Wyoming Library Director and Children’s Librarian shock community by defending obscene books for children – and threatening county officials with lawsuit.

SEE: https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/23a/WY-Library-defends-obscene-books/index.html;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

After constant pressure from local MassResistance parents, County Commission had called a special meeting over the library book problem.

See the video below! Library staff uses absurd ALA talking points to bully and confuse officials.

January 31, 2023
The Campbell County Commission Chairman (top center) begins the special meeting "to come to a resolution" with library staff over the books in the children's and teen sections.

This is a rare occasion to hear library officials defend their toxic actions!

In Gillette, Wyoming, the outrage by MassResistance parents over the graphic sexual and homosexual books for youth in their county public library has continued to grow. But now the parents and their public officials realize that the library staff defends all its actions – and won’t back down an inch. The staff sees no problem with horribly obscene material in the hands of children and refuses to make any “judgments” about it.


For over a year, local Wyoming MassResistance parents and others have been pressuring the Campbell County Commission and the Library Board (which the Commission appoints) to force the library staff to remove the obscene sex books in the children’s and teen sections. Both boards were long dominated by hostile liberals, even in that “deep red” area, and progress was slow. But in 2022, the County Commission finally got a conservative majority, and in turn, they appointed a majority-conservative Library Board.

In October 2022 the new Library Board took the bold first step: cutting ties with the far-left American Library Association (ALA) and its Wyoming affiliate. As we’ve reported, the ALA trains library staff to collude with LGBT groups to suppress parents. The library staff was angry over losing this ALA “training” which they claim is necessary for “professional development.” But the Library Board was indicating that more changes were soon to come.

The County Commission calls a “reconciliation” meeting

On December 6, 2022, the Campbell County Commission called a special meeting of the Commission members, the Library Board members, the Library Director, and the library’s Children’s and Teen Director. The purpose of the meeting was to come to a resolution – and possible compromise – over the library books. The Commission Chairman truly wanted “to put this issue behind us.”

The public wasn't allowed to speak at this meeting, but they wanted to be there and see it - and make sure their officials knew they were watching!

But that’s not what happened. The library staffers refused to budge. They fought back with a barrage of the ALA’s aggressive and well-crafted talking points. And they defended the pornography in a most despicable manner. (See video below.)

The Library Director speaks

The meeting began with some introductory comments by the Chairman and some Library Board members. Then the Library Director, Terri Lesley, came up to speak and answer questions.

Terri Lesley, the Campbell County Library Director.

She went right to her ALA playbook of talking points:

  • She started by playing the victim. She accused a “group of people” (i.e., MassResistance parents) of “planning to come after the library … that’s how this thing started.”
  • She said that removing any books, or even moving books within the library, “is a First Amendment violation – and that means that we could get sued.” She told the Commission that this lawsuit will be very expensive and that the county’s insurance probably won’t cover it. “And it’s a lawsuit the county can’t win,” she said. [This is simply a fear tactic, and patently false. In fact, the ALA and ACLU lawyers almost never win these cases because they clearly aren’t First Amendment violations.] And she added that she will personally refuse to violate the First Amendment.
  • Another reason the books need to be there, she said, is that the library must “serve the entire community” [apparently including sexual deviants?] and that they’ve been “asked to provide books to meet everybody’s reading interest.”  [However, they refuse to include the book The Health Hazards of Homosexuality, which people in the community have asked the library to include.]
  • She stated, “Nobody has presented any hard evidence that library books have harmed people in this community.” [But in fact, there is overwhelming medical evidence that pornography and obscene material causes lifelong psychological damage to children and teenagers. That’s why child obscenity laws exist.] Nevertheless, she said that “social issues” are what cause problems for children, not obscene books.
  • Another reason that obscene children’s books should not be removed from the shelves: “If you don’t like the book, don’t check it out.”
  • She railed about losing the ALA’s “professional training.” and said that the staff is very upset about it and that the action has created a “hostile work environment.”

Finally, the County Commission Chairman asked her if she agreed with a pro-LGBT activist’s statement, “Drawings or artwork depicting penises and vaginas are informational and not thought-provoking or arousing to kids.” She answered that she agrees with that. She went on to explain that the sexually graphic novels in the library are useful because they help kids “grasp a concept.”

