Is Big Tech Censoring Child Trafficking? thumbnail

Is Big Tech Censoring Child Trafficking?

/in , , , , /by

By Veterans 4 Child Rescue

It would seem that one of the most uniting causes in the world would be to protect children. Specifically: children who are being trafficked, exploited, and abused sexually, physically, mentally, and emotionally.

A recent increase in awareness about the prevalence of child trafficking has led to a concerning counter-movement by large, public platforms. There seems to be a concerted effort to squash the voices of organizations and individuals who are speaking out against child exploitation and sex trafficking.

If children are being trafficked in any significant quantities in our country, shouldn’t the public be made aware? Shouldn’t action be taken, policies changed, and justice served?

Or, what motive would there be to censor people who are raising awareness and demanding action?

Should Big Tech companies have the power to control what information or opinions citizens are allowed to speak about on public platforms?

Is this an intentional effort to suppress or censor this information from being shared with the public? Or are these large platforms simply guarding their users from misleading information?

Let’s discuss the facts.

What Is Child Sex Trafficking?

According to the United States Department of Justice:

“Child sex trafficking refers to the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a minor for the purpose of a commercial sex act.”

According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC):

“While any child can be targeted by a trafficker, research, data and survivor lived experience and expertise have revealed traffickers and buyers often target youth who lack strong support networks, have experienced violence in the past, are experiencing homelessness, or are marginalized by society.  Traffickers are masters of manipulation and prey upon vulnerabilities using psychological pressure and intimidation to control and sexually exploit the child for their benefit.

The issue of child sex trafficking is complex. Understanding the various forms of child sex trafficking and indicators can create opportunities for prevention, identification and response. Most importantly NCMEC embraces and encourages all efforts on this issue to be survivor-informed, child-centered, and trauma-informed.

Below are some examples of child sex trafficking:

 Pimp-Controlled Trafficking

Child is trafficked by an unrelated individual, male or female, who often develops an intentional relationship with the child which is later used as leverage in the exploitation.

 Familial Trafficking

Child is trafficked by a relative or a person who is perceived by the child to be a family member such as individuals referred to as “auntie” or “uncle” but are not directly related to the child.

 Gang-Controlled Trafficking

Child is trafficked by a member of a gang or trafficked by the gang.  Gangs leverage their organizational structure, violence, and local, national and international networks to instill fear and loyalty in the child victim.

 Buyer-Perpetrated Trafficking

Child is being trafficked but does not have an identified trafficker.  Instead, the buyer is directly exploiting the child’s vulnerabilities by offering money, food, and/or shelter in exchange for the sexual exploitation.

Child sex trafficking can have devastating immediate and long-term consequences, including health impacts, psychological and physical trauma and even death.”

How Many Children Are Trafficked Every Year in the USA?

No one knows the real numbers of trafficked children, because most of it is not reported.

Child trafficking can happen to any child, regardless of race, gender, education, citizenship, and socio-economic status. Most people think of child trafficking as children bound and beaten in hidden bunkers in 3rd world countries. While that is a reality for many children around the world, most people don’t realize that child trafficking is rampant in the USA and that the victims and perpetrators may be right in front of them.

The USA is one of the main destinations and sources of child trafficking.

It’s estimated that hundreds of thousands of children go missing in the USA every year.

Child Trafficking is estimated to be a $38-50 BILLION dollar a year criminal enterprise in the USA alone.

Why is Child Trafficking Censored on Social Media?

Despite surmounting evidence of child trafficking in all 50 states and every major city, large social media platforms like Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and TikTok seem to suppress, censor, and/or remove posts on the topic.

In 2020, hashtags such as #SaveTheChildren and #SaveOurChildren were banned or censored on most big social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok. This seemed to be in response to the influx of people who were made aware about the massive scale of child trafficking in America and the amount of posts, questions, and concerns that ensued.

While some theories about certain public figures being involved with child trafficking have yet to be proven, the evidence and prevalence of child trafficking in the USA are undeniable.

The viral impact of these awareness campaigns arms the public with the information they need to safeguard children and help prevent this gruesome crime from thriving in their communities. It even resulted in hundreds of organized rallies and marches all over the USA, from Washington, to Tennessee, to Michigan to California. Increased public awareness also funds the nonprofit organizations who are taking action to protect and rescue children.

Why would anyone want to sabotage efforts to raise awareness about child trafficking?

As of the writing of this article, the following hashtags are censored – meaning, banned – on Instagram.

  1. #ChildTraffickingAwareness
  2. #ChildTrafficking
  3. #ChildSexTrafficking
  4. #EndChildTrafficking
  5. #ProtectChildren
  6. #ProtectOurChildren
  7. #ProtectTheChildren
  8. #SaveChildren
  9. #SaveOurChildren
  10. #SaveOurChildrenFromPedophiles
  11. #SaveTheChildren
  12. #StopChildTrafficking
  13. #StopChildAbuse

What’s even stranger is: hashtags about human trafficking, such as #HumanTrafficking / #EndHumanTrafficking / #StopHumanTrafficking hashtags are NOT censored.

#ChildAbuse and #ChildAbuseMaterial are not banned. #StopChildAbuse is.

It’s almost as if it’s an intentional effort to ignore, suppress, or deny this industrial scale harm to children!?

Why The Censorship? Who Does It Benefit, and Who Is It Hurting?

Big social platforms are known to remove or censor posts and hashtags, shadowban accounts, or even delete or permanently ban accounts who post about child trafficking. When the account creators appeal the platform’s decision, it often leads down an endless maze of unclear responses, such as “We removed this post because it violates our community guidelines.” More often than not, even if the post is factual and does not violate their posted community guidelines, the platform will still refuse to reinstate the content or accounts.

As of the writing of this article, Veterans For Child Rescue and the founder, Craig “Sawman” Sawyer have been banned or deleted multiple times from the following platforms:

  1. Instagram
  2. LinkedIn
  3. Twitter
  4. GoFundMe
  5. YouCaring

Below are some examples of the recent Account Warnings and censorship on TikTok, as well as the responses to our appeals to restore the content.

EXAMPLE 1 AND EXAMPLE 2

Why Do Some Think Child Trafficking is a Conspiracy Theory?

Some reasons may include:

  •  High level customers in elite positions of power actively work to enable this criminal industry and keep their behaviors a secret.

We’re all familiar with the Jeffery Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case. Why hasn’t the client list been released? Why have none of their clients been brought to trial? Why is there no justice for the countless victims?

  •  As the fastest growing and 2nd most profitable criminal enterprise in the world, there is big money protecting the secrecy of it.
  •  Most large online platforms suppress information about child trafficking awareness. They also suppress and censor the messaging and reach of organizations like Veterans For Child Rescue who are dedicated to countering child trafficking and making the USA a safe place for children.
  •  Some political and religious groups mixed some truth with some un-factual stories or exaggerations that resulted in misinformation. This has unfortunately caused some to categorize child trafficking as a theory or political talking point.
  •  There is a massive lack of public awareness and education on this matter. Most people don’t know what to look for or how to help, and therefore, many victims and situations are overlooked.
  •  The reality of this evil is simply too harsh for people to face. If they accept its existence, they’re left with 2 choices: do something, or do nothing. Unfortunately, many people choose to pretend it doesn’t exist so they do not feel responsible to take action.
  •  Survivors are often threatened, coerced, slandered, or shamed into silence. Child abuse and trafficking is difficult to prove, and even more difficult to prosecute. Many antagonists will use gaslighting tactics, call the victims liars, and cause them unwanted attention and negative press. This can cause a domino effect of traumatizing experiences and even put the victim in danger.
  •  Most child abusers and traffickers are not convicted. Despite solid evidence, many abusers go unpunished, or only serve light sentences.

What Can We Do to End Child Trafficking?

1. Raise Awareness

Awareness reduces the predator’s ability to operate. 

Read:

Watch:

  •  CONTRALAND: a shocking documentary exposing child trafficking and predators in the USA

2.     Get Involved in Your Community

  •  Attend local events, school board meetings, elections, and get to know who is running your town.
  •  Write your elected officials and demand harsher punishments for predators, laws to protect children, and support for victims and survivors.
  •  Volunteer at shelters, after school programs, and community events.

3.     Refer

  •  Connect Veterans For Child Rescue with donors, District Attorneys, elected officials, media, and any businesses, groups, or entities willing to stand with us.

4.     Shop & Support

  •  Purchase V4CR merchandise – guaranteed conversation starters! 100% of the proceeds support our mission.
  •  Shop on Smile.Amazon.com and choose “Veterans For Child Rescue” as your charity. Amazon will donate a percentage of your purchase to our cause.⁣⁣
COVID-shot Echoes: I Had a Most Odd Experience Saturday thumbnail

COVID-shot Echoes: I Had a Most Odd Experience Saturday

/in , , , , /by

By Selwyn Duke

In “My troubling COVID vaccine story experiences,” I wrote last year about how within a short period of time I met three men at the same recreational area who announced to me they’d had heart attacks. All three had previously taken the coronavirus genetic-therapy agents (GTAs, aka “vaccines”). Add the friend who suffered heart inflammation and the neighbor of mine who had an adverse reaction after having the shots, and it was quite a series of “anomalies.” I’ve had another similar experience now, too.

While in a supermarket checkout line Saturday, I got to talking to the fellow behind me, who was holding a pair of floral bouquets. He’d bought them for two different funerals. One was for his brother, who’d died of a heart attack — at age 24. The other was for a friend’s son who’d passed away. I asked him how old was the son was.

“He was in first grade,” the man replied.

“What happened to him?” I then queried. The fellow said he didn’t know, that the boy was found “dead in bed”; he’d died in his sleep.

Having studied COVID since the “pandemic’s” beginning and the GTAs’ secondary effects since the drugs’ introduction, you can probably guess what immediately occurred to me. But the man was glassy-eyed and obviously grieving, and I felt it would’ve been inappropriate to inquire about the departed’s GTA status, so I didn’t. But I wouldn’t want to bet they hadn’t had the shots.

Naysayers will claim I’m jumping to conclusions, but here’s the point: I’m well into middle age (very well!), and I’d never before had so many odd experiences such as those outlined above. What’s more, my anecdotal experiences accord with data showing there has been an enormous amount of increased mortality since the GTAs’ introduction.

Flashback: Just consider the December 30, 2021 testimonial of Scott Davison, CEO of insurance company OneAmerica, who spoke of a spike in mortality his industry was seeing that was worse than that associated with a one-in-200-year catastrophe. Bear in mind when reading the below that Davison wasn’t making any political point when delivering his information; in fact, there’s no indication that he’s even an ideologue. As The Center Square wrote January 1:

OneAmerica is a $100 billion insurance company that has had its headquarters in Indianapolis since 1877. The company has approximately 2,400 employees and sells life insurance, including group life insurance to employers in the state.

Davison said the increase in deaths represents “huge, huge numbers,” and that’s it’s not elderly people who are dying, but “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica.

“And what we saw just in third quarter, we’re seeing it continue into fourth quarter, is that death rates are up 40% over what they were pre-pandemic,” he said.

“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.”

Davison was one of several business leaders who spoke during the virtual news conference on Dec. 30 that was organized by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.

Most of the claims for deaths being filed are not classified as COVID-19 deaths, Davison said.

“What the data is showing to us is that the deaths that are being reported as COVID deaths greatly understate the actual death losses among working-age people from the pandemic. It may not all be COVID on their death certificate, but deaths are up just huge, huge numbers.”

Now, note that that this “third quarter,” 2021 age-18-to-64 death increase generally coincides with when the GTAs were pushed on people under 65.

It was once vanishingly rare to hear about a young 20-something dying of a coronary or an apparently healthy seven-year-old passing away in his sleep. But such incidents occur with regularity now (related example here).

Unfortunately, establishment institutions have no interest in investigating this mortality, not any more than mainstream media have a desire to cover it. Too many powerful people are implicated. After all, it isn’t just Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of our time’s true villains, who has dirty hands. Politicians, bureaucrats, media figures and other influential figures all conspired to strong-arm Americans into taking the GTAs while censoring, demeaning and canceling those who dared dispute their narrative. The hole they’re in is so deep, all they can do is keep digging and wait for this all to “go away.”

