White House Brags About Robbing Americans With Ease: Biden’s student loan cancellation plan that requires Americans to pay off debt that they are not responsible for
Dave Brat joined Addison Smith on "In Focus" to discuss:
Category: Free Speech/Constitution
California Passes COVID Policy Law Silencing Doctors
BY CAROLYN HENDLER, JD
SEE: https://thevaccinereaction.org/2022/10/california-passes-covid-policy-law-silencing-doctors/;
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
A new law in California will punish doctors if they give their patients information related to COVID-19 that does not conform to “contemporary scientific consensus” and can be deemed “misinformation” or “disinformation” by the California Medical Board or California Osteopathic Board. Assembly Bill 2098 was sponsored by State Senator Richard Pan, a pediatrician, and signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 30, 2022. It is scheduled to go into effect Jan. 1, 2023, and allows doctors to be charged with unprofessional conduct and put on probation of no less than five years or be suspended and lose their medical license.1 2 3 4
The California Medical Board and California Osteopath Board will have the authority to investigate and adjudicate claims that a doctor violated the law.5 If a physician is found to have departed from the government-approved “standard of care” policy related to COVID-19, one of the California medical boards could revoke his or her medical license.6
COVID Standard of Care Policies Have Frequently Changed Over Time
The government, employers, schools, colleges, and universities have often changed their policies on masking and COVID vaccinations over the past three years, which demonstrates that the government’s position on COVID-19 facts and policies changes and what is considered “standard of care” may be true one day but not be true the next. Even so, doctors in California who dissent from the government’s official positions on COVID-19 prevention and treatment could lose their careers for using their best professional judgement in caring for their patients.7
Highlighting that the bill is another attempt to eliminate free speech, lawyer Jonathan Turley said:
The problem is they are targeting the very people that we want to feel free to express concerns and doubts. These are the people that we need to be part of the debate, and they are chilling that debate.8
This new law effectively maintains that the current government-backed “contemporary scientific consensus” is the only medical advice that a doctor should be allowed to share with their patients about the ever-evolving SARS-CoV-2 virus, whether or not that “scientific consensus” evolves over time or current government policy is considered by a doctor to place a patient at risk because, for example, it is contraindicated by the individual’s medical history.9
Even staunch supporters of the COVID shots and mask-wearing have expressed concern with this new law censoring doctors’ private conversations with and treatment of their patients. Eric Widera, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco warned:
… the standard of care has changed a lot in 2½ years… What was misinformation one day is the current scientific thinking another day.10
Newsom Signs Assembly Bill 2098 Into Law Claiming It is “Narrowly Tailored”
On Sept. 30, Gov. Newsom signed the bill into law stating:
Assembly Bill 2098 provides that the dissemination of misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19 by physicians and surgeons to a patient under their direct care constitutes unprofessional conduct.11
Gov. Newsom defended his actions claiming that the bill was…
narrowly tailored to apply only to those egregious instances in which a licensee is acting with malicious intent or clearly deviating from the required standard of care while interacting directly with a patient under their care.12
The governor’s opinion is not supported by the language of the bill itself. There is nothing in the bill to suggest that it is “narrowly tailored” and only applies to “those egregious instances in which a licensee is acting with malicious intent” as Gov. Newsom suggests.13
The bill sets forth…
It shall constitute unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.14
The words “egregious instances” or “malicious intent” cited by Gov. Newsom are not mentioned anywhere in the text of the law. Perhaps that is because it is egregious to assume that a doctor, who shares a professional opinion about what would be in a patient’s best interest based on the individual’s medical history, is doing that with “malicious intent.”
Apparently, the California Medical Board plans to decide on a case-by-case basis what constitutes inappropriate professional behavior that requires punishment after receiving a complaint that a physician has disseminated “misinformation” or “disinformation” related to COVID-19 to a patient.15
According to California Medical Board spokesman Carlos Villatoro, when a complaint is received, the Board…
uses physicians who are experts in their field to review the individual facts and circumstances involved in the situation under investigation, and opine on the appropriate standard of care that should have been followed at that time. No two cases are the same, and the Board would make this determination based on the facts and circumstances of the given case.16
Since decisions will be made by California medical licensing boards based on facts and circumstances at the time of the complaint, doctors may unwittingly put their license on the line when they treat patients using their best professional judgment.17
Dr. Pan said that he proposed the bill to stop doctors like Simone Gold, MD, who founded America’s Frontline Doctors during the pandemic and formerly practiced in Beverly Hills, from providing patients with what he termed “misinformation” about COVID-19. Dr. Pan led the effort to remove the personal belief vaccine exemption from California public health laws in 2015 and, in describing this law, ominously said:
When someone blatantly provides misinformation, totally inaccurate information—especially with intention—that harms patients. That takes away the patient’s ability to make appropriate decisions.18
Dr. Pan’s statement raises two serious issues. First, it appears that he believes patients should only be allowed to receive COVID information and make “appropriate decisions” about their health care if he and the California Medical Board are the arbitrators of what constitutes an “appropriate decision.” In addition, the law does not speak about intention. If intention is not a component of the law, how can the California Medical Board infer or take a physician’s intention into consideration when doling out punishment?
Physician Critics of the New Law Speak Out
Jay Bhattacharya, MD, epidemiologist, and professor of Health Policy at Stanford University Medical School wrote an article warning:
The language of the bill itself is intentionally vague about what constitutes “misinformation,” which makes it even more damaging. Doctors, fearing loss of their livelihoods, will need to hew closely to the government line on Covid science and policy, even if that line does not track the scientific evidence… What is abundantly clear is that this bill represents a chilling interference with the practice of medicine. The bill itself is full of misinformation and a demonstration of what a disaster it would be to have the legislature dictate the practice of medicine.19
Dr. Bhattacharya points out that doctors have an obligation to treat their patients according to their individual needs and health history. This law contradicts that principle by requiring doctors to act as agents of the state, who are only allowed to repeat what some characterize as “scientific consensus” but others may characterize as government-backed propaganda.20
Legally, doctors owe a duty of care to their patients. This duty of care extends to warning and advising patients of the benefits, risks, and side effects of taking a medication or biological and allowing the patient to make an informed, voluntary decision about whether or not to take the risk, which supports the informed consent principle.21
When doctors are prevented from informing patients about the inherent risks of taking a novel vaccine or a drug that could potentially cause harm based on an individual’s health history, or a doctor is too afraid to say anything at all out of fear of being prosecuted for professional misconduct and losing the right to practice, it seems doubtful that this new law will protect doctors with a valid defense in a medical malpractice lawsuit.
Liberal activist Leana Wen, MD wrote in a Washington Post column:
While well-intentioned, this legislation will have a chilling effect on medical practice, with widespread repercussions that could paradoxically worsen patient care… The problem is that medical practice is rarely black and white. Much of the time, broad recommendations are intended to be tailored to the individual patient… Indeed, another lesson from covid is that science is constantly evolving. In a public health emergency, official guidance often lags cutting-edge research. Consider how long it took the CDC to acknowledge that the coronavirus is airborne. Should doctors have been censured for recommending N95 masks before they were accepted as an effective method for reducing virus transmission?
Kevin Kiley a California Assembly member predicted the courts will not allow the new law to stand and tweeted:
On Friday Newsom took a sledgehammer to the First Amendment by signing the medical censorship bill. The courts will strike down AB 2098 in short order.22
Lawsuit Already Filed in US District Court by Two Physicians
Two California doctors, Mark McDonald, a psychiatrist, and Jeff Barke, a primary care physician have already filed the first lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California asking for the law to be revoked. The doctors are represented by Liberty Justice Center and claim that the new law must be struck down because it violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments. A motion seeking a preliminary injunction has also been filed.23
Daniel Suhr, managing attorney at Liberty Justice Center, explained:
We rely on our doctors to give us their best medical advice, yet the State of California is stopping doctors from doing just that. That’s not just wrong, it’s unconstitutional. Doctors enjoy the same free speech rights as other Americans. The State of California cannot define a so-called scientific consensus on an issue and then punish anyone who dares challenge it.24
It is difficult to believe that the law will survive constitutional challenges and leaves open the bigger question: how could a bill that is overtly vague and unconstitutional on its face have been signed into law in the first place?
If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.
Click here to view References:
1 Purtil C. Doctors fear California law aimed at COVID-19 misinformation could do more harm than good. MSN Oct. 6, 2022.
2 Johnson R, Kory P. California Gov. Newsom must not declare war on doctors over so-called medical ‘misinformation’. Fox News Sept. 26, 2022.
3 Sacca P. Gavin Newsom signs bill making it easier to punish California doctors who spread COVID ‘misinformation,’ top epidemiologist warns: ‘Chilling interference with the practice of medicine’. The Blaze Oct. 2, 2022.
4 Ibid.
5 Purtil C. Doctors fear California law aimed at COVID-19 misinformation could do more harm than good. MSN Oct. 6, 2022.
6 Johnson R., Kory P. California Gov. Newsom must not declare war on doctors over so-called medical ‘misinformation’. Fox News Sept. 26, 2022.
7 Halon Y. California’s new bill that punishes doctors for COVID ‘misinformation’ is ‘chilling’ and ‘dangerous:’ Turley. MSN Oct. 3, 2022.
8 Ibid.
9 Johnson R, Kory P. California Gov. Newsom must not declare war on doctors over so-called medical ‘misinformation’. Fox News Sept. 26, 2022.
10 Purtil C. Doctors fear California law aimed at COVID-19 misinformation could do more harm than good. MSN Oct. 6, 2022.
11 Sacca P. Gavin Newsom signs bill making it easier to punish California doctors who spread COVID ‘misinformation,’ top epidemiologist warns: ‘Chilling interference with the practice of medicine’. The Blaze Oct. 2, 2022.
12 Newsom G. Statement to Members of the California State Assembly on the signing of Assembly Bill 2098 (Professional misconduct by physicians and surgeons in the dissemination of misinformation or disinformation to patients under their direct care related to COVID-19). State of California Office of the Governor. Sept. 30, 2022.
13 California Assembly Bill 2098
14 Ibid.
15 Purtil C. Doctors fear California law aimed at COVID-19 misinformation could do more harm than good. MSN Oct. 6, 2022.
