The brilliance, the resilience, and the courage of the Israeli people is truly astonishing. Despite a 7-front war and relentless attacks from the the Biden Administration, the UN, the EU, the MSN, Academia, Amnesty International, et. al., Israel continues to flourish.
How many countries not named the United States could thrive in the midst of such a vicious onslaught. The answer is zero.
Israeli technology startups are on track for a record year of mergers and acquisitions, according to Vintage Investment Partners, as wars in Gaza and Lebanon didn’t dent investor appetite.
The country had $9.1 billion in tech M&A through the first three quarters of the year and is on track for $10 billion, according to figures published by the investment firm in a presentation on Thursday. The previous record was $8.6 billion, set in 2021.
Asaf Horesh, a managing partner at the firm, said the data demonstrate continued global interest in Israeli tech despite the financial difficulties from the ongoing conflicts. He said roughly 30% of the M&A activity over the last year was in cybersecurity.
Israel’s tech deals this year include Salesforce Inc.’s $1.9 billion acquisition of Own, a data management provider, and Nvidia Corp.’s $700 million purchase of Run:ai, an AI startup.
The record sum doesn’t include the $23 billion offer Israeli cybersecurity company Wiz rejected from Alphabet Inc.’s Google in July.
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-12-08 18:53:512024-12-08 18:53:51Israel Set for Record Tech M&A in 2024 on Cyber, AI Deals Despite War and Onslaught From the Global Left
“The hardest arithmetic to master is that which enables us to count our blessings.”
Just think about that. Doesn’t that ring true?
That is one of many insightful quotes from Eric Hoffer. Thomas Sowell (one of our most talented writers) authored a fine piece about Hoffer. Please read it!
The rest of my commentary will be selected quotes from Hoffer. I would find it difficult to improve on almost any of them.
There are so many that I decided to break them up into two random groups (see Part #1). That way I’m hoping that readers will not be overwhelmed, but take the time to reflect on the magnitude of this wisdom. This is group two…
Far more critical than what we know (or what we don’t know) is what we don’t want to know.
You can discover what your enemy fears most, by observing the means he uses to frighten you.
The hardest thing to cope with is not selfishness or vanity or deceitfulness, but sheer stupidity.
The future belongs to the learners-not the knowers.
One of the surprising privileges of intellectuals is that they are free to be scandalously asinine without harming their reputations.
Propaganda … serves more to justify ourselves than to convince others; and the more reason we have to feel guilty, the more fervent our propaganda.
The average American of today bristles with indignation when he is told that his country was built, largely, by hordes of undesirables from Europe. Yet, far from being derogatory, this statement, if true, should be a cause for rejoicing, should fortify our pride in the stock from which we have sprung.
People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them.
Even the sober desire for progress is sustained by faith – faith in the intrinsic goodness of human nature and in the omnipotence of science.
It is the fate of every great achievement to be pounced upon by pedants and imitators who drain it of life and turn it into an orthodoxy which stifles all stirrings of originality.
When we lose our individual independence in the corporateness of a mass movement, we find a new freedom — freedom to hate, bully, lie, torture, murder and betray without shame and remorse.
The Greeks invented logic but were not fooled by it.
Not all who are poor are frustrated.
Discontent is likely to be highest when misery is bearable; when conditions have so improved that an ideal state seems almost within reach.
To change everything, simply change your attitude.
Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2024 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-12-07 16:51:372024-12-07 16:51:37Critically Thinking about Eric Hoffer: #2
The Supreme Court’s forthcoming ruling on state child sex change bans could impact a range of issues related to gender identity, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The justices heard oral arguments Wednesday on Tennessee’s law banning medical procedures intended to help a child live as an identity “inconsistent” with their sex, which the Biden administration argues violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
“There’s been no constitutional analysis of gender identity issues from the court prior to this,” Skrmetti told the DCNF on Thursday. “In the Bostock case, they were looking at statutory language.”
In the high court’s 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County decision, the majority held that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity equates to sex discrimination in the employment context.
“So potentially, there could be language in the opinion that significantly impacts not just the protection for kids from gender related procedures with life-altering impact,” Skrmetti said. “There could be an impact on litigation about women’s sports teams, about bathroom privacy, potentially other areas of law.”
Tennessee lawmakers William Lamberth and Jack Johnson, who are behind the bill at the heart of today’s Supreme Court case, speak outside the court after oral arguments. @DailyCallerpic.twitter.com/axy3SLopRC
Skrmetti believes his team did a great job defending the case before the court but acknowledges “you never want to predict” what is going to happen. Win or lose, the court could opt to issue a narrow ruling, or something broader and precedent-setting.
“The court asked a lot of brilliant questions,” he said. “It was a long argument because I think they recognize this could be a significant case precedentially, and they have months now to think about it and work through it, so there’s a long way to go before we get a decision.”
Several conservative justices pointed to European countries limiting gender transition procedures for children. Justice Samuel Alito questioned why the government claimed that overwhelming evidence supports the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy while failing to acknowledge studies indicating otherwise, such as the Cass report commissioned by the National Health Service (NHS) England.
Meanwhile, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson drew a parallel between banning child sex changes and bans on interracial marriage. “I’m worried that we’re undermining the foundations of some of our bedrock equal protection cases,” she said.
Tennessee contends its law does not draw lines based on sex, but based on medical purpose. Giving testosterone to a girl will have vastly different effects than giving it to a boy, the state argues.
Nearly half of all U.S. states have passed laws like Tennessee’s. Skrmetti is certain that this won’t be a decision of “no consequence.”
“The risks to kids are profound. You’re talking about potential lifelong loss of the ability to have children, the lifelong loss of the ability to have sexual function, a life of dealing with tumors and blood clots, bone density disorders, cognitive impairments,” he said. “So it’s not something to be taken lightly.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-12-06 01:51:442024-12-06 01:51:44Tennessee AG Says SCOTUS Could Pave Way To Ending Child Sex Changes And Saving Women’s Sports With Just One Ruling
The most thorough report ever released on America’s reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic has concluded that virtually everything that would have gotten you banned from social media for spreading “misinformation” was true.
After a two-year investigation, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released its 520-page report titled “After Action Review of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Lessons Learned and a Path Forward” this week. The report finds the COVID-19 virus likely originated from a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where it may have been manufactured as a chimera. Lockdowns, mask mandates, social distancing, and vaccine mandates were not based on sound science and did more harm than good. Natural immunity exists for COVID-19, as it does for other viruses. And President Donald Trump’s “racist” travel bans likely saved lives.
Expressing any of these would have been enough to get one banned from social media. Twitter infamously set up a portal for government agents to flag “misinformation” and target posts or whole accounts for shadow bans, censorship, or removal. Meta boasted that, since December 2020, “following consultations with leading health organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO),” the company had “removed false claims about COVID-19 vaccines that have been debunked by public health experts” from Facebook and Instagram. In February, it broadened its list of verboten ideas “to include additional debunked claims about the coronavirus and vaccines,” such as “COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured,” and “Vaccines are not effective at preventing the disease.”
The new report debunks this “debunking.”
1. The COVID-19 virus was probably man-made and originated from a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
From the outset, public health officials such as Dr. Anthony Fauci presented the novel coronavirus outbreak as the result of a “zoonotic spillover” — that the virus transferred from an animal to humans, probably a bat purchased at a wet market and eaten. Yet the balance of the evidence shows that “SARS-CoV-2, the Virus that Causes COVID-19, Likely Emerged Because of a Laboratory or Research Related Accident,” says the new report.
“The U.S. National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” wrote Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) in his introduction.
In 2018, EcoHealth applied for a federal grant to fund a new project at the Wuhan Institute of Virology which “sought to do what nature had not been ever known to do — insert a furin cleavage site into a SARS2 virus,” states the report. “EcoHealth and its WIV partners stated their intent to create a SARS-like virus with a furin cleavage site, which is the exact same feature that made humans susceptible to COVID-19 infection.”
Rather than come clean about this federal funding, “Dr. Anthony Fauci Played Semantics with the Definition of Gain-of-Function Research,” the report concludes.
“The WIV has a published record of conducting ‘gain-of-function’ research to engineer chimeric viruses,” noted a State Department fact sheet released in January 2021. “The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19.”
Further, “key evidence that would be expected if the virus had emerged from the wildlife trade is still missing,” such as infected animals. Dr. Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at MIT and Harvard, wrote in The New York Times that “the outbreak at the Wuhan market probably happened after the virus had already been circulating in humans.”
Dr. Robert Redfield, the Biden administration’s director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), testified before Congress last March 8, “COVID-19 infections more likely were the result of an accidental lab leak than the result of a natural spillover event.” Weeks earlier, the FBI and the Department of Energy expressed their support for the lab leak theory, with varying degrees of confidence. Even legacy media fact-checker Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post, who originally claimed that “it is virtually impossible for this virus [to] jump from the lab,” later acknowledged that the lab leak theory was “credible.”
2. Social distancing of six feet had no science to back it up.
The rule that Americans keep “social distancing” of six feet between one another to prevent COVID transmission became one of the most consequential events of the pandemic. Businesses deemed worthy of being open had to limit how many customers they could serve, and schools had to rearrange rooms or resort to virtual learning to comply with the new guidelines.
The report states bluntly, “There Was No Quantitative Scientific Support for Six Feet of Social Distancing.” Yet the report merely repeats what the guidelines’ authors have already admitted.
Last January 9, Dr. Anthony Fauci said “I don’t recall” where the six-feet guideline came from. “It sort of just appeared” from the ether. “I was not aware of studies” that justified the social distancing decision, said Fauci. The rule amounted to “just an empiric decision that wasn’t based on data or even data that could be accomplished.” Two days later, Dr. Francis Collins testified, “I did not see evidence” to support the six-foot rule. This June 3, Fauci admitted that “there wasn’t a controlled trial … there wasn’t that scientific evaluation of” the rule.
In short, says the report, “There were no scientific trials or studies conducted before this policy was implemented, there appeared to be no pushback or internal discussion amongst the highest level of leadership, and more importantly there appears to be no acceptance of responsibility. That is an unacceptable answer from public health leadership.”
3. Masks do not effectively stop the spread of the COVID-19 virus — and masking children did more harm than good.
The most ubiquitous symbol of the COVID era was the paper face mask. The masks, required by public venues and many businesses, supposedly protected their users against transmission of the novel coronavirus. YouTube actually suspended Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a doctor, for posting a video quoting studies saying that masks do not work.