The Children’s and Teens' Librarian speaks

Next, Darcy Acord, the Children’s and Teens Librarian, came up to speak. Her statements were even more disturbing.

Darcy Acord, the Campbell County Children’s and Teens Librarian

She started by saying that when it comes to sexual issues, her job is to have a “variety of resources.”

When it comes to age level for books, she determines that by vocabulary, the difficulty level of reading, and the intended audience – not the content. She calls these “data points.” Also part of the data points is the “professional reviews” of the book. [Many of these books are “reviewed” by LGBT or Planned Parenthood groups, and have no credibility.]

She said the librarians do not look at whether a book is “appropriate” for a child or teenager. Just the opposite – she said they don’t believe in imposing any “values” when selecting children’s books.

The County Commission Chairman then asked her about a particular book in the teen section. He said that a large portion of that book included drawings and artwork of actual [homosexual] sex acts along with descriptions of a 14-year-old boy having a sexual experience with a 47-year-old man. He said, “That’s not informational. How can we agree that there’s an age group we don’t think it’s appropriate for?”

She answered that his question is about “opinion” and she needs to work with “data points.” She said she knows which book that is, and the reason it was in the library is that it passed the “objective parameters” that the library has for books for youth.

Another of the County Commissioners reminded her that obscenity doesn’t have absolute protection under the First Amendment. Since it’s the “obscene” books that get challenged in this library, how does the staff determine what’s “obscene” for books in the children’s and teen sections?

Her answer was bizarre. She said the term “obscene” isn’t objective. “We have to go back to objective data points.”  She reiterated that those data points include an intended audience, the age of the protagonist, professional reviews, etc. Thus, this book is about a 14-year-old – so it would go in the teen collection, she said. (You could see people’s jaws drop in the room.) She added that she refuses to give her personal definition of obscenity.

She didn’t stop there. She said, “It’s an individual’s or family’s right to read those books.” (In other words, child obscenity laws are a violation of children’s rights to read pornography.) She said that even though the books are available for children in the library, “nobody is forcing kids to read these books”.


Here’s the video clip of their statements before the County Commission. See it for yourself:

VIDEO: Library staffers defend graphic sexual children's books (12 min 46 sec)

The workshop ended with the Library Board Chairman saying that an entirely new collections policy (with completely different “data points”) is clearly needed to ensure that obscene books don’t enter the collection and that the library staff must remove books that do not comport with the new policy. This is clearly not what the library staff wants at all. It would also make it more difficult for any lawsuit. We’ll see what happens.

Final Reflections

This is basically how the flood of sickening sex books for children and teenagers gets into America’s libraries – and how public officials are intimidated into backing down.

Normal people don’t do this to children. Most folks don’t realize how innately perverted – and just plain evil – the people are who are running these libraries.

It’s disappointing that the Campbell County officials felt the need to “dialogue” and “negotiate” with the library staff over this. The Library Director and staff are employees of the county.

One point that’s rarely brought up is that these library staffers would be in prison if their states didn’t have a narrow exemption from their child obscenity laws for libraries and schools (which were written decades ago when people had common sense).

We have long asserted that bureaucratic “challenges” to obscene library books are not the proper approach. The books don’t bring themselves in. Bad people bring them in. Those people should be fired.

Mass Resistance will continue to be at the forefront of this fight across America!

Facebook Twitter Email Print

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!

These are the Republicans Protecting Ilhan Omar

Rep. Matt Gaetz: Ilhan Omar shouldn't be lumped with Schiff and Swalwell

Ilhan Omar's is unfit to serve: Andy Biggs

Ilhan Omar claims Republicans don’t want a Muslim on foreign affairs committee, are ‘OK with Islamophobia’


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2023/01/ilhan-omar-claims-republicans-dont-want-a-muslim-on-foreign-affairs-committee-are-ok-with-islamophobia;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Maybe the Republicans don’t want someone on the foreign affairs committee who is so far to the Left that she equates the U.S. and Israel with Hamas and the Taliban. But Omar knows how to play the Left and its media, and so she is making this all about identity politics.

