POLK COUNTY, FLORIDA: Citizens Defending Freedom Files Complaint RE: Pornographic/Age Inappropriate Books in Public Schools thumbnail

POLK COUNTY, FLORIDA: Citizens Defending Freedom Files Complaint RE: Pornographic/Age Inappropriate Books in Public Schools

By Royal A. Brown III

Apparently, No law enforcement agencies in Polk County, Florida have taken any action concerning pornographic/age inappropriate books currently available in Polk County Public School Media Centers. It is difficult for me to explain their seemingly lack of concern about this issue by refusing to even conduct an investigation nor even to openly support an Opt-In option for parents.

We owe our appreciation to Polk County Citizens Defending Freedom (CCDF) and Polk Executive Director Robert Goodman for having the courage and integrity to take this action which 42 Winter Haven 912ers and 48+ County Citizens Defending Freedom members participated in. It seems very reasonable to ask for an OPT-IN policy which will require parents to actually approve access of these books to their children. We are hopeful the State DOE or other agency will weigh in on this issue.

As stated below, Lisa Miller, Sarah Fortney, Sara Beth Wyatt and Kay Fields opposed Superintendent Heid’s initial plan for an Opt-In, Opt-Out policy and convinced him to change it to only an Opt-Out policy which few parents will even know about. In evidence of this, the Aug deadline has already passed with only 42 parents of over 100,000 PCPS students completing the Opt-Out form online. So much for supporting Parent’s Rights.

Lisa Miller expressed concern below about a law suit and that the left would come after the Bible which are both faux reasons in my opinion.

Remember this when voting in General Election in Nov. and vote for Jill Sessions to replace Lisa Miller in the SB run off.

Leader of group targeting Polk school library books asks police agencies to take action

Paul Nutcher The Ledger  09/30/22

Goodman filed reports with Lake Alfred, Winter Haven, Haines City and the Mulberry substation of the Sheriff’s Office as well as its main office to inform law enforcement of the board policy. As of Tuesday, he had not visited the Lakeland or Bartow police departments.

When none of the law enforcement agencies took action, he cast a wider net, writing an email to Gov. Ron DeSantis, Attorney General Ashley Moody, State Attorney Brian Haas of the 10th Judicial Circuit based in Bartow, members of the Florida legislature, county commissioners and the Polk School Board.

Goodman said Tuesday he had received a reply from at least one of the state officials but would not say who it was. None of the state officials contacted by The Ledger responded to requests for comment.

Read more.

©Royal A. Brown III. All rights reserved.

Watch as Pelosi Damns Pro-Life Policy to Hell thumbnail

Watch as Pelosi Damns Pro-Life Policy to Hell

By Church Militant

Hard-hitting news and analysis through an authentic Catholic lens.

Church Militant Evening News topics:

  • Podcast priest defends motherhood
  • FBI official accused of political bias forced to resign
  • Faithful American prelate offers inspiration for Catholics
  • No straight answer about monkeypox?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Connecticut Asst. Principal Brags About Woke Indoctrination of Students, Blacklists Catholic Teachers

McClain, GOP lawmakers demand Garland, ‘spineless’ DOJ ‘bring justice’ for ‘anti-Catholic’ attacks

Voters in These 4 States to Decide Abortion Law at Ballot

Myth vs. Fact: Correcting Misinformation on Maternal Medical Care

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

There Was No Pandemic Mastermind thumbnail

There Was No Pandemic Mastermind

By Steve Templeton

The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either—but right through every human heart.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

There is a lot of celebratory football-spiking going on in COVID response-skeptic social media circles.

When two groups of people are diametrically opposed to one another on a singular issue, and the beliefs of one of those groups is validated by events, the other group may just wish to slink away and “put everything behind them.”

I think this is happening with the COVID-19 pandemic. After years of misleading, politically-driven information campaigns designed to increase vaccine uptake, the CDC has finally admitted something that everyone knew, but most couldn’t say: that SARS-CoV-2 infection-acquired immunity protects against severe disease upon reinfection just as well or even better than vaccination.

The problem wasn’t just the messaging on protective immunity. From pushing damaging and unsustainable lockdowns to contriving a false consensus on masks to massively inflating risks of COVID-19 in children and schools, the CDC’s record has been utterly dismal.

After the reality-mugging of the last two and a half years, I’m sure many people in the CDC and other government agencies would like to quietly move on, much as the rest of the world already has.

But that can’t happen just yet. Some very tough and pointed questions need to be asked about the decisions that led to shutdowns and mandates and who made, influenced, and benefited from those decisions. The pandemic exposed a dysfunctional, politicized and risk-averse health bureaucracy with little incentive to act beyond its own naked self-interests. A bright and continuous spotlight on the systemic failures of government agencies is only the first step to meaningful reform. But it has to happen.

The temptation to place the blame for these failures on a single person or a small, yet powerful group of people will be irresistible. The concept of an evil mastermind or a sinister cabal of deep-state Illuminati pulling all the strings to shut down the world, hurt working-class people, and keep poor children out of school has been a reflexive way for many people to make sense of the messy world we’ve lived in since March 2020.

There are some problems with this way of thinking. The fact that most Western governments acted in a very similar manner—initially trying to reassure the public, then panicking and issuing lockdowns and other damaging policies and blaming the people when they didn’t work—raises an important question. How could a single person or group of people orchestrate all that so quickly?

When people are angry about so much needless destruction and waste, they want to put a face to that anger, to identify a target. They need someone to blame, someone to put on trial, condemn and cancel. It’s much more difficult to put institutions, systems, or culture on trial, and much less satisfying.

There were certainly many people who took advantage of pandemic chaos in rather dubious ways. They stockpiled masks or drugs to resell at huge profits, were compromised by ties to pharmaceutical companies, or gained notoriety by feeding the media’s insatiable appetite for sensationalized predictions of doom. Those representing special interests lined up to use the crisis to their advantage, and when they were successful, lobbied for more. This misbehavior should certainly not be ignored.

Yet if all the blame for the disastrous pandemic response is successfully put on one person or a group of people, it ensures there will be a scapegoat and only that. They might be put on trial, demonized, and canceled, a process that many of us would enjoy watching. But the systems and culture that incentivized them to behave badly will remain in place.

The CDC has already started the process of rebranding itself in light of its admitted failures. Predictably, it involves some cosmetic reorganization yet otherwise increases institutional power and reach. With these superficial changes, the ossified, dysfunctional culture will continue to balloon and lumber on, consuming more and more resources with an ever-decreasing net benefit, waiting to be exposed again by another crisis. Rinse and repeat.

Accepting the CDC’s faux contrition and bogus pledge of reform would be a mistake. The organization is in need of a serious overhaul. The conflict of interest that results when government organizations make policy recommendations and fund research to support those recommendations needs to be removed by separating both functions. Positions should not be guaranteed for life, but subject to periodic renewal, and easier to terminate. The power of permanent bureaucrats to micromanage national health policy should be minimized as much as possible.

Most skeptical readers will read the above and say, “Yeah, right. Not gonna happen,” and I would tend to agree with that. In fact, I think the problem is even more intractable than just institutional reform. After all, as many people in the CDC and other government agencies liked to remind us during the pandemic, they only make recommendations. They didn’t force the federal government, states, and cities to implement and enforce mandates. All of those places did so on their own, unfortunately with great energy and enthusiasm. For many aspiring totalitarians, CDC recommendations were merely a convenient foil for increasing their own power and influence.

Perhaps the most important question is, where would leaders get the idea that all of this behavior was, not only acceptable but commendable?

The answer is—they got the idea from us. The public long ago accepted that government organizations like the CDC have assumed responsibility for their well-being, during normal times and in times of crisis. If the CDC can’t protect us and provide the absolute certainty we demand during times of crisis, then what are they good for? An excellent question.

The pandemic has shown that government agencies cannot, in fact, do those things very well at all. Even if they could protect people and provide them with absolute certainty, they wouldn’t be incentivized to do so. Instead, in a crisis government agencies will follow the path of least resistance, in this case providing an illusion of safety, security, and control for politicians and the public. All one had to do was believe the illusion. Because of the absolute terror of the unknown and complete ignorance of the risks of severe disease and death, most people were more than willing to take comfort in CDC recommendations and subsequent government mandates without the slightest hint of skepticism or protest. A pervasive safety-at-all costs culture enabled all of it.

By all means, we need to take a very long and hard look at the leaders and bureaucrats that took the easiest, yet the most damaging path of lockdowns and mandates. We need to expose all of their corruption, incompetence, and hypocrisy. It’s going to be a huge task that will take a considerable amount of time, and it has to happen.

Yet ultimately, when looking for someone to blame for the disastrous pandemic response, the most important place we need to look is in the mirror.

Steve Templeton is Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology at Indiana University School of Medicine – Terre Haute. Formerly CDC/NIOSH. Immunology of Infectious Disease.

*****

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

TAKE ACTION

Are you fed up? Are you worried that America in rapidly sliding into a neo-Marxist state by the radical left in control of Washington with historically narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and an Executive controlled by unnamed far leftists in place of a clinically incompetent President Biden? They are desperate to keep power and complete their radical progressive agenda that will change America and our liberty forever.

Americans just witnessed the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 without one Republican vote in the U.S. Senate and House (just as Obamacare was passed in 2010). The IRS  will be hiring 87,000 new agents, many armed, to terrorize American taxpayers.

Americans witnessed the FBI raid at the Trump Mar-A-Lago home and property of President Trump, truly a first in all of American history. We know what that is about. 

It is undeniable that the Democrat Party and the administrative state (the executive branches of the DOJ, FBI, IRS, et al) are clear and present dangers to our Republic and our liberty as they increasingly veer further away from the rule of law and the Constitution. What is the solution? At this critical juncture, there is only one action we can all take.

The only viable and timely solution at this critical point is to vote – yes, vote correctly and smartly to retake the U.S. House and Senate on November 8th and to prepare the way to retake the White House in two years. Vote and help everyone you know to vote. Please click the TAKE ACTION link below – we must vote correctly and in great numbers to be sure our votes are counted to diminish the potential for the left to rig and steal the midterms and the 2024 elections as they are clearly intending to do after their success in 2020.

The Vaxxed Are ‘Dropping Like Flies’ from Sudden Death Syndrome thumbnail

The Vaxxed Are ‘Dropping Like Flies’ from Sudden Death Syndrome

By The Geller Report

/1 Comment/in , , , , , , , , , /by

There’s no other way to say it.

Dolphins executive Jason Jenkins dead at 47 https://t.co/olF55TJnVs pic.twitter.com/QtgSPYsRgm

— New York Post (@nypost) August 28, 2022

German insurer: Covid jab injuries jump almost 3,000%

The British Government Has Begun Paying $140,000 for COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Victims

Unusual Toxic Components Found in COVID Vaccines, ‘Without Exception’: German Scientists

Deaths Among Female Children Increase by 57% Immediately After Taking Covid-19 Vaccine

PFIZER DOCS: 44 Percent of Pregnant Women Miscarried After Receiving Pfizer Vaccine

Denmark Bans Covid Vaccine for Children

FDA Accepted Major Flawed Study From COVID Vaccine Producer

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

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

Long-Term Disability Claims Are Soaring Among Vaccinated Pilots

Miami Dolphins exec dies (mysteriously) at 47

Bulgarian Tennis Player Grigor Dimitrov Retires in His Opening Match During Winston Salem Open After Experiencing Dizziness and Shortness of Breath (VIDEO)

18-Year-Old Kentucky High School Athlete Dies Unexpectedly Due to Cardiac Arrest After Helping Flash Flood Victims

Data Proves ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ Fiction Is Death by Covid Vaccination

Over 30 deaths of young, healthy Canadian doctors cannot be explained any other way than they were killed by the vaccine

Jabbed Athletes Die Suddenly

FIFTH Young Doctor, Triathlete, 27, DIES SUDDENLY

Gov’t Database Reveals 10,000% Increase in Cancer Reports Due to COVID Vaccines

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

0 0 The Geller Report 2022-08-30 09:41:22The Vaxxed Are ‘Dropping Like Flies’ from Sudden Death Syndrome

CNN Medical Analyst Says Masking Stunted Her Toddler’s Language Development—and Taught Her an Important Lesson about Tradeoffs thumbnail

CNN Medical Analyst Says Masking Stunted Her Toddler’s Language Development—and Taught Her an Important Lesson about Tradeoffs

By Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

A year ago, Dr. Leana Wen was arguing unvaccinated people shouldn’t be allowed to leave their homes. But now she says she’s abandoned her “extremely cautious” Covid views.