The suspension seemed odd, as the government itself ultimately performed a triple Lutz on the efficacy of face masks. “Seriously people — STOP BUYING MASKS!” tweeted then-Surgeon General Jerome Adams on leap day, February 29, 2020. “They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if health care providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!” The CDC and WHO issued guidelines in March 2020 encouraging mask-wearing only for those who were ill or caring for someone who was. But a month later, in April 2020, the CDC issued a guidance recommending people wear masks around others and “went as far as posting a video teaching the public how to make masks with a T-shirt and rubber bands.”
During his first two days in office, President Joe Biden signed executive orders making the wearing of masks compulsory for federal workers and contractors, and then on airplanes and other public transportation. Biden administration officials offered contradictory statistics, telling the public wearing masks made them anywhere from 350% to 56% less likely to get COVID. As this author wrote at The Daily Wire, the Biden administration relied on flawed studies, one of which “found that cloth masks could reduce transmission — or make the wearer 17% more likely to test positive than someone wearing no mask.” Most studies showed no correlation between COVID-19 outbreaks in schools and masking.
The new report verifies what Paul and science have long known: “Masks and Mask Mandates Were Ineffective at Controlling the Spread of COVID-19,” and “Forcibly Masking Young Children, Ages Two and Older, Caused More Harm than Good.”
The report cites the U.K.-based Cochrane Collaboration, whose research “did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks” and that “[t]here were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.” Numerous studies over many years had come to the same conclusion. In 2015, the BMJ publication discovered cloth masks offered “almost 0%” filtration of viruses. In fact, “Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.” One team of researchers found “significant levels of pollutants” in all face masks, questioning whether paper face masks are “safe to be used on a daily basis and what consequences are to be expected after their disposal into the environment.”
“Ignoring the science and facts of COVID-19 and the harms of masking young children was profoundly immoral on behalf of the leadership of the country’s public health officials,” states the House report.
The Biden administration began to walk back mask mandates and directives in 2021 and 2022. “The science has changed,” Dr. Leana Wen (formerly the president of Planned Parenthood), told CNN in February 2022. Yet the science had always shown masks do a poor job of preventing the transmission of viruses.
The results bear this out. “The trajectories of the rate of COVID-19 infections for states with mask mandates and states without is virtually identical,” the report notes.
4. Science did not support COVID-19 vaccine mandates, which needlessly hurt Americans and the U.S. military.
On August 24, 2021 — one day after FDA approval of the Pfizer COVID injection — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced a vaccine mandate for members of the U.S. armed forces. In November, the Biden administration extended the vaccine mandate to all federal workers, health care workers who worked in a facility accepting federal Medicare or Medicaid funds, and Head Start contractors or volunteers. OSHA issued a federal vaccine mandate for all employers with 100 employees or more.
“The COVID19 vaccine mandates caused people to lose their livelihoods, hollowed out our healthcare and education workforces, reduced our military readiness and recruitment, caused vaccine hesitancy, reduced trust in public health, trampled individual freedoms, deepened political divisions, and interfered in the patient-physician relationship,” says the report.
In all, more than 8,000 soldiers left — or were fired from — the military for refusing to take the then-experimental COVID-19 jab. “However, more than 17,500 troops’ religious exemptions were still being adjudicated just prior to the rescission of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate,” states the report.
Gil Cisneros, Biden’s undersecretary of Defense for personnel and readiness, defended the great military vaccine purge as “appropriate disciplinary action” necessary “to maintain good order and discipline,” which affected only a “small fraction” of service members. “Congressman, I would say we are as strong as ever” as a result of the mass firing, Cisneros told then-Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).
The report finds it no coincidence that, in 2022, the military missed its recruitment goals by 25%, or 15,000 soldiers. “Vaccine Mandates Were Not Supported by Science and Caused More Harm than Good,” the report concludes.
5. Natural immunity applies to COVID-19, like any other virus.
Yet the Biden-Harris administration attempted to coerce Americans into getting the COVID-19 shot, in part, by denying or dismissing a scientific fact that applies to every other virus in existence: natural immunity. Once someone has gotten a viral infection, that person develops antibodies that lower the risk of reinfection. “Public Health Officials Disregarded Natural Immunity, Despite Its Proven Effectiveness and Durability,” says the report.
As this author reported at The Washington Stand, Biden administration officials formally denied the efficacy of natural immunity, under oath. “There’s no good evidence, and the research is still going on as to how we need to progress with this,” Cisneros testified to Congress last February 28. “But as for right now, natural immunity is not something we believe in for this, and so we are still moving forward” with vaccine mandates.
6. COVID-era lockdowns had no scientific grounding and irreparably harmed Americans.
If face masks were the most prominent sight of the COVID era, its most infamous words were uttered on March 16, 2020: “15 days to slow the spread.” The government ordered Americans to “shelter in place” and not have unnecessary physical contact with anyone else. Church members were often ordered not to meet in person or saw their attendance severely limited. Schools closed down. Businesses not deemed “essential” closed, many permanently. Relatives died without their loved ones at their side.
Ronald Reagan once said, a government program “is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” The “15 day” program proved no exception. Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus response coordinator, admitted, “No sooner had we convinced the Trump administration to implement our version of a two-week shutdown than I was trying to figure out how to extend it.” In some areas, restricted capacity endured for more than a year.
The report notes that “Unscientific COVID-19 Lockdowns Caused More Harm Than Good.” The lockdowns were unnecessary and extracted a demanding mental and physical toll on Americans. Lockdowns ignored the fact that the virus proved most deadly to the elderly and vulnerable populations with comorbidities. By August 2020, the CDC knew that 40% of Americans were struggling with mental health issues. A study in Nature released this March found mental health disorders surged by 22% from 2019 to 2020. Another study found an extra 212 young people committed suicide in 2020, and the CDC found adolescent overdoses more than doubled during the lockdown period.
Adults also died at higher rates from non-COVID diseases. “One analysis done using CDC data found that non-COVID-19 excess deaths totaled nearly 100,000 per year in 2020 and 2021,” the report states.
Further, “Long Term School Closures Were Not Supported by Available Science and Evidence,” notes the report. Instead, the Biden administration invited a teachers’ union, the American Federation of Teachers led by Randi Weingarten, to shape the federal school closure guidelines. The AFT’s “School Closures Significantly Contributed to Increased Instances of Mental and Behavioral Health Issues” and “Made an Already Alarming Trend in Declining Physical Health Worse,” states the report.
“The American people could have been better served by policies which focused on protecting the most vulnerable while prioritizing productivity and normalcy for the less vulnerable,” the report concludes.
COVID-19 had one additional casualty: American liberty. “The Constitution cannot be suspended in times of crisis and restrictions on freedoms sow distrust in public health,” wrote Wenstrup.
7. President Trump’s ‘racist’ China travel ban likely saved lives.
When President Donald Trump learned of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, he promptly paused all inbound flights to the United States from China. Although the legacy media regarded this as a “racist” undertaking, President Trump’s travel restrictions against China — and Europe — delayed the spread, the report finds.
“With four years of hindsight, it is clear the international travel restrictions early in the pandemic delayed spread of the virus but did not prevent COVID-19 from entering the U.S. By the time the European travel ban was enacted in March 2020, it is now known that the virus had already spread significantly within the U.S. due to earlier untracked travel from Europe,” the report notes. “One study estimated that the U.S. travel bans helped to prevent approximately 77,000 cases of COVID-19 in the first month of their implementation. This study concluded that, while the travel restrictions did not entirely stop the virus from entering the U.S., they were effective in slowing the rate of transmission, giving the U.S. healthcare system more time to prepare and respond to the pandemic.”
Critics Say the Report Is Incomplete
Critics welcomed the report’s openness but felt it did not go far enough to address the adverse impact of the COVID-19 shot and suppression of basic civil liberties. “Forgive my cynicism,” Dr. Robert Malone, chief medical and regulatory officer for The Unity Project, told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” on Tuesday. “I don’t see the federal government at this point in time taking these suggestions in and acting appropriately to respond to them. This should be a very active [case of] ‘lessons learned’ on their openness and transparency. We’re not seeing that.”
Dr. Malone noted the report’s odd “juxtaposition of endorsement of Operation Warp Speed, followed by a resounding lack of endorsement of the efficacy and safety of the vaccines.” He found the disconnect “perplexing” or an example of “the usual D.C. process of speaking out of both sides of one’s mouth.”
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins agreed transparency over public health measures is “something I think we need to stay on” in the second Trump administration.
Dr. Malone is “right to be cynical, because government rarely learns its lessons,” Perkins concluded.
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.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-12-06 01:51:432024-12-06 01:51:43Congressional Report Finds (Nearly) Every COVID-19 ‘Conspiracy Theory’ Was True
Abolishing the Department of Education: A Critical Necessity
Conservative policymakers have long criticized the U.S. Department of Education, arguing that its centralized authority undermines parental and state control of education. Since its creation in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter, the department has been labeled a costly failure, unable to achieve its stated goals despite decades of effort and ever-increasing budgets.
A Failed Experiment
As federal control over education expanded, the results have been catastrophic. Testing scores have steadily declined, global proficiency rankings have plummeted, and public trust in the system has eroded. In stark reality, only 26% of eighth graders perform at or above grade-level proficiency. The growing disconnect between funding and results highlights the system’s inefficiency. Federal spending per student rose from $11,221 in 1979 (adjusted for inflation) to $17,700 in 2023, yet student performance has stagnated or declined.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reports that 13-year-olds recently scored their lowest math proficiency levels in over 30 years. Similarly, the number of high school seniors who did not read a single book for pleasure nearly quadrupled between 1976 and 2021—tragic! These statistics paint a grim picture of a system that fails to prepare students for a competitive and increasingly globalized world.
A Bureaucratic Overreach
Critics argue that the Department of Education prioritizes bureaucratic interests over student success. Despite contributing only 9% of overall education funding, the federal government controls 90% of education policies, stifling local and state innovation. Former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos has called for its closure, stating, “We spent over $1 trillion…and we’ve gotten nothing but worse results.” She advocates redirecting federal funds directly to parents through block grants, empowering them to choose the best educational options for their children.
The department has also faced backlash for imposing controversial social policies, including promoting gender ideology and critical race theory (CRT) in curricula and forgoing grades or discriminating based on skin tone when grading in the name of race equity. Some school systems stooped as low as segregating students by skin tone in the name of DEI.