16 Ibid.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Bhattacharya J. A Warning From Shanghai. Common Sense Apr. 12, 2022.
20 Ibid.
21 Nolo. A Doctor’s Legal Duty of Care Explained. All Law.
22 Sacca P. Gavin Newsom signs bill making it easier to punish California doctors who spread COVID ‘misinformation,’ top epidemiologist warns: ‘Chilling interference with the practice of medicine’. The Blaze Oct. 2, 2022.
23 Mark Mcdonald, Jeff Barke v. Kristina D. Lawson. Case 8:22-cv-01805 Document 1.
24 Doctors File Federal Lawsuit to Stop California Medical Censorship Law. Liberty Justice Center October 2022.
There’s a Public School Child Sexual Abuse Epidemic No One Is Talking About
BY MATT MARGOLIS
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Did you think Drag Queen Story Hours, transgender closets, and porn in school libraries were where sexually grooming kids ended in the public school system? Guess again. There is a widespread epidemic that has not gotten enough attention, and that’s the shocking number of public educators who have been arrested for child sex-related crimes this year.
Nearly 270 public educators have been arrested for child sex-related crimes in the first nine months of the year. These crimes have been against students of all ages, including anything from simple grooming to statutory rape.
According to Fox News Digital, one public school educator has been arrested every day this year. This includes four principals, two assistant principals, 226 teachers, 20 TAs, and 17 substitute teachers. The majority of the arrests (75%) were for alleged crimes committed against students. Roughly 80% of those detained were men.
Related: ‘Gays Against Groomers’ Organizes to Join Parents in the Fight Against Sexual Grooming in Schools
As disturbing as this is, the number of children whom public school officials and teachers have victimized is likely much higher, as the above numbers only represent those where an arrest has been made.
“The number of teachers arrested for child sex abuse is just the tip of the iceberg — much as it was for the Catholic Church prior to widespread exposure and investigation in the early 2000s,” Christopher Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News Digital. “The best available academic research, published by the Department of Education, suggests that nearly 10% of public school students suffer from physical abuse between kindergarten and twelfth grade.”
“According to that research, the scale of sexual abuse in the public schools is nearly 100 times greater than that of the Catholic Church,” Rufo added. “The question for critics who seek to downplay the extent of public-school sexual abuse is this: How many arrests need to happen before you consider it a problem? How many children need to be sexually abused by teachers before you consider it a crisis?”
Bank Allegedly Closes Religious-freedom Group’s Account and Demands Donor List to Reinstate It
BY MICHAEL TENNANT
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
JPMorgan Chase Bank recently closed the account of the National Committee for Religious Freedom (NCRF) without explanation, then offered to reinstate the account if the nonprofit would provide it with lists of its donors and endorsed political candidates, claims NCRF chairman Sam Brownback.
NCRF exists to protect religious freedom “by providing a critically needed political response to the ongoing attacks, in law and culture, on America’s First Freedom,” Brownback, former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, said in a January press release announcing the group’s formation.
Needing a place to store the NCRF’s funds, Brownback and the organization’s executive director “went into a Chase branch in the District of Columbia to open an account, no problem,” Brownback told Fox Business. “Then, several weeks later, I went to put another deposit in the account, and they said, ‘Your account has been canceled, we’ll be sending your money back to you.’”
In a September 27 letter to JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, Brownback wrote that the NCRF also received a letter “notifying us that Chase had decided to ‘end their relationship’ with the [NCRF] and that our account would be closed.”
According to Brownback, when the NCRF’s executive director called the bank about the matter, “the people said the decision was made at the corporate level, it’s secret, we’re not going to tell you why, and it’s irrevocable.”
“We were just stunned.”
The sudden, unexplained closure of the account was bad enough, but the story gets worse, at least in Brownback’s telling. In his letter, the NCRF chairman alleged that “someone from Chase eventually reached out to our Executive Director and informed him that Chase would be willing to reconsider doing business with the NCRF if we would provide our donor list, a list of political candidates we intended to support, and a full explanation of the criteria by which we would endorse and support those candidates.”
“Does Chase ask every customer what politicians they support and why before deciding whether or not to accept them as a customer?” he continued. “Are the same standards and scrutiny applied across the board to all non-profit organizations?”
Chase, for its part, isn’t commenting on the reason for the account’s closure. A spokesperson did, however, assure Fox Business that “we have never and would never exit a client relationship due to their political or religious affiliation.”
“We’ve just heard of way too many groups and entities, particularly religious-associated ones, that have been canceled by their providers,” he said. “And we want to start seeing some of these cases investigated.”
Indeed, Big Tech, Big Finance (including JPMorgan Chase), and Big Medicine have all been pushing for the cancellation — or even the prosecution — of dissenters from the “woke” zeitgeist. It would hardly come as a shock to learn that Chase did so in the case of the NCRF.
“I’ve done this work [on religious freedom] internationally for a long time,” Brownback told Fox Business. “Then I come back into the U.S., and I’m seeing this growing level of exclusion of people of faith, of putting them on the outside, and it really concerns me.”
“Any ground you lose on religious freedom here gets magnified around the world because everybody watches what we do,” he averred.
Brownback put Dimon on notice that his experience with Chase has led the NCRF to launch a project “to identify other organizations which have faced similar treatment on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs.” The group has already begun the campaign with the hashtag #ChasedAway. They also plan to petition state attorneys general to get involved, Brownback told Fox Business.
Noting that Dimon recently told the Senate Banking Committee that “freedom of religion” was one of America’s “core values,” Brownback asked him, “Do you, and the bank you lead, truly respect religious freedom as a core value that binds all Americans? The recent actions of Chase Bank would seem to suggest otherwise.”
Dimon has not yet replied to Brownback’s letter, the former ambassador said.
Dan Ball WITH Tina Ramirez: UNHINGED ‘Journalist’ Calls CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES On Mom Over Columbus Day, 10/12/22
Hundreds of Muslims Shut Down School Board Meeting Over LGBTQ+ Book Controversy
BY MEGAN FOX
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
This is the fight I’ve been waiting for. Let’s be totally honest. The only religious people the left is truly scared to offend are Muslims. Criticizing Muslims is completely off the table according to the left’s rules of engagement, so if Muslims are upset about something, the amount of twisting, back-bending, and acrobatics the left will perform in order not to offend them will be something to see.
So when hundreds of Muslim parents, upset at gay porn in the school libraries, showed up to a school board meeting in Dearborn, Mich., and it devolved into shouting and chaos with board members running away and gay protesters being chased to their cars, the fallout was absolutely hilarious. The headline in the Detroit Free Press after the event went haywire was “LGBTQ and Faith Communities Struggle for Unity.” BAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Can you imagine what the headline would have been if it were a Baptist church chasing gay protesters to their cars? “Fascist White Supremacist Book Burners Bash Gay Man in Parking Lot,” or “Rabid Religious Zealots Terrorize Gay Man Defending Right to Read,” or something equally terrible. I don’t know about you, but I’m enjoying this disaster.
Enjoy this thread and all the videos in it. I know I did.
I’ll be going over this hysterical story on today’s live stream. I’m covering the Darrell Brooks trial (if I can get through it and more). Meet me there!
RON DESANTIS FOR GOVERNOR-HIS LIFE & BACKGROUND
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PayPal Stock Plummets After Telling Users It Will Fine Them for “Misinformation”~PayPal Did NOT Back Down, STILL Threatens $2,500 Fines for Promoting ‘Hate’ and ‘Intolerance’
BY ROBERT SPENCER
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
The story was shocking: As PJM’s Rick Moran stated Saturday, “The financial services company PayPal announced a controversial policy to deduct up to $2,500 from the accounts of users who spread ‘misinformation.’” But as the news of this astonishing plan circulated far and wide, PayPal experienced a swift backlash in the form of a blizzard of account cancellations, and quickly backed down, claiming that the announcement went out “in error” and adding: “PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy.” That’s terrific, or would be if it weren’t for the fact that PayPal’s current Acceptable Use Policy still threatens $2,500 fines per infraction for promoting “hate” and “intolerance” — language the Left regularly uses to characterize (and demonize) speech that is critical of its insane policies.
Eugene Volokh pointed out Sunday that PayPal’s Acceptable Use Policy, which was last updated on Sept. 20, 2021, warns the unfortunate PayPal user that “you must adhere to the terms of this Acceptable Use Policy,” or else: “Violation of this Acceptable Use Policy constitutes a violation of the PayPal User Agreement and may subject you to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation, which may be debited directly from your PayPal account(s) as outlined in the User Agreement (see ‘Restricted Activities and Holds’ section of the PayPal User Agreement).”
Click on that “Restricted Activities and Holds” section, and you’ll find a long list of “you must nots,” including the expected prohibitions of fraud, selling counterfeit goods, and the like. But included on the list of things you must not do is “Provide false, inaccurate or misleading information.” False, inaccurate, or misleading in the eyes of whom? Why, of PayPal’s Leftist hall monitors, of course, and no one else, including the person PayPal accuses: “If we believe that you’ve engaged in any of these activities, we may take a number of actions to protect PayPal, its customers and others at any time in our sole discretion.” No one else’s. You’ll have no appeal, no recourse, and no opportunity to present your side of the story.
And among the “Prohibited Activities” listed on the Acceptable Use Policy page, you’ll find forbidden “the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that are discriminatory or the financial exploitation of a crime.” No problem, eh? You have never engaged in or ever plan to engage in any promotion of hatred, violence, or intolerance, so you’re in the clear, right? Wrong. Leftists routinely accuse patriots of promoting hate: Wanting a secure southern border is promoting hate. Not wanting to see our schools become platforms for genuinely hateful and false race grievance propaganda is promoting hate. Disagreeing with the Leftist dogma that Islam is a religion of peace is promoting hate. Not believing that Jan. 6 was an insurrection or that Donald Trump is a traitorous Russian puppet is promoting hate.