During the 1960s, the phrase “the personal is political” became a rallying cry for second-wave feminists challenging the social framework that existed at the time.

There was an unhealthy collectivist undercurrent to this idea—“There are no personal solutions at this time,” wrote Women’s Liberation Movement member Carol Hanisch in an essay on the topic, “There is only collective action for a collective solution”—but the phrase also contains an element of truth.

Personal experience does play an undeniable role in how many humans perceive politics and social structures, which brings me to CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen.

Throughout the pandemic, Wen was in what I’ll call the “pro-mandate” camp.

In March 2021, she excoriated governors who rescinded or failed to pass mask mandates in their states.

“We are not out of the woods. We haven’t reached the end of the pandemic,” Wen said in a pro-mask CNN piece. “It’s counterproductive and truly infuriating these governors are treating this as if the pandemic is over. It’s not true.”

Later that year, she went so far as to argue that unvaccinated people shouldn’t be allowed to leave their homes.

“We need to start looking at the choice to remain unvaccinated the same as we look at driving while intoxicated,” Wen told CNN’s Chris Cuomo. “You have the option to not get vaccinated if you want, but then you can’t go out in public.”

.@DrLeanaWen: “There are privileges associated with being an American. That if you wish to have these privileges, you need to get vaccinated. Travel, and having the right to travel in our state, it’s not a constitutional right as far as I know to board a plane.” pic.twitter.com/eyhEVooV20

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 10, 2021

A year later, Wen’s views have changed. In a recent Washington Post article, she explained why she’ll no longer be masking her children and how she shifted away from “being extremely cautious” with Covid protocols.

“I accept the risk that my kids will probably contract covid-19 this school year, just as they could contract the flu, respiratory syncytial virus and other contagious diseases,” she writes. “As for most Americans, covid in our family will almost certainly be mild; and, like most Americans, we’ve made the decision that following precautions strict enough to prevent the highly contagious BA.5 will be very challenging.”

Wen’s observations are not wrong. The new variants are less deadly, and this is particularly true for children, which has always been the case.

A year ago, when Wen was still advocating strict mandates, we pointed out that the CDC’s own data showed small children were at far greater risk of dying from the flu, drowning, vehicle collisions, cancer, and other things than Covid.

This data, for whatever reason, apparently did little to persuade Wen in 2021, however. What does appear to have changed her mind is that her child appears to have suffered from the mandates.

“Masking has harmed our son’s language development,” she bluntly asserts in the article.

Throughout the pandemic, few policies have been debated with more fury than mask mandates. The vast majority of these debates focus on a single point: does masking prevent or even reduce Covid transmission? Some studies say yes, others cast doubt on their efficacy.

For many, however, the efficacy of masking became a sort of dogma that could not even be questioned. (If you doubt this, consider that until a few days ago one faced risk of suspension on YouTube for suggesting that masks don’t play a role in preventing Covid transmission.)

Far less discussion focused on the costs of forcing people to wear masks, and Wen now sees this as a mistake.

“There is a tradeoff,” Wen says.

Many on Twitter have asked–how did I go from being extremely cautious with #covid19 precautions for nearly two years to now resuming pre-pandemic activities, including not masking my young kids at school?

I explain in this @postopinions column 🧵: https://t.co/3UGUxWvCH7

— Leana Wen, M.D. (@DrLeanaWen) August 23, 2022

Many, however, refused to acknowledge this and argued that masking is simply a moral imperative. I recently had a discussion at a family gathering with a person who supports mask mandates. He became indignant when my sister-in-law said she didn’t think it was right to force her children to wear masks at school all day long.

“It’s about protecting others,” he said. “It’s the smallest thing.”

The fact that he was not wearing a mask himself as he said this didn’t seem the least bit ironic to him, but it proved Wen’s point: there are tradeoffs. (If there was not, we’d wear them all the time.)

The idea of tradeoffs is perhaps the most basic principle in all of economics. It’s rooted in a simple idea: in order to have or do one thing, one must sacrifice having or doing something else. All things come with opportunity costs, big and small. (A minor tradeoff with masking is simply being able to breathe more freely.)

For most of the pandemic, many Americans and most public health officials refused to acknowledge the reality of tradeoffs. In 2021, The New York Times described a phenomenon known as “Covid Absolutism.” It consists of two primary factors: 1. Taking every conceivable step that could reduce the spread of Covid regardless of its actual effectiveness; 2. Downplaying or ignoring the unintended consequences and tradeoffs of these policies.

There is an important difference between taking steps that *appear* to reduce the spread of Covid and taking steps that actually reduce the spread of Covid.

A thread…

— David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) February 12, 2021

Basic economics, however, teaches us the folly of this thinking.

“There are no solutions, there are only trade-offs,” Thomas Sowell famously observed.

This was the economic lesson Wen learned during the pandemic. She didn’t learn it in a classroom or in a textbook. She learned it in her personal experience when her own child began to struggle with language development (not a minor tradeoff), just like countless other children.

Writing in The Atlantic, Stephanie Murray also wrote about the reality of tradeoffs, stating that many parents with youngsters who are struggling see the potential benefits of masking as a poor trade for what they lose developmentally.

“Children with speech or language disorders offer perhaps the clearest example of these murky trade-offs,” she writes.

This is precisely why decision-making must be left to individuals, not bureaucrats. Nobody is more capable of weighing the pros and cons of a trade or action better than the people who themselves stand to lose or benefit from that trade or action (or in this care, their parents).

Dr. Wen no doubt knows a great deal about public health, just like Anthony Fauci and Rochelle P. Walensky. But even Fauci and Walensky, I suspect, would concede that it’s Wen who knows what’s better for her child.

It must be stressed that it’s not just that Wen wants what’s best for her child. It’s that she actually knows what’s best for her child because she has infinitely more knowledge about her child than any distant bureaucrat or meddling politician could ever possess.

Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek detailed this “local knowledge” concept in his work exploring “the knowledge problem,” and he showed why central planners seeking to engineer society through force are capable of producing little beyond “planned chaos.” This is why it’s so important that freedom of decision-making is left to those who have the most local knowledge and can most accurately assess the risks and rewards of any given action.

The good news is that Wen, to her credit, appears to have learned something throughout the tragedy of the Covid pandemic, as have so many others.

The tragedy is that for so long she overlooked tradeoffs and used her platform to advocate coercive policies that deprived individuals of the ability to choose, a tragedy that is compounded by the fact that Wen now finds herself a target of cancellation for advocating a more sensible approach.

I’m on 3 immunosuppressants. COVID’s been scary.

I never talk about this. Until I saw 600 experts publicly compare @DrLeanaWen to a supporter of eugenics bc she’s come to oppose mandates.

They’re doing this in the name of folks like me. I’d like to tell you why they’re wrong.

— Billy Binion (@billybinion) August 25, 2022

It’s an ironic twist considering that only a year ago Wen herself was a proponent of confining unvaccinated people to their homes, and not one we should celebrate.

But hopefully it can be a learning experience for Wen and others, who now recognize the danger in turning what should be individual decisions over to bureaucrats and political tribes.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

RELATED ARTICLE: The CDC is Broken and Apologies Can’t Fix It: “We’ve Made Some Mistakes, But NOW You Can Trust Us!”

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

Understanding the Dangers of Ambien Addiction thumbnail

Understanding the Dangers of Ambien Addiction

By Kevin Morris Delphi Behavioral Health Group

Certain places have achieved the status of “The City that Never Sleeps.” New York City is the most famous example of this. It’s a place where the lights are always on, and there are always things to do. However, many of us could describe ourselves as people who never sleep, and it has nothing to do with city life. Instead, it has to do with problems of insomnia and other sleep disorders. Ambien has risen to the occasion as a miracle drug to combat sleep disorders, and its popularity cannot be downplayed. But what are its dangers, and just how addictive is this sedative drug?

Sleep at What Cost?

Ambien’s website wastes no time describing the complex problem of insomnia. The claim is that 30 percent of Americans have trouble falling asleep, and if you fall into this one-in-three category, it’s time to talk to your doctor about this drug, which people have turned to “for more than two decades.” It’s a strong statement, and it communicates two things to the average reader: Sleep problems are common to many of us, and Ambien is a time-tested option to help you get to sleep.

It is true that roughly one in three people have at least mild insomnia. However, it’s important to know that the idea of time-tested sleep aids is a much more rocky journey than it might sound. The story of sleep aids is very much a story of ongoing sedative drug addiction. Early on, people used barbiturates to try to relieve their insomnia. Over time, however, medical professionals and others discovered these drugs caused significant side effects, including behavior disturbances, severe addiction, and withdrawal symptoms.

The 1960s saw a shift from barbiturates to benzodiazepines, a drug that was believed to be much safer but ended up causing the same tendency of addiction and withdrawal. In fact, as the most commonly prescribed drug in the world at one time, benzos arguably caused even greater damage than their barbiturate predecessors. This is where the era of Z-drugs begins, with Ambien leading the way as the No. 1 sleeping pill on the market.

Unfortunately, over two decades of Ambien use have taught us a different story than the idea of time-tested reliability; Ambien can be very addictive with withdrawal symptoms that can be medically dangerous. This seems contrary to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)’s scheduling of Ambien, classifying it as a Schedule IV with a “low potential for abuse.” However, in 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave Ambien a black box warning, along with other sleeping medications, such as Lunesta and Sonata. The FDA’s black box is its strongest warning label for drugs that can have serious or life-threatening side effects.

DUIs and Fading Memories

Besides the initial danger of being an addictive drug, what are some examples of Ambien’s serious and life-threatening side effects? Two main side effects that come up in headlines quite often are intoxication and memory loss. Intoxication might sound surprising, but it’s true that DUIs are no longer limited to alcohol. Ambien’s effects are truly intoxicating, causing people to black out, hallucinate, and even drift in and out of consciousness. People under the influence of Ambien can begin to experience these side effects while driving, or these side effects can lead them to get behind the wheel without realizing what they are doing. Because of this, the term has been coined “sleep-driving.” More and more deadly car crash stories involving Ambien are coming to light.

This also connects the problem of Ambien-induced intoxication to the problem of memory loss. Public indecency and even sexual assault cases have occurred under the influence of Ambien. Some defendants claim they have no memory of committing these crimes. Some suggest that this is true, while others claim that these statements are taking advantage of another known side effect of Ambien: memory loss. Ambien is a central nervous system (CNS) depressant.

The drug activates a receptor in the brain that suppresses the firing rate of other neurons, slowing down activity in the central nervous system. This is Ambien’s sedation process, which is how it helps people fall asleep. But this process also reduces the activity of neurons responsible for learning, memory, and decision-making. A whole host of factors can intensify this problem (other drug use, age, metabolism, physical health, etc.). Ambien’s short half-life means people can wake up while still experiencing the other sedative effects. In some cases, memory loss is limited to what someone did while under Ambien’s influence. Still, abuse and long-term use of the drug can lead to a permanent decline in memory, including dementia.