Ensuring Safeguards in a Decentralized System
Dismantling the department raises concerns about potential disparities among states. Critics worry that blue states may adopt radicalized policies that could undermine national unity and educational standards. Some propose legislative safeguards to prevent this, ensuring baseline standards that preserve American identity and historical accuracy while banning DEI, CRT, Social Justice Activist Training, All Ages Comprehensive Sex Education, Gender Fluidity, the 1619 Project, Parental Rights Violations, Gender and Sexual Orientation Counseling, Planned Parenthood education programs, and more.
While the task of decentralizing education is immense, it offers an opportunity to lift up America’s children and secure the nation’s future while stripping power from the teacher unions, which have promoted a Marxist agenda in government schools for far too long.
The day before the election, Democratic Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar joined countless other liberals in mocking Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for the latter’s suggestion that America reduce its high levels of fluoride.
“I was a little shocked that one of their closing arguments for Donald Trump was take the fluoride out of water,” Klobuchar told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Nov. 4. “I guess they’re ending with more cavities.”
Skepticism of fluoridated water had been lumped in by the liberal establishment with a host of other heterodox views, often dubbed “conspiracy theories,” held by Kennedy and his allies.
Kennedy has harshly criticized fluoride, calling it a neurotoxin and an industrial byproduct. He’s claimed the mineral can cause arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease.
He has pledged that the Trump White House will recommend to communities that they remove it from their drinking supplies immediately after Trump takes office. Trump appeared to co-sign the proposal, saying it “sounds alright to me.”
CNN’s Abby Phillip invited Harvard-trained epidemiologist Dr. Syra Madad onto her show the same day to deride Kennedy’s fluoride criticisms: “I do think there are some rocks to be thrown, frankly, at RFK Jr.”
Madad called Kennedy “dangerous” and said his views on fluoride were “against science.”
“It is safe. It’s not toxic,” Madad told the panel.
“When you look at adding in additional amounts of fluoride, even then, the studies have not proven any significant health adverse effects,” she continued.
But numerous other health officials and toxicologists believe Madad is wrong.
“I think that there is sufficient data now, largely from the epidemiological literature in multiple populations, done by different investigators, that early life exposure to fluoride is associated with an increased risk of IQ loss,” Dr. Linda Birnbaum, a board-certified toxicologist and former director of the National Toxicology Program (NTP), told the Daily Caller.
Birnbaum headed the NTP, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), from 2009 to 2019. She is now an adjunct professor at the University of North Carolina’s Gillings School of Public Health, in addition to still contributing research to HHS.
During her tenure, the NTP conducted a systematic review of the published scientific literature on the association between fluoride exposure and neurodevelopment. It found that exposure to higher levels of fluoride — levels it categorized as 1.5 milligrams per liter of water or higher — are associated with lower IQ in children.
The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has declared, “… the data support a consistent inverse association between fluoride exposure and children’s IQ.”
In the meta-analysis by NTP, 52 of 55 studies revealed a decrease in children’s IQ with an increase in fluoride. Internal…
The review said there was insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion about the effects of exposure at 0.7 milligrams per liter, which is the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) current recommended level for U.S. community water supplies.
However, Dr. Birnbaum told the Caller, the NTP is running a comprehensive meta-analysis of the data that will likely show the linked drop in IQ rate is occurring at rates well below the 1.5 milligrams per liter number.
In fact, while Dr. Birnbaum maintained she hasn’t yet seen the newest version of the meta-analysis, older versions she did see show “that it’s quite clear that there may be really no safe level of fluoride just like there’s no safe level for lead,” she said.
Nearly all of the studies the NTP reviewed concluded the mineral was neurotoxic, Stuart Cooper, executive director of the Fluoride Action Network, told the Daily Caller.
The 1.5 number, which the NTP concluded with “moderate confidence” leads to lowered IQ in children, is in line with the World Health Organization, whose current guidelines suggest maintaining levels below that concentration will prevent dental fluorosis, a yellowing or visible calcification of the teeth caused by excessive fluoride exposure.
Cooper argued that the NTP’s report was partially political.
“If you were actually doing a real systematic dose response analysis of a Health Hazard Assessment, do you think you would just magically land on 1.5, which happens to be the World Health Organization’s number?” he asked. “It would be like point 82763, you know, I mean, it wouldn’t be 1.0, what happened? [The report] just coincided miraculously with the World Health Organization? That’s where politics was kind of embedded into this document.”
Cooper, who has spent over 14 years ringing alarm bells about fluoride, says his organization has repeatedly requested supporting studies from the CDC and the American Dental Association (ADA) that prove fluoride is safe but “after 80 years they had nothing.”
“They couldn’t confirm. They have no studies showing that low levels is safe for the developing brain. So here they are exposing 200 million Americans, 2 million pregnant women, 300,000 exclusively bottle-fed infants right at this very second to fluoridation in the drinking water. We have 64 studies showing that that’s harmful, that poses an extreme risk. They have zero studies confirming safety. And yet they want you to ask me what more evidence do I need to find.”
The CDC lauds fluoride as a landmark innovation in preventing tooth decay and caries, otherwise known as cavities. The agency calls community water fluoridation one of the “top ten public health achievements of the twentieth century.”
Thanks to water fluoridation in the U.S., the CDC claims “dental caries declined precipitously during the second half of the 20th century.”
But that precipitous drop has occurred in both fluoridated countries and non-fluoridated alike. Countries with no community water fluoridation like Iceland, Italy and Japan, have all seen even steeper drops in cavities, according to data from the WHO.
“Although the prevalence of caries varies between countries, levels everywhere have fallen greatly in the past three decades, and national rates of caries are now universally low. This trend has occurred regardless of the concentration of fluoride in water or the use of fluoridated salt, and it probably reflects use of fluoridated toothpastes and other factors, including perhaps aspects of nutrition,” KK Cheng, a professor of public health and the Director of the University of Birmingham’s Institute of Applied Health Research, wrote in the British Medical Journal.
— Fluoride Action Network (@FluorideAction) March 18, 2016
Some western communities did remove fluoride from their water and actually saw their cavity rates decrease. Buffalo, New York, a city which removed fluoride in 2012, saw their rates of cavities for people between the ages of 12-65 drop, according to data from the National Institutes of Health.
Nine years after removing the mineral from their water supply, however, Buffalo began fluoridating again in September after families sued the city in a class action lawsuit, alleging their children had to receive more dental care as a result of the fluoride halt.
Despite the many studies and experts expressing concern over the mineral, CNN and Dr. Madad continued to push both its safety and efficacy in reducing cavities.
“Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral, it’s not a man-made mineral,” Madad told CNN.
Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral. It is an ionized form of the element fluorine. Yet Kennedy Jr. called it “industrial waste” in a Nov. 2 tweet.
On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water. Fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease. President…
Fluoride does occur in nature, and in fact many of the studies evaluated in the NTP report were from international communities in China and India who do not fluoridate their public water supply, but simply have high natural levels of the mineral in their groundwater.
But the specific type of fluoride that’s added to American public water supplies is often a chemical byproduct from the fertilizer industry, Cooper explained.
Phosphate fertilizer giants, like The Mosaic Company, produce the precursor to fluoride as a byproduct of their fertilizer production process and then sell it off to dental supply companies and municipalities for their water supply, Cooper told the Caller.
Cooper says the byproduct is known within the industry as “scrubber liquor,” because it’s literally scrubbed from the side of smokestacks.
The chemical companies make a nice profit from this side business, Cooper told the Caller, however he added that if it were banned in public water supplies, it likely wouldn’t hurt their bottom line.
“It wouldn’t be a big deal for them if it went away economically, because they could just replace it with other markets, including in Africa and China, where they’re seeing an increase in fluoride toothpaste. They actually still use the same product, but it’s refined to pharmaceutical grade,” Cooper said.
While many public health agencies still sing the praises of fluoride’s anti-cavity benefits, some dentists say it’s not as effective in treating cavities as the CDC and others profess.
Dr. Staci Whitman, a Portland-based dentist, said she used to be militantly pro-fluoride until she started looking into it.
“I never questioned what my professors in dental school told me. I never questioned the data that was presented to me. I absolutely thought anyone that spoke out against it was lulu tin foil hat brigade, just a total kook,” she told the Caller.
Staci actively participated in pro-fluoride campaigns, handing out pamphlets detailing the benefits of the mineral and attending lectures and debates on the topic. It was at one of these debates where Dr. Whitman had an epiphany.
“I realized that these people representing antifluoride, if you will, they were very articulate, very professional, had a ton of science and data that I had never seen, never had even heard, never even knew there was potentially an issue with water fluoridation. It wasn’t even on my radar.”
Then, Dr. Whitman began to read. “I don’t know if I can support this anymore,” she realized. “And that was when I thought water fluoridation maybe worked, and now we know it really doesn’t. We know that fluoridated countries have the same decay rate as non-fluoridated countries.”
The vast majority of European countries do not fluoridate their water.
“Most of those countries have banned the practice because they view it as a medical experiment. It’s the only chemical we add to the water supply that’s not intended to treat the water. It’s intended to treat the consumer,” Cooper said.
Florida once again leading the way w/wise public health recs from @FLSurgeonGen
Almost all of Europe (gray👇) decided decades ago against fluoridating water; benefits unclear w/access to topical fluoride
Dr. Whitman said she went along with fluoridation because everybody else did.
“I literally was just making it up. I was just seeing what my professor said, which I would say, ‘Oh, look at you. No cavities. You must have grown up in a fluoridated community.’ I was just saying it because everyone else did. It was observational. That’s not science.”
Dr. Whitman pointed to the latest findings on community water fluoridation from the Cochrane Report, a systematic review of research in health care and health policy which she calls “the gold standard.”
Cochrane reviewed 21 studies of community water fluoridation and found the practice “may slightly increase the number of children who have no tooth decay in either their baby teeth or permanent teeth.”
However, “these results also included the possibility of little or no difference in tooth decay,” the report added.
Cavities are the largest chronic disease globally, affecting both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities alike, Dr. Whitman explained. Fluoride, she told the Caller, is not the problem. Rather, it’s the food we eat.
“No one gets cavities because of lack of fluoride,” she said.
“Ancestrally, we didn’t have fluoride in our lives. Look at the skulls from 10 or 12,000 years ago. The teeth are pristine. So what changed it was our diet. It was an agricultural revolution and the industrialized revolution we started adding sugar and flour into everything. So fluoride is just a cop out for our issue with our food system and big food and the big sugar industry.”
Dr. Whitman explained she’s not necessarily anti-topical fluoride, and pointed to the widespread availability of fluoridated toothpaste as further evidence for the unnecessary nature of water fluoridation. But she also recommended hydroxyapatite, a calcium and phosphorus based teeth cleaner that is used in Italy, Japan and other western European countries, as a fluoride alternative.
