TAKE ACTION: Stop Chinese Paramilitary from Flooding Our Borders thumbnail

TAKE ACTION: Stop Chinese Paramilitary from Flooding Our Borders

By ACT For America!

China’s Dangerous Alliance with Iran and Their Proxies.


TAKE ACTION: Stop the Chinese Paramilitary Threat in America!


Earlier this year we wrote about Chinese soldiers flooding our borders with known ties to the CCP People’s Liberation Army.

Our coalition partner, Colonel John Mills, has issued a compelling warning regarding the ongoing and relentless invasion across the unsecured Southern Border. According to his assessment, this breach in border security is being exploited by international terrorists and Chinese paramilitaries, who are using it as an opportunity to position the vanguard of their advance force for a potentially dangerous “summer of love” in 2024. With a known number of Chinese para-military personnel already present as an advance force for invasion within the US, the time to act is now!

One of the key points raised by Colonel Mills is the resemblance between the current situation in the United States and the well-known “little green man” strategy used by Russia. This term, “little green man,” is used to describe agents or operatives placed by Russia in target regions, often as a prelude to invasions, as seen in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014 and 2022. These agents are used to foment unrest, gather intelligence, and create chaos to facilitate Russia’s strategic objectives.

Over 107 thousand illegal Chinese military-aged immigrants have been admitted into the United States since Biden took office.

Colonel Mills draws a parallel with China’s attempts to employ a similar strategy in Taiwan. However, he highlights the success of a new national security law passed in December 2019, which has helped identify and neutralize such agents who were operating within the legacy Kuomintang (KMT) political party which should serve as a guide to a similar solution here in the US.

🔴Joe Biden creating economy for Chinese migrants in panama outside of the Darien Gap🔴 @BenBergquam @AgueroForTexas @RealAmVoice @WarRoom_FanPage @CabelloAuden @stevegrubershow pic.twitter.com/e8psuvDuhE

— Oscar El Blue (@Oscarelblue) July 8, 2023

INVASION

Incredible clip from Oscar El Blue @ in Panama. Shows primarily Chinese & several Venezuelans processing to board NGO bus North to Mexico w U.S. as final destination.

Watch clip carefully
Thread 1/4@Oscarelblue @GordonGChang @RealAmVoice

pic.twitter.com/BQr8DadOK9

— Common Sense is Very Uncommon (@1TxStar) June 10, 2023

The core concern is that, with the unsecured Southern Border acting as a point of entry, the United States could be hosting an array of such covert operatives, whether they be international terrorists or Chinese paramilitaries.

The dark relationship between China, Islamism, and conflicts in the Middle East is alarming. China has established ties with Iran, which is predominantly Shia, and Iran, in turn, supports Hezbollah, another Shia organization. However, Iran also supports Sunni Hamas in the Palestinian territories. The notion of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” often applies in these cases.

In case you missed it, Hamas Terrorists Based in Venezuela Crossing Our Border.

The Chinese state media’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict is concerning, portraying the United States as an “enemy of peace” in the context of this conflict. This rhetoric reflects the wider geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States, where both nations are positioning themselves as global powers.

The Chinese Communist Party’s aggressive stance toward Taiwan, along with territorial disputes with neighboring countries like India, the Philippines, and Japan, underscores its broader ambitions and the complex geopolitical landscape in the Asia-Pacific region. The interplay between China’s foreign policy, support for various factions in the Middle East, and its wider geopolitical goals paints a dangerous picture.

As the United States grapples with the ongoing border security issue, it becomes crucial to address the potential presence of covert operatives, agents, or actors who might be leveraging the situation for their purposes.

RELATED ARTICLE: Hamas May Have Used North Korean Weapons During Israel Terror Attack: REPORTS

EDITORS NOTE: This ACT for America report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TAKE ACTION: Stop Chinese Paramilitary Flooding Our Border thumbnail

TAKE ACTION: Stop Chinese Paramilitary Flooding Our Border

By ACT For America!

China’s Dangerous Alliance with Iran and Their Proxies.


TAKE ACTION: Stop the Chinese Paramilitary Threat in America!


Earlier this year we wrote about Chinese soldiers flooding our borders with known ties to the CCP People’s Liberation Army.

Our coalition partner, Colonel John Mills, has issued a compelling warning regarding the ongoing and relentless invasion across the unsecured Southern Border. According to his assessment, this breach in border security is being exploited by international terrorists and Chinese paramilitaries, who are using it as an opportunity to position the vanguard of their advance force for a potentially dangerous “summer of love” in 2024. With a known number of Chinese para-military personnel already present as an advance force for invasion within the US, the time to act is now!

One of the key points raised by Colonel Mills is the resemblance between the current situation in the United States and the well-known “little green man” strategy used by Russia. This term, “little green man,” is used to describe agents or operatives placed by Russia in target regions, often as a prelude to invasions, as seen in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014 and 2022. These agents are used to foment unrest, gather intelligence, and create chaos to facilitate Russia’s strategic objectives.

Over 107 thousand illegal Chinese military-aged immigrants have been admitted into the United States since Biden took office.

Colonel Mills draws a parallel with China’s attempts to employ a similar strategy in Taiwan. However, he highlights the success of a new national security law passed in December 2019, which has helped identify and neutralize such agents who were operating within the legacy Kuomintang (KMT) political party which should serve as a guide to a similar solution here in the US.

🔴Joe Biden creating economy for Chinese migrants in panama outside of the Darien Gap🔴 @BenBergquam @AgueroForTexas @RealAmVoice @WarRoom_FanPage @CabelloAuden @stevegrubershow pic.twitter.com/e8psuvDuhE

— Oscar El Blue (@Oscarelblue) July 8, 2023

INVASION

Incredible clip from Oscar El Blue @ in Panama. Shows primarily Chinese & several Venezuelans processing to board NGO bus North to Mexico w U.S. as final destination.

Watch clip carefully
Thread 1/4@Oscarelblue @GordonGChang @RealAmVoice

pic.twitter.com/BQr8DadOK9

— Common Sense is Very Uncommon (@1TxStar) June 10, 2023

The core concern is that, with the unsecured Southern Border acting as a point of entry, the United States could be hosting an array of such covert operatives, whether they be international terrorists or Chinese paramilitaries.

The dark relationship between China, Islamism, and conflicts in the Middle East is alarming. China has established ties with Iran, which is predominantly Shia, and Iran, in turn, supports Hezbollah, another Shia organization. However, Iran also supports Sunni Hamas in the Palestinian territories. The notion of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” often applies in these cases.

In case you missed it, Hamas Terrorists Based in Venezuela Crossing Our Border.

The Chinese state media’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict is concerning, portraying the United States as an “enemy of peace” in the context of this conflict. This rhetoric reflects the wider geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States, where both nations are positioning themselves as global powers.

The Chinese Communist Party’s aggressive stance toward Taiwan, along with territorial disputes with neighboring countries like India, the Philippines, and Japan, underscores its broader ambitions and the complex geopolitical landscape in the Asia-Pacific region. The interplay between China’s foreign policy, support for various factions in the Middle East, and its wider geopolitical goals paints a dangerous picture.

As the United States grapples with the ongoing border security issue, it becomes crucial to address the potential presence of covert operatives, agents, or actors who might be leveraging the situation for their purposes.

RELATED ARTICLE: Hamas May Have Used North Korean Weapons During Israel Terror Attack: REPORTS

EDITORS NOTE: This ACT for America report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Shocking Report EXPOSES that 66% of U.S. Current Military are Overweight thumbnail

Shocking Report EXPOSES that 66% of U.S. Current Military are Overweight

By Royal A. Brown III

In my day the BMI limits were broken out by age e.g. younger the age the smaller the allowed BMI.

If a soldier was over the weight for their height they had to be taped and BMI computed. If they were within the allowed BMI limits for age/height they were OK BUT this still went on their Officer Efficiency Report or Enlisted Efficiency Report and could sway a promotion board unless board members did right thing and considered your photo and score on APFT (PT test). For the more muscular this was important – some of us who had to be taped scored max or close to max on our PT tests.

Now, with the failed recruiting goals one could conjecture the standards on weight will either be ignored or lax especially for non-combat arms and women but who knows in this current woke military environment.


Nearly 70% of active service members are overweight, report finds

By Meghann Myers

More than two-thirds of active duty service members are within the overweight or obese ranges of the body mass index, according to a report by the American Security Project released Thursday.

Defense Department data shows that the obesity rate, calculated using a person’s age, height and weight, has more than doubled over the past decade, from 10% to roughly 21%. At the same time, more than half of young Americans now qualify as obese, and it’s the no. 1 disqualifier for recruiting prospects.

“At a time when we are struggling to recruit an adequate labor force for the military, the growing rates of obesity are especially alarming,” said Matthew Wallin, chief operating officer of the American Security Project. “No person defending our country should find themselves unsupported and unequipped to fight a personal battle against obesity.”

The report’s major recommendations include reviewing body composition standards, as BMI tends to underestimate obesity when compared to more high-tech body fat measurement devices; troops with high BMI should be referred to credentialed doctors with an expertise in treating obesity; and DoD should include BMI data on reports it provides to Congress on recruiting and retention.

“The growing prevalence of obesity in service members reduces the readiness of the all-volunteer military, but it isn’t a moral failing; it’s a health crisis,” the report reads. “Framing obesity as an issue of insufficient willpower or discipline prevents soldiers from seeking and receiving treatment, makes commanders and healthcare workers less inclined to intervene, and worsens health outcomes across the services.”

The BMI, which is based on a 200-year-old calculation that sought to define the body composition of the “normal man,” has faced controversy in recent years.

The American Medical Association in June updated its policy on BMI, acknowledging “historical harm” and “racist exclusion” associated with the index, “because BMI is based primarily on data collected from previous generations of non-Hispanic white populations.”

The new policy urges doctors to use BMI as one measure of body composition, complemented by measurements of visceral fat, body adiposity index, body composition, relative fat mass, waist circumference and genetic/metabolic factors.”

Still, the report’s author told Military Times on Thursday that the BMI is still medicine’s best indicator that someone should be screened for chronic conditions associated with high body fat percentage.

“It’s important to note that the AMA hasn’t called for doctors to step back from BMI,” said Courtney Manning. “The report that led to their most recent recommendation actually found the opposite, that BMI is more accurate than other commonly used measurements,” but that it shouldn’t be used alone to diagnose obesity.

“They also reiterated that a BMI above 30 remains a key indicator that someone should be immediately checked out for conditions highly correlated with obesity, such as insulin resistance, high blood pressure, hyperlipidemia, and vascular dysfunction,” she added.

The report’s main message, though, is to push DoD to put more effort into helping those struggling with their weight, whether it’s high numbers on the scale or disordered eating in general.

Treating a failed height-weight test as an administrative issue, Manning said, rather than a health issue, is not doing troops any favors.

If a service member fails their tape test, it goes in their personnel record and they may be ordered into a remedial program to increase their exercise and adjust their diet, with the consequence that they can be involuntarily separated if they don’t lose weight.

But they should be sent to a doctor, Manning said, to examine what factors might be contributing to their weight and whether any other health issues are developing as a result.

Meghann Myers is the Pentagon bureau chief at Military Times. She covers operations, policy, personnel, leadership and other issues affecting service members.

Read full article on Military Times.

©2023. Royal A. Brown. All rights reserved.

Progressive City Plans to Hand Out ‘Guaranteed Incomes’ To Transgenders, Illegal Immigrants thumbnail

Progressive City Plans to Hand Out ‘Guaranteed Incomes’ To Transgenders, Illegal Immigrants

By Judicial Watch

Progressive City Plans to Hand Out ‘Guaranteed Incomes’ To Transgenders, Illegal Immigrants

Sarah Arnold | October 06, 2023

If you didn’t think San Francisco could get any more liberal, think again.

The progressive city announced plans to hand out money to low-income transgender people, favoring black and “Latinx” recipients in particular. The “Guaranteed Income for Trans People” (GIFT) program will also be open to illegal immigrants and people who are incarcerated.

According to 1,719 pages of documents from the City of San Francisco, obtained by Judicial Watch, San Francisco will allocate tax dollars on a preferential basis for black and Latino transgender individuals through a program that offers financial assistance to transgender people

Fox News Digital reported

The pilot program provides low-income transgender residents with payments of up to $1,200 each month for up to 18 months with the goal of providing “economically marginalized transgender people with unrestricted, monthly guaranteed income as a way to combat poverty.” It uses pre-paid debit cards due to participants potentially not having bank accounts. The amount someone can receive is capped at $4,000. 

Program documents, including those on its public website, say it prioritizes enrollment by race as well as those who engage in “survival sex trades,” those who have been in prison, and illegal immigrants. 

Read more here.

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

The Hidden Epidemic of Transgender Indoctrination thumbnail

The Hidden Epidemic of Transgender Indoctrination

By MERCOLA Take Control of Your Health

  • While it seems the transgender ideology came out of nowhere, schools have been teaching children that their identity is separate from their biology, and that gender is a choice, for a long time. Today, transgender ideology is being taught to children as early as preschool
  • Transgenderism is primarily a social contagion, although exposure to synthetic chemicals, in utero and in early life, may play a role in some cases, especially in boys identifying as girls
  • Classic gender dysphoria primarily affected boys, and always presented at a very early age. Now, teens and young adults claim they’re transgender, which was never the case before. Girls identifying as boys now make up about 60% of cases
  • Many in the affirmative care field insist that you can block puberty without negative effects and that hormone therapy effects are reversible, neither of which is true. Proponents of transgender ideology also claim that unless trans kids are affirmed in their new identities and provided medical and surgical treatment to transition, they’re at high risk of suicide, and that’s not true either
  • “Lost in Trans Nation,” written by Dr. Miriam Grossman, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and board-certified medical doctor, provides parents with the required knowledge and tools to protect their children from the transgender ideology contagion

In this interview, Dr. Miriam Grossman, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and board-certified medical doctor, discusses the dangers of transgender ideology, which is her specialty, and, more importantly, how to protect your children from it.

