As we gather to celebrate both Easter and Passover this week, there exist minacious people and organizations that hate these two major religious groups, both observant and unobserved. The Mayor of New York City and his wife appear to be Hamas sympathizers. It seems the wormy and rotten Big Apple has learned nothing or simply forgotten the lessons of 911.

As the first Muslim Mayor of New York, he can and, as a public figure, probably does practice Taqiyah, an Islamic injunction where he can conceal his beliefs, and say anything, if it will protect him physically and professionally and further his politico-religious cause.

Too many Americans, especially our naive and excitable youth, view Hamas through quixotic, John Lennon–style kaleidoscope glasses, imagining it to be a righteous, radical “Resistance movement,” while ignorantly casting Israel as the antagonistic juggernaut of Western colonialism. Yet Judea and Samaria—now part of modern Israel—stood in the same place nearly three thousand years ago. This portion of the Levant is historically Jewish land. In 136 CE (Christian Era), the Romans renamed Judea and Samaria Palestina in an effort to strip the ancient Jewish property of its rightful history and heritage. 

There were no Arab Muslims in “Palestine” until long after the 7th century CE. Through military conquest, Islam spread across the Middle East, transforming societies that for centuries had been predominantly Jewish, Christian, pagan, Zoroastrian, atheist, and more. It’s hard to imagine that Persia (now Iran), Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Libya, Morocco, Lebanon, Turkey, etc., were once free to practice their original belief systems.

Iran, which supports Hamas and Hezbollah, guns down its protesters who are opposed to the cruel and corrupt government of its fanatical mullahs. How fortunate we are here in America to protest our political leaders without fear of retribution. No Kings, indeed.

Regarding Hamas, the Islamist terror organization, German-Egyptian intellectual Dr. Hamed Abdel Sama inquires, “Why isn’t Hamas building bomb shelters for the people (of Gaza)? Nobody is asking this question. Because Hamas needs victims, it needs children to die in order to keep its cause alive. If Gaza was destroyed and only the leaders of Hamas died, the world would stop sympathizing with this cause. It would be over. So why isn’t Hamas building bunkers for the children, instead of letting them die in order to present them in shameful pictures-pictures that violate children’s rights even after they are dead, and say ‘our children are dying?’ Didn’t you foresee this when you decided to launch missiles at Israel?”

 Hamas does not govern Gaza as a sovereign state but operates as a militarized base from which to attack the Jewish state with mortars and missiles. Its strategy is to provoke and pressure Israel into responding. By placing command-and-control centers, munitions depots, missile launchers, and tunnels inside civilian neighborhoods, hospitals, and businesses, this Islamist terror organization has cynically manipulated much of the Western world into viewing Israel as a criminal occupying power.

Had the five Arab nations—Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon—not attacked Israel one day after May 14, 1948, the rebirth of the Jewish state, there likely would not be a Palestinian refugee problem. 

Hamas, the resistance movement, invaded southern Israel on October 7th, 2023, murdering hundreds, burning families alive, raping, taking hostages, many of whom perished in captive squalor. The majority of victims were civilians because Hamas chooses “soft targets,” but will fight the IDF if they have innocent Palestinian civilians shielding them, thus winning the Western media wars. Approximately 1200 people, 80% of whom were innocent civilians were murdered by the drug-fueled Hamas terrorists. It is reminiscent of the Nazi military, which manufactured Pervitin, a potent amphetamine for the Wehrmacht (Army), Luftwaffe (Air Force), and the Kriegsmarine (Navy)

The following hadith or statement can be found in Sahih al-Bukhari (Book of Bukhari), which is second only to the Quran in Islamic authority. In the 9th Century, Imam Al-Bukhari compiled a collection of hadiths, or sentences, paragraphs, and complete narrations attributed to the Prophet Muhammad.  This Hadith can be found in Hamas’ mission statement: “The Hour will not come until you fight the Jews: until the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say: O Muslim, this is a Jew behind me; kill him.” -Sahih Al-Bukhari-2926.

 Finally, in 1920, the British Mandate of Palestine was declared by the League of Nations, but to appease the surrounding Arab nations the next year, Winston Churchill cleaved off three-quarters of the original Mandate and declared this land mass off-limits (to this day) to Jewish settlement. That land became Jordan.

Hamas and the Israel/Palestine Conflict are greatly misunderstood and misinterpreted, especially by those who, with profound ignorance, protest Is

-By Peter Fernandez

To the Editor:

Why was there 100% testimony condemning ICE and zero testimony commending ICE at the legislature’s public hearing on March 31, 2026?

It’s simple: the unified state media—including the Vermont Daily Chronicle and its radio broadcast—did not publish the date and time of the hearings. Only the opponents of ICE knew about it.

For the past three months, I have actively supported Guy Page’s campaign to defend ICE. I spoke publicly on his radio broadcast and committed to testifying at the hearing. Unfortunately, I didn’t learn the actual time until it was too late.