Our teeth, Dr. Whitman explained, are comprised of hydroxyapatite, not fluoride. The use of the alternative can prevent the development of dental fluorosis, which affects 40 percent of teenagers in America today, according to the CDC.
It can also prevent the much more serious skeletal fluorosis, which can severely distort a person’s bones. While communities across the United States add fluoride to their water supplies, governments in India and China and other communities with high natural levels of fluoride have spent millions of dollars on research and removal efforts, Cooper told the Caller.
“The government and many nonprofits have been working for decades to solve that problem. It’s just, it’s just really difficult, and it’s difficult to filter out, and that’s why we get to this point here in the United States where … we voluntarily add it, we self-inflict this harm,” he said.
Both Cooper and Dr. Whitman pointed to the embedded nature of the mineral in standard dental practices as a barrier to change the public perception on its potential harms.
“I don’t think there’s a nefarious action. I think most dentists just don’t know the issue very well,” Cooper said. “When I talk to them at city halls and I talk to them at legislative hearings, the average dentist has been working with topical fluoride their whole life in their dental office. They learned one day in dental school, they heard about the benefits of water fluoridation as settled science, and they believe it, and they care about children.”
Still, he said, the American Dental Association, who publicly endorse water fluoridation, are too deep in defending the practice to change course.
“At this point, it’s a lie that’s too big to fail,” he said. “If they now admit that they were not only wrong, but that many millions of children were harmed by this, there would be a grand loss of trust in the American Dental Association. And unfortunately along the way, as the dental lobby is really wealthy and powerful, they co-opted government in support of this.”
Both experts argued the burden of proof should be on the pro-fluoride side, especially considering the high stakes surrounding neurodevelopment.
“I am trained as a dentist to fix teeth, but I can’t fix a brain,” Dr. Staci said. “We only have one shot at developing a child’s brain.”
Cooper concurred.
“The cavity can easily be filled, but damage to the brain is permanent and has lifelong consequences. There are no second chances with brain development, and we have a large volume of government-funded research that now shows that fluoride at the levels experienced in Florida communities is neurotoxic. That’s the scientific consensus. There is no contradictory science. And we have government-funded research showing that for decades, and they knew it, we have been overexposing infants to water fluoridation,” he concluded.
The American Dental Association, in fact, receives millions of dollars from corporations that produce fluoride products, an ADA memo requested by Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley in 2010 revealed.
“These dental product companies were giving different grants … but they were also giving millions of dollars to pay for the ADA’s endorsement of their products,” Cooper said. “You see that ADA seal of approval? Well, the one rule the ADA has to get that seal of approval is your product must contain fluoride. So even if you make a really great Xylitol toothpaste, they’re not going to put their stamp of approval unless you also add fluoride.”
Cooper lauded the Trump administration and Kennedy Jr. for taking action and drawing publicity to the issue.
“What the Trump administration is doing, what RFK is doing is on water fluoridation, is common sense that elected officials ought to be doing at every level,” he said.
Now, some public health officials are following Trump and Kennedy’s lead.
Dr. Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s Surgeon General, officially recommended against community water fluoridation last month, citing “the neuropsychiatric risk associated with fluoride exposure.”
Adding fluoride to water increases the risk of neuropsychiatric disease in children and reduces their IQ. We can strengthen teeth without consuming this neurotoxin.
The data are consistent, adding fluoride to our communities’ water must stop.
His recommendation follows a landmark September decision from United States District Judge Edward Chen in Northern California forcing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to more strictly regulate the levels of fluoride in water under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
“The scientific literature in the record provides a high level of certainty that a hazard is present; fluoride is associated with reduced IQ,” Chen, an Obama appointee, wrote in his decision.
Still, some communities, like Buffalo, New York, are doubling down. Nine years after removing the mineral from their water supply, Buffalo began fluoridating again in September.
Others still express doubt that the studies showing high levels of fluoride linked to neurotoxicity are in any way relevant to the levels at which American water is fluoridated.
“Fluoride can certainly be toxic,” Dr. Ryan Marino, a board-certified toxicologist and professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, told the Caller.
“Acute fluoride toxicity is one of the worst poisonings I can think of. However, the levels of fluoride used for dental health benefits in American drinking water are significantly below the levels that could even start to cause harmful effects and toxicity, and the levels we use have never been shown to cause harmful effects or toxicity,” Dr. Marino concluded.
But given the recent California ruling and Kennedy Jr.’s anti-fluoride campaign, Cooper is hopeful the tide is turning.
“There’s decades of science that we’ve been doing our best to get out there, but it’s been stifled by mainstream media and the ADA,” Cooper said. “Finally, now they can’t keep the lid on it anymore, and it’s just like they don’t know what to do. They’re in a panic.”
The Daily Caller contacted the CDC, the ADA, the NTP, HHS and Dr. Syra Madad for comment but did not hear back by publication.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-12-03 23:52:542024-12-03 23:52:54RFK Jr. Wants Fluoride Out Of Water — And It’s Not Nearly As Crazy As His Detractors Claim
This is an interesting and at times amusing look at how a benchmark magazine of science and reason has become a vector for dialectical narrative enforcement.
Some of the examples he offers could be seen as amusing, if it wasn’t for the red zone level of danger to America and the West that it represents.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-30 18:51:342024-11-30 18:51:34VIDEO: A Veteran Journalist Details the Nature of Scientific American that Once August Magazine
A few months ago, Stephen Coughlin did a very interesting half hour on the Marxist attack on the family we all know as Feminism. He makes the case that feminism was always and has always been a weapon against the traditional Western family.
In previous interviews I have done with specialists in Feminism, a woman who’s name escapes me at the moment, once explained that the original suffragette manifesto was just the Communist manifesto by Marx, where proletariat was scratched out and women was written in its place as the oppressed group.
I am not totally sure how literally she meant it, but the point was well made.
Below is Stephen’s talk for those who have not seen it. If it seems dense at the start, stick with it. The point is worth waiting for and is clear as day.
Let’s have a look at what appears to be a reaction to feminism, but in fact is at least an equally effective attack on the family in a way that could be used to define controlled opposition. In fact even totally unwitting controlled opposition:
There are MANY many men who do this exact thing in different flavours. Each explaining the dangers of romantic relationships with women. And they do so to the great satisfaction of men who have been brutalized by a now Marxist legal system. One so lopsided that women would probably have a great deal of difficulty not taking advantage of their enormous power within it.
These videos, (and I don’t mean to pick on this one man below. There are many but it is these two examples that inspired me to set it to paper) why men should never commit to women in a relationship. More on that after the examples.
One might even wonder why something that appears to be so anti-women would be allowed on YouTube. And the hundreds or thousands of other videos that are well monetized which also carry the same messaging.
It all makes sense if you look at the net result. The end of love. Commitment. Perhaps most importantly, having character and the kind and amount of character it takes to sustain a loving relationship with someone through the trials and tribulations of raising children and other occasional hardships.
This along with Feminism’s tripling of what is expected of men and explaining to woman that any constraint whatsoever on anything they wish to do is oppression, In other words, to curtail one’s immensely powerful sexuality in all facets is being oppressed, while with men, any expression of masculinity or heterosexual normalcy is oppression. So the creation of videos such as the one above is a clear and logical consequence of the legal and cultural reality of the deconstruction of heterosexual relationships by a century of a Marxist line of operation.
Whether or not the creators of these videos are aware of what they are doing is irrelevant. None of them are doing anything to try and fix the situation. All of them are trying to make it worse. Destroy any residual trust. Increase the inertia of a system that has turned men and women against each other. Their insight is usually limited to the practical results of feminism and what may be the motive for women to take advantage of the system as it is. The word, “Hypergamy” can be heard often. But usually in a context that is negatively interpreted.
Same guy:
In the clip above, he warns men against women who want a traditional life because of a problem that is very likely true in many cases, without offering a solution to the problem. This is an attack on the family whether he knows that or not. And does the exact kind of damage feminism does, but from the other side of the dialectic. The counter-thesis.
And we do know solutions exist. Until recently, marriages mostly lasted till one person died. The surviving partner was usually torn in half by grief. A good indicator that they were well and properly bonded to their partner. Divorce was rare. Now jokes like, “Next time I feel like getting married I am just going to walk up to a strange woman and buy her a house”. Or: “When I go on a date with a man I ask myself, is this a guy I would want my future kids to spend weekends with?”.
The fact that the jokes work are pretty good indicators of where the culture is.
I want this to be short. So no lengthy explanations of how to solve these problems. But the answer lies in the culture, and willingness on all parties develop character. And this means specifically that one uses one’s freedom to choose a path, and then limit oneself in one’s subsequent choices after that initial decision to walk the path in order to achive success and overall happiness.
From a game theory point of view, one tends to value things proportional to the sacrifices you make for them. In no small part this explains our attachment to our children, along with the emotional attachments of course.
Having character means making sacrifices to make a relationship work, for the greater satisfaction and long term happiness that comes with success in that endeavour. So making the sacrifices for a relationship can make one value it more, with the right attitude. Of course, can also make you resentful with a bad one.
Taking issues with these proposed solutions is fine. I don’t pretend to expertise in this area. But the central point is the thesis-counter thesis, solution of feminism and male anti-relationship culture, who’s presence on YouTube makes a lot more sense if one sees it as the other side of the attack on the family, as opposed to criticism of women as an oppressed ‘minority’.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-29 16:54:182024-11-29 16:54:18VIDEOS: The Attack on the Traditional Family from Both Sides of the ‘Feminist Dialectic’
Another day, another human trafficking scandal at Planned Parenthood.
Check out this report from the New York Post, if you’re feeling brave:
Stomach-churning emails show Planned Parenthood negotiating terms regarding the donation of aborted fetuses for medical research.
The emails discuss fetal tissue like any other commodity such as sugar or rice, nonchalantly negotiating for fetuses up to 23 weeks old from elective abortions.
A heavily-redacted so-called “Research Plan” submitted to the University of California San Diego (UCSD) Institutional Review Board and approved in 2018 states scientists wanted 2,500 fetuses from up to almost the sixth month of gestation for experimentation.
The emails came to light via the Center for Medical Progress’s David Daleiden, who still to this day is wading through 2010s lawfare launched by California’s erstwhile attorney general Kamala Harris.
As the Post points out, selling chopped-up unborn babies is a federal crime, but donating them and then receiving “reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage” for said babies is not.
In this case, Planned Parenthood employed an additional legal shield by drawing up contracts with UCSD that retained the “intellectual property rights” of the fetal tissue with the abortion giant.