And so what PayPal’s still-in-force Acceptable Use Policy is saying is that at PayPal’s sole discretion, it can decide to start fining wrong thinkers and taking thousands of dollars from your account for the sole reason that you don’t toe the Left’s political line. PayPal backed down on fining you for spreading “misinformation,” but few people seem to have noticed at all that it still threatens to fine you for “hate” and “intolerance.” Don’t like drag queens sexualizing primary school children? If a PayPal wonk decides that’s “intolerance,” you could be out $2,500, and remember, that’s just for one infraction alone. If you dare to express your dissent more than once, you could be into PayPal for tens of thousands of dollars.
Can they do this? Will they do this? That depends on who wins the game of judicial roulette. Will a case challenging this get heard by a judge appointed by Obama or Biden, or by one whom Trump appointed? PayPal’s Acceptable Use Policy is one indication of why Leftists are so avid to pack the Supreme Court and so incandescently enraged with Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Give the Left a Supreme Court majority, and the ruling will come that PayPal is a private company that need not be bound by First Amendment considerations, and is free to put political pressure on its users however it may wish to do so.
It’s certainly time to ditch PayPal. But make no mistake: PayPal is not alone in this. They’re just out front on it. Before too long, every one of the social media giants and financial services will have similar policies, unless there comes to be such a change in the American customer base that these massive corporations see that woke fascism simply isn’t profitable for them, as tens of thousands of people, or more, stop using their services. That part is up to us.
Journalist Called Child Protective Services on State Senate Candidate—for Celebrating Columbus Day with Her Daughter
The Christopher Columbus statue is shown at Manhattan's Columbus Circle, Sunday Aug. 27, 2017, in New York. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews)
BY CATHERINE SALGADO
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Yes, you read that right. A leftist journalist called Child Protective Services on a Republican state Senate candidate and single mother because she teaches her daughter to celebrate Columbus Day. Apparently, celebrating the man who made it possible for America to exist and for us to live here falls under the leftist definition of “abuse.”
Self-described “Award-Winning Multimedia Journalist” David Leavitt called Child Protective Services (CPS) on Republican Virginia state Senate candidate and single mom Tina Ramirez for being pro-Columbus Day. The drama began when Ramirez referenced PayPal’s recent attempt to fine “misinformation”-spreaders $2,500. Ramirez tweeted, “Only women can be pregnant. Do I owe PayPal $2500 now?” Leavitt replied with the highly rational comment, “Why are you celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement?” Ramirez, apparently realizing that Leavitt was referring to Columbus Day, tweeted, “I teach my daughter real American history. I refuse to join the radical left’s campaign to erase history.”
Leavitt, who has over 330,000 Twitter followers, tried to start a harassment campaign against Ramirez, tweeting, “Can someone please call child care services on Tina Ramirez who’s teaching her child to be a racist?” He then evidently decided that he couldn’t wait for anyone else to report Ramirez, because he began to post an extended tweet thread complaining about how long the wait was on Virginia’s child abuse hotline. Perhaps the wait time is long because woke journalists call the hotline to complain that mothers are teaching their children history?
Ramirez fired back at Leavitt’s stunt, tweeting, “Mighty bold and liberal of you to lecture a Hispanic mother with a black daughter on racism. What’s next? Are you going to lecture me on women’s rights?” Leavitt sneered, “Having a black child doesn’t make you any less racist.” The journalist also retweeted dozens of comments bashing Ramirez and her pro-Columbus tweet, including comments like “Slavery is American history” and “I feel very sorry for your daughter. She will learn the truth one day and hate you for not helping her navigate racism, back lives matter, and all the ‘history’ you choose to ignore.”
Since Leavitt’s tweets revealed that he spent over an hour on the CPS line waiting to report Ramirez, the Republican candidate tweeted, “Radical leftist @David_Leavitt didn’t just call CPS to level accusations against me. He waited an hour on hold, tying up the lines of our CPS professionals trying to help Virginia’s children. The radical left is willing to put our children at risk to cancel conservatives.”
Despite calling CPS on Ramirez, Leavitt later cluelessly whined on Twitter, “I’m being the subject of targeted harassment by someone who’s celebrating the torture, rape, murder, and enslavement of indigenous peoples.” The “harassment” he quote-tweeted just said, “Poor Davey is upset about Columbus day 🙁 Get well soon, pal.” The journalist then claimed he’d received a death threat. He also tweeted about “#IndigenousPeoplesDay,” which is the left’s new name for Columbus Day but is apparently unaware that Columbus Day was established as a holiday to counteract violent prejudice against Italian Americans. The holiday’s purpose is to fight racism.
Related: Another Faux Native American Is Outed
While unjust deeds were done by Columbus’s men (often against his instructions) and Columbus did make mistakes, he was not a “murderer” of natives. He was, in fact, remarkably eager to treat the natives humanely. And there were natives who were very happy to see him. As Meridian Magazine explains, native chief King Guacanagari asked for Columbus’s help in defeating an enemy tribe of cannibals, who were “destroying” Guacanagari’s tribe. Columbus assisted Guacanagari to defeat the cannibals, and then sent captured cannibals as slaves to Spain. But his motivation for the latter action is far more humane than you might think, as he wrote to the Spanish monarchs, “We send by these two vessels some of these cannibal men and women, as well as some children, both male and female. Their Highnesses can order them to be placed under the care of the most competent persons to teach them the language.” Columbus added that he hoped the slaves “may one day be led to abandon their barbarous custom of eating their fellow creatures. By learning the Spanish language in Spain, they will much earlier receive baptism and ensure the salvation of their souls.” Columbus wanted to help even cannibals and enemies in the best way he knew how — by trying to get them to Heaven. Would Leavitt be that generous to men who had previously tried to kill and eat him?
The American Spectator wrote that the “crimes” of which Columbus is perpetually accused, including genocide and mass enslavement of natives, are “a total fabrication.” The Spectator cited original documents and noted that Columbus even defended natives against the Spanish.
Meridian Magazine describes Columbus by noting, “His relations with the natives tended to be benign. He liked the natives and found them to be very intelligent.” It’s too bad there isn’t more intelligence to be found from woke journalists.
Lives and Liberty Lost by Order of the Deep State~Freedom, innovation, progress, opportunity, and choice — all on the Left’s chopping block.
BY JONATHAN EMORD
SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/lives-and-liberty-lost-by-order-of-the-deep-state/;
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Three-quarters of all federal law is not enacted by those we elect but by the unelected heads of over 200 government departments, agencies, and bureaus. Under our Constitution, only Congress has the power to make laws (Art. I: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States . . .”), and yet, through a deliberate circumvention of the Constitution, federal agencies have for over one hundred and forty years created, enforced, adjudicated, and punished parties for violating laws Congress never enacted. Indeed, as Professor Philip Hamburger explains, the administrative state is largely indistinguishable from the dreaded Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission that the Founding Fathers condemned for their abuses and constitutionally prohibited.
The Administrative State makes decisions that sacrifice individual liberty and property, but also even human life—all without adherence to constitutional limits on government power. A single example can illustrate the point. For over sixty years, to protect drug companies from competition, the FDA has maintained a blanket ban on information associating nutrients with disease risk reduction, thus giving drug companies a monopoly on therapeutic claims. Under that ban, the FDA prohibited Americans from receiving at the point-of-sale information associating 800 micrograms of folic acid in dietary supplements with a reduction in the risk of neural tube defects (e.g., spina bifida and anencephaly). That ban was held unconstitutional in Pearson v. Shalala in 1999, but for at least two decades before the Court ruled, FDA’s censorship resulted in an estimated 2,500 preventable NTDs each year and countless NTD-related abortions. FDA continues to censor numerous nutrient-disease claims that, if allowed, would save lives.
Consider just a few more examples of the unconstitutional power and abuses visited upon us by the Administrative State. The Founding Fathers were very familiar with general warrants and believed them antithetical to individual liberty; they prohibited them in the Fourth Amendment. Prohibited, general warrants are nevertheless used every day by federal administrative agencies, a flagrant violation of the Fourth Amendment. In Stanford v. Texas, the Supreme Court explained that “[v]ivid in the memory of the newly independent Americans were these general warrants known as writs of assistance under which officers of the Crown had so bedeviled the colonists.” Justice Potter Stewart wrote for a unanimous Court that Americans were entitled to “’ be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects from intrusion and seizure by officers acting under the unbridled authority of a general warrant.” Yet every day, general warrants are issued by federal agencies, like the FTC, the EPA, and the BLM, acting without a federal court order and commanding Americans to produce all manner of the most sensitive financial records and documents entirely on suspicion and without ever having to prove probable cause.
As early as 1895, in Coffin v. United States, the Supreme Court made unequivocal that those accused by the government were entitled to a presumption of innocence. Yet every day the Administrative State presumes those it accuses to be guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Moreover, the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is ignored in the administrative law context, such that routinely individuals accused by agencies are ordered to provide testimony against themselves.
It is a cardinal constitutional principle, articulated well by Madison in Federalist No. 47, that the prosecutor not also be the judge because impartial justice is impossible when the very official seeking conviction of the accused is also the one with legal authority to decide the dispute. Madison wrote: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” And yet, when administrative law judges decide a case, their decisions are but recommendations to the agency heads, the very heads who ordered the prosecution in the first place. That leads to biased decision-making. Indeed, former FTC Commissioner Joshua D. Wright explained that in his agency’s history, he could not find a single instance in which the accused was ever found innocent of the wrongdoing charged by the FTC: Every time FTC accuses, it holds the accused guilty!
Under the Sixth and Seventh Amendments, every American is entitled to a jury trial before the government imposes a penalty (a restriction on his or her liberty or a command that he or she pay the government money or forfeit property). And yet, when administrative agencies impose huge fines, discontinue any enterprise, or deny the accused the right to advertise, label a product, or market a good or service, the party affected is denied the right to a trial before an impartial jury of peers.
These are among many violations of constitutional rights that take place across the United States as Administrative Agencies enforce their rules which Congress never passed into law. There are thousands of Americans who have lost their jobs, lost their businesses, lost their livelihoods, and, indeed, lost their liberty and lives because of government agencies depriving Americans of constitutional rights to achieve politically preferred outcomes. The Deep State has swallowed not just political enemies but honest, hard-working Americans in virtually every field of endeavor. Freedom, innovation, progress, opportunity, and choice have all been put on the chopping block by the voracious regulatory state that now dominates and controls America.
