands (combined, incl. 9/11 indirect war deaths many more) — Islamist militants (Sunni).
  • Other communal/sectarian episodes worldwide (e.g., pogroms, riots in various countries) — cumulative tens of thousands — mixed perpetrators across religions.

Rough summed midpoints (illustrative, non-precise):

  • Events where perpetrators are predominantly Muslim-identified (includes Islamist militants, Sunni/Shia state/sectarian actors, and major wars with Muslim-state perpetrators): combined midpoint estimate (sum of listed relevant midpoints) is on the order of several million (rough indicative midpoint total ~4–8 million), driven largely by Iran–Iraq War, Bangladesh 1971, ISIS/Taliban era conflicts, partition violence partial share, and other insurgencies.
  • Events where perpetrators are predominantly non-Muslim-identified (Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, secular nationalists): combined midpoints also number in the millions when including partition (shared), Cambodian genocide (secular), Bosnian/Serb actions, Myanmar (Buddhist actors), Sri Lanka, and others (~3–6 million indicative).
  • Secular/ideological regimes (e.g., Khmer Rouge) and ethnic conflicts where religion was secondary remain major components of total deaths.

Bottom line (concise):

  • Using inclusive rules you requested, it is plausible that Muslim-identified perpetrators (state and non-state, including intra-sect Sunni vs Shia violence) account for a plurality of violent deaths tied to religiously-identified actors since WWII — largely because many high-fatality conflicts in the late 20th and early 21st centuries involved Muslim-majority states or Islamist groups.
  • This conclusion is highly sensitive to attribution choices, event inclusion/exclusion, and death-estimate sources; different reasonable rules can yield different pluralities or none at all.

•

by Reid Fitzsimons

I recently watched the 1971 made-for-TV movie Brian’s Song for the first time since 1971. It was amazing how I remembered scenes and even individual lines after 55 years. Brian was Brian Piccolo, an extroverted rookie running back with the Chicago Bears in the mid-60s, who became great friends with Gale Sayers, the soft-spoken and extraordinarily talented fellow rookie running back. The former was 2nd string, and the latter won awards and accolades. Piccolo was white with a trace of redneck while Sayers was black, and the movie was primarily about the deep relationship they developed. There was a lot of football itself and the love of playing it, as compared to the love of money and celebrity in the decades since.

Brian Piccolo and Gale Sayers on the left, James Cann and Billy Dee Williams from Brian's Song on the right

It was a positive movie that took place during a time when Jim Crow was receding, and black and white people could indeed find not just racial tolerance, but go well beyond it: as Piccolo was hospitalized dying of cancer at the age of 26, Sayers had to attend an awards banquet, and as he received an award for bravery (overcoming a severe injury) he declared, “I love Brian Piccolo,” followed by clarifying who truly was brave. This was the movie that gave men permission to cry.

Pages: 1 2

• 1 Comment

•

by Reid Fitzsimons (note this article was first published at the American Thinker: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/01/progressives_give_them_just_enough.html)

Affluent progressives have the ongoing challenge of maintaining their wealth and status while keeping up appearances of benevolence and compassion. Regarding race, in post-WW2 America, as the old use of intimidation by Democrats to manage black people receded more subtle strategies were needed. These were mentioned by then Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, D-TX) who, in discussing the 1957 Civil Rights Bill with Sen. Richard Russell (D-GA) said: "These Negros, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppitiness. Now we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference..."

LBJ as Senate Majority Leader; he had a reputation for being physically dominating, called "the Johnson Treatment"

To put it another way, Johnson and his peers had to find a way to keep black people disenfranchised while appearing to empower them, and ultimately ensure they voted Democrat in perpetuity. Fooling and manipulating a targeted demographic is certainly not unique in history and this progressive approach proved to work spectacularly: it remains ubiquitous almost 70 years later. Autonomous and competent people are not amenable to manipulation, hence it became necessary to make the targeted demographic embrace the opposite: helplessness, dependency, and victimization.