Seeing past the statutory subterfuge, Daleiden told the Post, “These documents show that Planned Parenthood is supplying healthy babies who are old enough to survive outside the womb from late term abortions to the University of California’s royalty-generating experiments.”
Indeed, most healthy babies born at 23 weeks survive outside the womb with sufficient medical care.
Daleiden’s revelation also puts to lie the legacy media’s efforts to downplay the prevalence and gravity of late-term abortions.
Surreptitiously monetising unborn babies who were aborted for elective reasons and could have survived if given the chance might sound like a Mengelian monstrosity, but it’s business as usual for Planned Parenthood. As previously noted here at Mercator:
This is an organisation that allegedly sells human body parts, is likely the biggest supplier of transgender drugs in the United States, performs some 390,000 abortions each year, uses American taxpayer treasure to abort brown babies overseas, was founded by the racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger, boasts US$2.2 billion in assets, and is supported by some of America’s biggest and wokest corporate giants.
n a Wall Street Journalop-ed published the day before the latest Planned Parenthood scandal broke, DOGE architects Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy singled out the taxpayer-funded behemoth for special attention:
DOGE will help end federal overspending by taking aim at the $500 billion plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress or being used in ways that Congress never intended, from $535 million a year to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1.5 billion for grants to international organizations to nearly $300 million to progressive groups like Planned Parenthood.
Pro-life groups have greeted the news with elation.
To be clear, the decision by Vivek and Musk is apparently a philosophical rather than a political one — that is, it arises from libertarian instincts, not conservative convictions. They explain:
The entrenched and ever-growing bureaucracy represents an existential threat to our republic, and politicians have abetted it for too long. That’s why we’re doing things differently. We are entrepreneurs, not politicians. We will serve as outside volunteers, not federal officials or employees…
We are assisting the Trump transition team to identify and hire a lean team of small-government crusaders, including some of the sharpest technical and legal minds in America. This team will work in the new administration closely with the White House Office of Management and Budget. The two of us will advise DOGE at every step to pursue three major kinds of reform: regulatory rescissions, administrative reductions and cost savings.
The pair refer to the “decisive electoral mandate” of Donald Trump’s recent win and the 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court as their impetus — and their once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to cut the clutter in Washington and free taxpayers from funding causes that would have horrified America’s Founders.
Horrified indeed would they have been at the dark arts of Planned Parenthood.
Mercifully, with the funding tap turned off, it will be a business in decline — and won’t future generations be thankful!
Do you think that DOGE will be regarded as a success by the time it winds up on July 4, 2026? Comment below!
Kurt Mahlburg is a writer and author, and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He has a passion for both the philosophical and the personal, drawing on his background as a graduate architect, a primary school teacher, a missionary, and a young adult pastor.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-29 04:51:282024-11-29 04:51:28One final scandal at Planned Parenthood as the DOGE axe falls
“The temperature is rising!” “The temperature is dropping.” The temperature is staying the same.”
We argue the “facts” of climate change (even as parts of New Jersey were just buried under 11 inches of global warming). One side wants the facts to show that man is disrupting the climate, while the other wants them to show that he’s not. But an almost never posed question should be asked:
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that our industry is causing global warming. So what?
No, I’m not a guy who “just wants to see the world burn” (and that would be literally). Rather, if anthropogenic climate change were occurring, why should we assume it wouldn’t be beneficial?
Oh, it’s not just that the Earth is greener and crop yields are higher when CO2 levels are greater; it’s not just that relative warmth breeds life. It’s also this:
Some scientists have said the Earth will soon enter, or has already entered, a significant cooling phase. Others even contend that another ice age is nigh. And if this is so, any man-caused temperature increase would merely mitigate this naturally induced but deadly phenomenon.
One of these scientists was the late Professor S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric and space physics expert who had been a founding director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project. “I have recently become quite concerned about ice ages and the dangers they pose to humans on our planet,” he wrote in 2015 — “and indeed to most of terrestrial ecology.”
Singer explained later in his article that there “are two kinds of ice ages”:
(i) Major (Milankovich-style) glaciations occur on a 100,000-year time-scale and are controlled astronomically.
(ii) “Little” ice ages were discovered in ice cores; they have been occurring on an approx. 1000-1500-yr cycle and are likely controlled by the Sun.
The scientist then warned that the “current cycle’s cooling phase may be imminent….”
Now, this is a frightening prospect. Even the liberal New York Times admitted in 2017, reporting on a Lancet study, that “cold weather is responsible, directly or indirectly, for 17 times as many deaths as hot weather.” That’s in our relatively warm time, too. What would happen during a major ice age?
Well, “The coolings are quite severe,” informed Singer. “[T]he most recent one, ending only about 12,000 years ago, covered much of North America and Europe with miles-thick continental ice sheets and led to the disappearance of (barely) surviving bands of Neanderthalers; they were displaced by the more adaptable Homo Sapiens.”
In other words, another major ice age would likely be a Hollywood-like, apocalyptic disaster. In fact, Singer insisted that we should be prepared to use scientific interventions to mitigate such an eventuality (while Bill Gates wants to do the same to cool down the Earth). To be clear, though, while Singer said that another ice age could begin tomorrow, it could also be tens of thousands of year away. And my article isn’t about hashing out the details, assessing probability, or recommending mitigation measures. (you can read Singer’s work for that). It is about this: prejudice.
Again, accepting for argument that man is significantly warming the planet (not my belief), why assume this is bad?
In reality, moderns’ thinking so often reflects a kind of misanthropism or, at least, a bias against Western-triumph-born modernity. People believing that extraterrestrials furtively visit our planet never assume the aliens’ matter-of-course environmental impact could be malign; they’re too advanced. People pondering a hunter-gatherer tribe (e.g., the North Sentinelese) generally assume they just must live “in harmony with nature” and be innocuous; they’re too primitive. Never mind that American Indians deforested stretches along, and caused the sedimentation of, the Delaware River long before Europeans’ New World arrival (to provide just one perspective-lending example). The activities of man, or modern man or Western man, depending on the precise prejudice, just must be harmful for the simple reason that he engaged in them. So, yes, racial profiling is a problem — against the human race.
In fairness, we can do and have done much to damage the environment. In fairness again, though, forested area in the U.S. is greater than it was a century back and our water and air are cleaner than they were 60 years ago. And in recent times the Great Barrier Reef has actually increased in size (this isn’t necessarily due to man’s activities). So we can also be good shepherds of the Earth.
The odd thing, though, about the misanthropic prejudice is that implicit in it is an idea that man is akin to some unnatural, artificial presence. This, coming from people who generally also believe man is himself only an animal, a mere product of evolution; in other words, just another part of nature. And, of course, whether the result of divine creation or evolutionary happenstance, part of nature (or Creation) is precisely what man is.
As for the world’s fortunes, 99.9 percent of the species of life that have ever existed are extinct, partially due to ice ages. So ironically, if man’s activities — either accidentally, intentionally or both — mitigate the coming ice age, we humans may be responsible for counteracting the next great extinction.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-26 15:52:382024-11-26 15:52:38Let’s Say Man IS Changing the Climate. So What?
Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…If you’d like to be added to (or unsubscribe from) the distribution of our popular, free, worldwide Media Balance Newsletter, simply send me an email saying that
Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g., PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen… We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize display issues.
Note 2: For past Newsletter issues see the archives from 2021, 2022, 2023, & 2024. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over all fourteen plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put this together — where you can search ALL prior issues, by year. For a background about how the Newsletter is put together, etc., please read this.
Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change. As a parallel effort, we have also put together a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on my website: WiseEnergy.org.
Note 4: I am not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or any of my websites) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical matters.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-25 12:52:032024-11-25 12:52:03AWED MEDIA BALANCE NEWS: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections
Imagine these words as the first speech delivered by the incoming Secretary of Education.
Today, I am here to deliver bitter medicine: American education has failed. Teachers and parents, administrators and government—and even students—all bear some responsibility.
The most common explanations for our educational crisis are inadequate funding, overuse of standardized testing, and systemic prejudice. They are false.
Our schools do not lack funding—no country spends more on public education.
The poor results of standardized tests indicate our failures; they are not the cause.
Our schools are not prejudiced—the most aggressive education reforms since 1955 directly aimed to eliminate systemic discrimination.
For decades, we ignored signs of trouble, but the COVID-19 pandemic revealed the depth of our challenges. The problems are so pervasive and complex that there is no quick fix. We cannot merely repair; we must rebuild.
Since 2020, American families have struggled mightily. The declining quality of education prompted affluent families to opt out of public schools, leaving middle- and working-class families with diminished resources and influence to push for reform. States’ refusal to enact school choice reforms widened the wealth gap and limited generational mobility.
But lower- and middle-class families bear some responsibility, too. The rise of single-parent households, less common among affluent families, has been catastrophic. When the only adult in the home works up to 60 hours a week to make ends meet, there is little time for homework help, PTA meetings, or engaging with school officials. Even in households with two working parents, time and energy are often in short supply.
Teachers, for their part, have good reason to despair. Despite the monumental importance of their work, many are underpaid. They face administrators who value standardized test scores above all else. Meanwhile, declining standards for decorum and discipline, often justified in the name of “social justice,” have made schools unsafe for both teachers and students. Violence and insubordination create an environment unfit for serious learning. Some parents treat schools as daycare centers or demand good grades for minimal effort. Worse, parents of disruptive students often refuse to ensure their children do not rob others of the opportunity to learn.
Yet teachers, too, have failed. They inflate grades to keep their jobs but do no favors for students unprepared for future challenges. This, in turn, lowers the quality of education for students ready for more advanced work, driving gifted students out of public schools.
Another harsh truth is that many teachers are unprepared for the job. The education system has failed for so long that many teachers have never mastered the material they are supposed to teach. Colleges steer future educators toward “education” majors, where coursework focuses more on leftist “social justice” ideology than on subject mastery. Some graduates believe their mission is to “dismantle” an “unjust” society by creating anti-American activists.
When these activist-teachers enter classrooms, they often abandon their duty to transmit America’s culture, knowledge, and values. Instead, they teach students to disdain their nation, its people, its past, and its way of life. This undermines social cohesion and deprives disadvantaged students of the tools they need to succeed.
Outdated curricula exacerbate these issues. Most schools still use models from the late 20th century, failing to address how computing, the internet, and artificial intelligence have transformed how we read, write, and learn. Even in innovative schools, teachers often struggle to balance the needs of non-native English speakers with those of native speakers, diluting the educational experience for the latter.