Until we limit law-making to Congress, as the Constitution requires, and until we end Administrative Agency rights violations, we will never enjoy that liberty that is our birthright as citizens of our constitutional republic. An updated version of a bill I wrote with Norm Singleton for Ron Paul years ago would help solve the problem. Called the Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act, it would prohibit any administrative agency proposed rule from taking effect unless passed into law by Congress, and it would sunset every existing regulation within three years unless passed into law by Congress. Add to that a requirement that agencies bring charges before independent federal courts, elimination of administrative law courts, and demand for de novo judicial review of all agency actions, and we would be well on our way to restoring the constitutional rights protections taken from us by the Administrative State.
Reprinted From Townhall.
Is This America? Jan. 6 Prisoners Ask for Transfer to Gitmo~When a U.S. administration treats Taliban prisoners better than American citizens.
BY ROBERT SPENCER
SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/is-this-america-jan-6-prisoners-ask-for-transfer-to-gitmo/;
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Since Jan. 20, 2021, America has gone swiftly from being a free republic to being an authoritarian regime in which foes of the rulers are locked up and subjected to conditions that are designed to destroy them and deter others from emulating them. Based on the false claim that the Jan. 6 entry into the Capitol constituted an “insurrection” aimed at nothing less than overthrowing the government, the Biden regime, chiefly Attorney General Merrick Garland, is working to criminalize legitimate political opposition to the Democrats’ far-Left agenda. In his infamous Sept. 1 speech before an ominous red-and-black backdrop and two Marines, Biden claimed that “MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.” Those were not mere words. The regime is acting upon them.
The Biden regime has decided to treat the Jan. 6 protesters, who are overwhelmingly patriotic Americans guilty of nothing more than supporting the former president and being concerned about the integrity of the 2020 election, as if they were dangerous enemies of the state. And so in America today, we not only have a Marxist regime that wants to crush all dissent; we have a gulag and political prisoners.
Last Sunday, Gateway Pundit published a letter from 34 of these prisoners to Garland, a rabid partisan and sinister authoritarian who has sicced the FBI on parents protesting the woke agenda at school board meetings, and who is virtually certain to ignore it and allow the inhuman treatment it describes to continue. The prisoners wrote:
When one considers a society that distinguishes itself upon the standards of a “First World Country” allocation among the other numerous Nations around the globe, while informing its citizens that they belong to a country that ensures “Liberty and Justice for All”, it’s difficult to imagine then, that The United States of America, supposedly the wealthiest Nation on the planet, would subjugate its own citizens to that of incarceration and injustice instead, all while administering medieval standards of living to the agonizing occupants of its “Correctional Facilities”.
The prisoners went on to charge that in the District of Columbia Jail, they were “all but slowly murdered in every way except for their very soul being ripped from their famished chests on behalf of this mercilessly sinister institution.” They added that “if this pale dungeon of Human Rights Violations dared to summon any honesty of hard choice pertaining to the abhorrent atrocities that take place behind these unforgiving doors, they should erect a sign above the front gate that says, ‘Abandon All Hope, Yee [sic] Who Enter Here.’”
These Americans, whose most serious crime is trespassing, state that they “have and will continue to endure” a long list of horrors, including “Begging for Help / Water / Medical Aid / Mercy through a 4-inch by 10-inch window of cold metal doors”; “No Visitations”; “No Religious Services”; “No Attorney Access”; and “Mail delayed 3-4 months prior to delivery.” Their laundry is returned “with brown stains, pubic hair, and or reeking of ripe urine.” They have found worms in their salads at mealtime, and the food is so poor that many are now suffering from a variety of ailments. In their cells, they endure black mold, cockroaches, and mice, and are denied “basic cleaning equipment to sanitize Living Space.” They have been “Stuck in Cells for 9 days without showers.” Medical professionals arrive months after they were requested, or not at all. They’re allowed to use tablets that are filled with “C.R.T. Propaganda”; “Re-Education Propaganda”; and “Racially Biased information.” They are made to endure “Solitary Confinement for 25 ½ hours or more at a time.” They have been “repeatedly Mocked and or Insulted for our skin color or “religious” documentation,” and have been “compared to ‘Beasts’, ‘Dogs’ and ‘Hogs by ‘The Final Call’ Magazine.” Jail staff mock them by wearing “Democrat, Black Lives Matter, Kamala Harris, Joe Biden related attire.” Meanwhile, they are “sent to ‘The Hole’ if we express any political views whatsoever.”
That isn’t even close to all of it; the prisoners even charge with physical and sexual assault by the guards. They accordingly ask Garland: “We hereby request to spend our precious and limited days, should the government continue to insist on holding us captive unconstitutionally as pre-trial detainees, to be transferred and reside at Guantanamo Bay, a detention facility that actually provides nutritional meals, routine sunlight exposure, top-notch medical care, is respectful of religious requirements, has centers for exercise/entertainment for its detainees despite the fact that those residents are malicious terrorists, real members of the Taliban and few are United States Citizens, instead of remaining trapped within the wretched confines of cruel and unusual punishment of the DC Jail.”
This is not grandstanding. The few remaining prisoners at Gitmo are treated far better. Biden’s handlers have a far more positive view of the Taliban than they do of conservative Americans. It is breathtaking that anything of this kind could happen in America, and it’s an indication of how far the Biden regime is from our founding principles. But this treatment will continue: the regime needs its scapegoats, and its bogus “insurrection” narrative, and so these unfairly persecuted people will continue to be made to pay for the crime of being in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.
VIRGINIA: ‘CHILDREN DON’T BELONG TO THE STATE!’ GOVERNOR Youngkin Defends Parental Rights in Schools
“Parents have a fundamental right to be engaged in their children’s lives,” Youngkin said. “And, oh, by the way, children have a right to have parents engaged in their life. And we needed to fix a wrong…children don’t belong to the state. They belong to families. And so, in these most important decisions, step one has to be to engage parents, not to the exclusion of a trusted teacher or an adviser, but to make sure that parents are involved in their children’s lives.”
LAKE OF FIRE: ‘We Have an Invasion, Our People Are in Danger~There’s No Time to Delay’
LAKE: "We're going to invoke our Article 1, Section 10 authority to take care of our own border...We meet all three criteria. We have an invasion, our people are in imminent danger, and time is of the essence. There's no time for delay."
FDA Withholds Autopsy Results of Those Who Died After COVID Shots
BY MARCO CACERES
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has refused a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to release the autopsy results of people whose deaths were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) after receiving a COVID-19 shot. The FOIA request was submitted by The Epoch Times newspaper.1
“VAERS is a centralized vaccine reaction reporting system that was among the safety provisions secured by parents of DPT (diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus) vaccine injured children in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986,” explains Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder-and-president-of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). It is jointly operated by the FDA and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).2 3
According to The Epoch Times, the FDA declined to release any autopsy reports of VAERS deaths, even redacted copies, citing FOIA section (8) (A) which allows federal agencies to withhold information from the public if an agency “reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption,” with the exemption being “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”1 4
FDA Refusal to Provide Autopsy Info Attributed to Concerns Over Personal Privacy
The FDA reportedly also cited federal law that blocks the release of “personnel, medical and similar files the disclosure of which constitutes a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”1 4
One possible reason for the FDA’s reluctance is that neither officials at the FDA nor at the CDC have found (or at least openly admitted) a “causal association” between the COVID shots and the post-COVID vaccination deaths reported to VAERS. A study published last year in the journal Clinical and Experimental Vaccine Research stated:
These regulatory agencies have not found a causal association, and there is no reason to state that the COVID-19 vaccine causes death. Data from the VAERS and available clinical information (death certificates, autopsies, and medical records) does not establish cause and effect between deaths and reported deaths. Deaths following vaccination equated to deaths caused by vaccines are irresponsible, misleading and scientifically inaccurate.5
To release autopsy reports of people who died after receiving COVID shots might lead to uncomfortable questions about the conclusions reached by FDA and CDC officials and raise the specter of a national re-evaluation and lots of second opinions regarding the safety of the shots.
That does not appear to be a conversation these and other public health officials at the helm of government agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and, specifically, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), appear anxious to have.
Those responsible for operating these federal agencies, not to mention countless doctors, scientists, and politicians around the country, have staked their reputations on assuring the American public that the COVID shots do not cause harm, much less death. Why indeed would they want to investigate and give space to a conversation by asking legitimate questions and offering dissenting views?
More Deaths After COVID Shots Reported in VAERS Than Any Other Vaccine
It must already be difficult enough having to acknowledge the 16,516 deaths in the U.S. reported to VAERS after COVID vaccinations as of Sept. 14, 2022.1
Still, it is a public conversation that should be allowed to take place. After all, it is no minor thing that, as Fisher notes, “There have been more deaths reported to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccinations than for any other federally recommended vaccine since VAERS became operational in 1990.”2
All of the FDA’s stated concerns about protecting privacy seem rather bogus, as the autopsy results sought through the FOIA request could be released with personal information blacked out. “The personal information could easily be redacted without losing the potential learnings from [the] autopsy,” said Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who serves as an adviser to the FDA.1
Besides, Witczak logically points out:
If someone submits their experience to VAERS they want and expect to have it investigated by the FDA. This includes autopsy reports. Autopsies can be an important part of postmortem analysis and should be done especially with increased deaths following COVID-19 vaccination.1
Why is transparency on this issue such a stumbling block for the FDA?
If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.
Click here to view References:
1 Stieber Z. EXCLUSIVE: FDA Withholding Autopsy Results on People Who Died After Getting COVID-19 Vaccines. The Epoch Times Sept. 30, 2022.
2 Fisher BL. More Deaths Reported to VAERS Following COVID-19 Vaccinations Than for Any Other Vaccine. The Vaccine Reaction July 11, 2021.
3 TVR Staff. Only One Percent of Vaccine Reactions Reported to VAERS. The Vaccine Reaction Jan. 9, 2022.
4 The United States Department of Justice. THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, 5 U.S.C. § 552.
5 Lamptey E. Post-vaccination COVID-19 deaths: a review of available evidence and recommendations for the global population. Clin Exp Vaccine Res September 2021; 10(3): 264–275.