What to Do

There’s no doubt that Ambien is widely sought after and widely abused. Ambien’s website states that the drug is meant to be used for “short-term” treatment, but the reality is people who are desperate enough to cure their sleep problems with medication are unlikely to limit prescription drug use to short-term. They may think, “if it’s working, why stop?” But using the drug for longer periods than prescribed only increases the risk of negative side effects and developing a substance use disorder with Ambien. If you or someone you know is actively using Ambien— especially if you were unaware of this information—it’s important to consider the risks involved. If an addiction has been formed, be sure to get professional medical help right away.

©Kevin Morris. All rights reserved.

Sources

K104.7 FM. (2022 Aug 26). This Nearby Charlotte City is the Best to Celebrate Labor Day Weekend In. Retrieved https://k1047.com/listicle/this-nearby-charlotte-city-is-the-best-to-celebrate-labor-day-weekend-in/

Ambien. (n.d.) Ambien Homepage. Retrieved https://www.ambien.com/

Sleep Health Foundation. (2011). Insomnia. Retrieved https://sleephealthfoundation.org.au/pdfs/Insomnia.pdf

Delphi Health Group. (n.d) Sedative Addiction. Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/sedatives/

Delphi Health Group. (n.d) The Effects and Dangers of Mixing Alcohol With Ambien. Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/alcohol/mixing-with-ambien/

Delphi Health Group. (n.d.). Guide to Benzodiazepine Addiction and Treatment. Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/benzodiazepines/

Delphi Health Group. (n.d.). Ambien Addiction Guide. Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/sedatives/ambien/

DEA (2018 Jul 10). Drug Scheduling. Retrieved. https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling

Healthline. (2019 May 2). FDA Issues ‘Black Box’ Warning on Sleep Aids Like Ambien: What You Need to Know. Retrieved https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-fda-issued-a-black-box-warning-for-sleep-aids-such-as-ambien

Delphi Health Group. (n.d) Guide to Alcohol Detox: Severity, Dangers, and Timeline. Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/alcohol/detox/

Harvard Health. (n.d.). Sleep Driving and Other Unusual Practices During Sleep. Retrieved https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/sleep-driving-and-other-unusual-practices-during-sleep-2019091617754

CBS Boston. (2022, Jun 1). Man charged with groping 2 women on flight from Los Angeles to Boston. Retrieved https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/california-man-charged-groping-women-flight-boston/

Delphi Health Group. (n.d) Why Does Ambien Cause Memory Loss? Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/sedatives/ambien/memory-loss/

Medical News Today. (2021 Aug 16). Ambien and Ambien CR: Side Effects. Retrieved https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/drugs-ambien#_noHeaderPrefixedContent

Delphi Health Group. (n.d.). Guide to Drug Addiction: Symptoms, Signs, and Treatment. Retrieved https://delphihealthgroup.com/addiction/

Healthline. (2019, June 29). Lunesta vs. Ambien: Two Short-Term Treatments for Insomnia. Retrieved https://www.healthline.com/health/healthy-sleep/lunesta-vs-ambien

Federal Court Strikes Down Biden Regime’s Transgender Medical Mandate thumbnail

Federal Court Strikes Down Biden Regime’s Transgender Medical Mandate

By The Geller Report

The demented pervert and his depraved party must be stopped. Save the children!

A federal appeals court on Friday struck down a Biden administration statute that forced doctors to perform medical procedures, including gender-transition procedures, against their religious beliefs.

By: Caden Pearson, The Epoch Times, August 27, 202:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit unanimously upheld a lower court’s ruling in Franciscan Alliance v. Becerra which protected around 19,000 health care professionals in Franciscan Alliance, a Catholic health care network, from performing medical procedures against their conscience.

The lower court’s ruling had permanently prohibited the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) “from requiring Franciscan Alliance to perform gender-transition surgeries or abortions in violation of its sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Becket, the legal counsel representing Franciscan Alliance, said the court explained that permanent protection from the statute was appropriate for health care workers.

“This ruling is a major victory for conscience rights and compassionate medical care in America,” said Joseph Davis, counsel at Becket, in a statement. “Doctors cannot do their jobs and comply with the Hippocratic Oath if the government requires them to perform harmful, irreversible procedures against their conscience and medical expertise.”

The court noted that the Biden administration argued for more chances to show why it needed religious health care providers to participate in gender-transition surgeries, but that the ACLU, a co-appellant, cited a previous case that worked against their argument, according to court documents (pdf).

“For years, our clients have provided excellent medical care to all patients who need it,” Davis said. “Today’s ruling ensures that these doctors and hospitals may continue to do this critical work in accordance with their conscience and professional medical judgment.”

Mandate

The mandate was first issued six years ago as part of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. Becket noted that this applied to “virtually every doctor nationwide.”

Section 1557 of Obamacare prohibits health care programs that receive federal funds from discriminating against patients on the basis of sex.

In May 2016, HHS issued a rule interpreting Section 1557’s prohibition of “discrimination on the basis of sex.” It defined sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of “termination of pregnancy” and the disputed concept of “gender identity.”

Franciscan Alliance claimed the 2016 rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by defining “sex discrimination” inconsistently with Title IX, which protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance.

This rule was swiftly challenged by nine states and a group of religious organizations and received protection from federal courts in North Dakota and in Texas.

Franciscan Alliance also claimed that the 2016 rule violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) by forcing it to perform abortions and gender-reassignment surgeries inconsistent with its sincerely held religious beliefs.

Becket says on its website that the Biden administration and the ACLU were “dissatisfied with not being able to force religious health care providers to violate their faith” and appealed the decision back to the Fifth Circuit.

The Biden administration has been accused of weaponizing Title IX to push “woke insanity” on Americans.

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

And Now, the Left Moves to Normalize Pedophilia thumbnail

And Now, the Left Moves to Normalize Pedophilia

By Jihad Watch

It isn’t as if we weren’t warned. Many people have observed for years now that the total exclusion of morality from the public square, and the refusal to declare that any behavior was wrong in itself, would lead to the normalization of all manner of abhorrent behavior. Such warnings seem almost quaint now, with drag queens in primary schools and toddlers being encouraged to undergo radical body mutilation. In this insane environment, it is no surprise whatsoever that the Left is now pushing to make pedophilia as normal as a walk in the park. The assault on traditional values is total and unyielding. No quarter will be given.

The Post Millennial reported recently that “a professional counselor who works with incarcerated sex offenders defended pedophiles as a ‘marginalized’ minority in a recent YouTube upload, sparking criticism as clips from the video went viral on social media.” Miranda Galbreath, who is a licensed sex therapist, posted a video which is, at least for now, unavailable. It was entitled “Let’s talk about minor-attracted persons.” In it, Galbreath advocates for the use of the term “minor attracted people” and claims that the term “pedophile” is a “judgmental, hurtful insult.” She says that pedophiles are “the most vilified population of folks.”

Amid all this rancid and dangerous propaganda, even “folks” is a charged word. While the Post Millennial transcribes the word as “folks,” it is likely that Galbreath said “folx,” which Merriam-Webster, a newly woke company like all the rest of them, explains is “used especially to explicitly signal the inclusion of groups commonly marginalized.” Galbreath is semaphoring to her Leftist audience that pedophiles are or should be considered to be among the Left’s protected victim groups, groups that are prized and privileged because they are supposedly “marginalized.” To redress the wrongs done by white, Christian, cisgendered, heteronormative bigots, these people deserve special consideration and accommodation.

Galbreath claims that the term minor-attracted person “simply means that the person has an enduring sexual or romantic attraction to minors. They have not chosen this attraction… you don’t get to choose to be heterosexual or gay, and you don’t get to choose to be a minor-attracted person.” It’s something the poor dears can’t help, you see. Galbreath doesn’t seem to have any interest, meanwhile, in the plight of people who don’t choose to become the victims of pedophiles. They don’t choose, either, but apparently they don’t deserve any consideration.

The Post Millennial notes that Galbreath is not just a talking head, but acts upon her ideas: “On her website, called Sexual Safe Space, Galbreath claims that she has been an active mental health counselor for over 20 years. According to the site, she provides ‘evaluation and treatment services in the community and within state prisons to folks who have committed sexual offenses.’ On her Linkedin profile, she displays experience working with the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections.” And one insane and immoral perspective leads to another: Galbreath “is also a registered member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which sets international guidelines and protocols for medically transitioning, including recommendations for minors as young as 14.”

Galbreath is not alone in trying to normalize pedophilia. She is just one part of a much larger push. As far back as October 2014, the New York Times published an op-ed entitled “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not A Crime.” Those who would dismiss that on the basis of its having been an op-ed and not a news article, and thus not necessarily reflecting the position of the Times itself, should investigate when the Times last published an op-ed arguing that Islam was not a religion of peace, and that jihad terrorists were inspired by texts and teachings of the Qur’an itself. The Times has, of course, never published such an op-ed, and never would. But normalizing pedophilia? That fits in just fine with the Times’ agenda.

And with that of the Washington Post, which chimed in on July 8, 2015 with a piece entitled “We’re shocked by every nice guy caught with child porn. But we shouldn’t be. Our image of pedophiles is completely wrong.” Even farther back, in 2012, CNN asked: “Do pedophiles deserve sympathy?” The answer was, of course, yes.

Clearly the media elites want us to accept pedophilia as normal as baseball and apple pie. But why? If we had any actual journalists today, they would be investigating and exposing the forces behind this unseemly push to normalize what is and always will be the horrific abuse of children. But we don’t.

AUTHOR

Robert Spencer

RELATED VIDEO: Sexual Ecosystems with Miranda Galbreath

RELATED ARTICLES: 

After Proclaiming The Opposite, Medical Pros Quietly Admit Mutilating Trans Kids Doesn’t Fix Depression

Pedophiles Believe They Should Be A Part Of The LGBT Community

The Faces of Pedophilia in America: Woody Allen and Dylan Farrow

America’s Sissy Problem

Binary [Science] or Non-Binary [Myth] — That is the Question!

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

Biden’s Border Catastrophe: Human Trafficker Says Cartels Harvest Children’s Organs And Stuff Drugs In Their Corpses thumbnail

Biden’s Border Catastrophe: Human Trafficker Says Cartels Harvest Children’s Organs And Stuff Drugs In Their Corpses

By The Geller Report

The poison fruit of Biden’s immigration disaster.

By: Jennie Taer, Daily Caller Foundation,  August 26, 2022

A Central American human trafficker said that cartels are harvesting children’s organs and stuffing drugs in their corpses as part of their illicit and profitable cross-border operations, the anonymous trafficker revealed in an interview with Fox News contributor Sara Carter.

“In most cases, they wanted to sell their organs, so that is the reason they take children,” the trafficker, whose face and voice were concealed, told Carter.

“Sometimes they take out the organs and they fill the body with drugs so they could take it through the border,” he added.

Wealthy people across the globe are purchasing the organs through unauthorized clinics, according to the trafficker.

WATCH: 

The trafficker said children are used because they yield high profits.

They just care about the money,” the trafficker said of the cartels’ interest in the lucrative operation.

Sexual predators also buy children from the cartels, he explained.

“I’ve heard that some people in places have very specific things that they like certain nationalities or certain age groups. So the cartels are looking for the people going around and when they spot someone with those characteristics, they tend to take them,” the trafficker said.

Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei told the Daily Caller News Foundation in June that smugglers have exploited the Biden administration’s “confusing” immigration messaging and used children to easily cross into the U.S. illegally.

“Right now there has been confusion with the messages. When they say we are going to codify all the children who have their parents here, what the coyotes say there is not convenient for them [the migrants]. ‘Let’s see. Grab the children and come,’ That child may be related, he may not be related. Wanting a child is the coyotes’ way of manipulating people,” Giammattei told the DCNF.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authorities have encountered over 1,900,000 migrants, 128,845 of which are unaccompanied children, at the southern border since October, according to agency statistics.

Keep reading…..