My only hope is that a nation with a less compromised medical establishment (perhaps Sweden or Japan?) will investigate and expose the truth about the GTAs. Regardless, there’s a reason why Rabbi Hillel Handler, Hagar Schafrir and other Holocaust survivors labeled the mass GTA inoculation scheme a “Holocaust” last year and, along with other figures, have called for the Nuremberg Code’s application: The worldwide GTA push may thus far be the crime of the century.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe, Gettr or Parler, or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine thumbnail

Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine

/in , , , /by

By Judicial Watch

Washington, D.C. – Judicial Watch announced today it received 345 pages of records from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a component of the U.S. Department of Defense, revealing that the United States funded anthrax laboratory activities in a Ukrainian biolab in 2018. Dozens of pages are completely redacted, and many others are heavily redacted. The records show over $11 million in funding for the Ukraine biolabs program in 2019.

The records were obtained in response to a February 28, 2022, Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency for records regarding the funding of Black & Veatch involving work of any manner with biosafety laboratories in the country of Ukraine.

Three phases of work are discussed in the records, several of which are indicated to have occurred “on site” at the Ukrainian labs.

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency provided a report titled “PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] at the [redacted (b)(3), which exempts information from disclosure when a foreign government or international organization requests the withholding, or the national security official concerned has specified in regulations that the information’s release would have an adverse effect on the U.S. government’s ability to obtain similar information in the future] Phase 2 On-the-Job Training Report, December 11-13/December 26, 2018” The Executive Summary includes information regarding “on-site” activities, likely referring to a Ukrainian biolab:

  • PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] on-the-job training was conducted for users of the [redacted (b)(3)] on December 11-13, under Phase 2 implementation activities, Anthrax Laboratory activities were conducted on December 28, 2018.
  • PACS existing configuration and customization were checked jointly with the on-site PACS Working Group
  • Phase 1 implementation activities including progress and current status were reviewed; issues and problems discussed and resolved;
  • Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for PACS use at [redacted (b)(3)] was updated to include Subculturing Operation process – the updated SOP submitted to the on-site Working Group.

The report provides a list of titles of “OJT [on-the-job training] Participants” with all participants names from Black & Veatch redacted, citing exemptions (b)(6) for personal privacy and (b)(3).

Senior Researcher Laboratory of Anacrobic Infections

Leading Researcher Laboratory of Anacrobic Infections

Senior Researcher Laboratory of Anacrobic Infections

Researcher Laboratory of Anacrobic Infections

Leading Veternarian Laboratory of Anacrobic Infections

Senior Researcher Laboratory of Bacterial Animal Diseases

Head of Anthrax Laboratory

Researcher Anthrax Laboratory

Senior Research Scientist Laboratory of Mycotoxicology

Leading Veternarian Laboratory of Mycotoxicology

Junior Researcher Laboratory of Leptospirosis

Laboratory Assistant Neuroinfection Laboratory

Research Scientist Sector of International Relationships and Geoinformation

A section titled “Future Activities” notes: “Phase 3 implementation agreed for March 2019.”

Included in the records is an Order for Supplies or Services dated August 1, 2019, is issued by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency to Black and Veatch Special Projects Corp. The total amount of the contract award is $11,289,142.00. The order contains approximately 35 contract line items set forth in a statement of work (SOW), dated March 5, 2019, titled: “Electronic Integrated Disease Surveillance (EIDSS) and Pathogen Asset Control (PACS) Implementation” The statement of work, consisting of 24 pages, was not provided, nor was there an explanation for the withholding.

A report titled “PACS [Pathogen Asset Control] Implementation at the [redacted (b)(3)]. Phase 3 On-the-Job Training Report, November 28-29.2018” states in its Executive Summary:

  • B&V has completed the final stage of PACS implementation at the [redacted (b)(3)]. The site has been fully commissioned in operations of PACS functionality.
  • PACS on-the-job training and on-site activities were conducted for users on November 28-29, 2018 under Phase 3 implementation activities
  • PACS existing configuration and customization were checked jointly with the on-site PACS Working Group
  • Phase 2 implementation activities were reviewed; issues and problems discussed and resolved;

A report titled “PACS [Pathogen Asset Control] Implementation at the [redacted (b)(3)]. Phase 3 On-the-Job Training Report, April 3-5, 2019” has its Executive Summary and other portions redacted, citing FOIA exemptions (b)(4) trade secrets, (b)(5) interagency or intra-agency communications and/or attorney-client privilege.

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency also provided a 2018 report titled “PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] Implementation Plan at [redacted (b)(3)]. Phase 2 On-the-Job Training Report, September 25-27, 2018.” The Executive Summary includes: “PACS on-the-job training was conducted for users of the [redacted (b)(3)] on September 25-27, 2018, under Phase 2 implementation activities.”

A list of “OJT [on-the-job-training] Participants” from contractor Black & Veatch includes job descriptions but all names have been redacted through exemptions (b)(6) personal privacy and (b)(3). Some of those job descriptions include:

  • Head of Laboratory Virology
  • Department of Molecular Diagnostics and Control
  • Researcher of Pigs Diseases Research Laboratory
  • Scientist of Laboratory of Virology
  • Department of Avian Diseases
  • Researcher of Department of Avian Diseases
  • Laboratory for Biosafety, Quality Management
  • Engineer of the Laboratory for Biosafety, Quality Management
  • Laboratory of Biotechnology
  • Researcher of the Laboratory of Biotechnology
  • Head of the Brucellosis Laboratory
  • Senior Researcher of the Brucellosis Laboratory
  • Head of the Molecular Diagnostics and Control
  • Head of the Tuberculosis Laboratory
  • Researcher of Tuberculosis Laboratory
  • Researcher of the Laboratory of Virology
  • The report also contains a section titled “Future Activities:”
  • PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] users to continue with material registration, moving and destruction operations.
  • PACS users to reflect the process of Subculturing in PACS.
  • B & V to update Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) to include the Subculture operations process.

[Redacted (b)(3)] to perform check of PACS interface and provide feedback (if any).

Phase 3 implementation agreed for December 2018.

A December 19-21, 2018, Pathogen Asset Control System report begins with an Executive Summary that states: “B & V has completed the final stage of PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] implementation at the Institute of Experimental and Clinical Veterinary Medicine of the National Academy Agrarian Sciences (NAAS) of the Ukraine. The site has been fully commissioned in all operations of PACS functionality.”

In a report titled “PACS Implementation Plan at the [redacted (b)(3)]” has the subtitle “Phase 3 On-the-Job Training Report, October 30 – 31, 2018 / November 14, 2018” The Executive Summary provides in part:

B & V has completed the final stage of PACS implementation at the [redacted (b)(3)]. The site has been fully commissioned in all operations of PACS functionality.

PACS on-the-job training and on-site activities were conducted for users on October 30 – 31, 2018, under Phase 3 implementation activities. Virology Department “activities” were conducted on November 14.

A section of the order titled “Special Contract Requirements” cites the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act and states the contractor “shall not engage in activities that incur expenditures in the Russian Federation, such as project management activities, procurement and shipping activities, travel or direct and indirect cost incurrences.” The contractor may, however, procure Russian-origin equipment from a Russian or non-Russian vendor located outside of Russia.

The records include 10 reports titled “Report of Transfer of U.S. Government Property Ownership.” between the Defense Threat Agency and the [redacted (b)(3)]. All of the property listed in the reports is redacted, citing exemptions (b)(3) and (b)(6). The total value of the property is $20,293.05

The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine claims the U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program is purely for bio-threat reduction:

The U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program collaborates with partner countries to counter the threat of outbreaks (deliberate, accidental, or natural) of the world’s most dangerous infectious diseases.  The program accomplishes its bio-threat reduction mission through development of a bio-risk management culture; international research partnerships; and partner capacity for enhanced bio-security, bio-safety, and bio-surveillance measures. The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats.

“These new documents shed needed light on U.S. involvement in the management and handling of pathogens in Ukrainian biolabs,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

On March 8, 2022, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland admitted to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “Ukraine has biological research facilities, which in fact we are now quite concerned that Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of, so we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces, should they approach.”

On March 26, 2022, the New York Post reported that Hunter Biden helped secure funds for a U.S. biolab contractor in Ukraine.

According to a webpage expunged from the website of the State Department:

PACS [Pathogen Asset Control System] was first installed in Ukraine in test mode in November 2009 at the Interim Central Reference Laboratory of the Especially Dangerous Pathogens (ICRL). Since then, Sanitary-Epidemiological Department (SED) of the Medical Command of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense received four mobile laboratories from DTRA with the goal of reinforcing the system of epidemiological surveillance in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Finally Backing Down’: Border Patrol Lifts Vaccine Mandate For Personnel thumbnail

‘Finally Backing Down’: Border Patrol Lifts Vaccine Mandate For Personnel

/in , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

  • U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has lifted its vaccine mandate, according to a memorandum exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
  • “CBP is halting the COVID-19 screening program, and employees may choose to withdraw their pending reasonable accommodation requests for screening exemption,” an internal CBP memorandum stated.
  • Several agents who fought for vaccine exemptions are both happy and frustrated over the new decision, they told the DCNF.
  • “Management is finally backing down because this is a fight that they’re not going to win. I think this is a huge win for people that didn’t get the vaccine. It’s almost like a relief,” one Border Patrol agent said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has ended the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for its personnel, according to a memorandum exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“CBP is halting the COVID-19 screening program, and employees may choose to withdraw their pending reasonable accommodation requests for screening exemption,” an internal CBP memorandum stated. National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd confirmed to the DCNF that both the vaccine mandate and testing requirements have been lifted.

President Joe Biden issued the mandate for all federal employees via a Sept. 9 executive order. Border agents who didn’t get vaccinated and didn’t have approved exemptions faced possible termination, two active agents and a union official previously told the DCNF.

Due to a court order, CBP paused the vaccine requirement in January in favor of Texas’ push to block the mandate.

But the latest move makes some unvaccinated agents feel like their battles against the mandate, the ostracization from their fellow agents and fears that they’d lose their jobs were all for naught, four of them, all from different sectors of the southern border, told the DCNF on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution.

“It frustrates me,” one Border Patrol agent fighting the mandate with a pending appeal for a religious exemption told the DCNF.

“It boggles my mind that the agency was ready to lose maybe about half of its workforce during this crisis that we’re having right now at the border. I just didn’t understand that they were willing  to reprimand these guys or even dismiss them or fire them going through this crisis at the border,” the agent added.

CBP leadership has realized it was fighting a losing battle, a second Border Patrol agent, who requested a religious exemption, told the DCNF.

“Management is finally backing down because this is a fight that they’re not going to win. I think this is a huge win for people that didn’t get the vaccine. It’s almost like a relief,” the agent said.

“It’s a joke because we’re so worried about COVID that we’re letting in all these aliens unvaccinated, untested, we’re not doing anything for them, right? We’re not testing them when they come across. We’re not giving them the vaccine when they come across, but COVID is such a big deal,” they added.

The record surge in illegal migration in fiscal year 2022, when CBP encountered roughly 2.3 million migrants, has only made matters worse for the workforce, especially those threatened for not getting the jab.

“It doesn’t even feel like we’re the sworn agents that we were developed and made out to be … we’re the guys that are protecting the border. It’s like they don’t even care. We’re not even like people to them. At this point. It’s just a statistic,” a third agent requesting a religious accommodation said.

“It does very much feel like we’re being tossed around and like our lives don’t matter. We’re talking about people with families, with medical issues, prior medical issues, monetary issues, there are some people that live check to check, and the patrol is going to burden them with termination. That was insane. You got to be kidding. We’re at this point now.”

A fourth agent, who fought against the vaccine mandate on both religious and medical grounds, said other than one superior, they’ve not faced too much scrutiny over the fight for an exemption.