Pages: 1 2

• 2 Comments

•

by Reid Fitzsimons (note an edited version of his article appeared in the American Thinker on-line magazine: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/11/at_2025_11_17.html)

On Oct. 18, 2025 a second round of anti-Trump demonstrations under the banner “No Kings” occurred throughout the US, with several million participants in total. Whether they are pampered hippies (or wannabe hippies) long past their sell-by date desperately trying to relive their youth or intrepid defenders of democracy, No Kings is an interesting phenomenon that warrants a closer look.

Older lady with pink hair at the June 2025 No Kings protest; Elderly people at No Kings protest
Pages: 1 2

• 3 Comments

•

By Reid Fitzsimons

Greta Thunberg achieved, at a young age, global celebrity as a professional protester and activist. She did not find activist fame in the usual way- first become a celebrity (eg actor or author) then exploit their status to preach about whatever they perceive as “injustice-” rather she ascended to the top by being perpetually and publicly aggrieved. She was born in Jan. 2003 in Stockholm, Sweden to parents of moderate fame: her mother is an opera singer and her father an actor and manager and seemingly are of at least moderate affluence. Thunberg apparently became depressed and anorexic when she was 11, perhaps over “climate change” (“I saw and heard these horrible stories about what humans had done to the environment, and what we were doing to the climate, that the climate was changing…”) and was soon thereafter “diagnosed” with Asperger’s syndrome, as compared to simply being a troubled child.

Left: Greta Thunberg at the UN 2019 Right: Blocking the entrance to the Swedish parliament 2024

Thunberg first appeared on the radar locally in 2018 when she was 15 via her Strike School for Climate campaign, where she skipped classes on Fridays to protest outside of the Swedish parliament. This led to invitations to speak at various rallies in Europe. A year later she was awarded global celebrity status by being a passenger on a hi-tech/ low carbon emissions yacht crossing the Atlantic Ocean and arriving at NY City to speak at a variety of climate protests and “strikes.” The culmination of this adventure was a speech she gave in Sept. 2019 at the UN, where she chastised the ostensibly climate concerned establishment with a speech that included “You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words. And yet I’m one of the lucky ones. People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!” It was noted by critics that sailing to NY rather than flying- making a statement, so to speak- was a bit silly because others had to fly across the Atlantic to deal with the logistics of the yacht. There was also cynicism in the fact that the vast majority of the world couldn’t reasonably sail across an ocean, let alone in an approx. $3 million yacht co-captained by a Prince of Monaco.

Pages: 1 2

• 3 Comments

•

by Reid Fitzsimons

There is a sense of personal liberation in being unburdened by thought and the pursuit of knowledge. If one can avoid uncomfortable experiences and banish from their sphere annoyances like different perceptions and opinions, they are freer to engage in self-gratification and pleasure, such as watching streaming TV, caressing an Iphone, sipping crafted coffees, getting tattoos, attending various protests, and all-in-all having a good time. If someone can dispel and render moot disagreement with their world view using a single word or mindless phrase, so much the better. After all, having to come up with a well-reasoned argument to support a position can be hurtful to the brain of certain people.

IRAN. August 27, 1979. After a short show-trial, 11 people charged as being "counterrevolutionary" were executed at Sanandaj Airport. Nine of the eleven men in this photo were Kurds. This photo won the Pulitzer Prize in 1980. The recipient was known as "anonymous" until 2006 when Jahangir RAZMI told the Wall Street Journal that he had taken it.
Left: Anti-red rally in the 1950s Right: One way to deal with people you disagree with in the newly created Islamic Iran, Aug. 1979

This approach goes back to ancient times and continues to the present. In the historic dark days of Christianity, for example, one merely had to make the accusation of heresy or witchcraft and the person who didn’t fit comfortably in your insulated world was gone, often literally. Or in the current dark days of Sharia Islam where calling someone an infidel can have a similar result. In the US, this isn’t necessarily a political right/left phenomenon, and there are recent examples of of it being used by putative conservatives: during the post-WW2 “red scare” it didn’t take much beyond accusing someone of being “red” or a “commie” to have a real negative impact on their lives. Presently, and for the past decade or so, this approach has been on the ascendancy with the progressive left, and is ubiquitous today.

Pages: 1 2