Robert Spencer Video: The FBI’s Relentless Hunt for ‘Right-Wing Extremism’~FBI Spied on Aretha Franklin for Forty Years
BY JAMIE GLAZOV
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Aretha Franklin Reveals Why the FBI Deserves No R-E-S-P-E-C-T
BY ROBERT SPENCER
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Has any government agency burned its reputation with the American people more quickly than the FBI? It wasn’t all that long ago that the vast majority of Americans assumed it to be an unimpeachable group of selfless and patriotic law enforcement officials who had dedicated their lives to protecting the American people from all enemies, foreign and domestic. But Rasmussen Reports revealed in August that “a majority (53%) of voters now agree” with Roger Stone’s statement that “we have a group of politicized thugs at the top of the FBI who are using the FBI…as Joe Biden‘s personal Gestapo.” And we do. But maybe we always have, and just weren’t as aware of it as we are now. It turns out that the FBI that we thought was ramrod straight and incorruptible, the FBI of Eliot Ness and Efrem Zimbalist Jr., was using your taxpayer money to track none other than Aretha Franklin. Not exactly a dangerous criminal. And that’s the problem.
Kids, Aretha Franklin was and is known as the Queen of Soul, and for good reason. She was the extraordinary singer who gave us the unforgettable “R-E-S-P-E-C-T,” “I Never Loved A Man (The Way I Love You),” “You Make Me Feel Like A Natural Woman,” “Until You Come Back to Me (That’s What I’m Gonna Do),” and a host of others. Unlike today’s crop of songstresses, few of whom (if any) could tie Ms. Franklin’s shoes, she was a singer first and foremost, not a lecturer or political commentator. Nonetheless, the New York Post reported on Tuesday that she was “tracked by the FBI for 40 years as the agency repeatedly sought — but ultimately failed — to tie the Queen of Soul to ‘extremists’ and ‘radicals,’” as has been revealed in documents that have just been declassified.
Rolling Stone magazine obtained Franklin’s FBI file and found in it a record of “false phone calls, surveillance, infiltration, and highly-placed sources” that the feds inflicted upon Franklin between 1967 and 2007. The file is full of references to “black extremists,” “pro-communist,” “hate America,” “radical,” “racial violence” and “militant black power.” It opines that Martin Luther King’s funeral, where Franklin sang, could turn into a “radical situation,” adding that “Sammy Davis Jr., Aretha Franklin… of this group, some have supported militant Black power concept.” Accordingly, King’s funeral could “provide the emotional spark which could ignite racial disturbance in this area.”
Forty years of this surveillance, forty years of taxpayer money wasted, and the feds found nothing, absolutely nothing, that they could use against Aretha Franklin. Her son, Kecalf Franklin, says: “I’m not really sure if my mother was aware that she was being targeted by the FBI and followed. I do know that she had absolutely nothing to hide though. It does make me feel a certain way knowing the FBI had her targeted and wanted to know her every move. But at the same time knowing my mother and the way she ran her business I know she had nothing to hide so they wouldn’t have found anything and were wasting their time. As you see… they found nothing at all.”
Related: Defund the FBI?
Indeed. But it’s bad enough that the effort was made. Why was the FBI wasting valuable resources tracking someone who was quite obviously not a criminal? Was there some dearth of actual criminals in the United States between 1967 and 2007 so that the feds could afford to burn through taxpayer money keeping tabs on an innocent person? Or was the agency’s need to justify its budget paramount above all other considerations to the extent that it opened up investigations of people who had done nothing wrong precisely because these investigations would burn through money and resources, and maybe even justify asking for a budget increase the following year?
Nowadays, when the FBI has been implicated in the Russian Collusion hoax and has steadfastly refused to do anything about the manifest indications of illegal activity on Hunter Biden’s laptop, these questions become all the more urgent. Nowadays, surveillance is a great deal easier and cheaper than it was in the 1960s and 1970s, and when the Biden regime is engaged in an effort to portray its principal political opponents as representing “an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic,” the fact that there are decades of precedent for it abusing its power by placing innocent people under surveillance is nothing less than chilling.
Aretha Franklin was just the start. If the FBI could surveil her, the feds can and will surveil anyone and everyone. Even you. The FBI, in the midst of this corrupt and authoritarian administration, has definitively lost any claim it may once have had to R-E-S-P-E-C-T.
Could PayPal Policy Allow Them to Deduct Up to $2,500 From Your Account for Spreading ‘Misinformation’?
WRONG THINK? THE ARBITER & MINISTRY OF TRUTH, COMMUNIST-STYLE!
DR. STEVE TURLEY: Woke PayPal May Go BANKRUPT!!!
BY RICK MORAN
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
UPDATE 5:18 p.m.: PayPal says we misunderstood them, and they’re so sorry we got all riled up for no reason.“An AUP [acceptable use policy] notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy,” a PayPal spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email. “Our teams are working to correct our policy pages. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused,” the spokesperson added.
This wasn’t a mistake. PayPal issued their revised AUP policy in September that included the stricture against “sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials that, in PayPal’s sole discretion, (a) are harmful, obscene, harassing, or objectionable, etc.” If nobody had said anything, they would have gone ahead with it.
Original story:
The financial services company PayPal announced a controversial policy to deduct up to $2,500 from the accounts of users who spread “misinformation.”
Beginning November 3, the company will expand its list of “prohibited activities,” including “the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials” that “promote misinformation” or “present a risk to user safety or wellbeing.” Users will also be penalized for “the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory.”
The kicker is, PayPal decides what’s “hate” speech, what’s “misinformation,” and what is “intolerant,” etc. Somehow, I don’t think their notion of “misinformation” would match yours or mine.
It’s apparently very expensive to oppress points of view the company disagrees with.
Deliberations will be made at the “sole discretion” of PayPal and may subject the user to “damages” — including the removal of $2,500 “debited directly from your PayPal account.” The company’s user agreement contains a provision in which account holders acknowledge that the figure is “presently a reasonable minimum estimate of PayPal’s actual damages” due to the administrative cost of tracking violations and damage to the company’s reputation.
“Administrative costs” of $2,500 being a “reasonable minimum estimate” of damages? Haven’t these guys ever heard of the “internet”? Here’s a PayPal joke for you: How many PayPal employees does it take to do an internet search for violent language from one user? Answer: Whatever they say it is.
“Under existing law, PayPal has the ability as a private company to implement this type of viewpoint-discriminatory policy,” Aaron Terr, a senior program officer at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, explained to The Daily Wire. “Whatever motivation PayPal has for establishing these vague new categories of prohibited expression, they will almost certainly have a severe chilling effect on users’ speech. As is often the case with ill-defined and viewpoint-discriminatory speech codes, those with unpopular or minority viewpoints will likely bear the brunt of these restrictions.”
Platforms such as Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook have formerly censored conservatives and others who subscribe to heterodox positions on controversial social issues, including transgenderism and homosexuality. GoFundMe seized millions in funds raised for trucker protests in Canada earlier this year, while Google recently began suppressing search results for crisis pregnancy centers.
“These kinds of policies are unwise, threaten free speech, and invite legal risk,” Jeremy Tedesco, vice president of corporate engagement at Alliance Defending Freedom, told The Daily Wire. “When companies apply policies to restrict the religious speech of their customers, they could run afoul of prohibitions on religious discrimination that exist in many state and federal laws.”
This is why the left is terrified of someone like Elon Musk taking over Twitter. Musk is not a right-winger by any means, but neither is he a radical leftist, as most social media platforms are run by and answerable to. Musk would actually make an effort to be fair — an intolerable situation for those intolerant of other viewpoints.
Make no mistake, conservatives will have their beefs with Musk for suspending and deleting accounts on the right. He is not a free-speech absolutist by any means. But the left will not control him. And that’s what they’re up in arms about.
Professors in Connecticut Reject Parents’ Involvement in Their Children’s Education
Yet another instance of elitism and condescension in academia.
BY JAY BERGMAN
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Last month an English teacher at Southington High School in Southington, Connecticut distributed to his students materials intended to facilitate “conversations about race, gender, equality, and inclusivity.” Among the claims students were expected to accept without question is that in America racism is “a systemic issue,” and that while “no individual is personally responsible for what white people have done or for the historical decisions of the American government, you are responsible for whether you are upholding the systems that elevate white people over people of color.”
After the materials became public, and parents in Southington made known their objections to the school board and to the superintendent of schools, 72 faculty at Southern Connecticut State University (SCSU) sent a letter claiming that parents had no business objecting to their children’s education: determining what their education consists of was the sole prerogative of the school system, and any materials Southington students received in its furtherance were intended simply to spur discussions of issues in the public domain, such as “the American historical narrative and whether we are truly an individualistic meritocracy in which freedom and equality reign.”
If debate and discussion had been the objective, the stamp of approval the SCSU faculty provided would be warranted. But what the English teacher intended – and what the SCSU faculty show they favor by supporting him — is indoctrination, not education. Amidst the assurances in the SCSU letter that its signers favor a diversity of viewpoints in the classroom is a statement supporting “white privilege” in the curriculum as a means of helping students to “contextualize” literature. But that would seem to suggest that white privilege in America exists, and that to question its existence is impermissible.
It is not an established fact that America today is systemically racist, favoring whites over people of other races, and that all whites, whether they know it or not, are complicit in this. If the English teacher and his supporters on the SCSU faculty had merely done a Google Search, they would have come across incisive critiques of these claims; among the most eloquent are those of African-American scholars such as John McWhorter, Glenn Loury, and Thomas Sowell. Moreover, if they had thought seriously about “systemic racism,” they might have realized how nonsensical it is: surely the ubiquity of Affirmative Action preferences favoring blacks and other “underrepresented” minorities in virtually every institution in America today proves its absence. In fact, the whole notion flies in the face of simple logic: unless they were idiots or clinically insane, the white racists who supposedly control America would not install and perpetuate something so contrary to their own interests.