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

FRAUD, WASTE AND ABUSE: Joe Biden and Joe Manchin’s Green New Deal—Costs a Lot of Green thumbnail

FRAUD, WASTE AND ABUSE: Joe Biden and Joe Manchin’s Green New Deal—Costs a Lot of Green

By Dr. Rich Swier

“I want to testify today about what I believe is a planetary emergency—a crisis that threatens the survival of our civilization and the habitability of the Earth. Just six weeks ago, the scientific community, in its strongest statement to date, confirmed that the evidence of warming is `unequivocal.’ Global warming is real and human activity is the main cause. The consequences are mainly negative and headed toward catastrophic, unless we act.”Statement of Hon. Al Gore, Former Vice President of the United States and Former Senator from the State of Tennessee on March 21, 2007.


Fifteen years and six months ago Al Gore appeared before the Committee on Environment and Public Works and said if something is not done immediately then the “survival of our civilization and the habitability of the Earth” are unequivocally headed towards a “catastrophe.”

This struck fear into the hearts and minds of many Americans and began the concerted effort by environmentalists to “go green.” Now we have the Biden—Manchin Green New Deal as the law of the land.

QUESTION: How is that working out to save our civilization and the habitability of the earth?

ANSWER: It doesn’t work but cost a lot to implement!

We recently reported on how the Biden administration sent federal agents to a farm in Bird-in-Hand, Pennsylvania to demand all green farmer Amos Miller stop selling his all green, organic, healthy foods to his 4,000+ customers.

We reported,

Amos Miller has been farming for 25 years. No electricity, no fertilizer, and no gasoline. He has tremendously impressive crop yields using only the only the oldest of methods, totally organic.

The U.S. Marshall Service raided this farm under the guise of ‘not using GMO drugs’ to raise their vegetables and livestock.

Isn’t what going green means? Don’t environmentalists, conservationists, people who want to save the planet want? How about those who want to eat healthy foods produced without steroids and other drugs or using genetic engineering?

Watch: Will organic Amish farmer bend a knee to the government?

Green New Deal—Costs a Lot of Green

As Biden’s armed agents attack a farmer in Bird-in-Hand, Pennsylvania legislators in California, i.e. political fanatics of going green, have decided to stop all sales of new internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.

Blaze Media’s Joseph MacKinnon reported,

On Thursday [August 25th, 2022], California’s Air Resources Board voted in favor of banning the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035. All new cars, trucks, and SUVs will be required to run on electricity (32% of which is presently generated by natural gas in the state) or hydrogen. This comes as a result of Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2020 directive prompting regulators to pursue such a policy. It is unclear, however, whether the state’s electric grid will be prepared for the transition.

[ … ]

As of January 2022, California had 837,887 light-duty electric vehicles (i.e. battery electric, plug-in hybrid, and fuel cell). It presently has 1,943 medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles. The state plans to have 1.5 million zero-emissions vehicles on its roads by 2025 and at least 5 million on its roads and by 2030.

What’s the Downside?

MacKinnon notes,

Senior energy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists Mike Jacobs told Yahoo Finance, “The use of an electric vehicle is like adding one or two air conditioners to your residence in terms of its energy increase.”

According to Brouwer, “If we try to move in this direction and only use battery electric vehicles, we will fail. … The grid cannot charge every single transportation application.” He recommended that California also invest in fuel-cell electric vehicles.

Whether it be a fuel-cell or a battery electric vehicle, investment in the grid is believed to be necessary to accommodate the charge needed for that additional “air conditioner.”

The Bottom Line

Going green is based upon the myth that mankind must suffer in order to save the planet.

Watch as Dan Ball and Alex Epstein explain what California’s vote to ban gasoline driven car sales by 2035 really means for we the people.

Californians are already facing an energy crisis and it will only get worse as more and more all electric vehicles are sold.

The cost of going green is shelling out more green by government and individuals. Going green is killing Californians and the Biden—Manchin Green New Deal will destroy our economy.

This is government fraud, waste and abuse from the California State House to the White House.

Gird your loins for more and more green to be taken out of your pockets to further the go green myths.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Admin Handed California The Power To Mandate EVs Nationwide

California’s electric grid may not be ready for Gov. Newsom’s ban on gas-powered cars

Goodbye, Anthony Fauci thumbnail

Goodbye, Anthony Fauci

By David Waugh and Ryan Yonk

When Anthony Fauci announced his retirement, a deluge of fawning coverage about his career immediately appeared in mainstream media outlets. This praise was both expected and deeply disturbing. Yasmeen Abutaleb of the Washington Post described him as the “nation’s preeminent infectious-disease expert who achieved unprecedented fame while enduring withering political attacks.” President Biden joined the chorus, commenting that “His commitment to the work is unwavering, and he does it with an unparalleled spirit, energy, and scientific integrity”.

On the surface, Fauci’s career looks impressive. He is one of the most cited scientists of all time, serving seven Presidents in various roles while working at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the National Institute of Health. In 2008, President George W. Bush awarded Dr. Fauci the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

His career, while lengthy, hardly deserves the unmitigated praise it’s currently getting. Instead, it exemplifies the problems that quickly emerge under technocratic rule. Dr. Fauci receives one of the highest salaries ever paid by the Federal Government (reportedly $434,312 in 2020), and commands more authority than any other career bureaucrat in recent memory. We can now purchase everything from Fauci bobbleheads to Fauci prayer candles. Some have even decorated their bodies with Fauci Tattoos. And why not? “I represent science,” he famously said. He believed it, and the US bought it.

That a career bureaucrat would become a phenomenon is one of the most interesting outcomes of the last two years. Since the start of the pandemic, few names are as recognizable to the general public as his.

The Bureaucrat’s Bureaucrat

Dr. Fauci’s career has been one of maximizing budgets and influence for his agencies and himself, all the while handling multiple public health crises with less than stellar outcomes. Economist Gordon Tullock in his book The Politics of Bureaucracy observed that the primary characteristic of a successful bureaucrat is “a desire to rise” and only secondarily does intelligence or competence impact the success of a bureaucrat. This understanding of success within bureaucratic systems is further illustrated by Friedrich Hayek in Chapter 10 of Road to Serfdom,  “Why the Worst Get on Top.” While Hayek’s work focuses on tyrannical politicians, the logic clearly applies to government bureaucrats. Indeed Dr. Fauci’s career demonstrates both these realities simultaneously. Far from the neutral expert concerned only with the best outcomes, Dr.  Fauci’s career is one of ambition and even “failing upwards.”

Dr. Fauci first rose to public attention in the 1980s during the AIDS crisis. In a 1983 Journal of the American Medical Association article, he speculated that AIDS could be spread through household contact. This resulted in widespread coverage from media outlets, who, citing Fauci’s work, stoked widespread alarm about AIDS transmission while raising his profile significantly. Two months later, Dr. Fauci avoided culpability for promoting the egregious claim by entirely reversing his stance, stating in an interview with the Baltimore Sun, “It is absolutely preposterous to suggest that AIDS can be contracted through normal social contact like being in the same room with someone or sitting on a bus with them. The poor gays have received a very raw deal on this.”

Unfortunately, the social harm from his irresponsible speculation was already done, and his reversed stance only advantaged his own career. His actions during the AIDS epidemic read like a masterclass in ambition and self-preservation.

From the beginning of his career, Dr. Fauci has embodied Tullock’s “successful bureaucrat,” gradually rising through the federal bureaucracy while expanding his own influence and that of the agencies he worked for. By the time he became the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, his star was formed. Over the rest of his career, despite contributing to a number of public health failures, Dr. Fauci grew into a powerful figure in Washington. Prior to his retirement, he commanded influence over a budget in the tens of billions.

His career came to a head during the COVID-19 pandemic and response. When it was to his and his agency’s advantage, he publicly called for nationwide school closureslockdownsforced masking, and vaccine mandates, only to later deflect when concerns were raised by the public and elected officials, stating at a Senate hearing, “everything that I have said has been in support of the CDC guidelines.”

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, his contradictions and changing narratives have resulted in confusion and an erosion of confidence in public health. Still, through it all, he has remained at the top of not just his agency but also in influence and public adoration. 

Maintaining that influence and adoration led Fauci to declare that he is the embodiment of science itself when questions were raised about his handling of the pandemic. In June 2021, he stated, “Attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science.” in November he doubled down:

But if they get up and aim their bullets at Tony Fauci, well, people can recognize there’s a person there. So it’s easy to criticize, but they’re really criticizing science, because I represent science. That’s dangerous.

And, just when you thought he could go no further, recently, at an award ceremony at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Fauci added that a whole generation of aspiring researchers follow his footsteps, because of “‘the Fauci effect’…people go to medical school and go into science…because I symbolize, integrity, and truth”

If only all of that were true.

*****

This article was published by AIER, American Institute for Economic Research, and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

Are you fed up? Are you worried that America in rapidly sliding into a neo-Marxist state by the radical left in control of Washington with historically narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and an Executive controlled by unnamed far leftists in place of a clinically incompetent President Biden? They are desperate to keep power and complete their radical progressive agenda that will change America and our liberty forever.

Americans just witnessed the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 without one Republican vote in the U.S. Senate and House (just as Obamacare was passed in 2010). The IRS  will be hiring 87,000 new agents, many armed, to terrorize American taxpayers.

Americans witnessed the FBI raid at the Trump Mar-A-Lago home and property of President Trump, truly a first in all of American history. We know what that is about. 

It is undeniable that the Democrat Party and the administrative state (the executive branches of the DOJ, FBI, IRS, et al) are clear and present dangers to our Republic and our liberty as they increasingly veer further away from the rule of law and the Constitution. What is the solution? At this critical juncture, there is only one action we can all take.

The only viable and timely solution at this critical point is to vote – yes, vote correctly and smartly to retake the U.S. House and Senate on November 8th and to prepare the way to retake the White House in two years. Vote and help everyone you know to vote. Please click the TAKE ACTION link below – we must vote correctly and in great numbers to be sure our votes are counted to diminish the potential for the left to rig and steal the midterms and the 2024 elections as they are clearly intending to do after their success in 2020.

World Economic Forum Promotes ‘Brain Implants’ for Children thumbnail

World Economic Forum Promotes ‘Brain Implants’ for Children

By The Geller Report

Klaus Schwab’s globalist organization insists that the idea of implanting a “tracking chip in your child” isn’t “scary.” The WEF suggests implanting tracking chips in the human body will help society usher in a “brave new world.”

By: Frank Bergman, Slay News, August 22, 2022

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has called on governments, health officials, and “humans” around the globe to consider their “rational” arguments for implanting chips in children’s brains.

Klaus Schwab’s globalist organization insists that the idea of implanting a “tracking chip in your child” isn’t “scary,” arguing that “they form part of a natural evolution that wearables once underwent.”

The group claims that children will even grow to see implanted chips as “accessories” that will eventually be “considered a fashion item.”

Parents should also learn to embrace such technology, according to the WEF, because “many children expect to develop superpowers” after watching “superheroes” in movies.

The WEF makes its case for implants in a new blog post where it suggests implanting tracking chips in the human body will help society usher in a “brave new world.”

Implanting chips into children should be viewed by parents as a “solid, rational” move into the future of augmented reality (AR), the WEF claims.

This shift toward AR puts humanity on the path toward “an augmented society,” according to the organization.

The WEF promotes the allegedly broad usefulness of chip implants in fields such as healthcare, education, and professional settings.

While praising how such technology could transform society, the WEF underpins the notion of providing guidelines on how to “ethically” regulate this vast potential power and, therefore, inevitably control it.

The WEF describes the tech as transformative but warns that it needs “the right support, vision, and audacity,” which is presumably provided by global governments are corporate power elites.

Slay the latest News for free!

However, it isn’t at all clear why “audacity” is called for by the WEF.

Yet, some of the “visions” for humans to be “seamlessly integrated” with technology that the WEF is suggesting seem pretty audacious.

The idea of replacing drugs with brain implants that will manipulate the body with electrical pulses has been around for some time.