“The rest of them, they understand it’s bullshit,” the agent said.

CBP didn’t respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

JENNIE TAER

Investigative reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: CBP Chief Tries To Reassure The Rank-And-File As Agency Levels Charges Against ‘Whipgate’ Agents

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

COVID Amnesty? How About Unconditional Surrender? thumbnail

COVID Amnesty? How About Unconditional Surrender?

/in , , , , , , /by

By Selwyn Duke

Brown University professor Emily Oster has created quite a stir with her recent article asking for a “pandemic amnesty.” In it, she calls for “both sides” in the COVID debate to forgive each other so we can focus on solving current problems. If Oster wanted exposure, she certainly got it, with commentators far and wide responding to her plea. If she wanted to heal wounds and close chasms, however, she failed miserably. Many have told her to go pound sand.

Genuine calls for forgiveness are noble, but, Professor Oster, you (and your critics) miss a significant point here: Forgiveness does not obviate punishment. Were it otherwise, following Jesus’s “70×7” prescription would mean emptying the prisons and hurting our beloved children by never holding them accountable for misbehavior.

So I’ll do my best to forgive, Professor Oster, but forgetting? No! I speak for many in saying that your plea is rejected — and offensive. And for there to be even the beginning of a rapprochement, there are two requirements (I’ll speak in this piece of “two sides” even though, of course, there’s much variation within each):

  1. You must hand over your “leaders” for judgment and justice.
  2. You must issue a genuine mea culpa and demonstrate that you’ve learned from your mistakes.

This matters immensely. Many on my side are angry, but I’ll nonetheless do what I and others did during the pandemic — not what you did, professor. I’ll react based on reason and not emotion and say that I’m not seeking retribution, viscerally pleasurable though it may be. And reason’s application informs that, as Herbert Spencer put it, “The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.” Thus must the foolish and often fiendish pandemic puppeteers be in the dock — and thus must their erstwhile puppets demonstrate that they’ve learned from the past.

Unfortunately, though, professor, you appear to have learned virtually nothing. You speak as if the COVID battles were some kind of mutual misunderstanding that degenerated into an ugly rift. This is yet another slap in the face. There was nothing mutual about it, not in terms of misunderstandings or malevolence or power or persecution.

Though many of us counseled against COVIDian madness, my side was content to let you and your fellow travelers wear a mask, or three masks; take a genetic-therapy agent (GTA) shot, or five; social distance by six feet, or 60; shut down your businesses and lock yourselves indoors for one month, or six; and generally behave like mysophobic Chicken Littles. But that wasn’t good enough.

Not only did you impose your mask empire and distancing fancies on us, but you shut down our businesses as part of a COVID regulation regime; destroyed livelihoods; impoverished people; caused untold numbers of lockdown-induced, secondary-effect deaths; and tried coercing us into taking the GTAs under pain of career destruction, firing tens of thousands of Americans who resisted your will. Why, CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen, cheered on by millions of you and speaking for many more, actually said that people such as me, GTA realists, should be prohibited from participating in society and banished to our homes. You also censored us when we dared explain our dissent, said we were killing people and impugned our character and patriotism.

By the way, Wen more recently renounced much COVIDian theology and wrote an article about how she no longer believes in masking children because her young son suffered mask-induced developmental problems. Yet as with you, professor, she issues no apology for her ill-informed, life-rending prescriptions.

Speaking of which, Professor Oster, you wrote of our correct prescriptions that in “the face of so much uncertainty, getting something right had a hefty element of luck. And, similarly, getting something wrong wasn’t a moral failing.” “We didn’t know,” you protested. Well, speak for yourself, professor.

Of course, some did oppose COVID regulations based purely on a desire for liberty or relied on instinct. Yet a twist on a famous saying comes to mind here: The more I research, the “luckier” I get.

Was it luck, professor, when I cited Dr. Knut Wittkowski — former longtime head of the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at the Rockefeller University in New York City — as warning in an April 1st and 2nd, 2020 interview that lockdowns were counterproductive? He also provided sage but unheeded prescriptions for managing the disease.

Was it luck, professor, when I cited experts as saying in February 2020 that the vast majority of us will contract the coronavirus, that most cases are mild and that “vaccines” wouldn’t save us? This information, by the by, was printed in the liberal Atlantic, the very magazine that published your piece! Did you miss it?

Was it luck, professor, when I cited early data out of Italy showing that the COVID mortality victims were aged 79.5 on average and more than 99 percent had comorbidities, again indicating that it wasn’t a disease imperiling the majority? Was it luck when I, presenting research, warned in 2020-’21 of masks’ lack of efficacy and the perils they pose, especially to the young? I could mention additional data, studies and experts I and others drew upon, but the point is this:

You could have known, professor. But you didn’t show due diligence. You had your head buried in establishment media and wouldn’t pay any mind to those who dared contradict it. Hey, only Ivy League input need apply, right, professor?

This matters because the problem isn’t that you fell victim to COVID propaganda; it’s that you’re the kind of person who could fall victim to COVID propaganda. And unless this changes — unless you learn from past mistakes — you’ll just make similar ones again during a future crisis. In fact, we see the same phenomena even now with climate change.

You also say, professor, that we should be willing to move on because most of those adopting bad policy had good intentions. Yet even if this were true, it’s irrelevant. A doctor can have the absolute best intentions but still be sued into oblivion for malpractice.

What of your claim, however? Does it reflect good intentions

  • when politicians, such as Governor Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.), imposed onerous COVID restrictions on us but then arrogantly violated those rules themselves?
  • when officials said we knew little about a “novel” virus but then made continual cocksure pronouncements and, colluding with Big Tech, censored anyone contradicting them (including the aforementioned Dr. Wittkowski)?
  • when an effort was launched to turn COVID “heretics” into second-class citizens?
  • when even today some schools have GTA mandates for young people, despite the well-known health risks?
  • when Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials continually lied to America while accusing dissenters of peddling “misinformation”?

Of course, it’s true that man is complex and people rationalize — aka, lie to themselves — perhaps more than they lie to others. But if the above is the result of good intentions, professor, who needs bad ones?

The point, however, is that these COVIDian “leaders,” such as Fauci and Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.), must be held to account and not survive, in power, to tyrannize another day. Yet our pseudo-elites instead continue to fail upwards, with your support, professor. But, then, you enjoy the same benefits, don’t you? Why, you say you’re now actually co-teaching a college class on COVID. Talk about an idiocracy!

In conclusion, Professor Oster, you opened your article mentioning that in “April 2020, with nothing else to do, my family took an enormous number of hikes.” This brings us to my response to your amnesty proposal: You can go take another one.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe, Gettr or Parler, or log on to SelwynDuke.com

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: No chance of pandemic amnesty for enforcers of false COVID narrative

The Lethal Fallout of Wokeness in Medicine thumbnail

The Lethal Fallout of Wokeness in Medicine

/in , , , /by

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

School standards have fallen for the sake of political correctness over effective and dependable education. That is dangerous.

In early October, my alma mater made headlines after it decided to fire chemistry professor Dr Maitland Jones Jr after 82 of his students signed a petition noting that his organic chemistry class was “too hard.” The students accused Jones of purposely making the class difficult, citing that their low scores negatively impacted their “well-being,” and their chances of getting into medical school.

Instead of evaluating the rigor and substance of Jones’ curriculum, NYU justified its hasty action by noting the class’s unfavourable student reviews. This type of judgment would never pass in the fields of architecture, aerial engineering, or even the food service industry; why is it permissible here?

In response to the disciplinary action, former medical humanities professor and bioethicist Dr Alice Dreger blasted the move in a tweet, saying it “made her skin crawl.”

“We aren’t going to end up with good doctors by letting undergrad pre-meds pass organic chem because universities want to protect their US News rankings,” she wrote.

This article made my skin crawl. We aren’t going to end up with good doctors by letting undergrad pre-meds pass organic chem because universities want to protect their US News rankings. Gah! https://t.co/ruPFtOQJVd

— Alice Dreger, Ph.D. (@AliceDreger) October 3, 2022

The reaction is justified considering how standards for pre-med programmes and even medical schools have shifted in the direction of equity and social justice. It seems that even professors cannot hold the line on academic performance, when the institutions they teach at make it a secondary importance to accommodating students’ sensitivities on the basis of how faulted or victimised they feel while learning in the highly competitive and demanding field of medicine.

The rise in efforts to increase diversity in medical schools can be seen as coming from a place of good intentions: to create an academic environment which promotes minority doctors, especially those who come from under-served communities. Having a diversification of medical practitioners is beneficial, especially if said doctors use their skills and talents to give back to communities that drastically need medical attention, such as inner cities and remote rural communities.

Advocates for broader outreach cite studies such as the AAMC’s report titled, “Altering the Course: Black Males in Medicine” which notes how the number of black male applicants dropped from 1,410 in 1978 to 1,337 in 2014. They could also point to a Yale-led study that found minority students are less likely to get placed in residency programs than their white and Asian colleagues.

These seem to be pressing issues which must be addressed if medical schools wish to increase black and brown students’ success rates. However, instead of working towards expanding tutoring, learning programs, and outreach initiatives, it seems as if universities and medical schools want to focus strictly on the intersectional aspects of this research.

The leader of the aforementioned Yale study, Mytien Nguyen, MSc, stated,

“In previous studies, we’ve really only looked at one dimension of identity, but there’s intersectionality and the compounding of multiple marginalized identities… we wanted to see how these identities came into play in the application process… there is a clear compounding effect of being a student underrepresented in medicine and lower income… there is a double whammy in terms of how medicine is classist and racialized.”

Nguyen states that it is unclear what is contributing to lower placement rates among marginalised students, and yet failed to consider how a plethora of other factors, such as lack of mentors in medicine, limited financial resources, and differing cultural perceptions of working in medicine, may contribute to this phenomenon. Looking back at AAMC’s report, it is important to note that while the number of black male applicants did decrease over the decades, the report also shows how the overall number of black medical students actually rose from 933 in 1978 to 1,227 in 2014 — a 32 percent spike.

This is a welcoming statistic which can be improved if schools provide marginalised communities with greater access to high school and pre-med opportunities.

Unfortunately, institutions like NYU have taken it upon themselves to lower the bar of admission through intersectional incentives, rather than enforcing academic standards — which we all agree are needed in order to have dependable and safe future doctors.

The shift in a medicine-based education to an emphasis on race and social concern was highlighted by former University of Pennsylvania Medical School Dean Stanley Goldfarb, who stated:

“… Today a master’s degree in education is often what it takes to qualify for key administrative roles on medical-school faculties. The zeitgeist of sociology and social work have become the driving force in medical education. The goal of today’s educators is to produce legions of primary care physicians who engage in what is termed ‘population health.’”

Medical schools’ administrations seem to have become taken over by sociologists and critical race theorists — if not in title, then certainly in practice.

Most recently in the news, the University of Minnesota Medical School conducted a white coat ceremony for its Class of 2026, where each student had to recite a modified Hippocratic Oath which — on top of pledging to do no harm and to help the sick whenever possible — would “honor all Indigenous ways of healing that have been historically marginalized by Western medicine… white supremacy, colonialism, and the gender binary.”

The politicisation of medicine has greater effects than just this sort of political white-knighting. Instead of focusing on promoting preventative care and treatment based on actual medical effectiveness, the impetus behind these medical schools’ actions seems to be entirely race-based. For example, Georgetown University is funding the study and formation of courses to prevent ‘microaggressions’ in medicine.

Likewise, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a new standard for teaching medicine which requires students to achieve ‘competencies’ in ‘white privilege’ or risk failing. It also seeks to do away with the ideas of gender and race, the latter of which the AAMC describes as “… a social construct that is a cause of health and health care inequities, not a risk factor for disease.” If this is the case, then how will doctors address the pervasiveness of Sickle-Cell Anemia and Multiple Myeloma in African-American communities, the prevalence of diabetes in Asian groups, or the largely unknown effects of hormonal therapies in minors?