“Islamophobia,” in this context as in all others, is a manipulative term designed to intimidate people into thinking it is wrong to oppose jihad violence and Sharia oppression, or even to criticize any Muslim, especially, in this case, Ilhan Omar.

“Omar says some Republicans don’t want a Muslim in Congress: ‘These people are OK with Islamophobia,’” by Julia Mueller, The Hill, January 29, 2023:

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on Sunday said some Republicans are “OK with Islamophobia” in response to questions about efforts by Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) to block her from continuing to sit on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

“You remember Donald Trump coming into my state and saying, ‘Muslims, Somali refugees are infiltrating our country.’ You remember [Rep.] Marjorie Taylor Greene [R-Ga.] coming to Congress after [Rep.] Rashida [Tlaib (D-Mich.)] and I got sworn in and saying, ‘Muslims are infiltrating Congress.’ You remember [Rep. Lauren] Boebert [R-Colo.] saying that I was a terrorist. What did McCarthy do? He said, ‘She apologized, and we don’t have to worry about her Islamophobia. That never happened,’” Omar said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“And so these people are OK with Islamophobia. They’re OK with trafficking in their own ways in antisemitism. They are not OK with having a Muslim have a voice on that committee,” Omar said.

McCarthy targeted Omar, the first Somali American and one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, for removal from Foreign Affairs. He also booted Reps. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) from the House Intelligence Committee.

Omar’s removal requires a vote by the entire chamber, while Swalwell’s and Schiff’s removals could be made by McCarthy alone due to rules around the Intelligence Committee.

“If they want to debate political differences, and that’s something that we should all have the opportunity to do so, but to smear someone and their character, their love for their country and the work that they get to do on a committee is wrong,” Omar said.

“And it is politically motivated. And, in some cases, it’s motivated by the fact that many of these members don’t believe a Muslim, a refugee, an African should even be in Congress, let alone have the opportunity to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

Omar has been accused of making antisemitic comments relating to American support of Israel. She has since apologized for the remarks and said on Sunday that “I might have used words at the time that I didn’t understand were trafficking in antisemitism.”

“To insinuate that I knowingly said these things, when people have read into my comments to make it sound as if I have something against the Jewish community, is so wrong. … I voted for every single resolution — no Republican can say that — condemning antisemitism. My work is clear,” Omar said….



SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2023/01/these-are-the-republicans-protecting-ilhan-omar;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

“We should be better than what the Democrats were.”

Can the new House GOP majority do anything? Even something as simple as booting Rep. Ilhan Omar off the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where she belongs as much as I belong on Al Qaeda’s councils, can’t proceed because some House Republicans are protecting her.

Why would they protect Miss “Some People Did Something?”

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) on Friday joined a group of House Republicans opposed to kicking Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) off the Foreign Affairs Committee, putting the high-profile effort dangerously close to failing.

Buck, a member of the right-wing Freedom Caucus, told NBC News’ Chuck Todd he is against Republicans removing Democrats like Omar from their committees.

Buck is the third House Republican to say they oppose removing Omar, along with Reps. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.).

“I think that we should not engage in this tit-for-tat,” Buck said.

Not engaging in tit-for-tat, better known as not fighting back, has worked brilliantly for Republicans thus far.

So what’s the plan to dissuade Democrats from doing this when they’re next in the majority? Scold them by emphasizing that Republicans will not lower themselves to engaging in any tit-for-tat. Do anything you like to us, but we will not respond with tit-for-tat.


After saying he’s opposed to Omar’s removal, Buck added: “I have a little bit less certainty about Congressman Schiff and Swalwell on Intelligence just because it’s a little bit different than a regular committee. But I’m going to think through that and make a decision.”

Deep thoughts are needed.

Rep. David Joyce (R-Ohio), the chair of the moderate Republican Governance Group, told Axios on Tuesday that Omar “should at least be given the opportunity to defend her prior statements” on the House floor.

“I haven’t taken a position on it because I haven’t seen a case against her, but I think she’s entitled to due process and she should be able to make her case on why she shouldn’t be [removed].”