Although, it’s not something that the public is all too keen on.

Nevertheless, the WEF has prepared for pushback from the proletariat by working in a sales pitch for the people who view the idea as “scary.”

Once the human body and AR technology have been “seamlessly integrated,” quality of life shoots up across the board, the Davos-based group promises……

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

D.C. Mayor: All Students Must Get Vaxxed, Unvaxxed Students Banned from Virtual Instruction, including 40% of Black Students thumbnail

D.C. Mayor: All Students Must Get Vaxxed, Unvaxxed Students Banned from Virtual Instruction, including 40% of Black Students

By The Geller Report

This is a crime against humanity. If this mayor was white, they’d be vilified as a vile Klansmen.

D.C. Mayor says unvaccinated students will have no virtual instruction, leaving out 40% of black students

By: Carlos Garcia, The Blaze, August 25, 2022:

Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, confirmed Thursday that there were no virtual instruction options for unvaccinated students which would leave about 40% of black students without any schooling at all.

Bowser was speaking to reporters in a media briefing when she made the comments.

“They can go to school on Monday. But they need to get their vaccinations,” she said, “and their families will be alerted as to the dates.”

When pressed about online instruction being available to unvaccinated students, Bowser admitted there would be no such opportunity.

“We’re not offering remote learning for children, and families will need to comply with what is necessary to come to school,” said Bowser.

Bowser had been previously confronted by a reporter about the large numbers of black students who remain unvaccinated, and she claimed that the numbers were inaccurate.

“Around 40% of black students in the district are unvaccinated and, therefore, under the district’s current policy regarding schools, will be unable to attend school,” said Daily Signal reporter Douglas Blair. “Why is the district continuing with this policy when it seems to disproportionately impact black students?”

“I don’t think that number is correct,” replied the mayor. “We have substantially fewer number of kids that we have to engage with vaccination. And I explained why it’s important. It’s important for the public health of our students and that we can maintain safe environments.”

However, those statistics came directly from Bowser’s office.

Earlier in August, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention eased the social distancing guidance for schools by saying that children exposed to the virus no longer had to test positive before returning to in-person instruction. They also said that they would no longer recommend schools avoid mixing groups of children.

Keep reading……

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Silenced Healthcare Workers Speak Out Publicly For The First Time

Baltimore NAACP Asks Governor To Deploy National Guard To Help Fight Crime As Murder Skyrockets

Nazi-Tactics: Biden Calls Republicans “Semi-Fascists”

Pennsylvania Senate Race 2022: Even Craven CNN Is Noticing Fetterman’s Crazy, Incoherent Campaigning

Feds ARREST Gavin McGinnes During Live Broadcast Over Jan. 6 (And He Wasn’t Even There)

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

NEWEST CLIMATE MYTH: Black Lives Movement Launches ‘Climate Initiative’ Centering on Black Americans thumbnail

NEWEST CLIMATE MYTH: Black Lives Movement Launches ‘Climate Initiative’ Centering on Black Americans

By The Geller Report

“I didn’t know that, according to Black Lives Matter, the climate discriminates against blacks! Is the climate now a ‘white supremacist global movement’ created by God?” — Dr. Rich Swier


Here we see the ‘intersectionality’ of every loathsome fraud and ludicrous hoax the left has rammed down the throat of the American people. Once a lie, a fraud, is accepted as ‘conventional wisdom’, the most absurd, irrational, and preposterous edicts and policies will follow.

Watch your taxpayer dollars flow into the race hustlers’ coffers.

Climate Initiative Centers on Black Americans

By: AP News, August 26, 2022:

The Movement for Black Lives launched a new climate change initiative Thursday, uniting more than 200 Black environmental leaders and organizations nationwide who have pledged to find equitable climate solutions centering on Black Americans and communities.

The Black Hive initiative builds on the movement’s 2021 Red, Black, and Green New Deal and reintroduces its Black Climate Mandate that outlines the urgency for a Black climate agenda and investment in equitable strategies that protect Black Americans specifically.

The announcement, first shared with The Associated Press, comes in the wake of a Supreme Court decision limiting the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and the recent passage of the Inflation Reduction Act.

[….]

“The climate crisis is happening because of corporate greed, government negligence, the divestment of solutions and the investment into the harmful institutions like the fossil fuel industry, that are harming our people,” said Valencia Gunder, national co-lead of The Black Hive. “It’s time for America to address the anti-Black racism that happens here.”

Gunder said she’s already seen the impacts of climate change in her home state of Florida. She’s been doing climate justice work in communities, focusing on the impacts of rising seas, residential displacement, and housing and food security issues. She said farmers in South Florida have told her they’ve started to see saltwater intrusion damaging crops.

“The climate crisis is probably the most important issue that we can work on,” Gunder said. “If we do not hurry up and pay attention and get to resiliency, I believe that we’re going to start seeing more destruction, more harm or death, more illness.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

WATCH: Biden Regime Targets Amish Organic Farmer for ‘not using GMO drugs’ in Armed Raid

Left-Wing ‘Green’ Energy Proves Useless

The Real Problem with Greta Thunberg Is Not Her Age

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

GENITAL MUTILATION IN AMERICA: List of 13 U.S. Hospitals That Operate on Underaged Children’s Sex Organs For Profit thumbnail

GENITAL MUTILATION IN AMERICA: List of 13 U.S. Hospitals That Operate on Underaged Children’s Sex Organs For Profit

By Dr. Rich Swier

There are only two genders and a global epidemic of social disorders and mental illnesses. 


We have been writing about the grooming of children by public schools, colleges and universities to provide sex partners for perverts, pederasts and pedophiles.

But even more onerous are those doctors who swore an oath to “first do no harm” that are profiting from the mutilation of the sex organs of underaged children.

This is nothing more than genital mutilation for profit.

No one can change their gender! What they can do is mutilate themselves psychologically, spiritually and physically. This is the greatest and most culturally destructive myth of my generation.

It is barbaric and goes against science and all that is right and the truth. Genital mutilation is not healthcare!

Joshua Arnold staff writer at The Washington Stand in an August 25th, 2022 article titled At Least 13 U.S. Hospitals Perform Gender Transition Surgeries on Minors listed the following hospitals who butcher underaged children to make a buck:

  1. The UCLA Gender Health Program’s pediatric practice (Los Angeles, Calif.) includes “puberty suppression therapy” and “hormone replacement therapy.” It also features “gender affirmation surgery.” According to their website, “most surgical procedures are not recommended until adulthood,” which implies that at least some gender transition surgical procedures may be performed prior to adulthood.
  1. The Gender Clinic at Stanford Medicine Children’s Health (Palo Alto, Calif.) treats both minors and “adults 18 years and older,” offering “puberty blockers and gender affirming hormones.” They provide gender transition surgery to “adolescents and young adults,” touting their “innovative surgical techniques” and “state-of-the-art operating suites.” They boldly state their not-so-medical opinion that “everyone deserves to have their physical body reflect their gender identity.”
  1. The Division of Plastic Surgery at Connecticut Children’s Hospital (Hartford, Conn.) “offers surgical options for gender affirmation to adolescents.” Their Gender Program recommends parents contact them “when puberty begins” for a range of treatments including “puberty blockers” and “hormone therapy.” They also link to various gender dysphoria support groups, including a Hartford group for ages 16-26 and a Bridgeport group for ages 13-24. In these support groups, children could develop close, emotional bonds to adults who are not relatives.
  1. The Essence Clinic at St. Luke’s Children’s Hospital (Boise, Id.) offers “hormonal therapy, including puberty blockers” and “surgical consultations and referrals” to “children, adolescents, and young adults.” Two of its five providers specialize in surgery.
  1. The Gender Development Program at the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago (Chicago, Ill., Westchester, Ill.) offers “gender-affirming surgery referrals” for “children and adolescents,” who may “begin care with us up to age 22.” They say they “work closely with several surgeons who are experienced in this type of care and can provide more information and referrals for patients seeking these services.” However, their 19-member gender development team includes two pediatric surgeons, a pediatric plastic surgeon, and an attending physician of plastic and reconstructive surgery, and one of their three locations is a “surgical treatment center,” making it likely that they perform surgeries in-house.
  1. At the University of Illinois Hospital (Chicago, Ill.), “gender affirming surgery” is systematically interwoven into their surgical department, with no division between surgeons performing gender transition procedures and surgeons performing other types of plastic surgeries, and seemingly no division in care between children and adults. As an example, the program’s director “focuses on the reconstructive needs of infants, children, adolescents, and young adults up to age 25” and “specializes with adolescents and young adults in the realm of chest reconstruction, including asymmetric breasts, oversized breasts (female macromastia and male gynecomastia), and top surgery.”
  1. The Boston Children’s Hospital (Boston, Mass.) has offered “gender-affirming chest surgeries for individuals over 15 years old” (see above).
  1. The Child and Adolescent Transgender Center for Health at Boston Medical Center (Boston, Mass.) provides “access to onsite hormone blockers,” “gender-affirming hormone therapy,” and “referral to … other Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery services” for “children, adolescents, and young adults.” The Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery presents a “unified structure” for all “gender affirming care.” An anonymous testimonial on their website indicates they perform transgender surgeries on minors, “As a parent of a child going through the transgender experience, I have found valuable information on this site. After the surgery, I will be caring for him/her at my home.”
  1. The Gender and Sexuality Service at NYU Langone’s Hassenfeld Children’s Hospital (New York, N.Y.) will perform “gender-affirming medical interventions” on a “child, adolescent, or young adult,” working with health insurers “to obtain approvals for presurgical and surgical procedures.” The sizable “Gender and Sexuality Service Team” of nearly 19 doctors include four who represent plastic and reconstructive surgery.
  1. Golisano Children’s Hospital, associated with University of Rochester Medicine, (Rochester, N.Y.) features “gender health services” to “youth and young adults” including “cross-gender hormone therapy,” “pubertal blockade,” and “surgical services” with three surgeons listed.
  1. Doernbecher Children’s Hospital (Portland, Ore., Beaverton, Ore.) offers “a full range of services for transgender and gender-nonconforming children and teens,” including hormone treatments, surgery, and handouts with tips on how to appear more like the opposite sex. They “evaluate surgery for teens on an individual basis.”
  1. The Gender Clinic at Seattle Children’s Hospital (Seattle, Wash.) accepts “new patients ages 9 to 16.” The services they provide include “puberty blockers,” “gender-affirming hormones,” and “gender-affirming surgery.” While gender transition procedures for minors require parental consent, “Washington state privacy laws limit parent and caregiver access to adolescents’ health information. … The patient chooses whether to consent to releasing medical information.”
  1. The Gender Health Clinic at Children’s Wisconsin (Milwaukee, Wisc.) focuses on “children and youth” and “will meet with new patients through age 16.” They offer “puberty-suppressing hormone therapy, gender-affirming hormone therapy, surgical treatments, and speech/voice training.” They refer patients 17 or older to “an adult hormone provider.”

We are saddened that some of our major university medical centers are in the business of doing irreparable harm to underaged children. This is gender mutilation of the worst kind.

This isn’t doing these patients any good to believe that by mutilating their sexual organs they can change their gender. Gender is immutable. Science tells us so.

To perform these types of “therapies” and surgeries is criminal at best.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: World Economic Forum Promotes ‘Brain Implants’ for Children

The Straw that Broke the Blue Bird’s Back thumbnail

The Straw that Broke the Blue Bird’s Back

By Jessica Hockett

Editors’ Note: The legal status of social media may be changing. Now that Alex Berenson has established that the Biden Administration pressured and colluded with Twitter and Facebook to suppress free speech about Covid, the constitutional issues change. The First Amendment applies to the government, not private parties. But when private parties, willingly or under threat of coercion suppress speech on behalf of the government, then the First Amendment may well apply to them as well. They become agents of the government. Constitutional legalities aside, the fact that the internet, sold initially as an international platform where free speech and the free expression of ideas would flourish, has been determined to be a tool of government, is frightening. Recent revelations that TikTok, a Chinese-held and administered website frequented by American youth, is not only collecting data but planning election and political coverage in the US, demonstrates that foreign hostile governments can also use “social media” as a third column within the US. Do these companies qualify as “private companies” when in reality they are conduits of government propaganda and speech abridgment?