This dramatic shift from upholding course standards to molding medicine in a racial lens is concerning. Though proponents of such measures would argue this is critical to improving race-relations in medicine and to deconstructing students’ “implicit biases,” saving lives and providing exceptional preventative care supersedes that.

A 2016 BMJ analysis found that medical errors in healthcare facilities are actually incredibly common and may even be the third-leading cause of death in the US. Medical malpractice accounts for about 251,000 deaths every year — this is more than accidents, stroke, Alzheimer’s, and respiratory disease:

A doctor’s most important duty to his or her patient is to do no harm — this includes preventing negligence, refraining from superfluous procedures, and ensuring every avenue of care is addressed prior to conducting invasive surgery. From shoddy hospital conditions to inexperienced nurses to just bad doctors, healthcare resulting in patient harm is a much more pressing issue than the alleged microaggressions resident doctors give off during their rotations.

The race and gender of a practising physician should not matter as long as they are skilled, capable, and reasonable in their practice. It is therefore the universities and medical schools’ responsibility to uphold the rigorous standards they once had in order to ensure their students are prepared to work in high-stress, highly complicated medical scenarios — above all else. We need capable and skilled doctors, period.

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

AUTHOR

Connor Vasile is a first-generation American and writer who wishes to raise awareness about classical liberal ideas which empower every individual, no matter their background or experience, to live their… More by Connor Vasile

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Rise of Wokeness in the U.S. Military – Let me give some examples of what I mean by wokeness.

The “Messed Up World of White Wokeness”

Disney’s Embrace of Wokeness is a Mickey Mouse Move

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences

What Is American Wokeness Really About?

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Congress needs to investigate the criminal snooping of the FBI and HHS thumbnail

Congress needs to investigate the criminal snooping of the FBI and HHS

/in , , , , , , /by

By Martin Mawyer

Federal law enforcement agencies are violating the 1974 Privacy Act by gathering, storing, and demanding social media posts be throttled or censored.

The sensible ambition of every human is to feel secure. To feel safe. To be worry-free from random or intentional attacks.

We desire it so much, that most are willing to sacrifice a little less freedom to obtain it.

Normally, those precious freedoms are gobbled-up by some government agency promising to snatch only a small portion of our personal sovereignty if we allow them to act as an iron shield against organized mobsters, gangs, criminal syndicates, and terrorists.

So, track us. We don’t care. Monitor us. Listen to what we say. Put a camera on every corner. Review what we write. Frisk us. Scan us. Snoop all you want. We have nothing to hide. We know the difference between right and wrong.  After all, it’s not about us.

Heck, we hardly notice those freedoms being scarfed up. The invasion of our privacy rights is ghostly, invisible, and ethereal.

All is fine and dandy‚ until…

…the government redefines what’s right and wrong.

Then we see it.

Now, we’re the bad actor. And good luck trying to reclaim those freedoms that could have protected us in the past.

Last week, Intercept (a leftwing, online news publication) shook America with the astounding revelation that the FBI and Homeland Security are working with Big Tech to scrub the internet of information they label “inaccurate.”

“Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the US government has used its power to try to shape online discourse,” the article reveals.

The goal of the Government is to scrub the internet of social media posts that “drive a wedge between the populace and the government.”

To that end, agencies inside the FBI and Homeland Security – that previously focused on international terrorists, such as ISIS – are using their snooping tools to go after Americans who post “misinformation,” “disinformation,” or “malinformation.”

If any of these law-enforcement employees determine a social media post will lower the nation’s “trust in government,” the content is flagged, stored, and then sent back to the originating social media platform with the expectation the message will be suppressed, throttled, or eliminated.

The snooping tools of the FBI: Babel X, Dataminr, ZeroFox

As much as I would like to reveal more about the findings in the Intercept story, that’s not the intent of this article.

I aim to broaden the discussion on a few things the Intercept article briefly mentioned.

Intercept reports that government officials have a unique portal to Facebook to request takedowns or throttling of postings they don’t like, which means anything that harms the “cognitive infrastructure” of the United States.

(The “cognitive infrastructure” would mean everything would be game)

But one of the most puzzling questions I wanted to be answered was how the FBI has the manpower to review virtually every social media message posted on the World Wide Web.

One of the answers is Babel X.

In April of this year, the FBI spent $27 million to purchase 5,000 licenses from Babel X.

In its purchase request, the FBI notified Babel X:

“The tool shall be able to gather information from the following mandatory online and social media data sources: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, LinkedIn, Deep/Dark Web, VK, and Telegram,” the bureau said.

But they’re hoping for a far greater reach.

The FBI also asked Babel X to give them the ability to search Snapchat, TikTok, Reddit, Gab, Parler, Discord, and others.

Bable X aside, the FBI also uses Dataminr to scour the data highway.

The FBI has 200 agents plugged into Dataminr (with its “advanced alerting tool”) to review Twitter posts that meet the bureau’s interest.

Of course, the FBI claims they need these tools to combat “terrorists and other criminals” that “communicate, recruit, and raise funds for illegal activity.”

But thanks to FBI official Laura Dehmlow [quoted in the Intercept story] we know the FBI also wants to eliminate the threat of “subversive data utilized to drive a wedge between the populace and the government.”

That “subversive” information, according to Intercept and a lawsuit filed by the states of Missouri and Louisiana, includes “malinformation” or “disinformation” of Joe Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal, Covid vaccines, the Hunter Biden laptop story, racial justice, the Ukraine war, and the 2020 election fraud claims.

The answer to how the FBI can monitor and takedown posts believed to harm “trust in government” is also found in a program called ZeroFox.

In court records, the FBI said they also monitor the Internet with ZeroFox (a $14 million contract) that surveils organizations across social media, including web domains, online news sites, blogs, forums, deep/dark web, and even email.

The “great” feature of ZeroFox is that it provides its customers with a “takedown service,” which allows the FBI to hide, delete and block posts they don’t like.

Read this from ZeroFox:

“Although ZeroFox will initiate a takedown request on behalf of a customer [such as the FBI], the social network or other online provider assesses the request against its own terms, rules and policies and decides whether to act on, or reject, the request. In other words, the third-party provider controls whether the material is removed.”

Of course, big corporations may fail to convince Facebook, for instance, to remove an unflattering post. But a request coming from the FBI?

Who wants to get on the wrong side of the FBI?

The 1974 Privacy Act protects American citizens

At one time, the FBI and Homeland Security focused their surveillance efforts on ISIS and other international, radicalized terrorist organizations and cartels.

For the most part, Americans applauded these law enforcement agencies and their zeal to protect America from another 9/11 attack. We weren’t ignorant, though. We knew it meant the FBI and DHS would resort to monitoring every crevice of the virtual world in all its forms, styles, and behaviors.

But we convinced ourselves we would never become the target of the US Government and their massive and invasive snooping tools that can collect, store, suppress or eliminate what we post.

Now, we know better.

But we can fight back.

The 1974 Privacy Act makes it illegal for the Federal Government to engage in any activity that gathers, maintains, keeps secret files, or releases to non-government parties the identity of citizens exercising their First Amendment rights.

Here are two important sections found under 5 US 552a of the 1974 Privacy Act that we can reasonably believe are currently being violated by many federal law-enforcement agencies:

“Each agency that maintains a system of records shall maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statue or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.” (emphasis added)

“Any officer or employee of an agency…who knowing that disclosure of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully discloses the material in any manner to any person or agency not entitled to receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000.” (emphasis added)

The takeaway is:

  1. It is illegal for the Federal Government to maintain, collect, or use any social media post that falls under the protection of the First Amendment.
  2. It is illegal for any federal employee to release that social media post to any person or agency (think Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc.) that is not entitled to receive it.

In addition, the 1974 Privacy Act requires the Federal Government to explain when the information is being gathered, why it is needed, and how it will be used. They must also ensure that those records are handled only for the reasons given.

Who believes the feds, when gathering up posts on Joe Biden’s failed withdrawal from Afghanistan, for example, are completing the process of explaining why that collection was needed and how it will be used?

America needs answers.

The way to get those answers is for Congress to immediately launch a full-scale investigation using its sledgehammer power of subpoenas to determine the numerous violations of the 1974 Privacy Act, including criminal offenses.

©Marin Mawyer. All rights reserved.

Feature Film ‘Lions And Lambs’ — Exposing Human Trafficking thumbnail

Feature Film ‘Lions And Lambs’ — Exposing Human Trafficking

/in , , , /by

By Veterans 4 Child Rescue

Vets for Child Rescue is honored to align with Storyteller Film Co to make a full length, action-packed movie called Lions and Lambs! 

One of the biggest challenges we face in our efforts to expose and combat child trafficking is the suppression of information online. We hope this movie will provide a strategic work-around to bring massive awareness to the issue while creating an entertaining action/thriller film that everyone will want to watch.

Feature Film Trailer: A young girl is kidnapped to be sold to the highest bidder.

At its core, 𝐋𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐋𝐀𝐌𝐁𝐒 is a vigilante action film.

It will have exciting car and foot chases, fight sequences, and good-ole fashioned REVENGE!⁣ ⁣

In order to have a broad appeal to a variety of audiences, it’ll be a #PG13 rated #movie.

It’ll feel like a blockbuster of the late 90’s early 2000’s — but with a twist of true-to-life storytelling.⁣ ⁣ Co-producers @Travis Conover – The Creator’s Podcast and Matthew Wallace have nearly 30 years combined experience in the film industry as actors, writers, directors and producers.⁣

They’re now on a mission to #RaiseAwareness and bring this topic to the masses while 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 our mission to 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 and 𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞 it.⁣

Travis Conover and J. Matthew Wallace will be acting and producing this project and they have generously offered to:

  1. Promote Vets For Child Rescue and our mission in the project
  2. Donate a large amount of the proceeds of the fundraising and profits from the film to V4CR’s mission.

Here’s how you can help!

  1. Learn about the movie and support it here: igg.me/at/LIONSandLAMBS. No donation amount is too small. Even $5 or $10 donated will show publicly as another “backer” of the project. They need at least 12,000 backers.
  2. Share the project directly with your friends and family. We need to drive over 50k people to this site in the next 2 weeks.
  3. Pray for the project to be fully funded, for protection around all involved, and for it to create massive awareness.

Crowdfunding is Necessary For This Project Because Hollywood Won’t Support It

“LIONS and LAMBS” is the story of a man who’s 12 year old niece is kidnapped and sold into sex slavery, and the lengths he’ll go to, to get her back.

Actor and Film Makers Travis Conover and Matthew Wallace partner with “Vets for Child Rescue” to tackle the issue of sex slavery in the United States. This action thriller explores the underground world of sex trade in Atlanta, Georgia and the horrible reality behind one of the most lucrative business in the world.

“LIONS and LAMBS” is written as a modern day action blockbuster, with inspiration from the best action films of the late 90’s and early 2000’s. While LIONS and LAMBS is centered around an important cause, quality storytelling, character development, and set pieces will be its foundation. It’s sure to be a fast-paced, action packed and entertaining thrill ride that will keep you pinned to the screen.

The story is approached from three unique angles. Firstly, the point of the view of the girl who is taken from her home in North Atlanta. Secondly, from her family’s point of view (primarily, her uncle Leon who is former military) and also from the perspective of law enforcement, who are fighting to bring down the people responsible for this horrible crime.

At its core, LIONS AND LAMBS is a vigilante, buddy cop action film. It will have exciting car and foot chases, hard-hitting, action-packed fight sequences, and a strong dose of good-ole fashioned REVENGE! Studies show that movies that do not include gratuitous violence and sex actually have a much broader appeal to audiences, so we will be aiming for a PG-13 rating. It will feel like a blockbuster of the late 90’s early 2000’s but with a twist of true-to-life storytelling.

The Cause

Unlike most films, this project in particular has the potential to raise awareness around the very serious issue of human trafficking. This project has pledged to raise over $100,000 for our organization to help put a stop to child sex trafficking.

The impact of raising awareness is also something that we hope this movie will help achieve. There is an intentional effort to suppress information about child trafficking, and this movie has the opportunity to bring awareness to the masses.