She’s the author of two books, “You’re Teaching My Child What?: A Physician Exposes the Lies of Sex Education and How They Harm Your Child,” and “Lost in Trans Nation, A Child Psychiatrist’s Guide Out of the Madness.”

Grossman is also a senior fellow at the Do No Harm Medicine, which fights “against identity politics” and “for individual patients.” “First, do no harm” is part of the Hippocratic Oath that doctors through the ages have sworn to abide by. Unfortunately, the Hippocratic Oath has been massively perverted and “do no harm” has basically fallen by the wayside.

“Do No Harm is a pretty recently formed organization of medical professionals who feel that our profession has lost its way,” Grossman explains.

“It has become politicized — by identity politics and other issues — to such a degree that our patients are suffering and our profession is suffering. DoNoHarmMedicine.org was founded by Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, a retired nephrologist from the University of Pennsylvania.

I believe he had the responsibility of organizing the curricula for medical students at the University of Pennsylvania, and he recognized the degree to which politics had entered into the curricula and was very alarmed. So, he retired and formed this amazing organization, which I would encourage every medical professional to check out and join.”

The Rise of Transgender Ideology

While Grossman has only recently become known as a leading voice opposing the mainstream transgender narrative, her involvement and concern about this unscientific belief system goes back about 15 years. For the casual observer, it may seem that transgender ideology sprang up from nowhere, overnight, but that’s not the case.

“The explosion in cases did actually happen quite rapidly, but the teachings, the ideology that says our identities can be separate from our biology — which is not based in science — and the belief that we can be someone different than what our body says we are, that’s been taught to kids in sex education for a long time,” Grossman says.

“I became aware of it in the mid 2000s when I was writing my book, ‘You’re Teaching My Child What?’ I was a psychiatrist for students at UCLA, and a lot of the kids coming to see me with anxiety and depression, especially the young women, were there as a result of unhealthy sexual behaviors.

A lot of them, an alarming number, had a sexual transmitted disease, an STD. They had herpes or genital warts, and these diseases are caused by viruses that are incurable essentially. Once you have a diagnosis of genital warts, the human papillomavirus or the herpes virus, you’ve got that for life.

It can be controlled, but not eliminated. So these are serious diseases … These were smart kids, and these were kids who were ambitious, yet they had made these foolish sexual decisions of hooking up with random strangers …

So I started looking into what kids are being taught in sex education, and I discovered that sex education … is not about health. It’s not about staying healthy. It’s about … promoting sexual freedom — all sorts of risky behaviors — and it’s about changing society.

My book, ‘You’re Teaching My Child What?’ … delves into the origins of sex education in this country. It is about sexual freedom. It’s about rejecting Judeo-Christian values. It is most certainly not about fighting bacteria and viruses. And sex education is introduced at a very young age, in kindergarten.”

Gender ideology is introduced even earlier, in preschool. Books read to preschool children will say things like, “Adults make mistakes when babies are born and only you know if you’re a girl or a boy,” and “Adults may have made a mistake when they decided that you were a girl or a boy,” or “Some people are born with a boy’s brain and a girl’s body.”

“These outrageously false ideas are introduced to children at a very, very young age,” Grossman says, “and that’s the danger. These ideas are going to reach your kids before you do.”

Transgenderism Is a Social Contagion

Grossman’s most recent book, “Lost in Trans Nation,” which came out in July 2023, provides parents with the practical information and tools needed to protect their families against the “transgender contagion.”

“It is a social contagion,” she says. “If your child ends up in a friend group, either in school or in the neighborhood or online, in which there is one or more kids who are identifying as transgender, nonbinary, or one of these other made-up words, there’s a much greater chance that your child … will also end up identifying.

So, no family is immune. I’ve talked to hundreds and hundreds of parents, and I’ve seen many, many kids in my office who get drawn into this belief system. And trust me, it’s a very difficult thing.”

The transgender contagion is so widespread at this point, Grossman suspects most of the college, high school and elementary school students believe that sex and gender are two separate things, and that you can choose your gender at will, because that’s what they’ve been indoctrinated to believe.

“When I use the word indoctrinated, I mean that this has been relentlessly pushed at them over and over again. They’re bombarded with this idea, presented as if it is a fact. It’s not a fact, it’s a belief. And it’s an outrageous belief. It’s an irrational belief that you can be something other than what your body says you are.

But this belief is pushed at them 24/7 from every direction, and it’s presented as fact. And, it’s presented in such a way that questions are not permitted. If you doubt, if you hesitate, if you ask questions, well then you are a hater and you are transphobic.

Kids want to belong. Kids want to be accepted in their social group. They don’t want to be seen as an outsider and certainly not as transphobic. That’s the equivalent of being racist, sexist and all those other awful things.

So, that’s why I use the word indoctrinated, and that’s why a majority of them are going to believe it. It’s being presented to them by authorities, educational authorities, medical authorities, government authorities, and they don’t hear the argument on the other side of it.”

Gender Dysphoria Then and Now

When Grossman was a medical student, rapid onset gender dysphoria (when a young child suddenly insists he or she is the opposite gender) was exceedingly rare. That all changed around 2015, when the number of cases suddenly exploded.

However, contrary to classical gender dysphoria, these more recent cases typically involve teens and young adults, which had never been the case before. What’s more, in the past, gender dysphoria predominantly affected boys, at a ratio of about 6-to-1. Today, girls identifying as boys make up about 60% of cases.

I, like many others, suspect synthetic chemicals, many of which have estrogenic activity, may be playing a role, especially in boys identifying as girls. Grossman doesn’t dismiss that possibility, but based on her work, she suspects social media and peer pressure are still the primary contributors.

“The kids say as much,” she says. “They develop symptoms of being unhappy with their bodies after binging on these YouTube videos of kids who are chronicling their own dysphoria and their own path. So there’s definitely a social contagion element.”

Transgenderism Is a False Cure for What Ails Them

Not surprisingly, children with a history of psychiatric issues, such as being on the autistic spectrum or struggling with anxiety, depression or emotional trauma, are more prone to falling victim to gender ideology.

“They learn about gender ideology, and they’re told that this could be the reason for your distress — ‘You’re feeling that you don’t fit in … because you are in the wrong body.’

And they come to believe that all their problems are going to be solved by this one solution, that identifying as the opposite sex, change their name, their pronouns and their appearance … that will be the solution.

We hear this over and over again from detransitioners, the people who went through the ‘affirmation’ and when they got more mature, they realized, ‘Oh my god, what have I done to myself?’ and regret what they’ve done.

I don’t like using this language because it’s Orwellian language, but let’s just call it what the mainstream medicine is calling it, which is ‘gender affirmation,’ which of course means you deny biology.

One of the main things that detransitioners talk about is how they were convinced that this would be the solution to all their mental health problems. Instead, they go through the process, their bodies are sometimes permanently disfigured from hormones and surgery, and their mental health problems have not been addressed.”

Kids and Parents Are Being Lied To

Making matters worse, children and teens are being lied to about the ramifications of hormone therapy and surgery. These are permanent changes being applied for what is likely a temporary emotional problem. You cannot undo the damage inflicted once you change your mind.

Remarkably, many in the affirmative care field insist that you can block puberty without negative effects and that hormone therapy effects are reversible, neither of which is true.

Proponents of transgender ideology also claim that unless trans kids are affirmed in their new identities and provided medical and surgical treatment to transition, they’re at high risk of suicide, and that’s not true either.

In fact, it’s the exact opposite. Detransitioners are at high risk of suicide because not only is it a struggle to get back to their real identity, but many now have severe medical problems brought on by hormones and surgery.

Those who have undergone sexual reassignment surgery, in particular, face the very real possibility of lifelong medical troubles and associated depression. Many have urological problems, recurrent infections, chronic pain and sexual dysfunction. They’re also sterile and will never be able to have children.

“In my congressional testimony that I gave a few months ago, I pointed out that in countries such as Sweden, Norway, Finland, the United Kingdom, where they have made these medical treatments essentially unavailable to kids for the past few years, there has been no increase in suicides or decreased mental health.

So that is simply not true. It’s terrible misinformation and emotional blackmail [to say] ‘The only chance your child has of living a happy and fulfilling life is if you go along with their new identity and give them whatever it is they say they want, even if your child is 10 or 12 years old.’ And this is what’s going on in the gender clinics.

It’s very, very important that people read my book, not only families in which they are in the midst of this difficulty, but families who in the future may face it, so that they are prepared and can understand what it’s about, so they know how to respond and how to protect their child before they’re indoctrinated.”

A Generation of Damaged Youth

Even if they don’t go through with surgery on the sex organs, boys are given massive doses of estrogen, a known human carcinogen that has a plethora of ill health effects. Girls taking high-dose testosterone also face serious adverse health effects, including irreversible voice changes and blood clotting disorders.

An ever-growing number of teenage girls are also getting double mastectomies. There are no hard numbers on how many top surgeries are being done, because no one is tracking transgender treatments and gender reassignment surgeries, but it’s definitely not a rarity anymore. Grossman comments:

“When I was writing my book and working on the chapter on double mastectomies, there were 47,000 young girls raising money on GoFundMe to have breast surgery — 47,000 … You have a whole population of young women who were led to believe that their breasts are simply disposable sex objects that don’t serve any other purpose.

Young women are never taught about the magnificent biology of nursing and of the nutrition, which is the gold standard nutrition, for newborns. There is nothing better for a newborn than mother’s milk.”

The Madness Is Coming From the Top

Children’s lives are being ruined by lies, and we need to be just as aggressive in sticking to biological facts as the indoctrinators are being aggressive in pushing vulnerable kids to make destructive health choices.

A major part of the problem is the educational system, as most schools are teaching transgender ideology. The solution, then, would be to get your children out of those schools. Grossman agrees, saying:

“Because gender issues have been framed as a civil right, every teacher can introduce it in their class — into English literature, social studies, civics, history.

Parents also have to be aware that … there are activist teachers, activist social workers and guidance counselors, who are out there to influence your child, and they will go as far as to keep it a secret from the family if the child requests to make some sort of identity change at school.

The school will keep it a secret from the parents, which is another outrageous element in all of this because it’s a parent’s right to know such a thing. So yes, you can remove your child from not only public school, but there are also private schools that push this ideology …

Their professional organizations — the National Educational Association, the professional organizations of social workers, school counselors, guidance counselors and principals — they have all bought into the narrative. So they are obligated to follow those policies, and the policies call for keeping the parents in the dark if the child says that’s what they want.

I tell a story in my book of teachers who have felt that it is wrong to keep the parents in the dark about their child’s gender identity at school and shared the information with the parents. They’ve been fired.

There are teachers, especially the younger ones, who have been indoctrinated. But I have people writing to me who are school psychologists and teachers, and they say things like, ‘I can’t do this anymore. I’m leaving this field. I’m retiring, I simply can’t do this anymore, it’s wrong.’

So parents need to be aware of that. And I provide in the book an appendix written by attorneys who are specialists in child and parental rights, and they explain exactly how to be proactive.

Even if your child is entering kindergarten, you can go into the school and you can, with a form that I provide on my website, merriamgrossmanmd.com, that puts the school on notice that they have no constitutionally based rights to direct the education of your child, that you don’t want your child being taught gender ideology and that you do not permit your child to be a part of any program or club in which this ideology is being taught.

And you certainly are not giving permission for your child to be called by a different name, or for your kid to use the opposite sex bathrooms. You have to [do that].”

Inoculate Your Children Through Biological Affirmation

Another important strategy that parents need to adopt is to affirm the biology of their children from the start. By teaching them the value and permanence of their biological sex, you can effectively “inoculate” them against deranged ideas being brought in later. Grossman explains:

“You can say to a 2-year-old or a 3-year-old, ‘You know you’re a boy, and you’re always going to be a boy. From the very first moment of your creation, you were a boy.’

This phrase, ‘sex assigned at birth,’ drives me crazy because it is so, so false. It is so outrageously untrue. Sex is not assigned at birth. Sex is established at conception and it is permanent.

Kids are being led to believe that sex — being male or female — is randomly assigned. Some doctor or nurse in the delivery room takes a look at you and makes this random decision that really isn’t based on anything real. No, you want to inoculate your child against that idea.

You want to tell your child that ‘You always were a boy or a girl, and you always will be. And that’s a great thing.’ Also, [teach them that] there are many different ways of being a girl or a boy. There isn’t one way.

There are some girls who love makeup and do all those stereotypically feminine things, and there are other girls who never want to put on a dress and they’re into building things and sports. And that’s great. That’s one kind of way of being a girl.

So from a very young age, we can tell kids that there isn’t just one way of being a girl or a boy, because what the ideology is telling them is that if you don’t fit into these ridiculous stereotypes, you may not actually be a girl (or a boy). So, you want your child to recognize that as not making sense.”

Another thing that children need to be taught from a young age is that being male or female has an impact on every system of the body. It’s not just a few skin-deep anatomical differences.

Your biological gender — immutable due to the presence of XX or XY chromosomes in every cell of your body — impacts how your brain works, your cardiovascular system, GI system and the immune system, and no amount of sex hormones and surgery will change that.