I want my words back.

That includes the words I borrowed from The Wall Street Journal that got me permanently suspended from Twitter, the micro-blogging platform and virtual battlefront of American social and political life.

Who am I? No one special. Just a Midwestern mom with a few college degrees who can write a sentence. For two-plus years, I posted data, analysis, opinions, and questions about the legality and effectiveness of pandemic-response policies on Twitter. I used a literary pen name – Emma Woodhouse – though I never kept my real identity a secret. I created the account in spring 2020 and accrued a modest 38,000 followers before the end.

It wasn’t until July 2021, when President Biden said Big Tech was “killing people” by not doing more to remove content that encouraged vaccine hesitancy, that some of my posts were deemed harmful.

First, it was a data-verified claim about the low risk that Covid poses to nearly every child. Then it was a critique of the public health messaging that vaccines and masks provide equivalent protection against the virus. Next, I was dinged for questioning the CDC’s motives in applying a different standard to defining “vaccine breakthrough” Covid cases than to other cases. Later, it was an expression of distrust in any pediatrician who wouldn’t be honest about the risk of myocarditis from vaccination versus infection in teen boys.

The straw that broke the Blue Bird’s back was my post of a Wall Street Journal article by Allysia Finley on July 5, 2022. I quoted her directly, “The FDA conspicuously lowered its standards to approve covid vaccines for toddlers. Why?” and linked her piece. The next day, my account was locked and removed from public view. Twitter denied my appeal and won’t restore the account.

I understand Twitter is a private company, ergo, my First Amendment rights don’t apply. But with evidence of the Biden Administration pressuring Twitter, I have to wonder whether the same strategy was applied to me.

I was a relentless critic not only of the CDC, but also of my Governor J.B. Pritzker’s pandemic-response policies and pet projects. I called him the most destructive, tyrannical, anti-child governor in Illinois history. I poked holes in state and local health departments’ data spin. I highlighted his hypocrisy. I scolded him for closing schools and bowing to union interests. I didn’t swear or threaten his physical safety, but not long before my Twitter termination, I pledged to do everything in my power to keep him from being reelected in November. He is, in my view, as “unfit to be the ruler of a free people,” like the Declaration of Independence signatories told their tyrant king.

I’ve always assumed I can say all of this, and more, about any elected official, under the Constitution. This is why I was loath to consider a connection between my Tweets being flagged, and my speaking against Mr. Pritzker.

Granted, I had nowhere near the following of other accounts in which the Biden administration apparently took interest. But “Emma Woodhouse” exceeded the follower counts of most Chicagoland news reporters and radio hosts. When average, passionate citizens gain influence in forums or among people that government would prefer are dominated by its own narratives, it’s not hard to imagine the government taking steps to make sure those people’s words are suppressed.

Twitter’s own Covid-19 misleading information policy gives all users reason to wonder whether they could suffer the same fate. Methods for reviewing violations include not only reports from fellow users and internal algorithms, but also “close coordination with trusted partners, including public health authorities, NGOs, & governments.”

If Twitter trusts these entities – some of which pressured both Twitter and other social media companies to make sure certain views and data don’t get traction – then it’s reasonable to assume that the leaders who are supposed to be protecting my rights may have been key players in silencing my voice. Deterring dissension by stopping the squeakiest wheel from making a sound isn’t new.

Luckily for Twitter, they don’t have to tell me exactly which part of the Covid policy my Tweets allegedly breached, or whether a “trusted partner” flagged the Tweet.

Lucky for those trusted partners too.

Right now, no one can see my Tweets except me. I can’t retrieve the archive of posts, so when Twitter eventually deletes the account altogether, there will be no record of the 64,000 messages I sent into the public sphere.

If that’s what the company wanted, fine. It’s the risk I took in using the service of a capricious corporation whose understanding of democratic principles is different from mine.

If it’s what the government wanted, I have no words – except to say I want mine back, where I put them, for all to see.

*****

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

TAKE ACTION

Are you fed up? Are you worried that America in rapidly sliding into a neo-Marxist state by the radical left in control of Washington with historically narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and an Executive controlled by unnamed far leftists in place of a clinically incompetent President Biden? They are desperate to keep power and complete their radical progressive agenda that will change America and our liberty forever.

Americans just witnessed the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 without one Republican vote in the U.S. Senate and House (just as Obamacare was passed in 2010). The IRS  will be hiring 87,000 new agents, many armed, to terrorize American taxpayers.

Americans witnessed the FBI raid at the Trump Mar-A-Lago home and property of President Trump, truly a first in all of American history. We know what that is about. 

It is undeniable that the Democrat Party and the administrative state (the executive branches of the DOJ, FBI, IRS, et al) are clear and present dangers to our Republic and our liberty as they increasingly veer further away from the rule of law and the Constitution. What is the solution? At this critical juncture, there is only one action we can all take.

The only viable and timely solution at this critical point is to vote – yes, vote correctly and smartly to retake the U.S. House and Senate on November 8th and to prepare the way to retake the White House in two years. Vote and help everyone you know to vote. Please click the TAKE ACTION link below – we must vote correctly and in great numbers to be sure our votes are counted to diminish the potential for the left to rig and steal the midterms and the 2024 elections as they are clearly intending to do after their success in 2020.

Mandatory Mis-Remembering on Natural Immunity thumbnail

Mandatory Mis-Remembering on Natural Immunity

By Paul D. Thacker

“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.” ― George Orwell, 1984

Releasing new pandemic guidelines last week, the CDC epidemiologist Greta Massetti divulged to reporters what many experts have long been saying: there is no difference between a COVID-19 vaccine and prior infection.

“Both prior infection and vaccination confer some protection against severe illness,” Massetti told reporters. “And so it really makes the most sense to not differentiate with our guidance or our recommendations based on vaccination status at this time.”

Major media outlets such as NPR, CNN, Washington Post, and the New York Times, dutifully repeated back new statements from CDC officials, without noting they had reported the complete opposite last year: COVID-19 vaccines provided much better protection than prior infection. See this CNN interview last August, for example, where Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy allegedly shot down an “antivaxxer’s claim” about natural immunity.

“We are seeing more and more data that tells us, that while you get some protection from natural protection, it’s not nearly as strong as what you get from the vaccine,” Dr. Murthy told CNN at the time.

While the natural immunity versus vaccination debate has been controversial over the last year, what is not debatable is that midterm elections are coming this November. And with a majority of Americans unhappy with the President’s pandemic policies, perhaps the CDC is relying on “midterm science” to guide their new appreciation for natural immunity.

The media’s forgetfulness of what they reported just last year on vaccines and prior infection is part of the pandemic’s Great Misremembering, collective amnesia where we march in step with government messaging while failing to recall prior statements and moments of glaring contradiction. For example when the media reported that the NIH’s Anthony Fauci was fully vaccinated and still got COVID-19, and then they misremembered to report his prior statement, “When people are vaccinated, they can feel safe that they are not going to get infected.”

“CDC’s COVID-19 prevention recommendations no longer differentiate based on a person’s vaccination status because breakthrough infections occur, though they are generally mild,” the agency now says in new guidelines. To help everyone join the Great Misremembering, here are some incidents you must fail to recall.

Mother Jones early out the gate

In the first few confusing months of the pandemic, when and researchers were still trying to understand the outbreak, Mother Jones crack reporter Kiera Butler already figured out the greatest threat to pandemic science: the ubiquitous “antivaxxers” pushing a dangerous “theory” called natural immunity. Note the scare quotes in the title around natural immunity.

According to Butler, this “dangerous theory” just might go mainstream. She ended her article quoting an expert who warned that if the natural immunity idea takes hold, it could persist even after the coronavirus pandemic dies down. “Those of us in this field will be cleaning up these messes for years to come,” Butler’s expert told her.

This “mess” now includes the CDC’s latest guidance.

John Snow Memorandum

Late in the pandemic’s first year, a group of researchers released a statement called the “John Snow Memorandum” that helped to shape American policy, as many of the signers had large social media followings. Among the signatories was Rochelle Walensky, then a Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, and now the Director of the CDC. “Any pandemic management strategy relying upon immunity from natural infections for COVID-19 is flawed,” reads the statement signed by the current CDC Director.

Yes, the very same person who runs the CDC that now tells us to not differentiate between the vaccine and natural infection warned us early in the pandemic that any pandemic policy that relies on natural infection is flawed.

As you read the CDC’s new guidance, please remember to misremember the memorandum previously signed by the current CDC Director.

CNN’s Maggie Fox: reliable press release journalism

Few reporters worked harder on behalf of vaccine manufacturers and the federal government to give full-throated support to vaccines than CNN’s Maggie Fox. As I previously reported, CDC Director Walensky divulged earlier this year that she had been overly optimistic about the efficacy of Pfizer’s vaccine after she saw a report on CNN. When I tracked down CNN’s article, I found that it had been written by Maggie Fox and was little more than a regurgitation of Pfizer’s own press release that had gone out earlier on the same day of her story.

In short, Pfizer’s press release became CNN headline, eventually becoming the CDC’s optimistic vaccine pandemic policy.

Shortly after the COVID-19 vaccines became available, Science Magazine published a study that found lasting immunity after recovery from infection. “Several months ago, our studies showed that natural infection induced a strong response, and this study now shows that the responses last,” the study’s lead author told the National Institutes of Health. “We are hopeful that a similar pattern of responses lasting over time will also emerge for the vaccine-induced responses.”

Further evidence accumulated in May when researchers published a study in Nature that concluded, “Overall, our results indicate that mild infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune memory in humans.”

Proceeding with little caution, CNN’s Maggie Fox tweeted the following July, “No valid scientific study has found that natural immunity protects better than vaccination does.” She then went on to write several stories throughout 2021 that continued to promote the notion that vaccination was superior to natural immunity.

Fox left CNN sometime around the end of the year, and wrote this January on her personal website:

But vaccinated people have more protection against severe disease than people who are unvaccinated – including those who have been infected once or more already. That’s because vaccines boost the immune system better than natural infection does.

With CDC guidelines that “no longer differentiate based on a person’s vaccination status” I tweeted to Fox asking if she wanted to update her previous opinion that seemed to ignore relevant science on natural immunity.

Finding some disparity in the meaning between “difference” and “differentiate”—the first is a noun, the second a verb—Fox tweeted back that I was trolling and attacking her, and that the CDC did not state what it stated.

COVID fact checks, of course

No aspect of the Great Misremembering would be complete without being careful to forget all the amazing fact checks out there. They function, of course, by carefully choosing the most extreme statement to carefully pick apart, and then implying that anyone even remotely associated with such thinking is a complete nutter.

So it’s not surprising to find some nitpicking at both LeadStories and Health Feedback.

LeadStories is funded by both Facebook and a Chinese company cited by the U.S. government for national security concerns. Writers at the website recently falsely attacked researchers for using a database on vaccine safety that they didn’t actually use.

Last August, LeadStories posted one of their typical fact checks that is difficult to follow and cherry picks information to come out in support of vaccines.

Since the CDC now says to not differentiate between prior infections and vaccination, one wonders if LeadStories is going to now fact-checking the federal government.

Health Feedback is a Facebook fact-checking service run by Emmanuel Vincent, who has been hiding throughout Paris to avoid appearing in court for possibly colluding with the U.S. federal government to ban people from social media and deny them their First Amendment rights. This fact check appeared just a few months ago, in April, and one wonders if they are going to update it to reflect the CDC’s new guidance.

Don’t hold your breath!