Follow the Lions And Lambs movie project and it’s team

Indiegogo: Indiegogo.com/projects/lions-and-lambs

Twitter: @TravisConover

Instagram: @Travis_Conover

©Veterans For Child Rescue. All rights reserved.

Medical Education Slides Into Intolerant Wokeness thumbnail

Medical Education Slides Into Intolerant Wokeness

/in , , , , /by

By Thomas C. Patterson

One of the things I appreciated most during my 30 years practicing medicine in Community Hospital ERs was that there, race just didn’t matter very much. ERs were open to all and there was one standard of care for all races and classes.

That was then. Today a wave of intolerant wokeness is sweeping over the house of medicine, insisting that medicine is shot through with systemic racism and that research and education efforts must be diverted from medical science to “dismantling white supremacy“ in medicine.

The Association of American Medical Colleges recently introduced their new Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) guidelines, which require that all medical students be taught to practice “allyship” when “witnessing injustice such as “microaggressions”.

Residents should use their more advanced knowledge of intersectionality in making clinical decisions. (Just when you thought that race-based medical protocols were in our dark past.). Faculty are charged with teaching how “systems of power, privilege, and oppression inform policies and practices”.

Medical schools are enthusiastically falling in line. Examples abound. In 2021 the Anti-racism Task Force at Columbia and the Diversity Task Force at Indiana University, joined by the University of Texas and other medical schools, endorsed the recommended AAMC “competencies”. “Health equity“ concepts have become a prominent component of medical education.

The University of North Carolina is one of many schools that not only teach “social justice“ and “anti-racism“, but use medical school applications to ensure compliance with principles of diversity in race, gender, and sexual orientation. Applicants who demonstrate reluctance toward the DEI agenda are weeded out in the application process. Oregon Health and Science University faculty are among those evaluated on their “DEA, anti-racism and social justice core competencies“ in performance appraisals.

The University of Arizona is on board too, with some additional twists. All faculty and staff are required to complete six hours of DEI training and complete one Implicit Association Test annually (in spite of its dubious relevance). Each of the 17 clinical departments is required to hold 3 DEI credit-eligible events per year. All departments also have designated “diversity champions“ to oversee compliance and round up laggards.

This is bad, very bad news for medical education, future doctors and their patients. Even before DEI was a thing, the quality of medical instruction had been in decline. Incoming students are less qualified and fail rates on board exams are climbing, partly because some students from groups that have been historically underserved are either allowed to skip the Medical College Admissions Test or are admitted with lower scores than those required from white and Asian applicants.

But instead of beefing up instruction in anatomy, physiology, and other disciplines that might come in handy when actually practicing medicine, medical schools are spending instructional time on such matters as white privilege and anti-racism, including critical race theory.

CRT includes the notion that white people are inherently prejudiced against people of color and that there really is nothing they can do but acknowledge their defect, apologize and grant compensating privileges to people of contrasting skin color, who by definition are incapable of bigotry. Dissenters from this new orthodoxy can be accused of “micro-aggressions” and “repressive practices” with ominous repercussions for their careers.

This intellectual intolerance also extends to those skeptical of “gender-affirming care“ for adolescents, the new practice of providing permanent medical and surgical alterations to gender-confused school children, so that they can for the rest of their lives pretend to be the gender they choose when a teen. What could go wrong?

Several countries, including the UK, Sweden, and France are now pulling back from relying on the judgments of impressionable adolescents for such drastic remediation, but dissenters in the US are still punished.

Medical educators who teach students that racism and mutilation are okay when officially approved should humbly recall the history of their own profession. Modern medicine has been of immeasurable benefit to mankind. But when evidence-based science is ignored and authority replaces free inquiry, bad things happen.

Bleeding and purging, eugenics, thalidomide, lobotomies and nonsterile wound probing are among the historical results. It is the duty of the medical profession to protect us from such horrors, not promote them.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Paxlovid Is a Fraud, When Will It Be Taken Off the Market? thumbnail

Paxlovid Is a Fraud, When Will It Be Taken Off the Market?

/in , , , /by

By Dr. Rich Swier

Can Taking Paxlovid Lead to More Serious Illness?

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Paxlovid, which was granted emergency use authorization to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 in December 2021, has become widely associated with rebound infection
  • While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Pfizer have tried to suggest that COVID rebound is spontaneous and not necessarily linked to Paxlovid, recent research found no rebound cases among COVID-19 patients who did not take Paxlovid
  • People who take Paxlovid can also still transmit COVID-19 to others, even if they’re asymptomatic
  • A number of high-profile individuals have experienced COVID rebound after using Paxlovid, including “The Late Show” host Stephen Colbert, comedian Jimmy Dore, Dr. Anthony Fauci, President Joe Biden, First Lady Jill Biden and CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. Most were double-jabbed and double-boosted. Walensky actually had three boosters
  • Emerging evidence also suggests SARS-CoV-2 can develop resistance to Paxlovid. Two separate studies cultured SARS-CoV-2 and exposed it to low levels of nirmatrelvir — the active antiviral ingredient in Paxlovid — which would kill some, but not all, of the virus. As a result, the virus became 20 times and 80 times less susceptible to the drug, respectively

So far, all of the drugs developed against COVID-19 have been disastrous in one way or another. Remdesivir, for example, which to this day is the primary COVID drug approved for use in U.S. hospitals,1 routinely causes severe organ damage2,3,4,5 and, often, death.

Another notable one is Paxlovid, which was granted emergency use authorization to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 in December 2021.6 While not showing signs of being deadly like remdesivir, Paxlovid has become so widely associated with rebound infection that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has even issued a warning about it. According to the CDC’s health advisory:7

“Recent case reports document that some patients with normal immune response who have completed a 5-day course of Paxlovid for laboratory-confirmed infection and have recovered can experience recurrent illness 2 to 8 days later, including patients who have been vaccinated and/or boosted.”

Asymptomatic Paxlovid Users Can Still Spread Infection

The CDC8 8 and Pfizer9 have suggested that sometimes COVID-19 naturally comes back after a person tests negative, implying that COVID-19 rebound is spontaneous and not necessarily linked to Paxlovid. However, research10 by Dr. Michael Charness of the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Boston refutes this notion.

When Charness and colleagues analyzed 1,000 cases of COVID-19 diagnosed among members of the National Basketball Association — none of whom took Paxlovid — no cases of COVID-19 rebound were found.11 They also found that people who take Paxlovid can still transmit COVID-19 to others, even if they’re asymptomatic. Charness told CNN:12

“People who experience rebound are at risk of transmitting to other people, even though they’re outside what people accept as the usual window for being able to transmit.”

Is Paxlovid-Induced Rebound Really Rare?

While Paxlovid-induced rebound of COVID is clearly widespread, health authorities insist the effect is “rare.” 13 Pfizer’s clinical trial had a 1% to 2% rebound rate. White House COVID response coordinator, Dr. Ashish Jha, put the rebound rate at 5% in real-life settings.

“If you look at Twitter, it feels like everybody has rebound,” Jha said during a White House press conference in July 2022. “But it turns out there’s actually clinical data.”

14

In one such study,15 5.87% of the 13,600 patients experienced rebound of symptoms within a month of the treatment. Dr. Aditya Shah, an infectious disease specialist at the Mayo Clinic, thinks the rebound rate may be as high as 10%.16

But if those rebound statistics were actually true, how does one explain the fact that so many high-profile celebrities and government officials who have used it have ended up rebounding? Statistically, that seems rather incredible.

High-Profile Rebound Cases

Good thing he is double boosted, next up – Paxlovid rebound. https://t.co/qe6xUQkW3C

— Dr. Joseph Mercola (@mercola) July 21, 2022

For example, in April 2022, the fully jabbed and boosted “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert got COVID, took Paxlovid and recovered, only to suffer a rebound a week later. Tweeting about his experience, Colbert referred to it as the “WORST. SEQUEL. EVER.”17 Comedian Jimmy Dore also experienced COVID-19 rebound after taking Paxlovid.18

Dr. Anthony Fauci got COVID in June 2022 — again despite being double-jabbed and double-boosted — and proudly shared that he took Paxlovid. Immediately after the five-day treatment, he tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Alas, three days after that, he not only tested positive again but all the symptoms of infection also returned, and they were more severe than the first time around.19,20

Fauci described his rebound in an interview: “Over the next day or so I started to feel really poorly, much worse than in the first go around. I went back on Paxlovid, and right now I am on my fourth day of a five-day course of my second course of Paxlovid. Fortunately, I feel reasonably good. I mean, I’m not completely without symptoms, but I certainly don’t feel acutely ill.”21

At the end of July 2022, it was President Joe Biden’s turn to announce he had COVID, despite being double-jabbed and double-boosted — something Biden had previously insisted could not happen (see video above). He too took Paxlovid and, like Fauci, ended up rebounding around Day 3, just as I predicted on Twitter.22 Unlike Fauci, however, he reportedly didn’t have any symptoms.23

In mid-August 2022, the double-jabbed, double-boosted First Lady, Jill Biden, came down with COVID,24 took Paxlovid and, like clockwork, rebounded a few days after finishing the treatment and initially testing negative.25

Toward the end of October 2022, double-jabbed and TRIPLE-boosted Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, got COVID. She’d received her fifth shot — the latest bivalent booster that has only been tested on mice — on September 22.26

Exactly one month later, she tested positive and reported mild symptoms.27,28 I think that makes the “new and improved” bivalent booster the shortest-acting shot so far. Anyway, Paxlovid to the rescue once again. And once again, it caused rebound. After initially testing negative after the treatment, she tested positive a couple of days later as symptoms returned.29

Government Researchers Investigating Rebound Effect

At the end of April 2022, Bloomberg described the post-Paxlovid rebound of David Ho, a virologist at the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center at Columbia University:30

“Ho said he came down with COVID on April 6 … His doctor prescribed Paxlovid, and within days of taking it, his symptoms dissipated and tests turned negative. But 10 days after first getting sick, the symptoms returned and his tests turned positive for another two days.

Ho said he sequenced his own virus and found that both infections were from the same strain, confirming that the virus had not mutated and become resistant to Paxlovid. A second family member who also got sick around the same time also had post-Paxlovid rebound in symptoms and virus, Ho says.

‘It surprised the heck out of me,’ he said. ‘Up until that point I had not heard of such cases elsewhere.’ While the reasons for the rebound are still unclear, Ho theorizes that it may occur when a small proportion of virus-infected cells may remain viable and resume pumping out viral progeny once treatment stops.”

Clinical Director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dr. Paul Sax, told Bloomberg:31

“Providers who are going to be prescribing this should be aware that this phenomenon occurs, and if people have symptoms worsening after Paxlovid, it’s probably still COVID. The big problem is that when this drug was released, this information wasn’t included [on the label].”

Research published in Clinical Infectious Diseases32,33 looked into why Paxlovid may be leading to rebound symptoms and suggests it could be the result of insufficient exposure to the drug. Possibly, the drug is metabolized more rapidly in some individuals. Alternatively, perhaps the drug needs to be administered for a longer period of time.

Is SARS-CoV-2 Becoming Resistant to Paxlovid?

Emerging evidence also suggests SARS-CoV-2 can develop resistance to Paxlovid if the drug doesn’t eradicate all of the virus the first time around. Two separate studies cultured SARS-CoV-2 in a lab and exposed it to low levels of nirmatrelvir — the active antiviral ingredient in Paxlovid — which would kill some, but not all, of the virus.

“Such tests are meant to simulate what might happen in an infected person who doesn’t take the whole regimen of the drug or an immunocompromised patient who has trouble clearing the virus,” Science reported.34

One of the studies revealed that SARS-CoV-2 developed three mutations after 12 rounds of nirmatrelvir treatment — “at positions 50, 166 and 167 in the string of amino acids that make up MPRO.”35 The mutations amounted to a 20-fold reduction in the virus’ susceptibility to nirmatrelvir.36

The other study37 also found mutations at positions 50 and 166, revealing that when they occurred together, SARS-CoV-2 became 80 times less susceptible to nirmatrelvir. According to the authors:38

“Reverse genetic studies in a homologous infectious cell culture system revealed up to 80-fold resistance conferred by the combination of substitutions L50F and E166V. Resistant variants had high fitness increasing the likelihood of occurrence and spread of resistance.”