By taking hormones to feminize or masculinize the body, you’re wreaking total havoc on the entire system, because it wasn’t designed for those hormones. The only predictable outcome of transgender hormone therapy is health problems.

More Information

The transgender ideology is a pervasive threat to our children, and parents need to educate themselves on how to battle it most effectively. Grossman’s book, “Lost in Trans Nation” is the only book out there right now that gives parents the necessary tools. So, if you have young children, pick up a copy. Also gift the book to new parents. It could be the most valuable baby gift they can get. In closing, Grossman says:

“Parents, it’s really essential for you to know as much as you can. I’ve put my heart and soul into writing this book [‘Lost in Trans Nation’] because I have seen too much. I have seen people, marriages and families destroyed from this ideology.

That is why I wrote this book. It was not an easy book to write. It’s not an easy book to read. But we have to live in reality and know what’s going on. Parents that contact me all tell me the same thing. They say, ‘We were blindsided. We never imagined that this could happen. We weren’t prepared for it.’ And so I want parents to be prepared …

I have tons of information that families can use to protect themselves. Once your child is involved, it can be really tough to get them out because they are essentially brainwashed.

In addition to believing that they may be born in the wrong body, they have been brainwashed to believe that anyone who challenges them, anyone who won’t use their new name and pronouns, is a bad person. [They’ve been told] their home might be unsafe if their parents won’t use their new name and that they may need to live somewhere else …

This is a push to change our culture, change our society — to place a wedge between kids and their parents and for the state to say that we know what’s best for your child, not you. It’s a very dangerous situation.

And I think it’s important just to mention that other countries, very progressive countries such as Sweden, have all done a 180. Those other countries are saying what the kids need is psychotherapy. This is an emotional disorder.”

In addition to her book, you can also find more information on her website, miriamgrossmanmd.com, including the “Parent’s Notice to Schools.” If you want to follow her on Twitter/X, her handle is @Miriam_Grossman. Also consider becoming a member of the Do No Harm Medicine.

RELATED TWEET:

This is how it’s done 🔥

Anybody know who this guy is? pic.twitter.com/VgJdEKlUl6

— Hodgetwins (@hodgetwins) October 14, 2023

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

Weekend Read: The Harsh Realities Of Single Parenting thumbnail

Weekend Read: The Harsh Realities Of Single Parenting

By Terri Marcroft

Editor’s Note: The following essay is the second of three by Terri Marcroft. We refer you to her first essay published in September in The Prickly Pear: Weekend Read: How Abortion Hurts Women. The issue of single mothers and fatherless children is a major cause of poor outcome for millions of children and the following essay is important for Americans to understand and to address.

Each year almost three million US women face unplanned pregnancy. Most believe their decision is between abortion and parenting. And most are single.

And the rise in births to unmarried women is celebrated.

The stigma surrounding single motherhood used to discourage women from choosing that option. The message from Hollywood is that single moms are the personification of female liberation and independence. Article after article inspires awe for the woman who triumphs as a single mom, from Parenting Magazine to Ranker.com.

Bucking the trend, popular magazine Evie published “The Celebrity Lie Of Single-Mom Life As Glamorous And Empowering” in May 2021. In that article, Lisa Britton described “. . . numerous starlets [are] flaunting their solo-motherhood lifestyles on Instagram, making things seem glamorous and easy,” while avoiding posting anything negative about their situations. Hollywood is framing solo motherhood as a form of female empowerment. One woman boasts on social media: “Week 2 of solo parenting and you can pretty much call me superwoman now, LOL. . . .”

Hollywood is framing solo motherhood as a form of female empowerment.

When Hollywood refers to single parenting as ‘glamourous’ or ‘fun’, they are speaking mainly about wealthy, slightly older women with established, successful careers. Of course, Angelina Jolie and Sandra Bullock can do it! But that’s very different from the teen who chooses to parent without a partner, without an education, and without a career.

Now for a dose of reality.

More Children are Living with a Solo Mother

Once largely limited to poor women and minorities, single motherhood is now becoming a new “norm.” This is due in part to the growing trend of children born outside marriage—a societal development that was virtually unheard of just a few decades ago. And more than 80 percent of single-parent families are headed by single mothers. Those single mother households are far more likely be low income and food insecure and nearly a third live in poverty.

In an effort to highlight this growing problem in America, then-Senator Barack Obama drove the point home in his June 2008 Father’s Day speech in Chicago when he said:

“Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today that family is the most important. And we are called to recognize and honor how critical every father is to that foundation. They are teachers and coaches. They are mentors and role models. They are examples of success and the men who constantly push us toward it.

But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are, is missing—missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.

You and I know how true this is in the African American community. We know that more than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled—doubled—since we were children. We know the statistics—that children who grow up without a father are:
– Five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime;
– Nine times more likely to drop out of schools;
– Twenty times more likely to end up in prison.

They are more likely to have behavioral problems or run away from home or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it.”

The Reality of Single-Mother Households

Single-mother households are far more likely to be poor than married-couple households. That is the reality. The poverty rate for single-mother families in 2018 was 34%, more than five times higher than the rate for married-couple families, which was only 6%. Nearly three-in-five (58 percent) of all poor children lived in families headed by unmarried mothers. And one-in-three single moms spend over 50% of their income on housing, while 27% struggle to afford shelter. Forty percent of single moms in the U.S. have jobs that provide low wages and no paid leave. Almost one-third of single-mother families are food insecure. Two out of three single moms receive reduced price or free meals. Among the homeless families in America, more than 80% were headed by single women with children.

It’s a grim picture of a hard life. Yet, it’s reality for those who don’t have the resources of someone like Angelina Jolie or Sandra Bullock.

The Effect on the Children

Parents who get and stay married tend to be different in many other important respects from single parents—including having more time, education, and income—and it may be these differences that lie behind the gaps in their children’s success, rather than the fact of marriage itself.

It’s not only the adults who pay the price of single parenting. The Brookings Institute research shows that family structure plays a big role in the success of children at various stages of life, as evidenced by their data. Children at every age have a greater chance of success in a home where the mother is married, and a lesser chance of success in homes of never-married mothers. Children raised by married parents typically do better in life on almost every measure.

In the United States, 24.7 million children live in a home where their biological father is not present. That equates to one in every three children in America. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, 85% of children who exhibit some type of behavioral disorder come from a fatherless home, as do 90% of youth who decide to run away from home. In addition, 75% of the long-term correctional facility inmates are from father-absent households.

Boys from Fatherless Homes

According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 93% of our prison inmates are male and more than half of the youth in prison grew up without their father. Children who live in a single-parent homes are more than twice as likely to die from suicide.

In his article, “Why Young Men Become Shooters,” Park MacDougald writes, “Whatever the nominal motivations behind them, rampage shootings are nearly always a product of wounded masculinity.” He quotes Ralph Larkin, a criminologist at John Jay College who has studied mass shootings for decades: “They are the most masculine of crimes.” Warren Farrell, author and chair of the Coalition to Create a White House Council on Boys and Men, states, “There’s common denominators among mass shooters. The most obvious is that they’re male—98 percent are male.”

A second common denominator is that they’re almost all dad-deprived males, Farrell continues. “What we think of when we think of mass shootings is the people who are hurt. We don’t realize that all of these people are hurt by boys who are hurt, who are deprived of their dads, who are feeling neglected and depressed.”

Fathers are an important component in helping young males grow into productive men.

Girls from Fatherless Homes

Girls need their dads too. Daughters from fatherless homes are four times more likely to get pregnant as teenagers And twice as likely to suffer from obesity. They’re far more likely to struggle with bad relationships, eating disorders, and depression. These glaring statistics paint a dreary, difficult picture of single motherhood for their children.
As with all our options, there are also downsides to single parenting for the mother. Furthermore, if a woman drops out of school to have and raise a child, the picture is even more bleak. Single parenting is challenging—and even more so if one’s education ends, undermining career and job growth opportunities before they’ve begun.

Summary: Let’s Be Honest about Single Parenting

One thing is certain: The women who choose to raise a baby on their own, thinking it will be glamourous and ‘fun’ to have baby at home, are starting on a long, arduous road. There may or may not be extended family support. There may or may not be a steady income for life’s necessities. Almost all will find that life as a single mom is an unimaginable amount of hard work — exhausting and expensive.

Most women find a way to make it work, mustering more strength and resolve than they ever knew they possessed. (We are resourceful that way!) Many will beat the odds, rise to the challenge, and become some of the best mothers ever. It is doable, just not glamourous or fun.

The child, too, faces an uphill struggle, but not of his or her own making. Through no fault of his own, the child begins life with disadvantages to overcome, just by the nature of the family structure. The solo parent household cannot offer all the benefits and advantages that a two-parent household can offer. That’s the harsh reality. Two adult parents in the home means there is more of everything to go around – not only money and other resources but also one-on-one time and attention.

We could not have predicted this massive shift toward single parenting, or the significant disadvantages that would result from it. The last few decades’ revelations about single parenting and how those children are doing over the long-term are worth consideration.

When faced with an unplanned pregnancy, many could think that parenting is a noble choice. With complete information, however, we might reconsider. Is it really the best decision for the child? Is it in his best interests? This is one situation where we can get a glimpse into the future and allow that new-found knowledge to affect our choices today, as well as the choices we encourage others to make.

*****

Terri Marcroft is an adoptive Mom to her 24-year-old daughter, Founder and Executive Director of Unplanned Good, an organization dedicated to promoting open adoption for women facing unplanned pregnancy. For more information, please see unplannedgood.org/. The article above is a condensed excerpt from her book Pro-Choice Pro-Adoption: It’s Time for a Loving, Positive Response to Unplanned Pregnancy published in 2022.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Planned Parenthood Prescribes Autistic Youth Cross-Sex Hormones after a 30-Minute Consult thumbnail

Planned Parenthood Prescribes Autistic Youth Cross-Sex Hormones after a 30-Minute Consult

By The Geller Report

The abortion mill is expanding its gruesome business into the monstrous child sex mutilation business. Mengele medicine is lucrative.

A New Jersey pediatrician, told the Free Beacon, “It’s criminal what Planned Parenthoods all over the country are doing.”

Planned Parenthood is Helping Teenagers Transition After a 30 Minute Consult. Parents and Doctors are Sounding the Alarm.

By: Aaron Sibarium, WFB, October 4, 2023

Fred has a history of developmental issues. He was diagnosed with autism—technically ADHD with autistic traits—at age four, struggled with depression and anxiety as he got older, and was expelled from three different special-needs schools due to behavioral problems, stemming in part from an impulse control disorder. He is an 18-year-old high school student in New Jersey and lives with his parents, who asked the Washington Free Beacon to withhold his real name.

Like many people on the autism spectrum, Fred cycles through obsessions and extreme views. He was part of an alt-right group chat as recently as last year, his parents said, but apostatized suddenly and now considers himself far left.

Still, Fred has a few interests that have remained constant throughout his life, all fairly typical for a teenage boy: guns, power tools, and metalworking. That made it all the more shocking when, in December 2022, at 17 years old, he announced he was a transgender woman.

The revelation came a few months after Fred’s best friend, who also has autism, began identifying as transgender. Concerned that this was another phase, but open to the possibility that it wasn’t, Fred’s parents tried to enroll their son, whom they were now calling by a female name at home, in the Gender and Autism Program at Children’s National Hospital, the only gender clinic in the country specializing in autistic youth. Fred was determined to take hormones, they told the clinic, which is known for its lengthy assessments. Before he did, they wanted to be sure his dysphoria wasn’t transient or peer-driven.

The clinic informed them in March that it had a waitlist of about a year. And Fred, who would be turning 18 in two months, wasn’t willing to wait.

In late July, while his parents were out of town and after he had come of age, Fred went to Planned Parenthood, which prescribes hormones to any legal adult without a letter from a therapist or a formal diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The only requirement is a brief consultation, usually with a nurse practitioner, about the drugs’ effects, which range from mood swings and male pattern baldness to permanent infertility.

How brief? Fred arrived at his local clinic, on North Fullerton Ave. in Montclair, New Jersey, at around 11:00 a.m., according to phone tracking data his parents used to monitor his whereabouts. By 11:39, they received a text message from CVS: Fred’s estrogen prescription was on its way. Instead of a months-long evaluation by expert psychiatrists, a nurse practitioner had, in little over 30 minutes, prescribed their special-needs son a powerful drug without their knowledge or consent.

The tomboy g̶e̶n̶o̶c̶i̶d̶e̶ is real.
I went thru this sound on TT.
Almost all of the posts were documenting FtM double mastectomies while encouraging it to an impressionable audience.
Captions include “I’m free!” And “I can finally start my life”
Big pharma is profiting billions… pic.twitter.com/kdfdTGI1cp

— ladie labrys (@LadieLabrys) August 6, 2023

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: California teen sues doctors over breast-removal surgery at age 13 in Kaiser Permanente’s SECOND blockbuster trans lawsuit

RELATED TWEET: Tucker on X Transgender, Inc.

Ep. 28  Trans, Inc: genital mutilation is not just a fad. It’s a full-blown industry. How did something this demented happen so quickly? Chris Moritz has been following the money. pic.twitter.com/N2em2hbTE8

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) October 4, 2023

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

Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes thumbnail

Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes

By Bobby Anne Flower Cox

If you have not yet read the book 1984 by George Orwell, you absolutely must.