How will we forget the Twitter experts?

Ryan Marino is a medical toxicologist and assistant professor at Case Western Reserve University, who has been making a name for himself as a “pro science” communicator when reporters need an expert to quote in some pointless, nutty story like Lyme Disease is not an “intergalactic substance.”

And here

After making a name for himself debunking Gwyneth Paltrow and Goop, Canada-famous law professor Timothy Caulfield pivoted to position himself as a COVID-19 expert, and quickly dismissed as a “conspiracy” the idea that the pandemic could have started from a lab. Caulfield almost never upsets powerful corporations in biomedicine, and managed to do so again by promoting vaccines.

And of course, Twitter’s very online resident gynecologist, Jen Gunter, who rarely misses an opportunity to jump into the middle of a controversy—any controversy. With a typical lack of self-restraint, Gunter slapped down a critic who pointed to the importance to natural immunity some months back.

“Vaccine induced immunity is superior,” the gynecologist tweeted. “So yeah, maybe come at me with a different argument.”

That different argument would be the new CDC guidelines, of course. But let us all forget.

*****

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

TAKE ACTION

Are you fed up? Are you worried that America in rapidly sliding into a neo-Marxist state by the radical left in control of Washington with historically narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and an Executive controlled by unnamed far leftists in place of a clinically incompetent President Biden? They are desperate to keep power and complete their radical progressive agenda that will change America and our liberty forever.

Americans just witnessed the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 without one Republican vote in the U.S. Senate and House (just as Obamacare was passed in 2010). The IRS  will be hiring 87,000 new agents, many armed, to terrorize American taxpayers.

Americans witnessed the FBI raid at the Trump Mar-A-Lago home and property of President Trump, truly a first in all of American history. We know what that is about. 

It is undeniable that the Democrat Party and the administrative state (the executive branches of the DOJ, FBI, IRS, et al) are clear and present dangers to our Republic and our liberty as they increasingly veer further away from the rule of law and the Constitution. What is the solution? At this critical juncture, there is only one action we can all take.

The only viable and timely solution at this critical point is to vote – yes, vote correctly and smartly to retake the U.S. House and Senate on November 8th and to prepare the way to retake the White House in two years. Vote and help everyone you know to vote. Please click the TAKE ACTION link below – we must vote correctly and in great numbers to be sure our votes are counted to diminish the potential for the left to rig and steal the midterms and the 2024 elections as they are clearly intending to do after their success in 2020.

The Fauci Rorschach Test thumbnail

The Fauci Rorschach Test

By Center For Security Policy

Tony Fauci’s announcement yesterday that he would finally step down from a public health post that he has parlayed over thirty-eight years into one of the most powerful – and the highest compensated – in the federal administrative state is a kind of Rorschach test.

Those who have seen Dr. Fauci as the heroic scientist who valiantly, and successfully, led the response to the COVID-19 pandemic are anguished by his retirement in December. For those of us perceiving him instead as the villainous uber-bureaucrat whose role reflected not hard science, but personal calculation and benefit, his departure is long-overdue and can’t come soon enough.

The question is: Will Fauci be held accountable, for example, for the consequences of his enabling the Chinese Communist Party’s biological warfare program to use U.S. funds and technology to create the coronavirus that has killed a million of us?

This is Frank Gaffney.

AUTHOR

Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Founder and Executive Chairman of the Center for Security Policy.

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Monkeypox And The Face Of Gay Promiscuity thumbnail

Monkeypox And The Face Of Gay Promiscuity

By Rod Dreher

Promiscuous gay German man’s nose nearly rots off from monkeypox. He also had advanced syphilis and HIV, but didn’t know it

That’s a pretty horrible picture, isn’t it? It’s a 40-year-old German monkeypox patient whose nose began to rot off after he caught the disease. Turns out that he was HIV-positive and didn’t know, plus was infected with advanced syphilis — also a surprise to him. He told doctors he had never been tested for a sexually transmitted infection. There he was, celebrating diversity like a champ, and now his nose is partially rotted off. Heaven knows who he passed along HIV, syphilis, and monkeypox to along the way.

Meanwhile, New Orleans is so far going ahead with its big Labor Day weekend Southern Decadence festival, an LGBT event that draws 275,000 to the French Quarter for six days of sex, dancing, and debauchery. Decadence was canceled the past two years because of Covid, but not over monkeypox, though it is certain to be a superspreader event.

I will never be able to understand the death wish of a culture in which a man like the anonymous German exists. Take a look at this collection of articles from medical journals, compiled by Joseph Sciambra (once a promiscuous gay man, now a chaste Christian), testifying to the shocking health realities of gay male culture. For example, according to the CDC in 2017, 60 percent of syphilis cases were found in only two percent of the population: gay men.

I remember being told by the media that gay men were vastly more promiscuous than straight men because society compelled them to be. Normalize homosexuality and grant same-sex marriage, and that would change. I never believed it because I knew perfectly well that gay men were insanely promiscuous not because they were gay, but because they were men. An ordinary male unrestrained by religious or moral scruple, and faced with a wide variety of willing partners who demand no emotional commitment, or even to know one’s name, before having sex — that man will likely behave exactly as most gay men do. Until now, at least, heterosexual men have had to cope with a culture of restraint imposed by women. Randy Shilts, the gay journalist who wrote And The Band Played On (and who later died of AIDS), made this very same point in his book. He said that straight men he’d spoken to expressed envy that gay men could have such a bounty of sexual experiences because they didn’t live with the restraining factor of women. There was always, always somebody — and usually many somebody — willing to say “yes” to anything you wanted, any time you wanted.

In the United States, we have had legal same-sex marriage from coast to coast for seven years now. Of course, the culture of debauchery has not changed. It never was going to change. And look, if the horrors of AIDS didn’t change it, why should monkeypox?

If all this is normative behavior in the gay male community (note well: I’m not talking about lesbians), then what chance does a young gay male have of not being caught up in it? We live in a culture where, for better or for worse, homosexuality has been largely destigmatized. It seems plausible that if a young gay man wanted to have a normal, “vanilla” lifestyle of dating, courting, and gay marriage, it would be possible. I wonder, though, how likely it is when the cultural norms within the gay male community are so debauched. Seriously, gay male readers, what advice would you give an adolescent gay male if he wanted to avoid falling into that gutter? If you don’t have the ability to use the comments section, email me at rod — at — amconmag — dot — com, and put COMMENT in the subject line.

In the late 1980s, during the height of the AIDS crisis, a New Orleans friend who is very liberal and pro-gay, though a heterosexual woman, told me a story about being out on the streets on Mardi Gras day. She said that she and her boyfriend were crossing lower Bourbon Street, the heart of the city’s gay community, when they saw a teenage boy, couldn’t have been a day over 17, staggering drunk (or drugged) and naked through the crowd of men. He had blood and feces running down his leg from his rectum. He had likely been raped. Nobody in the crowd was trying to help him. He was lost and wandering. He disappeared into the crowd of nearly-naked gay men partying in the street. My friend said the sight of that poor kid, who may well have been infected with HIV that day, upset her so much that she asked her boyfriend to take her home, that her day was done.

We never talk about stuff like that. It violates the Narrative. But it happens. It’s not the whole story about gay male culture here, but it’s a part of the story.

But if I’m honest with myself, of the dozens of men I’ve been with (at least the ones I remember), I can only think of a handful I don’t regret. The rest I would put in the category of “casual,” which I would define as sex that is either meaningless or mediocre (or both). If I get really honest with myself, I’d say most of these usually drunken encounters left me feeling empty and demoralized. And worthless.

I wouldn’t have said that at the time, though. At the time, I would have told you I was “liberated” even while I tried to drink away the sick feeling of rejection when my most recent hook-up didn’t call me back. At the time, I would have said one-night stands made me feel “emboldened.” But in reality, I was using sex like a drug; trying unsuccessfully to fill a hole inside me with men. (Pun intended.)

I know regretting most of my sexual encounters is not something a sex-positive feminist who used to write a column for Playboy is supposed to admit. And for years, I didn’t. Let me be clear, being a “slut” and sleeping with a lot of men is not the only behavior I regret. Even more damaging was what I told myself in order to justify the fact that I was disposable to these men: I told myself I didn’t care.

I didn’t care when a man ghosted me. I didn’t care when he left in the middle of the night or hinted that he wanted me to leave. The walks of shame. The blackouts. The anxiety.

The lie I told myself for decades was: I’m not in pain—I’m empowered.

Looking back, it isn’t a surprise that I lied to myself. Because from a young age, sex was something I was lied to about.

Yeah, me too. I was never any kind of “slut,” if that word can be applied to men. But it took me a while to work out that what the world (meaning popular culture) told me about sex was a lie. I was not especially sexually active in my pre-Christian years, but that wasn’t for lack of trying. What slowed me down was the misery I felt after doing the deed. Everything was clear after that: the lies I told the women, and myself, about what we were doing. I loved sex, but more than that, I really did want it to be about love, real love. I kept trying to tell myself that it was fine for it to be meaningless because that’s what I was supposed to think. It was a lie. It was only after my conversion and learning the value of chastity, that I was able to see the true meaning of sex. It kept me away from surrendering my life to Christ for years because I thought — I had been told — that it was my birthright to enjoy commitment-free sexual pleasure. Hadn’t we put away the hypocrisy of our parent’s generation? Weren’t we, you know, liberated? I believed that with my mind, but my heart, and my body, said otherwise.

For me, the truth came with the suddenly real prospect that I might have made a woman I had been with after a drunken hook-up pregnant and that if she was, and had an abortion (as she defiantly told me she would when I told her that I would stay with her and help her raise the baby), my opposition to the abortion would in no way eliminate the moral guilt I would bear because of my foolishness. Then I had to face the ugly reality of the life I had chosen. It was a moment of moral reckoning for me. I had to think back to the woman I had been involved with the year before, who had really thought I loved her because I said so with my body; when I broke up with her, she was devastated. Many years later, I found her online and asked for her forgiveness. I didn’t know what I was doing. Mostly. But deep down, of course, I knew, but I did it anyway because I didn’t want to be some kind of Christian freak.

That man above, with his hideous nose, bears an outer sign of an inward reality. I never had a disfigurement, an STD, or anything like that. But inwardly, I was diseased. And I regretted it. I got to the point, in 1992, of realizing that I wanted the truth, and Christ, more than I wanted my desires. I knew without a shadow of a doubt that the liars in church who told me that my latent Christian scruples were old-fashioned and could be cast aside were deceivers. I had a difficult four years of struggling with chastity between my conversion and my marriage, but in that time in the desert, I matured spiritually and was able to feel in my body the truth of what I had accepted with my mind at my conversion.

Promiscuous gay male culture is the epitome of the Sexual Revolution. But they are not the only guilty ones, not by a long shot.

UPDATE.2: From NBC News:

Since the outset of the global monkeypox outbreak in May, public health and infectious disease experts have told the public that the virus is largely transmitting through skin-to-skin contact, in particular during sex between men.

Now, however, an expanding cadre of experts has come to believe that sex between men itself — both anal as well as oral intercourse — is likely the main driver of global monkeypox transmission. The skin contact that comes with sex, these experts say, is probably much less of a risk factor.

In recent weeks, a growing body of scientific evidence — including a trio of studies published in peer-reviewed journals, as well as reports from nationalregional and global health authorities — has suggested that experts may have framed monkeypox’s typical transmission route precisely backward.

Imagine that: monkeypox is a gay STD, but public health experts chose to lean heavily into the explanation that did not stigmatize gay male promiscuity, because reasons. Ah, the Holy Narrative! Never, ever, ever stigmatize sexual liberation, especially gay sexual liberation, because #LoveWins, or some bullshit. Meanwhile, people’s noses are rotting off, and they are suffering in excruciating pain, especially on their penis and anus, all because they can’t keep their pants up.