It’s still unknown what might happen when two courses of Paxlovid are taken in quick succession to treat COVID-19 rebound — as occurred with Fauci. It’s possible that ever-mutating COVID-19 variants could be created.

Other antivirals on the market to treat COVID-19 have also led to concerns about drug resistance. Molnupiravir (sold under the brand name Lagevrio), approved by the FDA for emergency use in high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID symptoms, has been shown to supercharge the rate at which the virus mutates inside the patient, resulting in newer and more drug resistant variants.39

Pfizer Gets Rich on Fraudulent Drugs

Video Link

Pfizer’s revenue is expected to reach $101.3 billion in 2022,40 thanks to the COVID jab and Paxlovid ($10 billion from Paxlovid alone) — both of which are frauds. Neither of them actually work as advertised, and both can make matters worse. In the case of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot, you can still get the disease once you’ve been injected and boosted, and may still transmit the disease to others as well.

Then, when the shots don’t work to prevent infection — and we’ve now seen even five doses won’t prevent infection — Pfizer makes even more money by selling Paxlovid, which in many cases causes rebound! There can be only one reason for why the FDA has not withdrawn both of these drugs, and that is because they’re actually working for Pfizer.

Pfizer itself doesn’t view COVID rebound after Paxlovid treatment as a failure; they see it as a successful venture because the more courses needed, the more money they make. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) in early July 2022:41

“During a recent investor call, a Pfizer official could spin the recent reports that the virus can hide from Paxlovid into good news, predicting that, as with the vaccine, patients may need multiple courses.

Immunocompromised patients ‘may carry this virus for a very, very long time,’ Dr. Mikael Dolsten [chief scientist and President of Worldwide Research and Development at Pfizer42] said in the investor call. ‘And we see that area as a real new opportunity growth area for Paxlovid to do very well, where you may need to take multiple courses.’”

FDA and CDC Are Extensions of the Drug Industry

Pushing a drug that causes COVID rebound does not appear to be in the best interest of public health. Paxlovid is a fraud and should be taken off the market. The fact that the FDA and CDC have focused on Paxlovid, remdesivir and molnupiravir to the exclusion of all others, including older drugs with high rates of effectiveness and superior safety profiles, sends a very disturbing message.

They’ve basically become extensions of the drug industry and have abandoned their original purpose, which is to protect public health — by ensuring the safety and efficacy of drugs, in the case of the FDA,43 and by conducting critical science and data analysis in the case of the CDC.44

Instead, they seem to be doing everything they can to protect Big Pharma profits, even if it costs you your life. Remdesivir, for example, costs between $2,340 and $3,120 depending on your insurance.45 Ivermectin, meanwhile — which has been very effective against COVID and shown to outperform at least 10 other drugs, including Paxlovid46 — costs between $4847 and $9448 for 20 pills depending on your location. The average cost is said to be about $58 per treatment.49

Paxlovid costs $529 per five-day course of treatment,50 and molnupiravir is around $700.51 While not quite as expensive as remdesivir, both are still nearly 10 times costlier than ivermectin, which is more effective. Imagine the billions of dollars we could have saved were it not for our health agencies being so compromised by industry.

Since the FDA and CDC cannot be trusted, it’s imperative to take responsibility for your own health. Do your own research and follow your own conscience and conviction. Remember, when it comes to COVID-19, early treatment is crucial, and effective protocols are readily available — just not from the FDA, CDC or even most hospitals.

For a refresher, check out Dr. Pierre Kory’s interview with Chris Martenson. You can also find many other articles describing treatment protocols by searching through my Substack archive.

Analysis by

Dr. Joseph Mercola

Sources and References

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Jones: Dems Failed to See Voters Deal with Inflation Every Day, Not Abortion or Democracy thumbnail

Jones: Dems Failed to See Voters Deal with Inflation Every Day, Not Abortion or Democracy

/in , , , , , /by

By Discover The Networks

Monday on CNN Newsroom, political commentator Van Jones stated that Democrats failed to see how much inflation mattered for working-class voters and pointed out that people do have to deal with inflation every day, while they don’t have to deal with abortion or voting every single day.

Jones said, “I think there was this kind of fool’s gold, this idea that the threat to democracy is so severe in the wake of this insurrection and in the wake of these election deniers possibly grabbing control of the government, that that was something that you had to talk about. But you also have to talk about the economy. I think the tragedy here is that the Democrats have something to say on the economy in terms of what Biden has done when it comes to 10 million jobs, what Biden has done when it comes to prescription drug prices, standing up to China on the CHIPS Act, and also the fear of what Republicans will do.”

He added, “Dobbs versus jobs, most people are going to be focused on the jobs.”

Jones concluded, “You don’t get an abortion every week. But you do buy gas every week. You don’t vote — democracy’s on the line, you don’t vote every day. You do have to eat every day. So, the price of food and the price of gas matters for a lot of working-class voters in a way that I don’t think Democrats really factored in.”

He’s half-right about democracy being on the line — it is, but the Republican Party isn’t the threat. Democrats are.

Van Jones

128 Known Connections

In April 2008, Jones made clear his desire to incrementally socialize, by stealth, the U.S. economy: “Right now we say we want to move from suicidal gray capitalism to something eco-capitalism where at least we’re not fast-tracking the destruction of the whole planet. Will that be enough? No, it won’t be enough. We want to go beyond the systems of exploitation and oppression altogether … until [the green economy] becomes the engine for transforming the whole society.”

To learn more about Van Jones, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

More Vaccine Deaths Reported to VAERS in the Last 20 Months Than All Vaccines in the Last 30 Years Combined thumbnail

More Vaccine Deaths Reported to VAERS in the Last 20 Months Than All Vaccines in the Last 30 Years Combined

/in , , , /by

By The Geller Report

Add this to the ever growing list of blockbuster news stories the Democrat media axis censors and scrubs.

“Mommy, make it stop!”

11 yo female – 5 minutes post 1st dose, said she couldn’t hear, said she “couldn’t feel her ears” Lost consciousness, came to after ~2-5 minutes After – Had a seizure for 5 minutes Screamed for Mom to “Make it Stop”

The CDC will regret this.

VAERS data

1/ pic.twitter.com/ddPE0ergfa

— Justin Hart (@justin_hart) October 20, 2022

Dr. Meryl Nass: More Vaccine Deaths Reported to VAERS in the Last 20 Months Than All Vaccines in the Last 30 Years Combined

The Epoch Times

“The FDA was instructed by a federal judge to revoke the license … because it had never been shown to be safe or effective,” says Dr. Meryl Nass, referring to regulation of the anthrax vaccine in the late 1990s.

Nass, a physician of internal medicine, began her research into pandemics 30 years ago, with a focus on anthrax vaccines and biological warfare. From the Rhodesian Civil War to the 2009 swine flu, she says she saw a profit-driven push for mass vaccination. In many cases, the public health establishment bypassed adequate testing, and modified or attempted to bury data, she says.

“WHO had changed the pandemic definitions a couple of months before the 2009 swine flu pandemic showed up … so, you didn’t need deaths anymore to trigger these contracts, it could just be a new virus,” says Nass.

Today, Nass is one of many doctors whose medical license is threatened for deviating from official COVID-19 guidelines during the pandemic.

“If all you’re good for is to give patients the government narrative … there’s not going to be any practice of medicine anymore,” says Dr. Nass.

Watch here……

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Children Suddenly Dying – ‘It’s Through The Roof’ – Dr. Peter McCullough

Colorado House Minority Leader Dies Suddenly Of A Heart Attack

Vaxxed Cardiologist Whose Father Died After Jab: Suspend mRNA Product NOW

50% Increase in Miscarriages; 50% Decrease in Fertility After COVID Vax

Army Penalizing Soldiers Seeking Religious Accommodation to Vax Mandate

Christians Protest Trinity Church Vax Policy: “Vax Proof or No Worship Policy”

Judge Orders NYPD Fired Over Unconstitutional Vax Mandate Reinstated

Vaccine Injured Pilots Meeting With Senior FAA Official/Whistleblower To Help Vax Injured and Unemployed

The Vaxxed Are Dropping Like Flies

Unvaxxed Coast Guard cadets given 24 hours to vacate campus, can’t go to class, change job

DC Mayor: All Students Must Get Dangerous Vax, Says Unvaccinated Students Won’t Get Virtual Instruction, Leaving Out 40% of Black Students

Un-Vaxed Christians Denied Entry to Historical Ground Zero Trinity Episcopal Church NYC

Democrat Regime BANS #1 Tennis Player Novak Djokovic From US Open But Allows Millions Of Unvaxxed To Cross US Border

Survey: More Than 750,000 Dead, 30 Million Injured Because of Covid Vax

FDA Pushes To Authorize Novavax’s Covid-19 Vaccine Despite Serious Cardiovascular Safety Issues

Vaxxed Young Adults are 92% More Likely to Die than Unvaccinated

Walgreens: Unvaxxed are testing positive for Covid-19 at the lowest rate, Triple Vaxxed at the highest

New York Couple Face Prison Time For Using False Vax Cards to Enter Bills Game

Vax-Injuries SKYROCKET: In 2022, Vaccine-Related Myocarditis Reports in VAERS Have Surged to Nearly Half the Total Reported in 2021

Florida Becomes First State To Recommend Against COVID Vax For Healthy Kids. Psaki Accuses Of ‘Conspiracy Theories.’

TRUCKERS REVOLT! ‘Freedom Rally’ truckers convoy hits Canada against vax mandates, WORLD RECORD CONVOY

Judge BLOCKS Biden Vax Mandate For Federal Workers

Poll Shows 45% Of Democrats Approve Sending Unvaccinated To ‘Designated Facilities’, One Third Support Taking Children Away From Unvaxxed

WATCH: UK Health Secretary Javid Challenged by Unvaccinated NHS Doctor About Mandated COVID-19 Vax

Registered Nurse in Ascension Health System: Stroke Victims Doubled Since Vax, Young People In Their 30’s, 40’s Who Have No Issues, Having Strokes

‘Tyranny Is Here On Our Doorstep’: Boston Unions Fight Mayor’s COVID-19 Vax Mandate

Democrat Chicago Mayor Bans Unvaxxed from Bars, Restaurants, Gyms: ‘‘Your Time Is Up’

The Lancet journal SKEWERS “Pandemic of the Unvaxxed” narrative as noxious propaganda garbage

DEATH TO THE UNVAXXED: Biden Threatens A Winter Of Illness and Death To The Unvaccinated

HERE WE GO AGAIN: Youngkin Won’t Ban Local Vax Coercion Like Real Conservative Governors

EXCLUSIVE! Another Anti-Vax Protest in NYC, “Art is our Birthright” Protest Admission Mandates at Metropolitan Museum

NAZI VACCINE MANDATE: Fraudulent Administration ‘Planned Inspections’, $136,532 Fines to Enforce Vax Mandate

EXCLUSIVE! WORLDWIDE 4 DAY ANTI-VACCINE MANDATE WALKOUT: NYC Freedom Rally – No Vax Mandates – NYC City Hall

MASSIVE ANTI-VAX MANDATE PROTEST: NYC Workers Pro-Choice, Anti-Mandate,”Hold The Line!”