But what is most egregious about the SCSU letter is not its confusion of opinion for fact. Rather, it is its condescending insinuation that since teachers should be autonomous in determining how subjects requiring special knowledge such as science, mathematics, and foreign languages should be taught, they should also be free to impose their own opinions or those of the school system on issues in history and the social sciences, on which people might fairly and legitimately disagree. The signatories of the SCSU letter seem to consider teachers everywhere, not just in Southington, uniquely privy to The Truth, and anyone who dares to challenge their presumption of omniscience should simply shut their mouths. To do otherwise, in the overheated language of the SCSU letter, is “to descend down the slippery slope of allowing parents to circumscribe and dictate the nature of public education.” As if that would be the worst outcome imaginable!
The SCSU faculty who signed the letter are wrong.
No less an authority than the United Nations, Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, passed by the General Assembly in December 1948, states that “parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” The good parents of Southington, and parents everywhere else in America, should reclaim what is perhaps their most essential parental right and obligation, namely to guide the moral education of their children so that as adults they can act as independent and autonomous citizens in a free society, capable of resisting the imposition of any dogma by government, private organizations, school systems, or college faculties.
Jay Bergman is a Professor of History at Central Connecticut State University and serves on the Board of Directors of the National Association of Scholars.
Here’s What Happened When a Concerned Mom Dressed Like Drag Queen at a School Board Meeting
BY MATT MARGOLIS
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
For years now, we’ve seen woke schools hiring drag queens to perform for young kids as some sort of exercise about tolerance and diversity. If you spoke out about it, you were a bigot.
Earlier this year, it was reported that New York City schools spent over $200,000 putting drag queen shows on for their students.
This is only part of the trend of inappropriate things happening in schools with the full knowledge and consent of woke school boards. Sexually explicit books are also being carried in school libraries and incorporated into curricula—all in the name of “tolerance.”
One school that brought in drag queens was in Ankeny, Iowa, and video from the performance was shared by Libs of TikTok.
The event sparked outrage, but one mom, Kimberly Reicks, decided to speak out about the inappropriateness of drag queens being used to entertain kids, and dressed as one of them to make her point.
“Does this outfit make you turn your head?” Reicks asked. “Does this outfit seem appropriate for anybody here to see? This is what the man dressed like in front of our kids. So if this makes your head spin — if this pisses you off in any way, shape, or form — it should. Because I’m embarrassed to stand here in the outfit that I am in today, but I have a point to prove — that this outfit should not be ever accepted in our schools anywhere.”
Reicks told The Daily Wire that the Ankeny Community School District is “notorious” for dismissing parental concerns.
“It has been over 131 days since I made our school board first aware of this event,” she explained. “We are now 32 days into the new school year and we still have no answers on what the outcome of the investigation was. Nor do we have any new policies to ensure things like this do not happen again.”
“I will do whatever measures I have to, to make sure events like this are addressed and resolved,” she added. “Even if that means wearing the exact same outfit as the 21-year-old drag queen performer to prove my point.”
Previously published footage of the drag queen event at the school showed that it wasn’t merely a performance; the drag queens were given an opportunity to groom kids with gender identity propaganda.
“When I felt like I couldn’t express myself in school, or I felt like I had to look like this at school… I could be whoever I wanted to be,” one drag queen told the students. “And I started to think, ‘What is gender?’ And I realized that no matter what pronouns you use, you are who you are… I know on the inside that I am who I am.”
SCOTUS Rejects Gun Rights Group’s Challenge to ATF Bump Stock Ban
MORE EVIL THAN HITLER: American Medical Association endorses horrific medical MUTILATIONS of children, demands police state DOJ arrest anyone who disagrees
BY MIKE ADAMS
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
(Natural News) In a shocking act of medical tyranny and authoritarianism, the American Medical Association is now demanding that the DOJ arrest and prosecute anyone who opposes surgical child mutilations carried out in US hospitals that fraudulent claim they are “affirming” a child’s “gender identity” by maiming them with medical violence.
“Leftist child abusers turn to the police state,” writes Daniel Greenfield at FrontPageMag.com:
When they get caught abusing children, the first resort of the leftist abusers, whether it’s the National School Boards Association or the American Medical Association is to label their opponents ‘domestic terrorists’ and demand that the Biden administration use the DOJ to arrest and silence them.
Now, the AMA is pro-mutilation, putting the organization in the same moral category as serial murderers, rapists, or Holocaust operatives.
Any doctor who remains a member of the AMA is now aligned with the for-profit mutilations of children in the name of “wokeism,” and America’s medical establishment joins the ranks of communist China with its forced organ harvesting in terms of outrageous acts of evil committed against humanity.
If they will mutilate children for profit, what other crimes will they commit against adults to make more money?
Furthermore, if AMA member doctors are willing to mutilate children for profit, what else are they willing to do for extra revenues? Could they perhaps falsely diagnose people with cancer so they might earn more money administering medically unnecessary chemotherapy? (Of course they do.) Might they falsely claim people have “complex COVID” so they can earn an extra $500K for their hospital by putting those people on ventilators and remdesivir, killing them in the process? This is the substance claim of a lawsuit that has already been filed against three hospitals in Fresno, California, which the lawsuit says profited by committing medical fraud and essentially murdering their own patients.
If the AMA is willing to mutilate children for profit, any rational person has to assume there’s no line they won’t cross. There’s nothing AMA-member doctors won’t do — no matter how evil — to make more money off the pain and suffering of innocent children and adults.
“Evidence-based medicine” is a joke: There’s ZERO evidence that a child can change their gender through surgery and chemical castration
The claims of the AMA, Big Pharma, and western doctors who say they only practice “evidence-based medicine” are absurd, if not downright fraudulent. No evidence exists whatsoever to claim that covid vaccines are proven safe and effective for any human being. The clinical trials were skipped, and the FDA resorted to Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) under the false panic of the plandemic to skip the long-term trials and simply declare mRNA injections to be safe, without supporting evidence.
And now, as Revolver.news is reporting, Big Pharma refuses to turn over mRNA data for independent assessment, indicating they are hiding the truth and committing an historic, global fraud in pushing covid “vaccines” that are neither safe nor effective:
In scientific circles, doubts arise as to whether the information provided by the manufacturers about the mRNA vaccine is correct. Biontech/Pfizer and Moderna have so far refused to independently verify the data. A Seiko member is now also criticizing.
Virologists, epidemiologists, pharmacologists – they may not have always been friendly to each other during the pandemic. But they are now coming together on one point: it is the demand for an independent review of the studies that led to the approval of the mRNA vaccines from Biontech/Pfizer and Moderna. The studies are published. However, the primary data, scientifically the decisive documents, are missing. All vaccine evaluations of the registration studies are based on them. Until now, the documents have been kept under lock and key by the manufacturers, and they are refusing requests to see them.
Similarly, there is zero evidence that a child can consent to a genitalia mutilation procedure under the delusional fairy tale belief that a person can “change their gender” through the use of a scalpel. This ludicrous idea being pushed by LGBT leftists (and complicit surgeons) is founded on the psychotic belief that children are born in the “wrong” bodies and that surgeons with scalpels can “correct” their biology by cutting off existing organs and making new holes or appendages to simulate replacement organs.
Mark my words: One day soon, in the not-too-distant future, this practice will be seen as the true HORROR it has become, alongside the gassing of the Jews, the mass starvation of Ukrainians via the Holodomor, or the Cultural Revolution genocide of communist China under Mao.
We are watching crimes against humanity unfolding right before our very eyes, with the full blessing of both the AMA and the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics), who are literally invoking the DOJ as a kind of “medical Gestapo” to silence anyone who opposes the violent mutilation of children.
“The worse the crime, the more the need to resort to police state tactics by the same leftists who accuse conservatives of being ‘authoritarians’,” writes Greenfield.
Even Adolf Hitler didn’t mutilate children for profit, but AMA doctors and surgeons do!
This is not hyperbole: Western Medicine has now declared it is in the mutilation business, forever cementing its own fate to go down in history as a dark art of quack science, child abuse, and human rights violations that will reverberate throughout history for centuries to come. Future historians will look back upon this time and shake their heads in disbelief that an entire class of so-called “doctors” would applaud the surgical mutilation of children, aghast at not only the practice itself but at the arrogance of the AMA demanding that the DOJ investigate and arrest anyone who opposes the practice.
The message is rather clear: If these AMA doctors can’t murder you with remdesivir, depopulate you with vaccines or mutilate your genitalia with scalpels, they will unleash the full might of the police state against you to threaten and silence you into compliance.
Western medicine has become a criminal cartel of violent mutilators who prey upon the young. After surviving the covid vaccine holocaust that has already killed millions around the world, why are we not surprised?
This is worse than Hitler, for even as Hitler murdered millions of innocent Jews, he did not mutilate children and call it “medicine.” He did not brainwash an entire generation of young people into hating their God-given bodies and trying to manipulate them into surgical harm.
Indeed, Hitler murdered millions and gassed innocent men, women, and children to death using chemical weapons (developed, ironically, with the help of a pharmaceutical giant named Bayer), but even Hitler did not slice off the breasts of little girls or the penises of little boys. Even in his own twisted, sick mind, such acts of horrific violence were probably unthinkable.
Yet those very horrors are now the “accepted” practices of today’s mainstream surgeons and doctors. The medical establishment is now an industry of medical violence against children, and the AMA has lashed itself to one of the most horrific evils ever carried out in the history of the world. Even China, with its organ harvesting of the Falun Gong, doesn’t mutilate children for profit. That designation appears to be emerging solely from western medicine (steeped in depopulation vaccines and deadly pharma drugs), where the very same nations who claim to be pro-Ukraine, pro-democracy, and pro-choice are permanently mutilating the bodies of children, taking away their choice to revert back to their actual God-given gender and to be whole in their birth bodies. Once the organs are sliced off, after all, there’s no getting them back. These children will grow up to be physically and psychologically scarred victims of a medical establishment gone criminally insane.
As one commenter writes: (DasWrite, via Front Page Mag)
Add the AMA to that rapidly growing list of once-respected organizations, including the FBI and the DOJ itself, that need to be disbanded or extensively reformed. They’ve abused whatever authority they had by allowing themselves to be weaponized by leftist ideologues for so long that they’re no longer forces for good but tools for totalitarian oppression.