“I don’t think tit for tat is necessary here,” said Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.). “We should be better than what the Democrats were.”

Dis someone send out a tit-for-tat memo?

The emerging consensus is that Republicans were elected to be “better” than Democrats by surrendering to them. It’s worked brilliantly for generations. Bound to work again now.

“When I am weaker than you, I ask you for Freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your Freedom because that is according to my principles.” ― Frank Herbert

Pope’s Moral Equivalence Between the IDF and Palestinian Islamic Jihad


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2023/01/popes-moral-equivalence-between-the-idf-and-palestinian-islamic-jihad;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

As is well known, big-hearted muddle-headed Pope Francis doesn’t take sides in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. As far as he is concerned, both sides are equally guilty of unleashing violence against the other; both deserve to be chastised and their respective acts of violence equally deplored. But of course, there is no moral equivalence between Palestinian terror groups, that plot to stab, shoot, and blow up with rockets innocent civilians, and the IDF, which seeks to defend the people of Israel by punishing and preventing such attacks. More on Pope Francis’ call for Israel and the Palestinians to stop what he calls their “spiral of death,” can be found here: “Pope calls for Israel, Palestinians to halt ‘spiral of death,'” Reuters, January 29, 2023:

Pope Francis on Sunday called on Israel and the Palestinians to engage in dialogue in pursuit of peace, deploring the recent violence in the region.

Speaking after the Angelus prayer in Rome, the Pope said he had been greatly saddened by the news of the Palestinians killed during Israeli counter-terrorism operations, as well as by the deaths of Israeli Jews in a synagogue terror attack on Friday.

Here’s the full report in the Vatican News on what the Pope said: “Pope prays for Holy Land as ‘death spiral’ widens in Jerusalem,” by Devin Watkins and Nathan Morley, Vatican News, January 29, 2023:

Pope Francis expressed his sorrow for the recent flareup in violence in the Holy Land on Sunday in his greetings following the noon-day Angelus prayer.

Since the beginning of the year, dozens of Palestinians have been killed in firefights with the Israeli army,” he said.

The Pope recalled the death of 10 Palestinians, including a woman, during an “Israeli military anti-terrorist raid in Palestine.”

He also lamented the deaths of 7 Israeli Jews who were killed, and three others who were injured, by a Palestinian as they were leaving a synagogue on Friday.

Note the order of things. The Pope first expressed his sorrow about the “dozens of Palestinians” who had been killed in firefights with the IDF since the beginning of 2023. Then he mentioned the death of ten Palestinians, most of them members of the terror group Palestinian Islamic Jihad, killed in Jenin. And only then did he see fit to mention the seven Israeli Jews who were killed in Jerusalem when he “also lamented” their deaths.

Why was Pope Francis “greatly saddened” by the deaths of eight terrorists who were in the final stages of planning a major attack? Was he “greatly saddened” by the death of Osama bin Laden? Was he “greatly saddened” by the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi? Was he greatly saddened by the death of Qassem Soleimani, the leader of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps? It’s an intolerable remark, bespeaking moral myopia.

How dare the Pope compares the deliberate murders of seven Israeli civilians, including a 14-year-old boy, with the killing of PIJ terrorists who had opened fire on the IDF soldiers who had arrived at their hideout to arrest them?

“I appeal to the two governments and the international community, and I ask them to find immediately, without wasting any time, other paths which include dialogue and the sincere search for peace.”

The Palestinians have rejected every Israeli offer for a peace settlement – in 2000, 2001, and 2008 – and the P.A. will only agree to talk if Israel commits itself in advance to being squeezed back within the 1949 armistice lines, which Abba Eban once described as “the lines of Auschwitz,” and which would leave Israel with a nine-mile-wide waist from Qalqilya to the sea. With such borders, the country could be cut in two by an invader from the East within an hour. As for that “search for peace,” Pope Francis ought to be directing his remarks to the unyielding and corrupt rais in Ramallah.

The Pope appeals to “the two governments.” But “Palestine” is not a state, and the Palestinian Authority is something much less than a government. The Pope ought to have made his appeal to “both sides.”