I loathed that novel when I read it as a teen, because I hated the entire idea of an authoritarian government controlling its people so deftly. The dystopian world it described was just so depressing, so wrong, from the first page to the last. And yet, here we are, almost 75 years after Orwell first penned the book, and we see how that hellish science fiction novel is now playing out before us.

Even the left-leaning Wikipedia describes the book as a “cautionary tale” whose theme centers on “the consequences of totalitarianism, mass surveillance and repressive regimentation of people and behaviours within society.” Modeled on the authoritarian states of Stalin’s Soviet Union and of Nazi Germany, the book takes a deep dive into the role of truth within a society, and the ways in which truth and facts can be manipulated by the government to control the population.

What you saw and heard with your own eyes and your own ears, the government denied and demanded you cast it aside and not believe it.

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

― George Orwell, 1984

Through the Ministry of Truth, the government (referred to in the book as “Big Brother” or “the Party”) engages in endless propaganda, intense surveillance, and the open and obvious negating of historical fact. Individual thought and questioning of authority led to immediate persecution. Why deny facts and rewrite history? Well, as Orwell says in the book,

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

― George Orwell, 1984


Now let’s fast-forward to the present day. I will begin with this profound statement that keeps churning over in my head:

They must really think we are stupid!

The “they” is our government (federal and state). The “we” is you and me, and the other 300+ million Americans across our country.

Alas, here we are, entering the final quarter of 2023, and we have the United States government, and many state governments (including New York’s former Governor Andrew Cuomo, current left-wing Governor Kathy Hochul, and the super-majority Dem legislature) proclaiming for all to hear that they did not force anyone to do anything detrimental these past 3.5 years. UNBELIEVABLE! Did you hear this? They are actually saying with straight faces that they didn’t force you to wear a mask, or lock down and shutter your businesses, or choose between taking an experimental drug or losing your job… Nope! They did none of that. And you – well, you are flat out crazy if you think they did. You are lying. You are exaggerating and totally overreacting. 

Unfortunately for Big Brother, ooops, I mean unfortunately for our 100 percent reliable, never-lies-to-us government, we have actual documents (including lawsuits), news stories, social media posts, and videos of the government at all levels mandating and forcing us to do all of those things and more. Here’s just one example of Biden himself, the “Big Guy,” mandating the C19 shot:

Biden is not alone. No, no. His entire administration is right there with him. His head of OSHA, Douglas Parker, is also now lying through his teeth about the OSHA mandate that REQUIRED (not suggested) that all employers in the entire nation with 100 or more employees force their employees to get the C19 shot, otherwise, they had to wear a mask and test constantly for C19. (That OSHA mandate was struck down by SCOTUS last year because it was unconstitutional, by the way). Then there’s the head of HHS, Xavier Becerra, saying there was never a mask mandate. What?! Another blatant lie.

Please take 2 minutes to watch this Congressman Kevin Kiley clip. You truly won’t believe your ears with the bullsh#* these Biden agency heads are spewing! As Congressman Kiley says in the video, the government is trying to tell us that “2 + 2 doesn’t equal 4.” You don’t get much more Orwellian than that!

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN

Why are they backtracking now?

Easy answers: 1) they didn’t have the authority to do any of it (all of it was unconstitutional) so they can’t justify and defend it now, and 2) if they can convince you they didn’t do it before, then you won’t mind as much when they do it again.

This should make your blood boil. It’s particularly infuriating to those of us who were speaking out from basically day one trying to tell people that the lockdowns, the masking, the shots, the limited number of people at your wedding or at your Thanksgiving table were all violations of the Constitution and our basic human rights! My colleague, Jeffrey Tucker, who is the founder and President of Brownstone Institute, where I am a Fellow, wrote an article the other day on this topic. At the end of it, he concluded:

The major media is tacitly conspiring with the political establishment, the corporate sector, and the administrative state to pretend like that fiasco was completely normal and also entirely forgettable, not even worth naming. We did the best we could with the information we had so just stop complaining about it! 

This is not going to work. It is too close to living memory for this level of gaslighting to be effective. The more these official institutions engage in this crazy form of denialism, the more they discredit themselves. 

*****

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

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Confession? LGBTQ+ Activist FREAKS Out Ranting Trans/Queers Will Be Killed Now That Florida Passed Death Penalty For Child Rapists thumbnail

Confession? LGBTQ+ Activist FREAKS Out Ranting Trans/Queers Will Be Killed Now That Florida Passed Death Penalty For Child Rapists

By The Geller Report

Florida’s law allowing the death penalty for child rapists is now in effect.

Florida’s law allowing the death penalty for child rapists is now in effect.

The minimum sentence is life in prison without parole. In Florida, anyone who harms children in such a horrific way will never walk free.

— Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) October 3, 2023

The minimum sentence is life in prison without parole. In Florida, anyone who harms children in such a horrific way will never walk free.

“The amount of people not understanding this is going to be used to kill trans and queer people is making me lose my mind.”

Holy sh*t. Is this a confession? pic.twitter.com/CpP2dSdznP

— Chaya Raichik (@ChayaRaichik10) October 3, 2023

Boom. There it is.

This would only ‘kill trans and queer’ people if they are child rapists and abusers, pedophiles.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: House of Horrors: 11 Illegal Aliens Among Men Accused of Gang Raping Girls in Small Minnesota Town

RELATED TWEET ON X:

Ep. 28  Trans, Inc: genital mutilation is not just a fad. It’s a full-blown industry. How did something this demented happen so quickly? Chris Moritz has been following the money. pic.twitter.com/N2em2hbTE8

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) October 4, 2023

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

The Malone Controversy: Part Two thumbnail

The Malone Controversy: Part Two

By Cherie Zaslawsky

On the home front, Robert Malone describes his wife Jill as his “fellow warrior” and business partner, so it’s worth noting that Jill Glasspool Malone, as Diana West has pointed out from perusing her LinkedIn profile, apparently admires a number of globalist powermongers as well as Big Pharma companies and governmental agencies, including the US Department of Health and Human Services and BARDA (Biomedical Advanced Research and. Development Authority), among others.

Take a look at this four minute video revealing Jill’s “influencers” on her LinkedIn page which has since been scrubbed: Bill Gates, Melinda French Gates, Richard Branson, and Justin Trudeau. The Malones seem to be very much on the same page, so her fellow warrior husband may well share her esteem for these powerful players.

Though perhaps the biggest red flag regarding Malone’s transition to critic of the mRNA shots, is that it took him a couple of years to adopt this new stance. Dr. Peter Breggin and Dr. Paul Alexander, among others, have been quick to point this out. Had Malone spoken out against the experimental gene therapy technique back in early 2021, thousands of lives could have been saved. Make that millions.

In fact, Dr. Breggin discovered a scientific paper Malone and MIT’s Darrell O. Ricke published on ResearchGate in January 2020, at the very first mention of Covid-19. They concluded that all SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were dangerous, due to the phenomenon of Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE). (emphasis mine)

Here’s an excerpt from the Breggin’s article: Could This Man Have Saved the World?

In the section on Vaccine Risks for Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE), Ricke and Malone write that their research “leads to the prediction that new attempts to create … SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have potentially higher risks for inducing ADE in humans…” This is a critically important dire statement about a very dangerous situation.

In addition, according to his wife Jill, Malone continued to work on cationic liposomes for mRNA vaccines during the 1990s, but discovered that: “unfortunately, the toxicity issues from the nano lipid particles that Dr. Malone observed in his research during the 1990s were never resolved.” Wouldn’t that also be something of great moment for Malone to announce to the world in 2020 and 2021?

But there’s another issue we need to address. Dr. Breggin has assembled a list of heroes in the health freedom movement that Malone has reportedly gone after in one way or another: Peter and Ginger Breggin, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Judy Mikovits, Dr. Jane Ruby, Foster Coulson, and more.

Here’s an example from Malone’s Substack:

“I learned last night that Drs. Peter McCullough and Harvey Risch have joined a company that is promoting overpriced vitamins, nutraceuticals, and telemedicine. The Wellness Company. This firm is headed up by a physician formerly with the Global Covid Summit group, and is now quite antagonistic to us. This firm is controlled by Mr. Foster Colson, head of the Colson group…”

I wonder who the “us” is, and also why Malone would cast aspersion on courageous Dr. McCullough who has sacrificed his career to stand up for our medical/health freedom and is endeavoring to offer the public better medical care than most of us get through Big Medicine/Big Insurance.

But the centerpiece of Malone’s attack is of course the $25 million defamation lawsuit against Peter and Ginger Breggin. Obviously, a lawsuit of this magnitude is not primarily about clearing one’s name of defamation (which ostensibly never took place), but of destroying the target of the suit. The Breggins are octogenarians, and this lawsuit would surely bankrupt them.

However, Malone may have just gotten an unexpected wake-up call. As the Breggins report: Judge Moon, who’s presiding over Malone’s defamation case against the Washington Post as well as his case against themselves, ordered his clerk to “STRIKE this case [Malone v The Washington Post] from the docket.”  He invoked Virginia’s Anti-SLAPP law which allows a judge to dismiss a case deemed without merit…”. And the cherry on top? The Judge warned Malone in no uncertain terms to stop filing meritless defamation suits. (Emphasis mine)

MALONE’S  DOOM-AND-GLOOM BELGIAN PALS

How did Malone come up with not one but two fearmongering Belgians? Is there something in the water in Belgium these days? We’ll consider psychologist Mattias Desmet below, but let’s give Geert Vanden Bossche his due now.

You may recall Vanden Bossche as the man who sounded a frantic alarm against “vaccinating during a pandemic!” which he asserted would force the virus to mutate to deadly strains, unleashing “a global catastrophe without equal.” It may also be worth noting that Bossche is affiliated with “the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and other vaccine proponents.” And that the “cure” he touted for this emergency was…more vaccines!

Turns out it isn’t mere coincidence that Malone has discovered these men and their dismal theories—at least not in the case of Vanden Bossche. Here’s what Malone said in an interview he did on Stew Peters’ show on January 28th, 2022 regarding Bossche:

“… I’m compelled by my friend and colleague and former co-worker from Solvay Vaccines, Geert Vanden Bossche, that his reasoning about the development of escape mutants under the pressure of universal vaccination is dead on!”

Later in the same 2022 interview, apparently echoing Bossche’s theory, Malone says: “We are basically breeding superbugs.”

And just days before this interview, during Senator Johnson’s round table discussion: Covid-19: A Second Opinion, after stating we don’t need any more fearmongering, Malone reintroduced Bossche’s alarming theory, warning the panel about deadly new variants emerging as a result of universal vaccination.

However, there seem to be a couple of problems with that dire thesis.

First and foremost, the “plandemic” was hugely overblown. The millions of deaths predicted by the fake computer modeling of Professor Neil Ferguson at Imperial College in London, fortunately never materialized.

Instead, there was an orchestrated psy-op, with a few “Covid hotspots” of undetermined causation—some say through 5G, some say through flu shots, some say through aerosol dispersion of a pathogen, and some say by means of the engineered Covid bioweapon. And while the vaccines themselves may well represent a “global catastrophe without equal,” that has nothing to do with Bossche’s extinction-level killer viral mutations.

But I’m happy to announce that Bossche’s theory of catastrophic variants has been soundly debunked, although most of us had already figured out it was bogus for one simple reason: it didn’t happen.

In fact, hopefully once and for all, Dr. Mike Yeadon, a true hero of the health freedom movement, put the kibosh on that bit of doomsday drama by pointing out that viral variants of Covid—even the ones most drastically different from the “novel virus”—only vary from the original virus by .3%!  Not quite enough to wipe out humanity. And not even enough to trick the immune system, which easily recognizes it as the same virus—well, 99.7% the same, scientifically speaking.

A SECOND LOOK AT MRNA TECHNOLOGY

There’s a powerful open letter by Sucharit Bhakdi MD, Karina Reiss PhD and Michael Palmer MD entitled The Eternal Dangers of RNA-Vaccines.

It begins this way:

“This open letter explains the dangers posed by mRNA vaccines, namely, that cells and tissues which take up the vaccine particles will suffer destruction at the hands of the immune system, and furthermore that cells which evade destruction may end up being genetically modified. The risk of genetic modification also pertains to egg and sperm cells and therefore to future generations. Both risks are inherent in this vaccine technology — they are not limited to the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 alone.“

The authors go on to describe what they call the “fatal flaw” in the mRNA technology:

“… if mRNA coding for any non-self protein is introduced into a cell, that cell will come under attack by the immune system. This is the fatal flaw that underlies the whole concept”. (Emphasis mine)

And their even more dire warning:

“In the laboratory, it is possible to insert plasmid DNA into the book of life. If this occurs in vaccinated humans, the possible consequences are unending. Disruption of the exquisitely tuned network that controls cell division and differentiation can lead to cancer. Mutations in sperm and fertilized egg cells could render altered traits inheritable and lead to the creation of beings that have departed from the evolutionary track of the human race.” (Emphasis mine)

And Dr. Peter McCullough has this to say:

“Synthetic mRNA is turning out to be a disastrous biotechnology for vaccine development. There is no “off switch” for production of dangerous antigens such as the Spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 or the hemagglutinin from influenza. There is no control over where in the body the lipid nanoparticles will deliver the dangerous genetic payload. Additionally, all cells that take up mRNA express foreign proteins on the cell surface inviting an immediate auto-immune attack on cells harboring the mRNA and it’s protein products as described by Dr. Panagis Polykretis.”

Perhaps the question should be raised, regardless of Malone’s presumed good intentions, whether his original genetic experiment was actually an ill-advised, even reckless venture that should have ended where it begun. As Mary Shelley pointed out in her iconic novel Frankenstein over two centuries ago, there’s a line that must not be crossed—experiments that push beyond it lead to catastrophe.