Over two dozen FDNY firehouses shut down over vax mandate staff shortage

Another Whistleblower Reveals It Is VAXED Admitted To Emergency Rooms, 90% Of Hospital Admissions Are Vaccinated and Hospital Administration Refusing to Report Adverse Events

Maine Hospital Fired So Many Unvaxed Employees They Had to Close the ICU

Civil Strikes Against Democrat Vax Mandates: Southwest CEO Blames Joe Biden For Airline’s Vaccine Mandate

DEMOCRAT SENATOR FEINSTEIN INTRODUCES BILL TO REQUIRE VAX TO FLY ON DOMESTIC FLIGHTS

‘Post-Vax COVID’ Is a New Disease

Local Detroit TV Asks For Stories of Unvaxxed Dying from COVID – Gets over 182K Responses of Vaccine Injured and Dead Instead

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

After Destroying Your Kids’ Education, Teachers Unions Think We Should All Just Hug It Out thumbnail

After Destroying Your Kids’ Education, Teachers Unions Think We Should All Just Hug It Out

/in , , , , /by

By Christopher Jacobs

One couldn’t help but notice the ironic timing. One week after the release of results on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) showed a historically large decline in student test scores during Covid-induced lockdowns, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten tweeted out approval of an article in The Atlantic calling for “a pandemic amnesty.”

Apart from the obvious quip of whether there’s an amnesty the left will not support, Weingarten represents perhaps the last person who has the right to advance this message. School lockdowns went on for far longer than they needed to, thanks to Weingarten and her union cronies — and America’s children paid the price. Parents across the country can and should take offense at Weingarten’s dismissive attempt at self-absolution.

Public Schools’ Prolonged Shutdowns

Weingarten’s intervention aside, The Atlantic article has more than a nugget of truth in it. At the beginning of the pandemic, we didn’t know a lot about Covid — exactly how and where it was transmitted, how to treat it, and so much else. In such an environment, people obviously would make statements they thought were true, and promote policies they thought beneficial, only to discover that later evidence proved them wrong.

To that end, writer and professor Emily Oster makes a fair point:

There is an emerging (if not universal) consensus that schools in the U.S. were closed for too long: The health risks of in-school spread were relatively low, whereas the costs to students’ well-being and educational progress were high. The latest figures on learning loss are alarming. But in spring and summer 2020, we had only glimmers of information. Reasonable people — people who cared about children and teachers — advocated on both sides of the reopening debate.

Notice the key qualifier here: “In spring and summer 2020,” people had little information about how Covid spread, and therefore (in Oster’s view) school lockdowns seemed reasonable.

But lockdowns didn’t last only through spring and summer 2020. In many cases, they lasted through the spring of 2021. A tracker of schools’ opening status found that a majority of public schools did not go back to fully in-person learning until the week of April 19, 2021. That’s more than one year after the pandemic began, and well after the period in which Oster argues incomplete and imperfect information should excuse public officials’ poor policy choices. Well into January 2021, at least 1 in 6 public schools remained fully remote, with the schoolhouse doors shut to all would-be learners.

By contrast, an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, released on the heels of the dismal NAEP scores nationwide, notes that Catholic schools took a different approach. Most Catholic schools had reopened their doors by the fall of 2020. And whereas public school students’ test scores dropped dramatically from pre-pandemic levels, scores in Catholic schools actually rose — particularly for African American and Hispanic students.

In other words, by the fall of 2020, school closures, and the drop in test scores that appear to have been caused by the same, represented a policy choice, one that Weingarten and the AFT embraced.

Pro-Lockdown Unions

To her credit, Oster notes that she advocated for school reopenings, and (wrongly, in my view) received harsh criticism at the time for doing so. Weingarten and the organization she heads, on the other hand, didn’t just support prolonged shutdowns — they worked behind the scenes to keep schools closed.

Documents released pursuant to Freedom of Information Act requests revealed how, within weeks of the Biden administration taking office, the American Federation of Teachers received a draft copy of Centers for Disease Control guidance on reopening schools. Several AFT-suggested passages raising doubts about school reopenings were adopted almost verbatim by the CDC, leading one public health expert to ask why “this political group [i.e., the AFT] gets to help formulate scientific guidance for our major [federal] public health organization. … This is not how science-based guidelines should work or be put together.”

Having found herself on the wrong side of history for promoting prolonged lockdowns, Weingarten has spent the past several months trying to rewrite it. However, her claims that AFT supported prompt school reopenings sparked so much pushback that she apparently now wishes to move beyond the entire matter.

America’s Children Suffered

Oster’s article argues that, in the interests of moving forward, “we need to learn from our mistakes and then let them go.” Certainly, perpetual gloating and/or insults won’t advance anyone’s long-term interests, even if they may make people temporarily feel self-satisfied.

But between the two extremes of forgetting history entirely or, to take a more cynical view, putting it in the proverbial memory hole and holding a perpetual grudge stands the appropriate middle ground, where people 1) admit fault and 2) take steps to make amends.

In the case of school lockdowns and their devastating effects, the solutions seem obvious. Even if she won’t offer her resignation as AFT president, will Weingarten admit that she and her organization got things wrong by casting doubt on reopening in AFT’s clandestine communications with the CDC? Will the public school teachers who spent months and months out of the classroom during the 2020-21 academic year commit to doing more in terms of after-school tutoring, to make up for the poor policies their union adhered to for far too long?

The American people should not try to exact vengeance on political leaders who made erroneous policy choices — but they have every reason to demand accountability, including from “leaders” such as Weingarten who fail to admit their mistakes. The children who could suffer the effects of pandemic-era learning loss for years, or even decades, to come should expect no less.

*****

This article was published by The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Unexplained Excess Deaths Are on the Rise thumbnail

Unexplained Excess Deaths Are on the Rise

/in , , /by

By Edward Ring

By a significant margin, and according to data reported weekly by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the death rate in America

remains elevated. If nothing else is certain as Americans continue to cope with the most disruptive event in the last half-century, one fact is indisputable: As the number of cases of COVID-19 decreased over the past few months, they now account for less than half of this persistently elevated death rate.

In the six years before the COVID era, deaths in the United States averaged between 2.6 million and 2.8 million people per year. These averages are adjusted for population growth, and with a population as large as that of the United States, the numbers should be, and are, remarkably stable. During the three years immediately preceding 2020, for example, the population growth-adjusted death rate from all causes varied by only 1.5 percent.

None of that is true today. The increase in total deaths—deaths from all causes, not just COVID deaths—is up significantly. In the nine months in 2020 from April to December, a normal death count would have been 2.04 million. Instead, during that period, 2.57 million people died, 26 percent above normal.

Deaths in the United States from all causes in 2021 were also well above normal—3.46 million versus only 2.8 million if it had been a normal year, 24 percent over normal. So far in 2022, with complete data available through August, total deaths were 1.91 million, against a projected 2.21 million if it were a normal year, which is still up 16 percent. These numbers are shown graphically on the chart below.

To put these overages in perspective, in recent decades before COVID came along, a very bad flu season would mean an increase in total deaths, but typically not much more than the usual increases every flu season. This can be seen above, where the normal multi-year average (blue line) rises to a peak of around 60,000 total deaths per week during the worst month of flu season in January, then descends to around 50,000 per week in mid-summer. Even the H1N1 virus didn’t have a significant overall impact. Between 2009 and 2010, the CDC estimates around 12,500 Americans died from H1N1. That represents not quite a 0.5 percent increase in total deaths.

While it is encouraging that total excess deaths in the United States during 2022 so far are only up 16 percent compared to 24 percent in 2021 and 26 percent in the last nine months of 2020, they are still well above anything we have seen in the United States in the last 100 years. But more troubling is the fact that according to the CDC’s own data, most of these excess deaths cannot be attributed to COVID. In the chart below, the blue line plots the number of excess deaths over the past two-and-a-half years, and the gray line plots how many of those excess deaths are attributable to COVID. The gray line is consistently below the blue line.

To put these overages in perspective, in recent decades before COVID came along, a very bad flu season would mean an increase in total deaths, but typically not much more than the usual increases every flu season. This can be seen above, where the normal multi-year average (blue line) rises to a peak of around 60,000 total deaths per week during the worst month of flu season in January, then descends to around 50,000 per week in mid-summer. Even the H1N1 virus didn’t have a significant overall impact. Between 2009 and 2010, the CDC estimates around 12,500 Americans died from H1N1. That represents not quite a 0.5 percent increase in total deaths.

While it is encouraging that total excess deaths in the United States during 2022 so far are only up 16 percent compared to 24 percent in 2021 and 26 percent in the last nine months of 2020, they are still well above anything we have seen in the United States in the last 100 years. But more troubling is the fact that according to the CDC’s own data, most of these excess deaths cannot be attributed to COVID…..

*****

Continue reading this article at American Greatness.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show thumbnail

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show

/in , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

There was a time, not too long ago, when the school nurse couldn’t give your child an aspirin or Tylenol without parental permission. This cannot stand. Whatever it takes to take back our children, regain our freedom must be done.

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show

By Jeremiah Poff, Washington Examiner, November 04, 2022:

Officials at an elementary school in Colorado discussed how to defy the wishes of parents who did not want the school to accommodate their child’s request to transition to a different gender socially.

According to internal emails obtained through a public-records request by the parent activist group Parents Defending Education, an official at Laurel Elementary School in Fort Collins, Colorado, asked administrators if they should disregard a parent’s request that their child be addressed by their legal name and pronouns corresponding to their biological sex.

“I’m wondering about what to do when an elementary school student has expressed their pronouns and chosen name but their parents directly tell school staff not to call the student by those pronouns,” the unnamed official said in an email dated April 4, 2022. “I feel very strongly about supporting the student but have heard that we legally have to follow the parents’ direction due to the age of the child (elementary school).”

The Laurel Elementary School administrator’s request for information was forwarded to a Poudre School District official, who directed the administrator to follow the student’s wishes for what name to be called but use the student’s legal name in conversations with the child’s parents.

“The school should use the student’s affirming name and pronouns at school and use their legal name and corresponding pronouns when talking with the family until they are supportive of the student’s new name and pronouns,” the email says.

Poudre School District did not respond to a request for comment.

Over the past year, school districts across the country have faced the ire of parents for facilitating so-called “social gender transitions” for students of all ages without the permission or knowledge of the child’s parent. The practice has led to several lawsuits and has prompted some elected officials to explore ways to ban the practice.

In a statement to the Washington Examiner, Parents Defending Education’s director of outreach, Erika Sanzi, blasted the school officials’ discussions as “unconscionable.”

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Left Destroyed Everything, and Now They Want A Free Pass

Watch these videos calling out Democrats as Racists, Pornographers, Groomers of Children and Unhinged

If You’re White and Fork Over $85,000, This Prestigious University Will Teach You to Hate Yourself

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Plants Are Trying to Kill You thumbnail

VIDEO: Plants Are Trying to Kill You

/in , , /by

By Vlad Tepes Blog

VIDEO: Plants Are Trying to Kill You – Dr. Rich Swier

Copyright © 2021 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.

We Must Have Accountability thumbnail

We Must Have Accountability

/in , , , , , /by

By Editorial Staff

By Justin Hart / Brownstone Institute

The failures and harms from our pandemic public policies are legion!

Fauci-endorsed lockdowns were ineffective (and damaging!); risks from COVID-19 are not uniform for the entire population but directly aligned to your age; the mortality impact on children is almost immeasurable but we burdened them with mandates and school closures; mask mandates have shown zero impact on quelling the spread of the virus; denied by Fauci and Co., natural immunity offers strong protection; and vaccines (designed for a 2-year-old variant) have proven ineffectual at stopping the current crop of feared COVID variants.

Dr. Fauci and his cadre of unelected health officials were on the wrong side of every one of these outcomes. They were made aware of every data point above but their one-size-fits-all policies have not changed in the face of the evidence. In their minds, there is only the panic.

Recently, Professor Emily Oster of Brown University, admits in a recent article that interventions like social distancing “were totally misguided” but begs for amnesty for the serious damage wrought by health overlords like Dr. Fauci.

*****

This article was published by Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

Election Day is tomorrow – Tuesday, November 8th. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots – 90% in Maricopa County).

If you have not submitted your mail-in ballot yet, DO NOT MAIL IT IN OR ‘DROP IT OFF’  ON TUESDAY AT YOUR POLLING STATION. It won’t be counted on Tuesday and may not be counted for many days or at all. 

If you have failed to ‘mail-in’ your ballot yet, surrender the ballot at the polling station on Tuesday, show your driver’s license and actually fill out a new ballot and vote in person. Your vote will be tabulated and counted for the evening announcement of election results.