We pray that a wave of lawsuits seeks substantial damages from these surgeons and hospitals for maiming children for profit, ruining their lives in the process. The AMA and AAP should both be named in the suits and held accountable for their promotion of these child mutilations carried out for profit. Alex Jones is being sued for hundreds of millions of dollars right now for harming no children at all and carrying out no acts of violence, merely speaking his opinion about a school shooting, an opinion which he soon corrected when new information was available. Yet AMA member doctors and surgeons are literally mutilating children with glee, for profit, marketing their services on social media (to children) and bragging about their mutilation achievements to a complicit corporate media that endorses the charade.
More importantly, if the DOJ were to arrest and criminally prosecute anyone in this scenario, it should be the doctors, surgeons, hospitals, and AMA executives who are carrying out these heinous crimes against children, all in violation of the AMA’s own guidelines for medical ethics, by the way. There are crimes against children being carried out right now in America, and the parties carrying out those crimes aren’t even hiding it… they’re bragging about it.
Medical violence against children must stop.
The medical establishment in America has become a cabal of torturers, mutilators, murderers, and propagandists. Please God make it stop…
Learn more in today’s Situation Update via Brighteon.com:
– The AMA demands DOJ prosecute anyone who opposes surgical child mutilations
– Outrageous escalation of MEDICAL DICTATORSHIP that exploits children for profit
– Leftists demand ALL opposing views be censored on climate, covid, elections, trans, etc.
– Berkeley law students demand “NO JEW ZONES” where Jews are banned
– Left-wing UK nurse says conservatives should be left to DIE
– Migrants enjoy 5-star cruise ship in the Netherlands while citizens starve
– Federal Reserve rolling out social credit scoring pilot project to enslave everyone
– Planterra to shut down its entire fake meat operation
– “Slow Food” activists demand global mass starvation and famine
– Radical Left is at WAR with the sky, the oceans, the sun, and the elements
– 60% of Americans now living paycheck to paycheck
– Kiyosaki tells listeners to keep buying gold and silver even as it gets cheaper
– Total collapse of the power grid in Bangladesh
Woman Rejects Democrats After Being Told to Sign a Workplace “White People Are Racist” Contract
BY SELWYN DUKE
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
“The business of progressives is to go on making mistakes,” noted G.K. Chesterton ages ago. Well, for one Pennsylvania woman, they just made one mistake too many. In fact, says family attorney Nicole Levitt, it’s to the point where “political liberalism seems to have passed me by.”
At issue is that as part of employer-mandated “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) training, she was asked to sign a contract stating that “all white people are racist,” as Levitt put it in a July video. She refused and now has filed an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaint against her employer.
Levitt explained in a Sunday article that she was enthusiastic about joining her current company. She states that being a licensed professional counselor as well as a lawyer, she finds it fulfilling to work in family law, working with domestic violence victims; she says she has even done pro bono work in the field, and her current workplace allows her to indulge her passions.
Levitt doesn’t mention who her employer is, but she’s identified as an associate attorney at We Care Legal Services, PLLC at the entity’s website. However, Levitt states that her current employer is “based in Philadelphia” while We Care Legal lists offices only in Levittown and Doylestown in Bucks County (which does border Philadelphia). So it is possible, though perhaps unlikely, that We Care Legal is a former employer that has not sufficiently updated its website.
Levitt’s problems started after the 2020 death of drug-addled criminal George Floyd. Levitt states that most of her employer’s clients are non-white and that her workplace “organized meetings about it [the incident]; everyone was upset.” She continued:
This evolved into having what was later referred to as diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) sessions, where we had affinity groups where staff were separated out into groups based on ethnicity, for example into a white group and a Black group. I was told that I had to attend a white affinity group meeting, but eventually, I was given permission to not attend, because I really didn’t agree with being separated by race.
… I felt it was very regressive. I felt that we didn’t need to listen to one group over another and split ourselves off into groups….
I found the approach of my organization to be very divisive and to be taking time away from our mission.
… I have always been adamantly opposed to racism. I joined the Racial Equity Committee at my job in 2020, but over time, I personally found the language used against white people to be very dehumanizing. I also discovered that there was to be a difference in stipends paid to members of the Racial Equity Audit Taskforce (“REAT”), where Black members of REAT would be paid more than their white counterparts. That seemed not only wrong, but illegal, a violation of US civil rights laws.
… And I was even asked to agree to a “Full Value Contract” shared over email that included a point saying we had to “Own that all white people are racist and that I am not the exception.”
It should be emphasized that Levitt is no conservative. Under the aforementioned July video, posted by the Jewish Institute for Liberal Values (JILV), it’s stated that she “is an active member of the Philadelphia Jewish community and is a founding volunteer of the [JILV].”
Levitt also states that she “used to be liberal” and is still “a more classic liberal,” but feels “politically homeless” with wokeness’ ascendancy and now doesn’t have affection for either major party.
Levitt also relates that the revisionist, anti-American, discredited 1619 Project was presented as truth at some of her company training sessions. Par for the course as well, Levitt says that by objecting to her workplace’s divisive program, she was accused of sowing division. Levitt relates her experiences in the JILV video above.
Levitt believes her employer’s “singling out [of] white people” and creation of a hostile work environment “is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.” She’s also not alone, as these woke anti-white policies have been embraced by workplaces, schools, colleges, and organizations nationwide.
Know that while Levitt has been alienated from the hard Left, she still hasn’t been red-pilled; in fact, she calls her employer’s trespasses “one of these cases where good intentions have gone very awry.”
And it’s not unusual to hear — though it was far more common decades back — that “liberals have good intentions” (with which they pave a road to Hell). But is this true?
Does it reflect good intentions when you tout “sanctuary cities” and condemn those opposed to illegal migration, but then avoid having migrants in your midst, as recently happened in Martha’s Vineyard, New York City, and Chicago?
Does it reflect good intentions when you advocate defunding the police, but then enjoy private security while non-white people you claim to champion must deal with the burgeoning crime?
Does it reflect good intentions when as in Dumbo, Brooklyn, leftists push diversity but then recoil when it’s introduced in their own schools, with one actually saying, “It’s more complicated when it’s about your own children”?
It’s easy being idealistic when you don’t have to live with your ideals. It’s easy being charitable when you outsource your charity. Why, with good intentions like that, who needs bad ones?
__________________________________________________________________
SEE:
MEDICAL MUTILATIONS: Hospitals increasing irreversible child transgender surgeries as American healthcare system descends into hellish nightmare for children
BY J.D.HEYES
SEE: https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-10-04-hospitals-more-irreversible-child-transgender-surgeries.html;
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
(Natural News) The American health care system is the latest institution to have become completely dominated by left-wing ideologues and hypocrites who think about the welfare of patients last and their politics and pocketbooks first.
That explains why a growing number of hospitals are actually taking part in gender reassignment surgeries for children that are permanent and could eventually lead to a life of disturbing depression and mental illness for recipients — all because they make money.
One of them — Seattle Children’s Hospital — has recently doubled down on its “mission” to remove the sex organs of developing children “even as pressure mounts on health systems to quit pushing irreversible surgeries on adolescent patients,” The Daily Caller reported this week.
On its website, the medical facility brags that it is “the only pediatric academic medical center with fellowship-trained plastic surgeons who provide gender-affirming surgery in our region — Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho.” A hospital spokesperson told The Daily Caller that despite increased pressure and tension over the permanent life-altering procedures, the facility will continue to perform “gender-affirming care” on children.
“We will continue to offer evidence-based gender-affirming care because it is lifesaving care and is aligned with our mission to help every patient live their healthiest and most fulfilling life possible,” the spokesman said. “Seattle Children’s providers are specifically trained to care for the unique needs of adolescents, teens, and young adults. This allows our team to offer personalized care that is tailored to meet each patient’s individual needs and goals.”
The “Surgical Gender Affirmation Program” at the hospital says it “treats teens and young adults” who are allegedly having gender identity issues using “complex procedures, including face and neck surgery, top surgery (breast/chest), bottom surgery (genitals) and body contouring.”
Billboard Chris, a father of two and activist traveling the country to warn about these harmful life-changing surgeries noted on Twitter: “Tissue harvesting for construction of a phallus. Gender-affirming hysterectomies must be done first, which WPATH now recommends for 17-year-old girls. This procedure is performed in children’s hospitals across the nation.”
“Of course, @BostonChildrens plays inspirational music in the background when advertising these services to kids. They might not make as much money if they showed these pictures,” he added in another tweet, detailing that a children’s hospital in Boston is also providing similar surgeries.
Listen to this ghoul explain:
While Seattle Children’s claims that patients have to wait until they are 18 years old to undergo genital reconstruction surgery that includes intestinal vaginoplasties using sections of the bowel to create a phony vagina, the institution also says that “a typical age is mid-teens or older” for other procedures, the hospital’s website says.
While it may be possible to ‘create’ certain body parts, the fact is humans are born either male or female, and honest physicians would tell you that biological sex really does matter when it comes to the prescribing of certain medications that affect males and females differently or can affect them differently.
“Men and women frequently have different experiences in relation to medicines and drugs. Sometimes the differences are seen in adverse effects or a drug having a greater effect. These differences can be related to the physiological differences between men and women, as well as other gender-specific differences,” the Alternative to Meds Center notes in a fact-checked article.
Worse, though, these life-altering surgeries are being performed on young people and kids without any thought as to whether they might someday have regrets or a change of heart — when it’s too late.
These people are sick; they are not ‘healthcare providers.’
Sources include:
Parental Authority: The Basis of Civilization
BY DENNIS PRAGER
SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/parental-authority-is-the-basis-of-civilization/;
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
As most Americans now realize, America is experiencing a societal breakdown. This should be obvious to anyone, even those facilitating this breakdown as they openly acknowledge they seek to break down American society.
This is a society that teaches its youngest citizens a suicidal lie: that America was founded in 1619, that it was built on slavery, and that even today it is systemically racist. At the same time, it does not teach the fundamental moral fact that every culture practiced slavery — Arab, Muslim, African, Asian, Native American — and usually more viciously (e.g., Arab slave masters routinely castrated black slaves so that they could not reproduce) than in America.