Our colleges and universities are also broken. Admitting underprepared students has lowered academic standards nationwide. General education curricula often assume a need for remediation, leaving motivated students without the challenge or preparation they deserve.
Government-run financial aid has inflated tuition costs while diminishing the value of college degrees. Proposals to cancel student debt signal to universities that they can continue raising prices without consequence, encouraging predatory admission policies that saddle students with unmanageable debt.
How do we revitalize American education?
Nothing short of an academic Sputnik will suffice. Just as Sputnik spurred the urgency that sent Americans to the moon, we need a bold initiative to revolutionize education:
We will create K-12 curricula prioritizing history, civics, and an understanding of our government.
We will eliminate curricula that divide Americans by race, class, religion, sex, or sexual identity.
We will implement school choice nationwide.
We will end federal student loan programs, allowing private lenders to evaluate borrowers’ ability to repay. Conditional lending will force colleges to lower tuition and revise admissions and program offerings.
We will expand vocational training and enhance opportunities for gifted students.
We will raise teacher credentialing standards to ensure advanced subject knowledge.
We will enforce decorum and discipline in schools. Uniforms will unify student bodies, and measures like suspension and expulsion will ensure classrooms are conducive to learning.
We will revise college accreditation standards to reflect post-graduation success and employment metrics.
We will penalize public colleges and universities that engage in discriminatory admissions practices.
And that is just the beginning.
The destiny of our nation depends on education. The effort to revitalize our schools must be as bold as our aspirations. Together, we will bring American education into the 21st century. Together, we will make American education great again.
Adam Ellwanger is a professor at the University of Houston–Downtown, where he teaches rhetoric and writing. He is also a Higher Education Fellow at The Leadership Institute’s Campus Reform.
We have reached the tipping point on the gender issue. If I had known that electing a trans-identifying man to Congress would so definitively advance the discussion of safety and privacy in women-only spaces, I might have donated to the campaign myself. For over a decade now, women have been speaking out about the problem of men who believe they are women seeking “refuge” in our bathrooms, locker rooms, college dorms, prison cells, and even sometimes our beds.
The pressure has grown as more and more Americans were confronted by the very real demands required by the “inclusion” of “gender diverse” people on their terms. Schools and sports teams have wrestled with whether, when, and how to accommodate the demands of transgender activists while ensuring the safety, privacy, and sanity of those folks unwilling to play along with pretending a person can change his or her sex.
The Biden-Harris administration was remarkable for shattering norms in this regard. In addition to appointing openly transsexual men to roles in the administration and hosting them for media appearances at the White House, President Biden creepily assured transgender students that he “had their backs.”
On the 50th Anniversary of Title IX, the Biden-Harris Department of Education released a sweeping rewrite of the policy that refused to acknowledge biological differences between men and women — while advancing the cause of gender ideology. The staggering scope of the proposed radical rule was met with greater backlash. The rule is now enjoined in 26 states nationwide as court cases proceed. We can be confident that the new folks in charge at DOE will waste no time in withdrawing this rule and offering common-sense protections for all students — and especially women and girls.
Then-candidate Trump and his campaign saw the backlash and heard thunderous applause from the crowds during rally speeches promising an end to the gender madness in our schools and medicine.
But in deep blue Delaware, political operative, former Obama official, and friend of Beau Biden, Sarah (formerly Tim) McBride campaigned for Congress and won election to the U.S. House of Representatives. And now we get to the action. Where would Representative McBride exercise and shower after those workouts? Which bathroom will he slip into during long sessions? And who decides these questions?
As the battle of the schoolhouse rose to the People’s House, South Carolina’s Nancy Mace (R) tried to lay down the law, literally. She wrote a bill that defined sex as male and female and protected sex-specific facilities for men and women in federal buildings.
Then, earlier this week, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) declared that under his leadership, men would be men, and women would be women. Representative McBride wisely agreed to follow these rules and sought to change the subject. Women across the country let out a cheer. After many years of fighting to preserve female-only spaces, this marks a turning point in the “transgender” march through the institutions. The work of ensuring these protections for women everywhere will continue, but now we have a wind at our back.
Women know we need men to protect us and honor each other’s needs for privacy. I’m grateful that Johnson handled this situation so quickly, setting an example for others to follow. I look forward to leadership from President Trump and appointees like Education Secretary nominee Linda McMahon, who I expect to use government power to protect women and children from the radical demands of gender ideology.
And the church will need to attend to the needs of those wounded by the very real consequences of crazy ideas like boys can become girls or vice versa. We have much to do! Let’s thank God for our victories along the way and continue to advance His Kingdom!
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.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-22 21:51:302024-11-22 21:51:30Reality Wins: Transwomen Are Men
Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s plans to protect taxpayers from wasteful spending will take a scalpel to Planned Parenthood funding, reasserting Americans’ financial autonomy by removing federal funds from the nation’s largest abortion chain.
The pair outlined their vision for the forthcoming Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, specifically underscoring plans to enact a host of policies long supported by pro-life advocates and government efficiency experts alike.
“DOGE will help end federal overspending by taking aim at the $500 billion plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress or being used in ways that Congress never intended, from $535 million a year to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1.5 billion for grants to international organizations to nearly $300 million to progressive groups like Planned Parenthood,” wrote Musk and Ramaswamy.
Taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood surged $65.9 million since President Joe Biden took office in 2021, even as inflation and a slow economic recovery from the artificial COVID-19 shutdowns eroded Americans’ real income.
Some of Planned Parenthood’s spending has been blatantly political. During the 2024 presidential campaign, Planned Parenthood announced plans to spend $140 million on supporting Democratic candidates who support abortion (and abortion funding) and to launch a long-term campaign to expand abortion in all 50 states. Their policy outline included $40 million on door-to-door canvassing, TV and online advertising, phone banks, and direct mail targeting voters in the swing states of Arizona, Georgia, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin in the 2024 presidential election. It also joined other left-wing organizations to launch a 10-year, $100 million campaign aimed at “securing access to abortion care in every state.”
Planned Parenthood’s annual report also notes the abortion chain spent $46.7 million on “public policy” and $14.8 to “engage communities.”
Pro-life and pro-family leaders welcomed the efforts to extricate taxpayers from funding Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion chain which has increasingly stepped into carrying out transgender procedures, often to minors as young as 12.
“Americans work hard for their money — and under the Biden administration, despite loads of hard work, that money didn’t go very far. For many, the economy was a top issue in this election. Working to ensure that American taxpayer dollars are only used in ways that work to further the good of our nation is at the forefront of the Trump administration’s agenda,” Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand. “It was beautiful to see that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have recognized that using American taxpayer dollars to fund the killing of unborn children is a complete waste of money. It is inefficient on so many levels — including that it robs Americans of future generations of children. I look forward to seeing the other areas DOGE recognizes as a waste of taxpayer dollars; this first announcement signaled that rebuilding a culture of life is part of taking back America.”
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins found “lots of good news in this plan,” specifically highlighting its calls to:
Defund Planned Parenthood.
Defund international [organizations] at odds with our interests.
Defund PBS/NPR.
Mass rescissions of unconstitutional regulations that exceed the authority of the Executive branch.
Return the federal workforce to the office five days a week, which “would result in a wave of voluntary terminations that we welcome.”
Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America (SFLA), had raised the issue of defunding Planned Parenthood repeatedly in recent days. “Hey DOGE, our tax dollars fund abortion,” she posted on social media last Thursday. “Taxpayers should not be forced to fund abortion. If President Trump’s goal is to end federal involvement in abortion, we must start by defunding & debarring Planned Parenthood.”
SBA Pro-Life America noted that Planned Parenthood had amassed a whopping $2.5 billion in net assets. “They should never get taxpayer dollars,” said the group, as it thanked Musk and Ramaswamy “for focusing on this important issue.”
Lila Rose of Live Action described the DOGE defunding proposal as “Amazing!”
Liberty Counsel hoped DOGE’s policy will push toward “ending all taxpayer-funded abortion.” Human Life International called DOGE’s focus on defunding anti-life programs “such good news” but asked Christians to “pray that this includes defunding global anti-life programs.”
“The federal government shouldn’t be in the business of giving away free money to non-governmental organizations. That should be obvious,” Ramaswamy commented separately.
But Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson lashed out at Musk and Ramaswamy, deriding them as “agents of chaos.”
Defunding Planned Parenthood means “wreaking havoc on our public health system, of which Planned Parenthood is an integral part,” she contended.
“Planned Parenthood doesn’t get a blank check from the federal government. Like any other health care provider, or hospital, Planned Parenthood affiliates are reimbursed for services provided to patients at health centers,” she asserted. “What Musk and Ramaswamy call ‘federal overspending’ provides critical and necessary sexual and reproductive health care to thousands of people every day — care that will disappear if they get their way.”
But Planned Parenthood officials settled a Medicaid fraud investigation, paying the state of Texas $4.3 million in 2013. Planned Parenthood’s Houston affiliate, Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast (PPGC), “improperly billed the Texas Medicaid program for products and services that were never actually rendered, not medically necessary, and were not covered by the Medicaid program — and were therefore not eligible for reimbursement,” announced then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R), who is now governor. Planned Parenthood accepted no blame in the settlement.
Wisconsin state auditors also concluded that up to two-thirds of all Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood facilities were fraudulent in 2016.
The abortion industry CEO said Planned Parenthood had defeated efforts to defund it in the past and would win again. “We’ve been here before — we are not new to shutdown and ‘defund’ fights. We fended off a number of these attacks during Trump’s first term — and Planned Parenthood health centers are still there serving millions of patients across the nation,” she claimed.
But Planned Parenthood gave up federal funding rather than choosing to reduce taxpayer-funded abortion advocacy. President Donald Trump stipulated in 2019 that recipients of federal family planning funding through Title X cannot refer women for or carry out abortions. Rather than “fending off” the fight or continuing to provide “care,” the Planned Parenthood Federation of America pulled out of Title X in 2019. President Joe Biden reversed the Trump administration’s pro-life policy in October 2021.
The Planned Parenthood CEO also noted that “50% of Planned Parenthood patients are enrolled in Medicaid and other federal and state programs for uninsured patients,” pointing out other potential revenue streams for DOGE to eliminate.
All branches of government aim to assist DOGE. House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) announced that he plans to create a Government Efficiency Subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) in the forthcoming Congress.
The administration’s plans call for DOGE to end all operations on Independence Day: July 4, 2026.