PIVOT NUMBER TWO: MASS FORMATION PSYCHOSIS

Interestingly, Malone apparently reinvented himself again, leaving behind his decades of work in the medical-biopharmaceutical-industrial-military-intelligence sector(s) where he developed relationships with CIA members among others, while ostensibly working in the Big Money realm of DARPA and BARDA contracts, etc.

Instead of continuing to focus on his area of expertise and the by now obvious dangers of the Covid shots using the mRNA technology he boasts of inventing, Malone threw a wild card into the freedom movement by importing another Belgian, the psychologist Mattais Desmet and his “mass formation” theory.

Perhaps due to Malone’s enthusiastic endorsement of Desmet’s notion of collective hypnosis, this became the talk of much of the freedom movement and many purchased Desmet’s book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism.  One of those who critiqued the theory was the eminent psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin, a man with impeccable credentials and decades of professional expertise.

But before I turn to what followed between Malone and the Breggins, let me call your attention to another result Malone accomplished by catapulting Desmet and his theories into the freedom movement’s cyberspace:

he changed the subject.

MASS FOMENTING OF ILL WILL IN THE FREEDOM MOVEMENT

The bad blood between Malone and the Breggins began with Dr. Peter Breggin’s insightful analysis of Mattais Desmet’s “mass formation” hypothesis. One might question why Malone saw fit to strike out at Breggin, a highly esteemed psychiatrist, for critiquing Desmet’s arguably rather slipshod psychological argument. Here’s the gist of the Breggins’ analysis of Desmet’s theory:

“A careful reading of most of the writings of Desmet and Malone on mass formation or mass psychosis will confirm that their ideas are most consistent with preventing any recognition or effective response to the elites who are now clamping down upon the citizens of the world with totalitarianism.

Dr. Breggin entitles his article: Mass Formation and Mass Psychosis: A False and Dangerous Concept that Threatens Our Freedom.

Here’s another quote:

Their basic idea behind mass formation or mass psychosis is that totalitarianism originates or arises spontaneously out of 30% of the people who become obsessed with giving away their freedom and becoming dependent. The people literally convert themselves into a totalitarian force of psychotic proportions that will eventually violently attack those who disagree with them while creating dictators like Hitler and Stalin. In his book, Desmet states outright:

“The crowd typically tries to impose its will on the society; it seeks control over society. This has always been the case…” (pp. 126-127)

In short, it is the people, and not the elite, the political class, or the wealthy and powerful predators, who seek to oppress us. It is the “crowd” — a mythological group that did not even exist during the height of COVID-19 oppression because crowds were illegal.

And here’s something recent I found on Desmet’s Substack substantiating Dr. Breggin’s point:

“Conspiracy theories respond to man’s irresistible urge to reduce the complexity of human existence and human relationships to something simple and understandable. Evil is located in a single object – an evil elite, an evil dictator, a religion, or a group of people – and then free-floating anxiety, frustration and aggression is focused on this one object. A conspiracy theory thus provides a privileged albeit misplaced psychological rationale to form a blind, fanatical mass that gives free rein to all problematic, dark human sentiments.” (Emphasis mine)

In other words: Don’t look at the Davos elites, don’t look at the billionaire globalist psychopaths, look over here instead. Look anywhere else. If you see evil somewhere, that’s just your free-floating anxiety glomming onto some random illusion and turning you into part of a “blind fanatical mass”. OK, Mattais. Got it.

By the way, in one of his posts on his Substack, Malone lists the goals of Agenda 2030—the elite cabal’s dystopian plan for the next seven years—and concludes this way: “Now, many of the above are legitimate goals – BUT for a nation, not as a world governance.” While it’s reassuring to see Malone argue against “world governance,” one might wonder why these communistic, Green New Deal, Great Reset, top-down authoritarian goals would be legitimate for any nation, other than, say, China and North Korea.

PIVOT NUMBER THREE: FIFTH GENERATION WARFARE

Perhaps since Mattias’ theory that we’ve all been hypnotized hasn’t panned out so well, Malone has shifted gears once more, leaving the issue of vaccine dangers even further behind. His new bête noire is 5GW, “Fifth Generation Warfare.” And as with “Mass Formation,” this new subject seems to be more about obfuscating nomenclature than any substantially new information. That our government and mainstream media are conspiring to propagandize us is old news—hardly a revelation to those of us who’ve been paying attention.

At a recent talk he gave at the Liberty Forum of Silicon Valley, Malone announced that Fifth Generation Warfare is not about territory, but about control of our minds through what he calls “unrestricted information warfare.” This is also not news. Alex Jones debuted his show “InfoWars” with his well-known tagline, “There’s a war on for your mind!” more than twenty years ago. But Malone does make his case effectively.

MALONE’S LIBERTY FORUM SPEECH ON 5GW: AUGUST 8TH 2023

For the third time in three years, Malone was invited to speak at the Liberty Forum of Silicon Valley. He began his talk graciously by delivering a well-deserved compliment to Emcee Jane Kearney, and acknowledging the growth he’s seen in many freedom warriors, to a round of applause. He then harkened back to his “hypnotism” theory, with the claim that 25% of people are readily hypnotized, highly suggestible, and readily go along with whatever an authority tells them to do.

He then pointed out that at the other end of the spectrum, 25% are the skeptics who question everything. And he complimented the audience not only as this 25%, but also suggested that many among us may also be in the 5% “tip of the spear” group of freedom warriors, as were the American Founders.

So now that the audience had been warmed up and nicely flattered, he proceeded with his topic, in which these same brave freedom warriors and wide awake skeptics and questioners were gradually recast as helpless victims of an all-powerful system of propaganda and control that leaves them without the ability to separate fact from fiction or right from wrong or to make rational decisions. Let’s parse this trajectory.

Here are a few quotes:

  • “In the 5GW environment, you no longer have the ability to think and process what’s right and wrong about government policy. You don’t have the material to think about whether that’s a good or bad policy.” What about our common sense? What about our moral compass? All gone?
  • “The idea of you as an independent voter and independent agent being able to have an influence on what your government is doing is completely obsolete…you don’t have the data.” Did we just lose our ability to think and reason, to seek redress of grievances, to protest injustice, and to vote?
  • “Your ability to perceive reality is completely warped.” Aren’t we perceiving it now, in spite of ongoing propaganda?
  • “You’re being highly manipulated within that (constrained) window with sophisticated understanding of how to exploit your own psychological weaknesses.” If that is so, how is it that We the Twenty-Five Percent are still seeking and finding the truth and fighting back?
  • “Everything you see, hear, feel, believe is a manipulated product of a weaponized psychological manipulation technology…and you really no longer have free agency.” Sounds like Winston in Orwell’s novel 1984. We’re clearly not there now, and let’s hope we never get there.

So how did Malone get from Point A, where the audience was informed, awake, aware and standing for freedom, to Point B, where they became hypnotized zombies with no thoughts of their own?

Perhaps for dramatic effect, he did it by blurring a key distinction.

He described what the power elite hopes to achieve as if it were a fait accompli. In doing so, he left out our ability to think, reason, figure things out on our own, our inner sense of right and wrong, and for many of us, our standing firm in the Judeo-Christian tradition. And oh yes, he left God and people’s belief in God out of the equation. No powerful Five Eyes Alliance can trump that.

FREUDIAN SLIP?

During his talk, Malone spent a good deal of time explaining that while he’s had, and still has, a number of connections with CIA officers both past and present, he’s on our side and recognizes the CIA and the Five Eyes Alliance of Intel agencies as the real culprits behind 5GWarfare.

At one point, in what may have been an extemporaneous anecdote to prove his point about the difficulty of finding the truth, Malone told a story about an EcoHealth Alliance proposal revealed by Project Veritas. It was a bizarre gain-of-function study involving bat coronaviruses, sent to DARPA.

Malone’s comment is instructive: “And the lovely thing from the standpoint of DARPA is DARPA wouldn’t fund it. And Tony Fauci did at the NIAID. When this came out, I was like, this looks like a smoking gun, but I don’t know that this is possibly real. Because it is so convenient for the Intelligence community to craft a narrative like this that transfers all responsibility over to Tony Fauci in the NIAID and away from us.” (Italics mine.)

Had Malone continued his comment in the third person, that last sentence would have ended: “… for the Intelligence community to craft a narrative like this that transfers all responsibility over to Tony Fauci in the NIAID and away from itself.” In addition, when he made the remark about handing the blame over to Tony Fauci in the NIAID, he thrust his arm out, pointing away from himself, and when he said the word “us” at the end of the sentence, he gestured towards himself. You can see this in the recording of his speech beginning at about 1: 01: 17. Innocent mistake or Freudian slip?

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Robert Malone is a complex character—a very intelligent man who has expertise in biodefense and medical research, and a long successful career working for the government in biosecurity projects. He’s now carved out a niche for himself in the freedom movement, where he remains somewhat controversial, in part due to that very background. Some postulate he’s controlled opposition. Some think he’s the cat’s pajamas.

Ironically, were Malone to stop labeling others in the Freedom movement as “haters,” and simply accept that people have the right to critique the work and ideas of those who are prominent in the public sphere, he might go a long way toward ending the controversies.

Along those lines, dropping his defamation lawsuit against the Breggins would have a very salutary effect on the freedom movement. We can ill afford internal squabbling as we face the mounting globalist threats to our lives and liberty.

Are we witnessing a well-meaning man with a prickly ego who’s prone to retaliate against perceived slights that are devoid of ill intent? Or are we witnessing psychologically sophisticated “controlled opposition” by a man who uses pretexts to sow discord within a previously harmonious community?

If the former, one may hope Malone reverses course and transcends this tendency. If the latter, all bets are off.

I’d go so far as to say that if Malone were to win his $25 million defamation suit against the Breggins—heaven forbid—that would signal the end the freedom movement. None of its leaders would likely feel safe from such ruinous lawsuits. The Deep State and globalist cabal would have triumphed, and one must then assume that was the plan all along, which would also seem to provide the definitive answer to the question: Who Is Robert Malone?

Conversely, if he drops his lawsuit, or if it fails, one would hope that in the future, Dr. Malone will direct his ire exclusively at the enemies of freedom, and not at its friends.

©2023. Cherie Zaslawsky. All rights reserved.

TUCKER ON X: Transgender, Inc. Genital Mutilation is Not Just a Fad. It’s a Full-Blown Industry. thumbnail

TUCKER ON X: Transgender, Inc. Genital Mutilation is Not Just a Fad. It’s a Full-Blown Industry.

By Dr. Rich Swier

Here is Episode 28 of Tucker on X, the latest expose on Trans, Inc. the gender mutilation industry.

Here is the time line on the key facts presented in this episode:

  • (1:11) Transgenderism: not a fad (2:49)
  • Sex changes: a big money maker (5:44)
  • Puberty blockers (15:22)
  • Trans surgeries: the grisly details (16:40)
  • Injuries (18:00)
  • What happened to FGM? (19:00)
  • Muslims & Sex Changes (20:15)
  • Thanks, Obama (23:19)
  • Behold the neophallus (27:23)
  • Eunuchs (29:30) The Trans Pritzker (31:00)
  • Trans Marxism (36:30) Who’s profiting? (38:10)
  • ESG for trans (39:47)
  • Long-term effects

Ep. 28  Trans, Inc: genital mutilation is not just a fad. It’s a full-blown industry. How did something this demented happen so quickly? Chris Moritz has been following the money. pic.twitter.com/N2em2hbTE8

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) October 4, 2023

©2023. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Confession? LGBTQ+ Activist FREAKS Out Ranting Trans/Queers Will Be Killed Now That Florida Passed Death Penalty For Child Rapists

Space Force General Admits Access to Gender Surgery a Bigger Priority than Accepting Qualified Candidates

Transgender Surgery Leaves People Lonelier, Depressed: Study by Transgender Surgery Dept. Chair

Elon Musk Drops Vaccine Bombshell Personal Story thumbnail

Elon Musk Drops Vaccine Bombshell Personal Story

By The Geller Report

The Covid shot “nearly sent me to the hospital.” There are tens of millions of post vaccine trauma stories not being told.

Elon Musk Drops Vaccine Bombshell Personal Story | Facts Matter

By: The Epoch Times, Facts Matter, September 28 2023:

2 days ago, the Vice President of the European Commission singled out Twitter as the largest platform hosting dis/misinformation — and added that they “will be watching” what Elon is doing.

This statement of hers came on the heels of an EU law recently implemented (the Digital Services Act) which—among many other things—forces social media companies to censor so-called “disinformation”.

However, as a rebuttable, Elon Musk took to his platform and started a thread wherein he exposed the hypocrisy of the government’s push to censor so-called disinformation, as well as his own experience with taking 3 doses of the mRNA vaccine.

Read more.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED TWEET:

Elon Musk says he would have went to prison before he forced workers to get vaccinated and the 3rd shot almost sent him to the hospital from vaccine injury. pic.twitter.com/6QvGQf3wN4

— An0maly (@LegendaryEnergy) September 26, 2023

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

VIDEO: Breaking the Silence: The Reality of De-Transitioning thumbnail

VIDEO: Breaking the Silence: The Reality of De-Transitioning

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

This video about men and women who reverted to their natal sex is disturbing and amazing. Disturbing because it shines a spotlight on their unhappiness and the cynicism of the transgender ideologues who helped them “transition”. Amazing because it was made by a commercial TV network in Australia. The interview with a medical expert at the end is one of the most fiery encounters on screen that you will ever see. Compelling viewing about a catastrophic medical scandal.