“It is with great pain that I hear of the news coming from the Holy Land.The spiral of death which is growing every day does nothing but kill the little trust that there is between these two peoples,” he said.

The Pope’s phrase “spiral of death” suggests another deceptive phrase that has often been used about the Israel-Palestinian conflict. We are told that an attack by one side or the other is part of a “cycle of violence” for which both sides must be equally blamed. But the violence proceeds thus: it begins with a terror attack by the Palestinians, involving the kidnapping or murder of several Israeli Jews, or the launching of rockets from Gaza into southern Israel; this leads to an Israeli attack to punish the terrorists responsible or to inflict sufficient pain on the Palestinians generally that the terror group or groups involved then decide to stop – for a while — their attacks.

Israel has had to fight four wars against Hamas in Gaza, each time in order to discourage Hamas from killing Israelis, or from launching rocket and missile attacks on civilians in such southern cities as Ashkelon and Ashdod. Israel, in fact, is not continuing a “cycle of violence,” but rather, trying to end, through punishing attacks, that “cycle of violence” everyone deplores but which few understand has been the fault solely of the Palestinians, for it has always been they who begin the violence.

Pope Francis, deploring the “spiral of death,” has refrained from passing any moral judgment on the two parties. Can he really think that there is no difference between Israel, only trying to protect its people and the Palestinians who wish to destroy the Jewish state? Since 1948, when the armies of five Arab states tried to snuff out the young life of the nascent state of Israel, the Jewish state had to fight two more wars for its very survival, in 1967 and 1973. Furthermore, Israel has had to fight many smaller wars against the Palestinian terror groups – the PLO, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade – that have launched thousands of attacks on the Jews of Israel. Does the Pope fully grasp this history?

In these attacks, which Pope Francis claims are part of a “spiral of violence” that he deplores, but about which he withholds judgment as to which side is more to blame, it has always been the Palestinians who have begun the violence, or more exactly, have never stopped their violence, and Israel strikes back not in every case, but mainly when a series of attacks have been particularly deadly, or when an Israeli attack will, in the opinion of the IDF, prevent a major attack from happening. The IDF’s entry into Jenin was undertaken to arrest those PIJ members plotting an imminent terrorist attack, as the Shin Bet had warned. It had no other purpose than to prevent that attack from taking place. This worry about terror attacks in Israel has recently become especially acute because, since last spring, there has been an upsurge in those attacks, and the IDF has, as a consequence, become more aggressive in raiding terrorist dens in Jenin and Nablus, currently the two centers of terrorist activity. The IDF went into Jenin not to kill, but to arrest the terrorists. But the soldiers were met with gunfire, and a three-hour gun battle ensued. When it was over, eight terrorists lay dead. Was the IDF fighting back in Jenin part of a “spiral of death,” or was it the justified reaction of those who had first been fired on? And wasn’t the mission itself, to prevent a terror attack on civilians, also justified? One would like Pope Francis to answer those questions.

The Pope seems to think that the murders in Jerusalem of seven Israelis by a 21-year-old Palestinian were in response to the gun battle in Jenin. But the Palestinian murderer had been planning for months to become a “martyr,” as his postings on social media make clear. The battle in Jenin did not prompt his violence in Jerusalem. The Pope wants to believe that we must blame this “spiral of death” on Israel, as one side – it doesn’t matter whether it is Israel or the Palestinians since both in his view are equally culpable – attacks the other; that other side then retaliates with its own attack, and again, the first side then responds, and there is no end to this. There is no room in Pope Francis’ understanding for moral judgments to be made on either side; it’s simply a case of two parties fighting each other for no good reason. The Pope is not about to suggest that the Palestinians’ reason for fighting is to bring about the destruction of the Jewish state, and Israel’s reason for fighting is to make sure that doesn’t happen. As the Pope sees it, every Palestinian who dies is just as much to be mourned as every Israeli; the “two peoples” (the Pope does not know that the “Palestinian people” were invented in the mid-1960s, at the suggestion of the KGB) must be helped by those who, like the Pope himself, will not presume to judge matters of morality, but will only work to end their “cycle of violence.”

In July, Pope Francis spoke of the possibility of retiring. That’s the best idea he’s had in a very long time.