This is a society that robs its youngest of sexual innocence. Teachers — nearly all of them women, the sex that society has always regarded as the natural guardians of sexual innocence — now routinely sexualize young people with discussions of sexual behavior and by having drag queens perform for them.
This is a society that has taken as a given that there are more than two sexes; that has Jewish and Christian clergy sign emails with “preferred pronouns”; that will praise the Disney Corporation for dropping all references to “boys and girls” from its theme park announcements.
This is a society in which refusing to say that men give birth can lead to social banning and the loss of one’s job and income.
This is a society that encourages violent crime. It elects prosecutors who allow violent criminals to avoid having to pay bail. Its elites advocate defunding the police. It keeps raising the dollar amount of stolen goods that constitute a felony. In short, America is now a society in which the dominant message to would-be criminals is that crime pays.
This is a society in which fewer and fewer young people are marrying, fewer are having children, and more are having children without being married, usually without a father in the life of the child.
This all began with the demise of moral authority — and moral, social, and intellectual chaos is the inevitable result.
Prior to the 1960s, America had moral authority — God, country, parents, the Bible, teachers, police, and clergy.
Not one of them is a normative authority today.
Starting in the 1960s, each one was overthrown. The ’60s motto “Never trust anyone over 30” perfectly embodied this — given that every one of these was older than 30. Soon, teachers were called by their first names and frequently talked back to, even cursed; on college campuses, “America” was often spelled “Amerika,” and the flag is now declared a symbol of white supremacy; police were referred to as “pigs”; clergy were rendered irrelevant; the American motto, “In God we trust,” was ignored or mocked; and the Bible went from the dominant book in American life to the trash heap of history.
Most important, parental authority rapidly declined.
Moral stability — in other words, civilization — is dependent on parental authority. Once that breaks down, all the others mentioned here also break down.
If you look at the two tablets of the Ten Commandments, you will notice that each tablet has five commandments. The first five are laws between man and God, while the second five commandments govern behavior toward fellow human beings (do not murder, steal, etc.). The first four “rest” on the Fifth; and the second four “rest” on the Tenth.
Taking the second tablet first, the four commandments that precede the Tenth depend on obedience to the Tenth Commandment. When people murder, commit adultery, steal or offer false testimony, it is almost always because they “covet” what their neighbor has — his property, his animals, his spouse.
Likewise, the first four commandments regarding God as the One Moral Authority rest on people obeying the Fifth Commandment: “Honor your father and mother.”
Parental moral authority is the vehicle to divine moral authority. That is why the Fifth Commandment, to honor one’s parents, is the only human-to-human commandment on the first tablet. It is also the only one of the Ten Commandments that promises a reward — “that your days on the land will be lengthened” and “so that it goes well with you.” You will have a long-lived civilization and things will go well with you when parents have moral authority.
Beginning in the ’60s, parents stopped telling their children what to do and instead began asking them to do things. Parents became much more interested in being loved by their children than in being honored by their children. Children stopped fearing parents, and parents began fearing their children. Parents became much more interested in their children’s feelings than in their behavior.
Today, elementary schools and high schools work to diminish all parental authority. The most obvious example is hiding from parents that their 10-year-old says he or she is not their biological sex. And should a parent tell his or her 10-year-old, “This is not so, you were born a boy and you are a boy” or “You were born a girl and you are a girl,” those parents run the risk of having the child taken away from them, not to mention severe condemnation from doctors, psychotherapists, and social workers.
One result of the breakdown of parental authority is that we probably have more child-parent alienation than at any time in American history. There are millions of parents whose adult children will not talk to them — many of them because of the way the parent voted (if the parent voted for former President Donald Trump, not if the parent voted for Hillary Clinton or President Joe Biden).
The bottom line is this: when parents don’t rule the home, chaos will rule society. And chaos always breeds tyranny. So, the choice is stark — either we have strong parents, or we will have a strong state.
The Berkeley ‘No Free Speech for Jews’ Movement
BY DANIEL GREENFIELD
SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2022/10/the-berkeley-no-free-speech-for-jews-movement;
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
Kenneth Marcus, who under Trump all too briefly served as Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the Department of Ed, calls the move by nine student affinity groups and organizations at Berkeley’s School of Law to ban Jewish speakers to be “Jewish-Free Zones.”
Nine different law student groups at the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Law, my own alma mater, have begun this new academic year by amending bylaws to ensure that they will never invite any speakers that support Israel or Zionism. And these are not groups that represent only a small percentage of the student population. They include Women of Berkeley Law, Asian Pacific American Law Students Association, Middle Eastern and North African Law Students Association, Law Students of African Descent and the Queer Caucus. Berkeley Law’s Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, a progressive Zionist, has observed that he himself would be banned under this standard, as would 90% of his Jewish students.
Tellingly, the rationale for this was the familiar one of safe spaces.
“In the interest of protecting the safety and welfare of Palestinian students on campus,” allies of the anti-Israel accepting its antisemitic rationale, “will not invite speakers that have expressed and continued to hold views or host/sponsor/promote events in support of Zionism, the apartheid state of Israel, and the occupation of Palestine.”
Safe spaces have become judenrein spaces. Much as they’ve become conservative-free, as they’ve purged women who believe in their own existence and anyone un-woke. Safety means total ideological tribalism and eliminating those who disagree.
And the free speech movement at Berkeley has become a no-free speech for Jews movement.
Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, who had previously come out against the entire category of restricting ‘hate speech’, has offered criticisms of the move, but if a dozen organizations had effectively banned black speakers from campus by say adding a code stating that they will only accept black speakers who think that slavery was wonderful, the response would be more than criticism.
This kind of thing is a straightforward case of disparate impact. And disparate impact has been used to sue universities, including Berkeley, before. Any restriction that effectively bars Jewish students from participating in a good deal of student life and restricts their career opportunities is an actual apartheid move that should be met with serious legal actions, not mere words.
Those who know history may remember the ‘Ghetto Benches’ that Jewish students in Polish universities were subjected to before the Holocaust. Nationalist student groups demanded that Jewish students be banished to ‘ghetto benches’. When the administration didn’t give in, they rioted and assaulted Jewish students. Eventually, the administrations gave in and ghetto benches became widespread. A few courageous faculty members refused to go along, but most did. It was a preview of the Holocaust which would have as its epicenter not long thereafter the mass murder of Jews in Polish death camps.
History repeats itself.
Newsom Signs Law Making California “Sanctuary State” for Kids Seeking Sex Changes
California Passes New Law (SB 107). Parents In All 50 States Should Be Terrified
California Wants Your Kids. Jonathan Keller Tells Us About Senate Bill 107
New law aims to make California haven for transgender youth
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 107 into law on Thursday.
The bill provides several safeguards for trans children, from out-of-state attempts to prosecute so-called “gender-affirming care” and other procedures.
One America’s Natasha Sweatte spoke with a clinical psychologist on the potential repercussions these surgeries and treatments can have on kids who are still developing.
Dysconnected: The Real Story Behind the Transgender Explosion
BY MICHAEL TENNANT
Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.
California Governor Gavin Newsom on Thursday signed into law a bill giving his state custody over any child who enters its borders, even electronically, in search of sex-change treatments, regardless of the wishes of the child’s parents.
The “gender-affirming health care” law, SB-107, gives California courts “temporary emergency custody” over any child who travels to the Golden State to obtain hormones, drugs, surgery, or other medical interventions to give the child the appearance of the opposite sex. It also protects any adults who accompany the child.
The law prohibits California courts from enforcing out-of-state subpoenas demanding information from healthcare providers about sex-change treatments given to minors over whom those states have jurisdiction.
In addition, it bars law enforcement from arresting or extraditing anyone “pursuant to an out-of-state arrest warrant for violation of another state’s law against providing, receiving, or allowing a child to receive gender-affirming health care and gender-affirming mental health care in this state, if that care is lawful under the laws of this state, to the fullest extent permitted by federal law.”
In other words, Newsom has “awarded himself custody of every child struggling with gender dysphoria, elected himself governor of every state to thwart their own laws that might protect children from harmful and sterilizing gender ‘transitions,’ and dared the entire nation to do anything about it,” Craig DeRoche, CEO and president of the Family Policy Alliance, said in a statement.
The horrific potential consequences of this new law cannot be overstated.
While “the primary victims of this policy … are the children,” it is “also an egregious attack on parents’ fundamental rights,” the Heritage Foundation’s Jay Richards and the Alliance Defending Freedom’s Emilie Kao wrote in a joint opinion piece in Newsweek:
Imagine the parental nightmares this California bill would unleash. A mother in Texas who has sole custody of her daughter could find her custody stripped by a California court who sides with an estranged father who takes the daughter to California to get puberty blockers. No family is off limits, and no court decision is safe, because California has decided that its courts — not those of the family’s home state — should be the final deciders of whether parents are fit to raise their child.
Worse, California is luring minors who believe they were born in the wrong body to abandon their families.
They further note that SB-107 “would also allow California doctors to treat minors still in other states. With the advent of telehealth, a child could get a prescription for hormones from a California doctor while at home in Arkansas or in Florida” regardless of those states’ relevant statutes — and the parents, if they even knew about it, would have no legal recourse.
SB-107, however, takes such decisions out of parents’ hands and places them squarely in the hands of minors (and allied adults). Individuals the state of California believes are unfit to drive a car, vote, or buy cigarettes are, it seems, perfectly capable of making life-altering medical decisions — decisions that Richards and Kao point out “can cause severe pain; permanent sexual dysfunction; long-term damage to bones, heart, and blood circulation; and sterility. And there’s no good evidence that they improve kids’ mental and emotional health.” On the contrary, such interventions may well make matters worse.
In short, California’s new law is a “political abuse of science,” in the words of The New American’s David Kelly.
The good news is that SB-107 is unlikely to stand up to legal challenges. As Kelly and others have observed, its disregard for other states’ statutes runs directly counter to the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause. One state simply cannot override another state’s duly passed laws, no matter how unjust officials of the former state believe them to be.
Whether SB-107 is struck down or not, it is yet another step in the radical Left’s ongoing war on families, faith, and facts.