AUTHOR

MERCATOR STAFF

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Nebraska Regs Require 7-Day Waiting Period, 40 ‘Neutral’ Therapy Hours for Minor Gender Transition Drugs

Among Progressives, Belief in God Falls

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

The Malone Controversy: Part One thumbnail

The Malone Controversy: Part One

By Cherie Zaslawsky

By now, in spite of the media blackout, most people probably know that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is running for the presidency. However, many may not know that one of his apparently informal advisors is reported to be a man named Robert Malone, who has risen from relative obscurity in the bosom of the Medical Military Industrial Complex, to prominence in the health freedom movement in just a couple of years.

This is particularly noteworthy, as RFK Jr., founder and CEO of Children’s Health Defense and author of The Real Anthony Fauci—a blistering account of the malfeasance of Big Government in collaboration with Big Pharma in the billion dollar business of marketing often unsafe and ineffective vaccines while protecting the purveyors from liability—is a vehement critic of the US governmental agencies where Dr. Malone has spent much of his career. So the question emerges, whose team is Malone really on: the health freedom movement’s, or the Deep State’s from which he hails?

If the latter, that would place him in the role of “controlled opposition,” i.e. someone who appears to be fighting the good fight alongside his compatriots, but who’s actually there to disrupt things or at least to act as a gatekeeper, keeping the conversation away from truths that could lead others to recognize and effectively oppose their actual enemy.

Interestingly, Malone’s Substack title is: “Who Is Robert Malone?”

So let’s see if we can shed any light on that question.

ENTER ROBERT MALONE

In my 2022 article The Knights of Senator Johnson’s  Round Table,  I mentioned a number of courageous panel participants, including Drs. Peter McCullough, Pierre Kory, Paul Marik, Harvey Risch, Aaron Kheriaty, and Christina Parks. As to Robert Malone, he seemed to me to be the odd man out, and he himself may have sensed that as well, as reflected in his opening statement on the panel: “A case could be made that whether you agree with what I say or disagree, it’s certainly valid that I should have a role in discussing the current data.”

Now why was he defending his right to join in the discussion when he already had a seat at the table?

Maybe trying to short circuit anyone who might view him as an infiltrator? After all, he makes no secret of the fact that he’s worked in what one might call the Big Med/Big Pharma/Deep State syndicate for decades, rubbing shoulders with Tony Teflon Fauci, as well as members of the DoD (Department of Defense), HHS (Department of Health and Human Services), BARDA (Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority), and Intelligence agencies, and profiting handsomely in the process.

Though many of us have come to realize our three-letter agencies have been largely co-opted and weaponized against We the People, the five-letter agencies: BARDA, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), DETRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency), NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease), and the new kid on the block, ACTIV (Accelerating Covid-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) are where the sausage is made, out of view of most people, in the bowels of the DoD and HHS. This is where Dr. Malone has spent much of his time working for the government.

Say the Breggins:

“All these Department of Defense and ACTIV affiliations, from our perspective, make Malone deeply mired in the military-industrial complex and the health-industrial complex, involving global public-private partnerships characteristic of globalism and the Great Reset. How Dr. Malone has managed to present himself as a health freedom fighter remains something of a mystery to us.”

In addition to his presence on Senator Johnson’s panel, Malone admits he’s had a seat at another kind of table, the notorious “Tabletop” pandemic wargames à la Event 201—though he’s quick to point out he wasn’t present at that one. Diana West quotes him from an October 2021 interview on Stew Peters:

“Where I’m at now is what we’re observing is a scripted response that has been pioneered in multiple war games by a small cadre of individuals, largely at Johns Hopkins University, largely funded by Bill and Melinda Gates and the World Economic Forum – that’s all true — involving multiple government officials. And as the war games become more sophisticated — and I’ve participated in some of these, too, although not the Hopkins‘ one…” (Emphasis Diana’s)

West goes on to call attention to the one major entity in the “small cadre” behind the scripted “plandemic” sessions missing in Malone’s account: the CIA. She quotes RFK Jr.:

“When I researched my book what I learned was that this [2019 pandemic simulation] event, Event 201, was not a one-time occurrence. We found 20 separate pandemic simulations beginning in 2000. One thing they had in common — most of them Bill Gates was involved in, Tony Fauci was involved in — but every one of them the CIA was involved in. The CIA wrote the script, high-level CIA officials participated in every one of those pandemic simulations.”

Did Malone just forget to mention the CIA’s key role in these “events”?

It’s also interesting to note that in August of 2023 in his talk at the Liberty Forum of Silicon Valley in California, Malone not only referenced the CIA, but blamed both American Intelligence Agencies and “Five Eyes—the alliance of intelligence agencies between the US and UK—for pretty much everything nefarious transpiring in our world today. However, he avoided mentioning, much less blaming, the billionaire globalists behind UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030—the “elites” at the top, whom Desmet actually warns us not to blame: The solution to the impasse we are in is not to forcibly eliminate any elite. On the contrary: that is the recipe for self-destruction.

THE INVENTOR OF mRNA VACCINES

To the understandable surprise of many, when he made his sudden appearance in the freedom movement, Malone described himself as the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology. This raised eyebrows for two reasons: first, because that experimental technology was thought to be harming and even killing people; and second, because such research is typically collaborative with many scientists working on it, as investigative journalist Kelleigh Nelson points out in her article on Malone.

Dr. Joseph Mercola puts it this way: “To be clear, he’s not the inventor of the COVID shots themselves but rather the foundational platform that underlies them, for which Malone holds several patents.” Though perhaps unsurprisingly, Malone’s wife Jill echoes her husband’s claim: “Dr. Malone is the inventor of mRNA vaccines (and DNA vaccines).” Not sure why he’d want that honor at this point, but let’s give credit where credit is due.

In fact, Malone has a point, as outlined in his wife Jill Malone’s in-depth article on The History of mRNA Vaccines and summarized in an article in the Atlantic.

Back in 1988 as a twenty-nine-year-old graduate student, Robert Malone reportedly injected a frog with DNA and RNA and discovered this resulted in a protein forming in its muscle tissue. He authored an important paper on this, and subsequently co-authored a second paper. But then, as often happens in academic settings, apparently bigger fish took over. And Malone has seemingly held a grudge ever since.

In fact, he refers to his experience at the Salk Institute and Vical as “an intellectual rape”—an odd expression, suggesting he felt personally violated and perhaps degraded by his treatment at the hands of these institutions. And he has a credible beef against them, even if, as some say, he did not invent the mRNA vaccine technology, but rather pioneered a new mechanism with potential for use in vaccination. Either way, he deserves credit for his discovery—or blame, as the case may be. Here’s a link to what Jill refers to as his seminal paper on both in-vitro and in-vivo RNA transfection.

Unfortunately, this experience in his youth may have been a formative one for his character. He was quick to perceive himself as a victim, and has seemingly harbored this complaint for over thirty years. “It’s all about Kati,” he gripes, meaning fellow scientist Katalin Karikó of BioNTech who’s   received accolades for her contribution to the mRNA technology. In fact, in 2020, he wrote to her that he’d been “written out of history,” and essentially blamed her for taking credit for his invention, closing his email to her with the chilling words: “This will not end well.”

PIVOT NUMBER ONE: FROM THE INVENTOR OF MRNA-VACCINE TECHNOLOGY TO ITS CRITIC

Ironically, Malone has at last found his long awaited glory—among the anti-vax, anti-mRNA freedom-loving crowd—the last place one would have expected. He’s done a 180-degree pivot from touting his brilliance as the inventor of gene-therapy vaccines, to acknowledging that the Covid vaccines were not ready for primetime—but he hedges his bets. As Diana West points out, after Del Bigtree described him as an anti-vaxxer, he told Del he wouldn’t be back on his show, since he’d studiously avoided that description. Fair enough, as he’d spent his entire professional career working on vaccines in one way or another, even under the Fauci at NIAID.

In fact, during 2020 and 2021 while making a name for himself in the health freedom movement, Dr. Malone was apparently quietly working on the development of a new Covid vaccine called RelCovax, for Reliance Life Sciences, a pharmaceutical company in India. Here’s Malone’s video presentation on RelCovax “a second generation multi-valent SARS CoV-2 vaccine candidate designed to meet global vaccination demands.”

And though Malone claims RelCovax is not a genetic vaccine, it is based on “heterologous expression” which Wikipedia describes as: “The expression of a gene or part of a gene in a host organism that does not naturally have the gene or gene fragment in question. Insertion of the gene in the heterologous host is performed by recombinant DNA technology…. After being inserted in the host, the gene may be integrated into the host DNA, causing permanent expression, or not integrated, causing transient expression.” Now I’m no vaccinologist, but it sure sounds like a genetic vaccine to me.

In fact, investigative journalist George Webb writes in a Twitter/X post: Look for Dr. Robert “DARPA” Malone AI generated “novel” bioagents and vaccines to start hitting the market. Looking hard at COVAX and Relcovax. In his two-minute video, Webb says these are next generation novel vaccines that go “from gene to vax” directly without using any cell cultures. What could go wrong? Don’t we need to “protect” the elderly and infirm?

“JAB THE ELDERS”

As Kelleigh Nelson and Diana West both point out, Malone’s on record saying “the vulnerable” should still get the shots, seemingly playing both sides of the street.

In fact, in an interview on Stew Peters from October 2021 as reported by Diana West, Malone described his “balanced approach” this way: “…jab the elders and the ones at high risk.” As Kelleigh Nelson points out, those are exactly the groups the Nazis considered “useless eaters.” I hear the same historical resonance when I read those three words: “jab the elders.” And what vaccines does Malone have in mind for this purpose—the mRNA vaccines he’s apparently acknowledged are flawed? The new “gene to vax” second-generation novel vaccines like RelCovax?

Let’s recall that “the vulnerable” are mostly the elderly. What’s rarely mentioned is that vaccines are most effective when the immune system is robust, as in childhood and teen years, and less effective as people age—especially when they reach old age. It’s called immunosenescence – aging of the immune system. Not to mention the myriad issues with vaccines, wouldn’t therapeutics be a much better way to protect the elderly?

But here’s a more fundamental question: Do we really want to risk more “transient” gene expression, or worse, in a vaccine for what is essentially a mild cold or flu for most people? More needles in more arms sound good to you? Me neither. Thanks anyway, Dr. Malone.

TWO MORE QUESTIONS

Speaking of questions, here’s another: How was it that Malone and his wife were able to write an entire book about the “coming epidemic” of Covid-19 and publish it on February 10th, 2020, a mere ten days after the WHO declared the “novel” coronavirus a global health emergency and only one week after the US declared a public health emergency?

Abstract of the Malone’s February 2020 book on “preparation and protection” from Covid-19

Oh, one more thing: How was it that the Malones knew that the name of the novel coronavirus would be Covid-19 when the WHO only announced that name on February 11th, 2020, the day after their book was published?

Stay tuned for Part Two!

©2023. Cherie Zaslawsky. All rights reserved.

The White House’s “Misinformation” Pressure Campaign Was Unconstitutional thumbnail

The White House’s “Misinformation” Pressure Campaign Was Unconstitutional

By Aaron Kheriaty

I am one of five private plaintiffs in the landmark free speech case Missouri v. Biden. Earlier this month, the Fifth Circuit Court found that the government “engaged in a years-long pressure campaign designed to ensure that the censorship [on social media] aligned with the government’s preferred viewpoints” and that “the platforms, in capitulation to state-sponsored pressure, changed their moderation policies.” This resulted in the censoring of constitutionally protected speech of hundreds of thousands of Americans, tens of millions of times. Based on this finding, the Fifth Circuit in part upheld an injunction on certain public officials put in place by a district court.

Even when the government appealed the injunction to the Fifth Circuit, its lawyers hardly disputed a single factual finding from the court’s ruling. A unanimous three-judge panel upheld the core findings that “several officials—namely the White House, the Surgeon General, the CDC, and the FBI—likely coerced or significantly encouraged social-media platforms to moderate content, rendering those decisions state actions. In doing so, the officials likely violated the First Amendment.” The government again appealed the injunction to the Supreme Court, where we expect a ruling this week.

The government’s claim that the injunction limits public officials’ own speech is absurd misdirection. The government can say whatever it wants publicly; it just cannot stop other Americans from saying something else. Free speech matters not to ensure that every pariah can say whatever odious thing he or she chooses. Rather, free speech prevents the government from identifying every critic as a pariah whose speech must be shut down.

We are all harmed when our rulers silence criticism. Our government’s self-inflicted deafness prevented officials and their constituents from hearing viewpoints that should have had a meaningful impact on our policy decisions. Instead, government censorship resulted time and again in the silencing of scientifically informed criticisms of, for example, harmful COVID policies. This allowed misguided and divisive policies to persist for far too long.

The scope of the current government censorship regime is historically unprecedented. “The present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history,” the district court judge explained in his ruling. He went on, “The evidence produced thus far depicts an almost dystopian scenario… The United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth’.” The Fifth Circuit panel concurred: “The Supreme Court has rarely been faced with a coordinated campaign of this magnitude orchestrated by federal officials that jeopardized a fundamental aspect of American life.”