“Our North Star for reform will be the U.S. Constitution,” wrote Musk and Ramaswamy. “There is no better birthday gift to our nation on its 250th anniversary than to deliver a federal government that would make our Founders proud.”
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.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-22 21:51:292024-11-22 21:51:29Pro-Life Leaders Praise ‘Beautiful’ Plan for DOGE to Defund Planned Parenthood
President Joe Biden awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Cecile Richards Wednesday, the former president of Planned Parenthood.
Biden praised Richards for her “courage” and fearlessness in leading America towards being “a nation of freedom” in an X post. Richards oversaw at least 3.8 million abortions during her 12 years as Planned Parenthood’s president, according to Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which analyzed several of the organization’s annual reports.
Today, I had the honor of awarding Cecile Richards the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
With absolute courage, she fearlessly leads us forward to be the America we say we are – a nation of freedom.
Through her work to lift up the dignity of workers, defend and advance women’s… pic.twitter.com/IayCTAFK4N
Richards stepped down from her position as head of the organization in 2018 after a federal investigation revealed Planned Parenthood was allegedly illegally harvesting and selling parts from aborted babies. Earlier this year, Richards announced that she has been battling the same form of brain cancer that killed Biden’s son in 2015, according to abc News.
The former Planned Parenthood president previously urged women “to be bold” in announcing their abortions and to encourage other women to do the same.
Biden’s commitment to his Catholic faith has come into question due to his open support for abortion, especially after a priest denied him Holy Communion in 2019 over his promotion of abortion as a public official. The Biden administration has reportedly spent just under $45,000 in taxpayer dollars between June and December of 2023 on travel expenses for military members to receive abortions.
Biden has also been accused of weaponizing the FBI against Catholics and pro-life advocates, labeling them as “potential domestic terrorists,” according to the House Weaponization Subcommittee.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-22 21:51:272024-11-22 21:51:27Catholic Joe Biden Awards Medal To Former Planned Parenthood Head Who Oversaw Hundreds Of Thousands Of Abortions
This full and complete briefing was presented in a secure setting for members of the Arizona House of Representatives and State Senate, along with various state-wide elected and high-level appointed officials.
The subject was the medical and health issues that will surely come into the United States with illegals, especially those from Middle Eastern and third-world countries.
As you know the President has every right to close the borders of the United States as a National Emergency exists.
When you read this declassified briefing, you will be even more alarmed to learn that most likely a Medical National Emergency exists if these illegals bridge the border.
SUBJECT OF BRIEFING: Bacteria Resistant to Antibiotics Found for the First-time in the United States
BRIEFING CLASSIFICATION: NOT RESTRICTED – OPEN SOURCE INTELLIGENCE//OSINT
SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION INTELLIGENCE DUE TO SENSITIVITY OF SUBJECT MATTER
BRIEFING LEVEL: Law Enforcement//Intel and Threat Assessment Specialists – Selected Elected Officials overseeing Public Safety
NOTICE OF RESTRICTED INTELLIGENCE COMMUNICATION:
The content of this briefing contains information and opinions along with findings that are considered as intelligence analysis classified as: SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION INTELLIGENCE – OPEN SOURCE INTELLIGENCE//OSINT. Said content is sensitive and proprietary, and is intended for LAW ENFORCEMENT//INTEL//THREAT ASSESSMENT SPECIALISTS. If you are not law enforcement//Intelligence or Threat Assessment Specialist or Selected Elected Official overseeing Public Safety issues or a designated professional vetted by the sender, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, copying or distribution of the herein stated material is strictly prohibited. No portion of this communication and/or attachment(s) are to be released to the public, the media, or others who do not have a direct need-to-know without specific documented authorization from the sender. Failure to abide by this admonishment may result in a legal action taken against you. Notify sender immediately if you have received this communication in error. WARNING: This Document is for Official Use Only//FOUO. It contains information that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).
FOR YOUR ANALYSIS AND CONSIDERATON:
On Thursday, June the 2nd, 2016, I released for public distribution a report titled a “Medical Ticking Time Bomb.” This report presented medical and other facts detailing a looming problem that will create a medical State of Emergency for Arizona and other states, especially Border States due to the unchecked and increased flow of illegals from South America and third-world countries, as well as Muslims purposefully being delivered into selected states in America, especially politically conservative states.
Both sets of incoming populations represent the poorest of the poor, and many are presenting with medical and physical challenges rarely seen and difficult to treat. More alarming are those coming into Arizona and other Border States who have not been medically screened, or who entered Border States in an unknown and unmonitored fashion. The current Measles outbreak in Arizona is an example of these named situations. My report discusses additional medical presentations specifically unique to populations in third-world countries, which populations, are now crossing our southern Border or being airlifted into selective states by the Federal Government with questionable (at best) screening.
For the first-time, researchers have found a person in Pennsylvania carrying a bacteria resistant to antibiotics of last resort. This report is highly disturbing, and health officials are sobered by this finding. The antibiotic-resistant strain was discovered last month in the urine of a 49-year-old Pennsylvania woman. Department of Defense researchers determined she carried the strain of E. coli resistant to the antibiotic Colistin, according to a report published yesterday in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, a publication of the American Society for Microbiology. Colistin is the antibiotic of last resort for particularly dangerous types of superbugs, including a family of bacteria known as CRE, which health officials have dubbed “nightmare bacteria.” In some instances, these superbugs kill up to 50% of patients who become infected. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention has called CRE among the country’s most urgent public health threats. The Pennsylvania case has set off alarms in various public safety and medical communities.
LYLE J. RAPACKI, Ph.D.
Protective Intelligence and Assessment Specialist Consultant at Behavioral Analysis and Threat Assessment Private-Sector Intelligence Analyst U.S. Border Intelligence Group ASIS International Association For Intelligence Officers Association of Threat Assessment Professionals – Arizona ATAP International Association Law Enforcement Intelligence Analysts
SENTINEL INTELLIGENCE SERVICES, LLC LYLE J. RAPACKI, Ph.D.
CONSULTANT AT:
Behavioral Analysis and Threat Assessment Protective Intelligence and Assessment Private-Sector Intelligence Lyle@Sentinelintelligenceservices.com
Arizona State Senate Briefing
Healthcare Issues – Illegals and Refugees
August the 17th, 2016
Imminent Challenges to Arizona:
So-named “Refugees” deliberately brought into the United States by our Federal Government are NOT well screened or at all for many diseases, such as HIV, Parasites, STDs, Hepatitis, Fungal infections, and illnesses not seen by American medical professions either ever, or in decades. These “refugees” also constitute approximately half of the TB cases now manifesting across America.
Tuberculosis is one of the most lethal infectious diseases in history, and despite the fact that we know there is no way to accurately vet the “refugees” being imported, agencies/departments in the federal government are allowing well over 200,000 into America by 2017.3. Tuberculosis is quickly becoming highly resistant to all our antibiotics, and it is a disease that is very easily transmitted. a). A fertile feeding ground for TB is anywhere in a country with close- quarters, lots of chaos, a shelter or temporary housing, and school classrooms. b). Many refugees are completely unaware they are carriers of TB.
The flood of humanity inbound to America (Arizona) will also bring microbes and parasites known as “superbugs” or as health officials in multiple states already are calling, “nightmare bacteria.” Data is now beginning to surface demonstrating that superbugs kill up to 50% of patients who become infected. Even the Center for Disease Control (CDC) has called this increase in superbugs the country’s most urgent public health threat.
Recommendations:
. Launch an aggressive statewide public awareness campaign – not sensational but candidly informational in makeup.
Immediately begin teaching about hygiene, especially in retention/detention centers, refugee facilities, and schools. Teachers and teacher’s aides should be trained in basic identification of disease onset, i.e. coughing, fever, skin changes; tummy aches and refers to school nurse for further evaluation.
Educational programs and Public Service Announcements (PSAs) encouraging early detection and treatment of Parasites, TB, Upper Respiratory Infections, HIV, Hepatitis and other STDs. Take away the stigma, and promote early detection and assistance without judgment.
Begin an immediate crash course for doctors and health care providers on the pending threats. A generation or two of Drs. have NEVER seen or treated some of the diseases and parasites coming this way. Check immunizations for health care providers.
Pre-stage pharmaceuticals and vaccines throughout the State in pharmacies, 24-Hour Walk-in clinics, doctor’s offices.
Legislature needs to begin serious planning for additional funding to address multiple areas of costs.
Prepare contingency plans to declare a State of Medical Emergency with shut- down of border, increased check points and screening stations. The State of Arizona needs to prepare contingency plans to shut down the Arizona portion of the Refugee Re-settlement Program and the children entering the US Unaccompanied Program. a). Healthcare screening immediately implemented in schools. b). Healthcare intervention for identified previously mentioned diseases implemented in schools and detention facilities. c). A monitoring and outcomes program immediately developed across the state.
Begin immediate discussions by and between all branches of State Government and State Agency Directors developing action plans and protocols in the event of mass medical challenges.
Treat this subject seriously, and not as an overreaction.
FOR YOUR ANALYSIS AND CONSIDERATION:
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been quietly transporting illegal immigrants from the Mexico Border to Phoenix and releasing them without proper notification, processing or the issuing of court appearance documents. During the week of June the 14th, 2016, 35 such individuals were transported 116 miles north of Tucson to a Phoenix bus station where they disembarked and went their separate ways. Judicial Watch was present filming the entire episode, and observed the white vans carrying said individuals arrive at the Greyhound Station on Buckeye Road in Phoenix, off load the individuals who then separated.
A handful of pediatricians who perform sex-change procedures on children led a successful pressure campaign to push a major transgender medical organization to remove age minimums for life-altering sex-change surgeries from its clinical guidance, according to emails exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Emails reveal the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) asked just four doctors — all of whom are considered leaders in the field of pediatric sex changes and have performed various transgender procedures — to review and provide feedback on an embargoed copy of the World Professional Association of Transgender Health’s (WPATH) clinical guidance, called the Standards of Care version 8 (SOC-8), weeks before its expected publication.
Based on the four doctors’ review, the AAP strong-armed WPATH into removing sex-change surgery age minimums from the SOC-8.
When the AAP asked the four pediatricians —Jason Rafferty, Ilana Sherer, Juanita Hodax, and Brittany Allen — to review the SOC-8 on the organization’s behalf in 2022, Rafferty, Sherer, and Allen were on the leadership team of the AAP’s Section on LGBT Health and Wellness, a group within the AAP that provides the organization with expertise and education on LGBT issues, according to an archive of its website.
The Biden-Harris administration also pressured WPATH to remove sex-change surgery age limits from their clinical guidance, according to records made public by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall while defending Alabama’s law restricting pediatric sex-change procedures.