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences thumbnail

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences

/in , , , , , /by

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

School standards have fallen for the sake of political correctness over effective and dependable education. That is dangerous.

In early October, my alma mater made headlines after it decided to fire chemistry professor Dr. Maitland Jones Jr. after 82 of his students signed a petition noting that his organic chemistry class was “too hard.” The students accused Jones of purposely making the class difficult, citing that their low scores negatively impacted their “well-being,” and their chances of getting into medical school. Instead of evaluating the rigor and substance of Jones’ curriculum, NYU justified its hasty action by noting the class’s unfavorable student reviews. This type of judgment would never pass in the fields of architecture, aerial engineering, or even the food service industry; why is it permissible here?

In response to the disciplinary action, former medical humanities professor and bioethicist Dr. Alice Dreger blasted the move in a tweet, saying it “made her skin crawl.”

“We aren’t going to end up with good doctors by letting undergrad pre-meds pass organic chem because universities want to protect their US News rankings,” she wrote.

The reaction is justified considering how standards for pre-med programs and even medical schools have shifted in the direction of equity and social justice. It seems that even professors cannot hold the line on academic performance, when the institutions they teach at make it a secondary importance to accommodating students’ sensitivities on the basis of how faulted or victimized they feel while learning in the highly competitive and demanding field of medicine.

The rise in efforts to increase diversity in medical schools can be seen as coming from a place of good intentions: to create an academic environment which promotes minority doctors, especially those who come from underserved communities. Having a diversification of medical practitioners is beneficial, especially if said doctors use their skills and talents to give back to communities that drastically need medical attention, such as inner cities and remote rural communities.

Advocates for broader outreach cite studies such as the AAMC’s report titled, “Altering the Course: Black Males in Medicine” which notes how the number of black male applicants dropped from 1,410 in 1978 to 1,337 in 2014. They could also point to a Yale-led study that found minority students are less likely to get placed in residency programs than their white and Asian colleagues.

These seem to be pressing issues which must be addressed if medical schools wish to increase black and brown students’ success rates. However, instead of working towards expanding tutoring, learning programs, and outreach initiatives, it seems as if universities and medical schools want to focus strictly on the intersectional aspects of this research.

The leader of the aforementioned Yale study, Mytien Nguyen, MSc, stated,

“In previous studies, we’ve really only looked at one dimension of identity, but there’s intersectionality and the compounding of multiple marginalized identities…we wanted to see how these identities came into play in the application process…there is a clear compounding effect of being a student underrepresented in medicine and lower income…there is a double whammy in terms of how medicine is classist and racialized.”

Nguyen states that it is unclear what is contributing to lower placement rates among marginalized students, and yet failed to consider how a plethora of other factors, such as lack of mentors in medicine, limited financial resources, and differing cultural perceptions of working in medicine, may contribute to this phenomenon. Looking back at AAMC’s report, it is important to note that while the number of black male applicants did decrease over the decades, the report also shows how the overall number of black medical students actually rose from 933 in 1978 to 1,227 in 2014—a 32 percent spike.

This is a welcoming statistic which can be improved if schools provide marginalized communities with greater access to high school and pre-med opportunities.

Unfortunately, institutions like NYU have taken it upon themselves to lower the bar of admission through intersectional incentives, rather than enforcing academic standards—which we all agree are needed in order to have dependable and safe future doctors.

The shift in a medicine-based education to an emphasis on race and social concern was highlighted by former University of Pennsylvania Medical School Dean Stanley Goldfarb, who stated:

“…Today a master’s degree in education is often what it takes to qualify for key administrative roles on medical-school faculties. The zeitgeist of sociology and social work have become the driving force in medical education. The goal of today’s educators is to produce legions of primary care physicians who engage in what is termed ‘population health.’”

Medical schools’ administrations seem to have become taken over by sociologists and critical race theorists—if not in title, then certainly in practice.

Most recently in the news, the University of Minnesota Medical School conducted a white coat ceremony for its Class of 2026, where each student had to recite a modified Hippocratic Oath which—on top of pledging to do no harm and to help the sick whenever possible—would “honor all Indigenous ways of healing that have been historically marginalized by Western medicine…white supremacy, colonialism, and the gender binary.”

The politicization of medicine has greater effects than just this sort of political white-knighting. Instead of focusing on promoting preventative care and treatment based on actual medical effectiveness, the impetus behind these medical schools’ actions seems to be entirely race-based. For example, Georgetown University is funding the study and formation of courses to prevent ‘microaggressions’ in medicine.

Likewise, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a new standard for teaching medicine which requires students to achieve ‘competencies’ in ‘white privilege’ or risk failing. It also seeks to do away with the ideas of gender and race, the latter of which the AAMC describes as “… a social construct that is a cause of health and health care inequities, not a risk factor for disease.” If this is the case, then how will doctors address the pervasiveness of Sickle-Cell Anemia and Multiple Myeloma in African-American communities, the prevalence of diabetes in Asian groups, or the largely unknown effects of hormonal therapies in minors?

This dramatic shift from upholding course standards to molding medicine in a racial lens is concerning. Though proponents of such measures would argue this is critical to improving race-relations in medicine and to deconstructing students’ “implicit biases,” saving lives and providing exceptional preventative care supersedes that.

A 2016 BMJ analysis found that medical errors in health-care facilities are actually incredibly common and may even be the third-leading cause of death in the US. Medical malpractice accounts for about 251,000 deaths every year—this is more than accidents, stroke, Alzheimer’s, and respiratory disease:

CLICK HERE: To view the National Center for Health Statistics Death in the United States chart

A doctor’s most important duty to his or her patient is to do no harm—this includes preventing negligence, refraining from superfluous procedures, and ensuring every avenue of care is addressed prior to conducting invasive surgery. From shoddy hospital conditions to inexperienced nurses to just bad doctors, healthcare resulting in patient harm is a much more pressing issue than the alleged microaggressions resident doctors give off during their rotations.

The race and gender of a practicing physician should not matter as long as they are skilled, capable, and reasonable in their practice. It is therefore the universities and medical schools’ responsibility to uphold the rigorous standards they once had in order to ensure their students are prepared to work in high-stress, highly complicated medical scenarios—above all else. We need capable and skilled doctors, period.

AUTHOR

Connor Vasile

Connor Vasile is a first-generation American and writer who wishes to raise awareness about classical liberal ideas which empower every individual, no matter their background or experience, to live their best lives and fulfill their goals.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Do Drug Expiration Dates Mean Anything? The Harvard Medical School’s Answer Will Shock You! thumbnail

Do Drug Expiration Dates Mean Anything? The Harvard Medical School’s Answer Will Shock You!

/in , , , , /by

By Dr. Rich Swier

Have you ever gone to the place where you keep your prescription and over-the-counter drugs to look at their expiration dates? Do you throw out any of your medications because they have “expired” according to the manufacturer?

Well the Harvard Medical School looked into to expiration dates and their findings were to say the least shocking.

On August 29, 2020 Harvard Medical School’s Harvard Health Publishing released an article titled Drug Expiration Dates — Do They Mean Anything? The Harvard Medical School reported,

The big question is, do pills expire?

[ … ]

This is a dilemma many people face in some way or another. A column published in Psychopharmacology Today offers some advice.

It turns out that the expiration date on a drug does stand for something, but probably not what you think it does. Since a law was passed in 1979, drug manufacturers are required to stamp an expiration date on their products. This is the date at which the manufacturer can still guarantee the full potency and safety of the drug.

Most of what is known about drug expiration dates comes from a study conducted by the Food and Drug Administration at the request of the military. With a large and expensive stockpile of drugs, the military faced tossing out and replacing its drugs every few years. What they found from the study is 90% of more than 100 drugs, both prescription and over-the-counter, were perfectly good to use even 15 years after the expiration date.

So, the expiration date doesn’t really indicate a point at which the medication is no longer effective or has become unsafe to use. Medical authorities state if expired medicine is safe to take, even those that expired years ago. A rare exception to this may be tetracycline, but the report on this is controversial among researchers. It’s true the effectiveness of a drug may decrease over time, but much of the original potency still remains even a decade after the expiration date. Excluding nitroglycerin, insulin, and liquid antibiotics, most medications are as long-lasting as the ones tested by the military. Placing a medication in a cool place, such as a refrigerator, will help a drug remain potent for many years.

[ … ]

The next time you face the drug expiration date dilemma, consider what you’ve learned here.

Read the full article.

QUESTION: Why would pharmaceutical companies underestimate the expiration of their drugs?

ANSWER: Make more $$$$$ by getting you to throw away perfectly good drugs!

Today many are questioning what our three letter health agencies, e.g. FDA, DHS, and pharmaceutical companies are saying about drugs, including the various Covid vaccines and their side effects.

Many are concerned about the effectiveness of prescription and over-the-counter drugs and their side effects.

We highly recommend that individuals consult with their doctors to determine if a drug has truly expired, is effective and what are side effects, if any.

We have tended to trust our government agencies, especially those who deal with healthcare and disease control. However, many today are skeptical and even against following the advise of our government agencies.

As Ronald Reagan said, “Trust but verify.”

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Liberal California Judge Just Gave Drug Dealers Permission To Deal Drugs!

Arizona Senate GOP affirms state will ignore CDC guidance on K-12 COVID shot thumbnail

Arizona Senate GOP affirms state will ignore CDC guidance on K-12 COVID shot

/in , , , /by

By Tom Joyce

(The Center Square) – Arizona will not require public school students to be vaccinated against coronavirus regardless of what the federal government suggests, a joint statement from the Arizona state Senate majority said.

Senate leadership noted that Governor Doug Ducey signed HB 2086 into law last May. Among other things, the bill says that coronavirus vaccinations cannot be a requirement for school attendance in Arizona; the bill passed with Republican support in both chambers of the legislature.

“This is just another example of how out of touch the federal government and its agencies are with everyday families,” Senate President Karen Fann, R-Prescott, said in a press release. “With Republicans currently in control of our state government, we can promise that we will never subject Arizonans to the requirement of an experimental vaccine that has raised questions over long-term health implications.

Fann said that families should make the best decisions for themselves when it comes to coronavirus vaccines and that she doesn’t think that decision should prevent people from being able to send their children to school in the state.

“Injecting something into our bodies is a very personal choice and is one that families should have complete control over,” Fann said in the release.” Parents with children in schools should not be forced to subject their kids to an experimental vaccine as a condition of in-class instruction. Senate Republicans believe parents ultimately have the right to make medical decisions for their child, and we will not take away that freedom.”

Senate leadership released the statement in response to an Oct. 20 announcement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices updates to the 2023 childhood and adult immunization schedules recommend coronavirus vaccinations for people over six months old.

The Arizona Senate leadership release was put out on behalf of Fann; Majority Leader Rick Gray, R-Sun City; President Pro Tempore Vince Leach, R-Tucson; Majority Whip Sonny Borrelli, R-Lake Havasu City; and David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista.

*****

This article was published by The Center Square – Arizona and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

How Not to Vote in Arizona

The 2022 midterm election is fast approaching. The system for voting in Arizona is predominantly by mail-in ballots (around 80% of all ballots). On October 12th, he ballots were mailed to all voters registered for mail-in voting in the 2022 midterm elections. ‘Election day’ is next Tuesday November 8.

Once upon a time when all voters went to the polls on the day of election, the tabulated results were announced the night of the election date. If the result of a specific race was razor thin and less than a legislated margin, a recount might prevent the naming of a winner. That was the exception for calling the results of the election.

It is still this way in most first world countries but not the United States and certainly not Arizona. Voting rules (some unconstitutional) were dramatically altered in many states in 2020 because of the Covid pandemic.

We at The Prickly Pear are very concerned about the flaws in Arizona’s predominant ‘mail-in’ voting system.

Please click on the red TAKE ACTION link below to learn How Not to Vote in Arizona as a mail-in ballot voter and to be certain your vote is included in the count the evening of November 8th.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.