The government’s only attempted defense is that it was merely offering help to the platforms without jawboning them—”just your friendly neighborhood government agency.” But the law is clear that even “significant encouragement” to censor protected speech—not just overt threats or coercion—is unconstitutional. We discovered that social media companies frequently tried to push back against government demands, before finally caving to relentless pressure and threats. The evidence we presented from 20,000 pages of communications between government and social media demonstrated both significant encouragement and coercion—as when Rob Flaherty, White House director of digital strategy, berated executives at Facebook and Google, dropping F-bombs, launching tirades, and browbeating the companies into submission—until they removed even a parody account satirizing President Joe Biden.

But the more insidious and powerful censorship happens when the government pressures companies to change their terms of service and modify their algorithms to control what information goes viral and what information disappears down the memory hole. With sophisticated deboosting, shadowbanning, search results prioritization, and so forth, citizens do not even realize they are being silenced, and viewers remain unaware that their feeds are carefully curated by the government. Novelist Walter Kirn compared this to mixing a record: turn the volume up on this idea (more cowbell) and turn the volume down on that idea (less snare drum). The goal is complete top-down information control online.

We were dismayed to discover the number of government agencies now engaged in censorship (at least a dozen) and the range of issues they targeted: the State Department censored criticism of our withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Ukraine War, the Treasury Department censored criticism of our monetary policy, the FBI (surprise!) ran point on several censorship ops, and even the Census Bureau got in on the game. Other targeted topics ranged from abortion and gender to election integrity and COVID policy.

Much of the state censorship grunt work is outsourced to a tightly integrated network of quasi-private (i.e., government-funded) NGOs, universities, and government cutouts employing thousands of people working round the clock to flag posts for takedown. But constitutional jurisprudence is clear: the government cannot outsource to private entities actions that would be illegal for the government itself to do. If a government agent hires a hitman, he is not off the hook simply because he did not personally pull the trigger.

So-called “misinformation research” at places like the Stanford Internet Observatory is a slippery euphemism for censorship—not only because Facebook executives admitted to censoring “often true” but inconvenient information under government pressure, but because these entities function as laundering operations for government censorship.

Recent attempts to rebrand the work of the censorship-industrial complex with more anodyne euphemisms—” information integrity” or “civic participation online”—don’t change the fact that this is not disinterested academic research, but cooperation in state-sponsored suppression of constitutionally protected speech, always in favor of the government’s preferred narratives.

CISA, the government’s censorship switchboard and clearinghouse agency housed within the Department of Homeland Securitydescribed its work as protecting our “cognitive infrastructure”—i.e., the thoughts inside your head—from bad ideas, such as the ones advanced in this article. (Not kidding: YouTube recently censored a video of our lawyers giving a talk on our censorship case.) These ideas aren’t throttled by government censors because they are untrue, but because they are unwelcome. There’s a more accurate term for the government’s takeover of our “cognitive infrastructure:” mind control. I don’t know a single American of any political persuasion who wants to be subjected to that.

*****

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

Image Credit: Shutterstock

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Tucker Carlson Declares Abortion a ‘Spiritual Battle’ thumbnail

Tucker Carlson Declares Abortion a ‘Spiritual Battle’

By The Daily Caller

Veteran reporter and cultural-cum-political commentator Tucker Carlson is declaring that the fight against abortion is in fact a matter of spiritual warfare. Speaking at a gala hosted by The Center for Christian Virtue last week in Cleveland, Carlson stated that abortion is not a “political debate” but a “spiritual battle.”

The ex-Fox News host said that for most of his life and career “the debates that we had in the political sphere were over competing visions for how to improve people’s lives.” Referring to debates over issues like minimum wage, Carlson said, “I was on one side of it, but I could also sort of see the other side. Both sides were at least pretending to try to improve the lives of the people who voted for them.” The prevalence of abortion as a political issue is, argued Carlson, a departure from the sort of debate he and much of America has long been accustomed to.

Carlson pointed to two Ohio ballot initiatives — one enshrining abortion in the state constitution and the other decriminalizing recreational drug use — that he found especially distressing and disturbing. He asked, “When you wind up in an election where the two top ballot initiatives are 1) encouraging people to kill their own kids and 2) encourage their kids to do drugs, who’s benefitting here?” He then extolled the joys of being a parent and raising a family, saying, “I’m serious. The one unalloyed source of joy in your life is your children, the point of life is to have children, and to watch them have grandchildren. Nothing will bring you joy like that will — nothing comes close, nothing comes close.” Carlson continued:

“So anyone telling you, ‘Don’t have children, kill your children,’ is not your friend, it’s your enemy. And by the way, it’s a very recognizable promise that they’re making to you, because it’s as old as time and it’s chronicled in great detail throughout the Hebrew Bible — it’s human sacrifice, which rears its head about every four chapters, and which is singled out for approbation every time. Of all the sins the ancient committed, that sin, every single time it’s described, is called detestable… Detestable. God singled that out.”

“Why were people doing that?” he asked. “Because, of course, they believed that they were getting power and contentment and happiness in return.” Carlson explained that child sacrifice was not a practice relegated to the Mayans or Aztecs but was practiced by practically every major civilization or peoples from antiquity. “Human sacrifice, the sacrifice of children, the killing of children is the one constant in human civilization.”

He continued to note that all these various ancient civilizations, spread across different regions and continents across the globe, all reached the same conclusion: that child sacrifice might provide happiness or safety. Carlson said that conclusion couldn’t be reached “organically,” pointing out that it contradicts evolutionary biology and the instinct to preserve and continue not just the species but the family.

So where did human sacrifice come from? “That’s an idea, an impulse that was introduced,” Carlson explained. “Outside forces are acting on people at all times throughout history in every culture on the planet to convince people that if they sacrifice their children they will be happy and safe.” He continued:

“And that’s exactly what this is. This is a religious rite. This is not a policy debate, they’re not telling you that some girl got raped at 13 and she needs to go to college and therefore, unfortunately, we need to abort the child. No. That was 20 years ago. Now they’re saying, ‘Abortion is itself a pathway to joy.’ Really? So this is not a political debate, this is a spiritual battle. There is no other conclusion.”

Addressing the other ballot initiative promoting recreational drug use, Carlson quipped, “Take more drugs and be happy? Right, okay.” He expounded that the results of that initiative would essentially zombify the population. “Less conscious, less aware, give your soul over, dull yourself, become a robot. Really? Those are the promises they’re making?”

The bulk of Carlson’s speech last week is reminiscent of a speech he delivered earlier this year at The Heritage Foundation’s 50th anniversary gala. In that speech, Carlson said that American debate used to center on differing policy plans for achieving what was generally an agreed-upon good outcome. But now, he said, “people … decide that the goal is to destroy things — destruction for its own sake — ‘Hey, let’s tear it down’ — what you’re watching is not a political movement, it’s evil.”

Referring to abortion, he reiterated that abortion advocates have gone from claiming that abortion is “sometimes necessary” to foaming at the mouth for abortion on demand anywhere, any time, for any reason. “If you’re telling me that abortion is a positive good … you’re arguing for child sacrifice.… That’s like an Aztec principle, actually.” He argued that the era of policy paper debates is over and America is now in a period of “theological” war. Days after delivering that speech, Carlson was removed from Fox News, reportedly because then-Fox chairman Rupert Murdoch thought the speech was too Christian and was unsettled by its theological overtones.

Last week, though, Carlson did more than just highlight the reality of America’s present spiritual war. He asked, “So how do you respond to this?” The answer, he suggested, is to remain courageous. Citing St. Paul as a hero of his, Carlson said:

“This is like the bravest guy ever. There’s not a letter he wrote where he didn’t have a sword hanging over his neck, he expected at any moment to be murdered, and I think the consensus among historians is, in the end he was. He was murdered. … But he lived with the certainty that he was going to be killed for his beliefs every day. And he was totally unbothered by it, completely. … He was never afraid.”

“And by the way,” Carlson asked, “why would he be afraid? He believed his fate was sealed. He was going to join Jesus. He was going to Heaven.” Carlson proclaimed that courage is the “marker” of the Christian faith, adding that if a Christian is afraid, then “you’re kind of not doing it right, are you? There’s no excuse for being afraid.” Whether facing the threat of a worldwide “pandemic” with a 99% survival rate or facing a firing squad for being a Christian, Carlson’s exhortation was clear: be not afraid.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

House Blocks Joe Biden From Using PEPFAR Program to Force Americans to Fund Abortions

Congressional Resolution Declares Unborn Babies are Persons With a Right to Life

Pro-Abortion Radicals Have Threatened to Rape and Kill Me Because I’m Pro-Life

Woman Heading to Abortion Clinic Rejects Abortion When She Sees Pro-Life People Praying

RELATED TWEET:

Abortion has gone from being tolerated to celebrated. What kind of sick people would tell you that killing your baby is a pathway to joy? pic.twitter.com/ohaYtnITPr

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) September 25, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


he Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The UK’s first womb transplant – what the media missed out thumbnail

The UK’s first womb transplant – what the media missed out

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

The first UK ‘womb transplant’, carried out by Richard Smith’s team in Oxford and announced at the end of August, understandably gained a lot of press coverage and was heralded by some as the ‘dawn of a new era’. In fact, the first uterus transplant was carried out in 2000 in Saudi Arabia in a 26-year-old woman who had to have the cadaveric transplant removed due to thrombosis 99 days later. Others have questioned how that particular procedure ever got through an ethics committee.

One of my lawyer colleagues remarked how little comment there has been, if any, about the ethical aspects of this first UK womb transplant and so wrote a helpful article on the topic herself.

There are several issues not raised in that article, however, that appear to have gone entirely without comment. The first relates to informed consent and the importance of receiving accurate information rather than skewed statistics.

In the case of wombs, a successful transplant is not saving a life, but ultimately about successfully gestating a healthy new life to the point of viability, despite the considerable risk to the recipient. In order to give valid consent, the chances of success of delivering a so-called ‘take home baby’ – of necessity via a Caesarean section followed by hysterectomy to avoid continuation of immunosuppressive medications – needs to be communicated accurately.

Dodgy statistics

Worldwide, with over 90 womb transplants carried out and 50 babies delivered, the success rate is in the order of 50 percent. In 2019, one US medical centre said a womb transplant was not worth the risk. However, some other clinics are putting out statistics of almost 80 percent success rates because they use the number of successful transplants, rather than the total number performed, as the denominator for calculating the rate. Thus, one clinic boasts a headline and opening paragraph as follows:

Uterus Transplant Team Has a Current Success Rate Close to 80%

As the publication shares, out of the 14 (out of 20) technically successful uterus transplants, there have been 12 successful live births, which gives us a success rate of 79%.

However, only 12 out of 20 transplants actually resulted in a baby. Sixty-two percent, though not really close to 80 percent at all, gives a far more accurate picture to those considering the procedure.

The second point not mentioned by the media concerns the fact that most of the world’s 100 or so uterine transplants have been from deceased donors. Consent for the deceased donation of organs considered routine for transplantation (such as heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, corneas, pancreas, and small bowel) is assumed in the UK unless the person concerned actively opts out.

Trans-plants

Although we are many years away from uterine transplants becoming routine, should they become so, they will be unique in that only biological females will be possible donors. Potential donors may regard a non-life (or non-sight) saving transplant in a different light from already well-established, routine transplants. Indeed, research will need to be carried out to ensure women are not deterred from donating other organs because of reservations they may have about uterine donation after death.

Usually, the recipient of a deceased donation cannot be specified by the donor. Still, if it does eventually become technically possible to transplant a uterus successfully into a biological male, many women may not wish to donate their wombs in such circumstances. This is a long way off, of course.

In response to questions, co-lead surgeon of the first UK transplant, Professor Richard Smith, said he thought this was decades away because it was technically more difficult due to ‘anatomical differences’ and other issues such as differing microbiomes in men and women. Nevertheless, if not given a choice to express a view on such a divisive issue, some women who might otherwise have elected to donate after death might opt out.

Finally, there is the high financial cost of uterus transplants and the question of who pays for them. The UK’s first womb transplant cost £25,000, even with the surgeons working pro bono, and was paid for by a charity. Is the NHS going to be able to afford the costs of such transplants into biological women with uterine factor infertility, let alone into biological men in whom the likelihood of a successful transplant (let alone the delivery of a healthy infant) is far more remote? Is this a justifiable use of public funding?

Truthfulness (Psalm 51:6) and justice (Micah 6:8) are important biblical ethical principles, and both are often absent in debates about fertility treatment more generally. Sadly, discussions – or lack of them – about uterine transplantation don’t look set to herald much change in that tendency.

This article has been republished with permission from the Christian Medical Fellowship (CMF).

AUTHOR

TREVOR STAMMERS

Trevor Stammers was a GP and a clinical teacher for over twenty years. He has worked in academia for the last fifteen years and was the editor of The New Bioethics from 2011 to 2022. He currently volunteers as a Public Policy Associate with CMF.

RELATED ARTICLE: Who is happiest? Married mothers and fathers!

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

UK Report: Over One Third of Children on Puberty Blockers Experienced Worsened Mental Health thumbnail

UK Report: Over One Third of Children on Puberty Blockers Experienced Worsened Mental Health

By Family Research Council

New research from the United Kingdom is showing that over a third of children placed on puberty blockers and hormone drugs suffered severe mental health deterioration afterwards.

A 2011 study conducted at the Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) clinic for children reported that children who were put on puberty blockers suffered no adverse mental health effects. However, new analysis conducted by Susan McPherson, a professor of psychology and sociology at the University of Essex, and retired social scientist David Freedman found that the majority of children put on puberty blockers and hormone drugs experienced erratic and fluctuating mental health, including over a third whose mental health “reliably deteriorated.”