Guy claims he is simply “incompetent.” The real question is: incompetent, or controlled opposition—just like much of the Republican Party?

As soon as Governor Scott refused to defend ICE, they all surrendered to the Democrats.

Who will make this an issue in the next election? This time, Republicans won’t have Trump’s name at the top of the ticket, and Republican voters won’t turn out in the same numbers.

Unlike many Republicans, I am not controlled opposition. I will continue to defend sovereign citizenship and oppose illegal trespass.

I will now speak publicly on YouTube. You can find me at BRIAN PEARL VERMONT on YouTube to hear my full comments.

-Brian Pearl

To the Editor:

As a conservation biologist who resides in South Starksboro, Vermont, I was alarmed to learn that the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Board’s is considering a petition to allow hunting bear with bait. If this were allowed, it would contradict the recommendations of Fish and Wildlife Department biologists. In addition, the significant scientific evidence against baiting is compelling, revealing detrimental effects on bears, ecosystems, and public safety.

Bear baiting disrupts natural diets and behaviors. Studies show that artificial food sources can constitute over 40% of a bear’s caloric intake in the fall, leading to dependency on human-provided food. The concentration of bears at bait sites not only enhances their physical condition and reproductive success (creating more bears on the landscape) but also escalates human-bear conflicts. Cubs raised around bait are less adept at foraging and more likely to encounter humans and become problem bears.

Moreover, bait sites attract various omnivorous species, such as foxes, raccoons, and coyotes, creating unnatural animal concentrations. This situation heightens the risk of disease transmission, including sarcoptic mange, parasites, and bacterial infections. Additionally, bait piles can provoke violent territorial disputes among bears attracted to the same bait piles. The Fish and Wildlife Department’s advisories against feeding bears for these very reasons.

Beyond the direct impacts on bears, baiting also results in harmful effects on the surrounding forest ecosystems. Repeated bait sites create chronic disturbance patches, reduce tree seedling regeneration, increase soil disruption, and favor the spread of invasive plant species – impacts that extend well beyond the bait pile footprint and alter long-term stand dynamics.

Governance and ethics also play a crucial role. Historical policy failures, where political pressures overshadowed ecological science, underscore the need for decisions based on transparent, science-based principles. Most wildlife biologists advocate for prohibiting baiting, favoring better management of attractants, public education, and coexistence strategies.

Vermont’s commitment to ecological integrity, public safety, and ethical hunting is at stake. We must ask whether allowing bear baiting truly serves these values or undermines them. I urge the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Board to critically assess the peer-reviewed evidence and adopt an ecosystem-based, conflict-reducing policy.

If you feel, like I do, that bear baiting should be prohibited in Vermont, please contact the Fish and Wildlife Board (you can find the contact info for your county board member on the FWD website) and your state representatives and let them know that this would be a terrible policy for Vermont.

-Jennifer Lovett, Starksboro

To the Editor:

Favoring hunters limits property rights – There’s a lot of talk right now about landowner rights being violated and government overreach, but there’s a bill, H.723, in the Senate, that seeks to help Vermonters.

As the law currently stands, landowners must physically post and date signs every single year, no farther than 400 feet apart and annually record their property with the town clerk for a small fee if they want to keep strangers from hunting, hounding, or trapping on their land without their knowledge. Hunters, including those using packs of hounds, may be on your property even at night for certain species like raccoons and coyotes. If even one sign is missing or improperly dated, your property is no longer legally posted. People, including hunters themselves, post their land for different reasons and it is not the Government’s place to place such an unreasonable burden. 

During a February 18th House Environment Committee hearing, the Fish & Wildlife Commissioner didn’t try to hide his bias. He proclaimed, ““As a person who’s got 80,000 hunters—or 70,000 hunters, depending on the year—that need open, private land, I don’t want to make the path too easy for folks to slam the door on all these hunters… I need to look out for the hunters because I am one and because I am protective of them.” Why isn’t the Commissioner protective of the elderly, those with disabilities and others who are being forced to allow activities on their land because they cannot meet these strict land posting requirements?” Does the Commissioner pay our property taxes? Maintain our land? Does he deal with the consequences when your property rights are ignored? No, he does not. So why is he telling us what to do on our land?
The legislature has heard from hundreds of Vermonters who want to reclaim their property rights from a very clear act of government overreach. The original version of H.723 offered a purple paint provision similar to the state of Maine that would’ve greatly eased the posting burden and made it easier for wardens to enforce. The Fish & Wildlife Commissioner opposed that because he doesn’t want to ease the landowner burden. The current version of the bill is still worth supporting as it removes the requirement to date the posted signs. As long as your signs are legible, hunters, hounders and trappers are required to keep off. It also protects landowners in case a sign blows away or is torn down. Vermont has one of the oldest populations in the U.S. with close to a quarter of our population being 65 years or older. This bill provides Vermonters like me with a more practical solution to exercising my property rights.

-Lark Shields, Craftsbury