UPDATE.3: Comments from readers emailed to me below. Here’s reader Brad:

I’ve been a long-time reader of your blog, first time commenting, but I feel I have something to say on your ask of what to tell young gay men facing “the community”.

First, a brief background. Been with my husband for 20 yrs. “legal” for 7. Prior to getting legally married we owned houses together and when you own debt you are together for better or worse. I called it the “gay man’s marriage license”. I officially came out when I was in my early 20’s and having to do it again all over as a small “c” conservative. This second coming out has been much worse and harder. My husband and I have lost friends and gained new ones in this journey.

I would tell young gay men to steer clear of the official “community” there’s nothing for you there of any meaning. We have few gay friends, because for a lot of gays, that part of their identity is all consuming. We are both more than just that one facet. I would tell that person to live their life, meet friends from all over, but don’t look to the gay community exclusively to welcome you with open arms. Most of those gays are “happy” on the surface but look deeper and you see people who are damaged either because of being exploited themselves by the community or rejected from their family of origin. The level of nihilism and just plain recklessness is insane.

Not sure if that’s a real answer, but I’ve found life to be very happy and fulfilled and that’s because I haven’t spent all my time surrounded by professional gays but live life with people from all walks of life.

Reader Jonathan:

I’m a 41 year old guy living in Northern California, engaged and monogamous for the last 5 years. Before that I went through a protracted period in my late twenties and thirties of dating and online hookups, although it was probably a comparatively mild experience and more consonant with what I think an average straight guy experiences who dates serially. Experimentation but nothing super crazy. Mostly what I found fun was meeting guys and discovering what my type was, what I really wanted out of life. The sexual stuff was fun, of course, but I never completely fell into the “notches on the bedpost” philosophy that many gay men find so difficult to resist. And I was always very cautious about STDs. I’d be lying if I said I never felt the pull of that mindset, though. I’m a late bloomer, a real introvert, so maybe those tempered me. Or maybe I was just lucky.  In the end though I think it’s really about learning balance in life and the value of cultivating deeper forms of happiness: artistic, spiritual, intellectual, moral, romantic.

Realistically, I think what we should hope for is that young gay men will follow a similar path to straight men who themselves usually date, have a period of exploration, and then eventually settle down. And in my opinion, it’s no secret how you do this. We’ve known for thousands of years going back to the classical systems. Even if you adopt a philosophical hedonism as your ethical system (a la say Epicurus), the value of moderation is of central importance to the very essence of pleasure.

I believe studies have shown for example that high achieving, highly intelligent straight men not only attract more beautiful women but also hew more closely to a monogamous lifestyle than their less competitive peers. This is no doubt because they can also sublimate themselves in their work, career, interests, etc. The problem in our society is that sublimation has a bad name. So instead call it balance or moderation. You can enjoy a few things in excess or many in moderation. And it’s always seemed to me that the happiest people are of the latter type. You know, variety-is-the-spice-of-life kind of thing. As we see, though, people can easily get carried away in one direction with that!

I’m not a religious person though, and have a more pragmatist ethics than most Christians. I read your blog because you seem like a real person with real concerns willing to say what he thinks. I respect that. For me monogamy is more of an ideal that people often don’t live up to rather than a strict existential requirement. But it’s still an ideal, still real in that sense of being a real ideal. That power of ideas and philosophical reflection has always been a part of my life, so maybe I’m not the most representative gay person out there.

Open relationships are indeed somewhat common in the gay male world, or least a common phase for many. And I’ve seen some signs in the zeitgeist that it might be rubbing off on straights. Who knows what the future holds, but I think humans will always have to balance their pleasures against one another. There’s no escaping the basic question of what exactly we should be doing with our time here on Earth. Because I’m not religious, I look for life’s meaning mostly in books. I’ve never given up on the idea that there’s some deeper way of living, whether spiritual, aesthetic, philosophical.

And so about the only advice one can give is to raise children with a deeper sense of what pleasures in life await them outside the sexual: intellectual understanding, the joy of helping others, genuine spiritual searching, aesthetic or artistic satisfaction. Young people, like everyone else really, are less likely to turn to extreme forms of pleasure seeking (drugs, sex addiction) if they grow up learning how to cultivate lasting happiness through larger social, intellectual, and moral connections.

These are good. Keep ’em coming.

UPDATE.4: Reader T writes:

This might sound like a dumb thing to say, but as a guy tempted toward all the ways guys can deprave one another, your monkey pox columns help disuade me from it. If it ever feels like you’re shouting into the void, you aren’t, you’re helping those of us on the edge get pulled back into center.

Not a dumb thing to say at all. Thank you!

Reader B:

The questions you pose are good ones. My best thought for young gay men who aren’t interested in promiscuity: be the change you wish to see in the world, and be unapologetically so. Leaving the party and sex culture will be hard and lonely (I’m on my own journey there, spurred by finding monogamous love). But attitudes are shifting generationally, it’s just going to take more time, bravery, and authenticity.

I think too we can start as gay men by asking ourselves what motivates this promiscuity if we can’t set it aside for our health and safety? I am opposed to the guilt and shame Puritanism heaps on us for appreciating bodily pleasures, but everything in moderation. Does the spread of monkeypox show we are not able to moderate this aspect of our lives? If so, could promiscuity be not only a personal but cultural addiction? And regardless of the original cause of our sexualized culture, do we not have a collective responsibility to face an addiction and imagine and work toward a healthier future.

I don’t have the answers. But as a community, I believe we need to be asking more questions about this topic, discussing them openly and honestly, and thinking deeply about our answers.

A reader who hasn’t written me for seven years dropped me this line:

It has been a while, but I have been reading your blog regularly.

On the issue of young gay men and the “lifestyle”.  My middle son came out to me and my wife about the time of our previous exchange. He was still in (Catholic) High School.  It came up a few times after that, but it was never in our face.  He had a good group of friends and we used to wonder if any was his boyfriend.  (None were).  He went away to college about 6 hours away and came home for holidays and summer vacation.  Aside from attending Pride Parades with his straight friends there was no indication that he was headed that way.  During his last semester he started seeing ‘Rich’.  Not much was said, about him, but we figured that it was going to happen.

At some point, my daughter let it slip that ‘Rich’ was 53 years old.  Now this was concerning.  Then our son asked if they could both come on our annual family vacation.  The kids have brought friends, romantic or otherwise before.  We were apprehensive, but said “sure”.

“Rich” it turns out is a very nice, quiet, thoughtful person.  You wouldn’t meet either one of them and assume they were gay.  I know how that makes me sound.

They seem to have a very quiet life and a good amount of friends, gay and straight.  I guess my hope for my son was to avoid the lifestyle and have a good quiet life, and it seems that is what he has.

Don’t get me wrong, there are things that bother us about the relationship, but I can’t say a hetero relationship would have been different in some regards.

We love our son and tell him often.  We never pushed him away because of this.  So, I don’t know how he avoided the kind of debauchery you read about, maybe he didn’t fully.  We are a short train ride to NYC, so it was available to him.

I like to tell myself that our acceptance of him as he is was a factor.  We did not, and still do not celebrate it.  There are no pride flags at our house.  I guess we treat it like my other son’s excessive tattoos.  That’s who he is.

*****

This article was published in The American Conservative and is reproduced by permission.

Photo credit: Boesecke, C., Monin, M.B., van Bremen, K. et al.

TAKE ACTION

Are you fed up? Are you worried that America in rapidly sliding into a neo-Marxist state by the radical left in control of Washington with historically narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and an Executive controlled by unnamed far leftists in place of a clinically incompetent President Biden? They are desperate to keep power and complete their radical progressive agenda that will change America and our liberty forever.

Americans just witnessed the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 without one Republican vote in the U.S. Senate and House (just as Obamacare was passed in 2010). The IRS  will be hiring 87,000 new agents, many armed, to terrorize American taxpayers.

Americans witnessed the FBI raid at the Trump Mar-A-Lago home and property of President Trump, truly a first in all of American history. We know what that is about. 

It is undeniable that the Democrat Party and the administrative state (the executive branches of the DOJ, FBI, IRS, et al) are clear and present dangers to our Republic and our liberty as they increasingly veer further away from the rule of law and the Constitution. What is the solution? At this critical juncture, there is only one action we can all take.

The only viable and timely solution at this critical point is to vote – yes, vote correctly and smartly to retake the U.S. House and Senate on November 8th and to prepare the way to retake the White House in two years. Vote and help everyone you know to vote. Please click the TAKE ACTION link below – we must vote correctly and in great numbers to be sure our votes are counted to diminish the potential for the left to rig and steal the midterms and the 2024 elections as they are clearly intending to do after their success in 2020.

To Stop Monkeypox The CDC Must Mandate Gay and Bisexual Men Wear Chastity Belts thumbnail

To Stop Monkeypox The CDC Must Mandate Gay and Bisexual Men Wear Chastity Belts

By Dr. Rich Swier

Dylan Housman from the Daily Caller on August 19, 2022 reported,

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a study Friday suggesting that people wear masks to protect themselves from monkeypox despite growing evidence the virus is transmitted sexually.

In a July 29th, 2022 article titled Cases of Gay STD Monkeypox Reported in Children noted,

How did children contract a predominately gay sexually transmitted disease? And why is no one asking that question?

  • Men who have sex with men are at the highest risk of infection right now from monkeypox, according to the WHO.
  • About 99% of cases are among men, and at least 95% of those patients are men who have sex with other men, according to WHO official Rosamund Lewis.
  • WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said men who have sex with men should consider limiting their sexual partners to lower their risk of infection and reduce the spread. The WHO chief called on media, public health authorities and government to fight stigma and discrimination, which he said will only fuel the outbreak.

Currently, HHS documents describe the current administration’s promotion of transgender ideology for children “at any age or stage.” Those documents also describe what it calls appropriate treatments for transgender adolescents, including: “‘Top’ surgery – to create male-typical chest shape or enhance breasts;” and “‘Bottom’ surgery – surgery on genitals or reproductive organs, facial feminization or other procedures.”

This is why we are finding children coming down with the Monkeypox.

The following tweet shows men in New York City lined up to get the Monkeypox vaccine:

NYers LINE UP FOR MONKEYPOX VACCINE

pic.twitter.com/HIOU31HjH4

— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) July 20, 2022

Here’s a video asking if the Monkeypox is the next HIV-AIDS, planned out 5 years ago:

Finally, here is an August 16th, 2022 article titled First Dog Infected With Monkeypox After ‘Sharing Bed’ with Gay Men in which Jim Hoft, from The Gateway Pundit reported,

Scientists have reported the first human-to-pet transmission of monkeypox when the dog of a gay French couple became infected after sharing a bed with its infected owners.

Early this summer, the 4-year-old Italian greyhound tested positive for the disease, not long after its French owners began experiencing symptoms, according to reports.

It is suspected that the gay men, ages 44 and 27, caught the virus as a result of having sexual contact with other men during their non-monogamous relationship.

“One man is Latino, aged 44 years, and lives with HIV with undetectable viral loads on antiretrovirals; the second man is White, aged 27 years, and HIV-negative,” according to a report published last week in the journal The Lancet.

Read more.

If the CDC is serious about its motto “Safer • Healthier • People” then, following the science gay and bisexual men must be the primary targets for stopping the spread of Monkeypox into the general population and infecting children, dogs, other animals and women.

To do this the easiest way of insuring that gays and bisexuals don’t have sex with other gays, bisexuals, children, animals and straight women is for them to wear a chastity belt. Chastity is the best defense against Monkeypox.

The chastity belt, along with vaccines, can help stop this new “pandemic” from spreading out of control.

If the CDC does not act quickly then more gay and bisexual men will undoubtably contract the Monkeypox disease and then spread it!

Don’t say we didn’t warn you. Better safe than sorry!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Cases of Gay STD Monkeypox Reported in Children

First Dog Infected With Monkeypox After ‘Sharing Bed’ with Gay Men