The original study, conducted on 44 children between the ages of 12 and 15, was reportedly based on group averages, while the new analysis relied on individual results, which McPherson and Freedman explained “allows us to look at how a treatment is performing in terms of the percentage of patients improving, deteriorating, and showing clinically significant change. … It is possible, using this approach, to look at patterns, such as who is benefitting and who is not.”

Last year, Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) opted to close down the Tavistock GIDS clinic after a government report found that the staff rushed and even pressured minors into taking puberty blockers and hormone drugs with almost no psychological or medical oversight. A reported 96% of child patients were placed on puberty blockers by Tavistock staffers, and concerns were raised over a tendentious focus on “gender dysphoria,” instead of considering other psychological factors in recommending drugs or surgeries for minors, which were summarily dismissed. In fact, the situation was so concerning that Dr. Hillary Cass, the pediatrician tasked by the government with investigating the claims against Tavistock, offered her recommendation to shut down the clinic several months early, saying she had enough information already to justify closing Tavistock.

Cass particularly stressed concerns she had over the use of puberty blockers and other hormone drugs, which the Tavistock clinic had been prescribing to children as young as 10 years old, many of whom were already on the autism spectrum or suffering various mental health issues like depression or eating disorders. In her interim report to the NHS, Cass noted, “There is lack of consensus and open discussion about the nature of gender dysphoria and therefore about the appropriate clinical response.” She added, “There has not been routine and consistent data collection, which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.”

Over the years, numerous whistleblowers — former staff governor Dr. David Bell, consultants and nurses like Marcus and Sue Evans, child safeguarding officer Sonia Appleby, and countless former patients who now, as adults, regret being put on puberty blockers and hormone drugs — have sounded the alarm over the Tavistock clinic’s practices. Most have pointed out that children and their parents were often denied informed consent as staffers rushed children onto puberty blockers after only three or four meetings. Some whistleblowers even explained that topics like “sexual orientation” were effectively off-limits and that a transgender identity and a battery of hormone drugs were the only options explored by clinicians. Others pointed out that the drastic rise in children going through Tavistock (from about 250 “patients” in 2011 to over 5,000 in 2021) and linked it to the growing puberty blocker and hormone drug industry.

The findings of the new analysis of the Tavistock study are in line with research conducted and published by Family Research Council. Dr. Jennifer Bauwens, director of FRC’s Center for Family Studies, explained earlier this year:

“At one time, gender dysphoria was considered a mental disorder, but now, due to the increasing prevalence of a worldview shaped by gender identity ideology, it has morphed into a human rights issue. The ideology borrows from the mental health aspects of gender dysphoria in order to justify medical ‘intervention.’”

She continued, “Advocates of gender-affirming care insist it is both lifesaving and evidence-based health care for those who identify as transgender. But the research used to make such a claim is full of methodological errors and can be easily disputed as a research body that is incomplete.” Notably, the original Tavistock study from 2011 focused on group studies instead of on individual situations and results. Bauwens added, “Not only are the currently published studies problematic, but there is a lack of ongoing and long-term follow-up reports that address the impact of cross-sex hormones and surgeries.”

In June, the NHS banned the use of puberty blockers and hormone drugs on minors, following a growing swath of European medical experts who have backed off gender transition procedures for children. France, Sweden, Finland, and Norway have also put restrictions on the use of puberty blockers and hormone drugs on children. The U.S. still hasn’t.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICES:

‘Let Us Raise Our Kids’: Thousands of Canadians Protest LGBT School Policies

Most Americans Don’t Consider Same-Sex Couples Raising Kids ‘Completely Acceptable’: Pew Poll

Roy Introduces Bill to Repeal FACE Act and End the Persecution of Pro-Lifers

‘There Are New Threats’: Experts Discuss How to Stop the Sexualization of Children

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

A Noted Physician Advocates COVID Civil Disobedience thumbnail

A Noted Physician Advocates COVID Civil Disobedience

By Barry Brownstein

Famously, at the start of his 1849 essay, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau observed, “That government is best which governs least.”

Few policymakers or politicians during COVID were influenced by Thoreau, who also pointed out that “government never furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got of its way.”  Did government mandates and lockdowns make us safer or less safe during COVID? Healthier or less healthy?

Thoreau defined the “right of revolution” as “the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable.”

Dr. Vinay Prasad is a practicing oncologist and a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco. He is one of the foremost practitioners of evidence-based medicine in the world. He believes the time has come to “refuse allegiance” and “resist” the COVID bureaucracy, which resorts to lies

To those who justify irrational policies such as masking a toddler, Prasad writes, “Just because things are bad, or the disease is worse than the intervention, doesn’t mean the intervention helps, or should be done.” Prasad is bringing Frédéric Bastiat’s classic idea to medicine: Do not ignore consequences.

Prasad has become increasingly disturbed at policies made for political, not medical, reasons. Recently, responding to a report that N-95 masks are being mandated for children enrolled at a Montgomery County school, in Maryland (a suburb of DC), Prasad wrote, “Only non-violent resistance can halt irrational public health actors.” At this point, note that the original title of Thoreau’s essay was “Resistance to Civil Government.”

The following are the forms of non-violent resistance Prasad recommends: Even if you or your child are sick, do not test for COVID. Send your child back to school when he is well enough. “Stop reporting these illnesses” to schools and employers. “Complain to your employer about any mandates.”  “Decline any further COVID-19 vaccination, unless RCTs [randomized controlled trials] show benefit in your age group.”

In short, ignore authorities; they don’t have your best interests in mind. Prasad adds that this resistance “is the only logical course left… It’s time to go dark with all COVID data. If enough people don’t participate, the irrationality will stop. Eventually.”

If Prasad had advocated this in 2020 or 2021, he may have found his board certification subject to disciplinary hearings. But this is 2023, and despite censorship, evidence is mounting, and the intellectual climate is changing.

Isn’t all medicine evidence-based medicine? Dr Prasad would answer, if only. In 2015, with his colleague Dr. Adam Cifu, Prasad wrote Ending Medical Reversal. Prasad and Cifu observed:

Medicine is the application of science. When a scientific theory is disproved, it should happen in a lab or in the equivalent place in clinical science, the controlled clinical trial. It should not be disproved in the world of clinical medicine, where millions of people may have already been exposed to an ineffective, or perhaps even harmful, treatment.

In their book, Prasad and Cifu wrote, “Each of us recalls moments when we realized that what we had told our patients, or did for them, was wrong: We had promoted an accepted practice that was, at best, ineffective.” Notice the use of the qualifier “at best,” as often interventions are harmful.

Prasad and Cifu estimated “as much as 40 percent of the things doctors do are ineffective.” They give many examples, such as estrogen replacement for postmenopausal women and medical procedures such as “stenting open coronary lesions in people with stable angina.”

If you watch television, you have probably seen the incessant Pfizer ads promoting their COVID treatment drug, Paxlovid. Yet, Dr. Prasad tells us, that despite the Biden administration’s pushing and subsidizing the drug, there is little evidence that the drug works.

Even without cronyism showing the way, ineffective and dangerous drugs are not uncommon in the annals of medicine. Until 1992, the drug flecainide was part of the standard of care to stabilize patients with irregular heart rhythms. Prasad and Cifu reported, “a large study called the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (or CAST trial) showed that flecainide, as well as a similar drug, decreased PVCs as expected but also increased patients’ chance of dying.” (emphasis added.)

Prasad and Cifu drew the essential conclusion that “even the most careful reasoning and the best scientific models do not guarantee an effective clinical treatment. What works in the lab, or on a computer, or in the head of the smartest researcher does not always work in a patient.” 

Yet Prasad and Cifu acknowledge, “this is a lesson that many physicians and leading researchers still have not really learned.” Lack of learning contributed mightily to the devastating policy errors during COVID. 

Writing years before COVID, Prasad and Cifu observed, “What has happened in medicine is that the hypothesized treatment is often instituted in millions of people, and billions of dollars are spent, before adequate research is done.” During the pandemic, necessary economic tripwires were disabled when vaccine manufacturers were indemnified from liability for harm caused by their products.

Prasad and Cifu provide timeless insights into why ineffective and dangerous treatments persist without “a strong evidence base.” They observe, “The weak evidence base is often ignored because of doctors’ faith in mechanistic explanations or studies that were designed to be deceptive by industry.”

Prasad and Cifu described the “act now, data later” mindset so common in medicine and in life today: “We have a problem; we need a solution. We hear the mantra every day. We need to solve this problem now. Ten minutes ago. Yesterday. It is not just in medicine but everywhere.”  This mindset, adopted by millions of Americans, is behind every ill-conceived practice instituted during COVID and also behind the increasingly destructive rush to “green energy.”

Reversing errors is not easy. Prasad and Cifu explained,

It is very hard to accept evidence that something you have done for patients, something that you truly believed was beneficial, is not useful. The evidence is even harder to accept when you have been well compensated for your work. Because of this, acceptance of medical reversals is never easy and opposition to them is usually passionate.

Thus, the medical administrative state won’t easily change. Yet, Thoreau asserted, government “can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it.” We have conceded too much. With our concessions, we have lost our humanity. In Thoreau’s words,

The mass of men serve the state… not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies… In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs.

We can regain our medical freedom by being more than “straw or a lump of dirt.” We can expand our comfort zone to go against the herd. The time is now to resist pressure from friends and family and to stop obeying authorities. Non-violent resistance is a viable recourse.

*****

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

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Here’s How Biden Admin Destroyed Our Immigration Law thumbnail

Here’s How Biden Admin Destroyed Our Immigration Law

By Victor Davis Hanson

Since early 2021 we have witnessed somewhere between 7 million and 8 million illegal entries across the now-nonexistent southern border of the U.S.

The more the border vanished, the more federal immigration law was rendered inert, and the more Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas spun fantasies that the “border is secure.” He is now written off as a veritable “Baghdad Bob” propagandist.

But how and why did the Biden administration destroy immigration law as we knew it?

The Trump administration’s initial efforts to close the border had been continually obstructed in Congress, sabotaged by the administrative state, and stymied in the courts. Nonetheless, it finally had secured the border by early 2020.

Yet almost all of the Trump administration’s successful initiatives were immediately overturned in 2021.

Construction of the wall was abruptly stopped, and its projected trajectory was canceled. The disastrous Obama-era “catch and release” policy of immigration nonenforcement was resurrected.

Prior successful pressure on Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador to stop the deliberate export of his own citizens northward ceased.

Federal Border Patrol officers were forced to stand down.

New federal subsidies were granted to entice and then support illegal arrivals.

No one in the Democratic Party objected to the destruction of the border or the subversion of immigration law.

However, things changed somewhat once swamped southern border states began to bus or fly a few thousand of their illegal immigrants northward to sanctuary city jurisdictions—especially to New York and Chicago, and even Martha’s Vineyard.

The sanctuary-city “humanists” there who had greenlighted illegal immigration into the southern states suddenly shrieked. They were irate after experiencing the concrete consequences of their own prior abstract border agendas. After all, their nihilism was always supposed to fall upon distant and ridiculed others.

New York Mayor Eric Adams went from celebrating a few dozen illegal immigrants bused into Manhattan to blasting his own party for allowing tens of thousands to swamp his now bankrupt city.

But why did the Biden administration deliberately unleash the largest influx across the southern border in U.S. history?

The ethnic chauvinists and Democratic Party elites needed new constituents, given their increasingly unpopular agendas.

They feared that the more legal Latino immigrants assimilated and integrated into American society, the less happy they became with left-wing radical abortion, racial, transgender, crime, and green fixations.

Democratic grandees always had bragged that illegal immigration would create what they called “The New Democratic Majority” in “Demography Is Destiny” fashion. Now they slander critics as “racists” who object to left-wing efforts to use illegal immigration to turn southwestern red states blue.

Mexico now cannot survive as a modern state without some $60 billion in annual remittances sent by its expatriates in America. However many illegal immigrants rely on American state and federal entitlements to free up cash to send home.

Mexico also encourages its own abject poor and often indigenous people from southern Mexico to head north as a safety valve of sorts. The Mexican government sees these mass exodus northward as preferable to the oppressed marching on Mexico City to address grievances of poverty and racism.

The criminal cartels now de facto run Mexico. An open border allows them to ship fentanyl northward, earn billions in profits—and kill nearly 100,000 Americans a year. Illegal immigrants pay cartels additional billions to facilitate their border crossings.

Don’t forget American corporate employers. Record labor nonparticipation followed the COVID-19 lockdown. In reaction to the dearth of American workers, the hospitality, meat packing, social service, health care, and farming industries were desperate to hire new—and far cheaper—labor.

Human rights activists insist that the borders themselves are 19th-century relics. And the global poor and oppressed thus have a human right to enter the affluent West by any means necessary.

Many in the tony suburbs and in universities do not live anywhere near the southern border. So they pontificate on the assurance that thousands of unaudited illegal immigrants will never enter their own enclaves or campuses.

The result is elite-bottled piety—but not firsthand experience with the natural consequences of millions chaotically fleeing one of the poorest countries in the world to pour into the wealthiest. Without background checks, vaccinations, and health audits, legality, high school diplomas, English facility skill sets, or capital, the result is an abject catastrophe.

Polls continue to show that the American people support measured, diverse, legal, and meritocratic immigration as much as they oppose mass illegal immigration into their country and the subsequent loss of American sovereignty on the border.

They understand what the Biden administration does not: No nation in history has survived once its borders were destroyed, once its citizenship was rendered no different from mere residence, and once its neighbors with impunity undermined its sovereignty.

Ending illegal immigration now depends solely on the American people overriding the corrupt special interests and leaders who profit from the current chaos and human misery.

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.