In an amicus brief submitted in the upcoming Supreme Court case United States v. Skrmetti, Marshall explains that Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine — who is openly transgender — had unsuccessfully pressured WPATH to remove the surgical age minimums, but the pressure from the AAP “tipped the scales,” causing WPATH to remove the child sex-change surgery age minimums.
“Thanks to the Biden Administration and AAP, SOC-8 does not contain age minimums for any transitioning hormonal or surgical intervention except for one: phalloplasty, the surgical creation of a neopenis,” reads Marshall’s brief. “WPATH considers all other surgeries and interventions ‘medically necessary gender-affirming medical treatment[s] in adolescents.’”
Tipping The Scales
In August 2022, after securing an embargoed copy of WPATH’s clinical guidance, AAP state government affairs analyst Jeff Hudson asked the pediatricians to review how the guidance aligned with current AAP policy. Rafferty was the lead author of the AAP’s controversial child sex-change policy, first published in 2018, that supported the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sex-change surgeries for minors. Reaffirmed in 2023, the AAP’s transgender policy notably excluded age minimums for drug or surgical interventions.
Hudson stressed the importance of reviewing the SOC-8 before it’s publication, noting it would have “implications” for their “existing legal arguments” as they fought state bans on child sex-change interventions in court.
“I explained our position and reasoning behind securing access to SOC-8 before its publication and WPATH agreed that the AAP and AAP chapters are leading the fight to protect access to this care at the state level and needs to be as prepared as possible,” wrote Hudson.
“There are implications for our existing legal arguments that I’ll work through with our counsel once you’ve reviewed and provided feedback.”
Hudson requested the feedback quickly so that the AAP would have time to “formulate an advocacy strategy and media strategy” before the SOC-8’s anticipated release in September. Emails show a small group from the AAP, which included Hudson, the gender pediatricians and CEO Mark Del Monte, was given access to the embargoed guidance.
The DCNF obtained a series of heavily redacted emails that appear to be discussions in which the gender pediatricians reviewed and commented on the embargoed draft of the SOC-8. In one heavily redacted email, Rafferty alluded to differences between the AAP’s policy and the WPATH clinical guidance, writing: “I personally continue to support the AAP’s current position over WPATH in my practice as articulated in the statement.”
Hudson met with WPATH leadership on Sept. 5, 2022, and the following day reached out to Sherer, Rafferty, Hodax, and Allen, sending an attachment with their final “collated” comments on the SOC-8, promising to touch base with them all about “the plan moving forward.”
On Sept. 8, 2022, then-AAP president Moira Szilagyi sent a letter to WPATH letting them know the final version of the SOC-8 “raised concerns” from their clinical experts, who emails revealed to be Rafferty, Sherer, Hodax, and Allen. The AAP specifically took issue with WPATH’s inclusion of age minimums for pediatric sex-change surgery and their validation of “anti-transgender arguments.”
“AAP experts agree SOC8 lacks the evidence to justify the recommended surgery ages,” Szilagyi wrote, ending with a request that AAP subject-matter experts meet with WPATH for further discussion.
Neither Sherer, Hodax, nor Allen responded to the DCNF’s multiple requests for comment.
NEW: More #WPATH court documents have been unsealed, and the evidence is incontrovertible: @SecretaryLevine applied political pressure throughout the drafting of the WPATH guidelines in order to remove age restrictions for gender surgeries on minors. #FireLevinepic.twitter.com/49VnxquvH5
Documents released by AG Marshall detail how the AAP’s refusal to endorse the SOC-8 sent WPATH into chaos.
In response to the AAP’s letter, Scott Leibowitz, a co-lead of the SOC-8 chapter on adolescents, urgently created a task force to review the AAP’s feedback and “figure out next steps,” according to an email sent Friday, Sept. 9, 2022.
“The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)- a MAJOR organization in the United States that is typically very pro-transhealth/gender affirming care- voiced its opposition to the SOC8, specifically due to aspects of the Adolescent chapter. Not only did they say they would not endorse the SOC, they indicated that they would actively publicly oppose it,” wrote Leibowitz.
“Clearly, if AAP were to publicly oppose the SOC-8, it would be a major challenge for WPATH, SOC-8, and trans youth access to care in the U.S.,” Leibowitz wrote.
That same day, Jon Arcelus, one of three co-chair’s responsible for leading WPATH’s SOC-8 development team, wrote to colleagues that he did not agree with bending the knee to the AAP’s request to remove sex-change surgery age minimums. In an email, he referred to the AAP’s policy as a “one sided narrative” and said making the changes they demanded “will make a joke of our methodology” and look “weak.”
“We can’t not [sic] write a document that looks like theirs, as it has a one sided narrative, extremely biased. I will be surprised in their guidelines are used at all,” wrote Arcelus.
“I think it will not be in the benefit of our community to remove ages as an suggestion and to make any of the changes that they are recommending. This will make a joke of our methodology and will see us as weak,” he wrote.
Then-president of WPATH Walter Bouman responded to Arcelus, writing: “I have also read all the comments from the AAP and struggle to find any sound evidence-based argument(s) underpinning these. I am seriously surprised that a ‘reputable’ association as the AAP is so thin on scientific evidence.”
Arcelus wrote he was “shocked” that the comments about the SOC-8 had come from “very junior people at the AAP.”
“I was shocked to see the feedback from very junior people from AAP, my suggestion was not to make any changes,” wrote Arcelus.
Leibowitz declined to comment through a Nationwide Children’s Hospital spokesperson. Neither WPATH, Arcelus, nor Bouman responded to the DCNF’s multiple requests for comment.
‘Reached A Deal’
In the early hours of Sept. 10, 2022, Arcelus sent WPATH colleagues his comments on the AAP’s requests to change the SOC-8.
“I am including the pdf with the comments from AAP. I have gone one by one through them and add my comments […] as to why we are not going to make changes or if we are say that we are removing it,” wrote Arcelus.
“Time is a problem as we want the SOC-8 to be out for Montreal, so we need to agree tomorrow whether 1) we ignore all their comments 2) we remove the sections that I suggest or more if you feel,” Arcelus wrote.
WPATH was under pressure to resolve the dispute with the AAP quickly, as it wanted to release the SOC-8 before an upcoming scientific symposium that began Sept. 15, 2022, in Montreal, Canada.
Through a public records request, the DCNF obtained 30 hours of recordings from the private WPATH symposium, where several speakers noted the SOC-8 was published the night before the symposium began.
Around midday on Sept. 10, 2022, Arcelus sent Hudson an email titled “Last version with changes.” The email included an attachment titled “SOC8 Final edit as agreed with adolescent chapter,” informing Hudson that WPATH had removed the age minimums from the SOC-8 as “agreed” upon and asking for the AAP’s endorsement.
“Thank you very much for today’s meeting and the support through this process. We have just finished our meeting and we have agreed to remove the ages and to add the sentence we agreed,” wrote Arcelus. “I hope that by doing this AAP will be able to endorse the SOC8 or at least to support it.”
Hudson forwarded the email to Rafferty, Sherer, Allen, Hodax and Mark Del Monte, asking: “Do you approve of these changes?”
“I think these changes are sufficient so that we would not need to oppose SOC8,” Rafferty responded, adding he didn’t see anything that “explicitly or directly contradicts or opposes our policies.”
“For us all, I think it is important to recognize that the [policy statement] is still our official policy even after SOC8 is released. These changes allow SOC8, especially the recommendations themselves, to at least be aligned with the [policy statement] without anything that explicitly or directly contradicts or opposes our policies,” wrote Rafferty.
Later that afternoon, Eli Coleman reported to his colleagues that the AAP was “satisfied with the proposed changes” and that the group was ready to provide a statement in support of WPATH.
One person on the WPATH email chain, whose name was redacted, wrote: “May I thank each and all of you for the tremendous effort you made to reach a deal with the AAP and to allow the SOC 8 to be published.”
‘So Much More’
Rafferty played a critical role in the development of the AAP’s child sex-change policy, which has no age minimums for sex-change surgery and refers to puberty blockers as “reversible treatments.”
The DCNF obtained an email written by Rafferty in June 2022 responding to a series of questions from the powerful D.C.-based Covington and Burling law firm, which represents the AAP in litigation seeking to overturn Alabama’s ban on pediatric sex-change, about the appropriateness of pediatric sex-change.
“We recently reviewed a lengthy article in the New York Times Magazine entitled ‘The Battle Over Gender Therapy’ […]. Given the prominence of the NY Times and the tenor of the article, which raises many questions about the appropriateness of gender-affirming care, we expect the article may be cited in support of bans on gender affirming care,” the law firm wrote. “Below we’ve listed some points from the article which may be used to support such bans or to challenge our amicus briefs, and some questions from our team.”
Despite the AAP’s push to remove age minimums from the WPATH SOC-8, Rafferty, when referring to gender exploration, told the law firm that some youth “try it out” without needing intervention.
“Do some youth ‘try it out’ – Yes, as children grow up gender exploration is a NORMAL part of development and understanding the society roles [sic] around them. Exploring one’s gender does not mean that any intervention is necessary aside from support and assuring their safety,” wrote Rafferty.
Unmentioned Risks
In his response to the law firm’s questions, Rafferty described how puberty blockers can cause sterility in children and admitted there were no studies evaluating whether puberty suppression leads to sexual dysfunction.
“Long story short, if you start blockers early in puberty before the eggs or cells that give rise to sperm mature (essentially before someone starts to menstruate or ejaculate), then later go directly on directly to cross sex hormone, then you never allow the maturation to occur and will essentially be sterile,” wrote Rafferty.
Transgender and gender-diverse children – like all children – need support, love and care from family, school and society. Dr. Jason Rafferty tells @NBCNews how research shows an affirming approach is the healthiest for a child’s development.https://t.co/8KdOfjRiMX
Rafferty further explained that while patients who’ve received sex-change interventions may have physical limitations in the mechanics of sexual intercourse, the experience of being sexually intimate in their “chosen” sex was “worth so much more to them.”
“Sexual dysfunction: As far as I know there is no study that looks at this, and frankly it would be a difficult study to do,” wrote Rafferty.
“The mechanics of an ‘internal orgasm’ and pleasure are quite different than penile erection, climax, and release of semen,” Rafferty wrote. “A fundamental point, however, is that for many people who are trans female, penile stimulation and external orgasm may actually be quite dysphoric and lead to an aversion or avoidance of sexual activity. I see this commonly in my practice. In adults post-op, I commonly hear that while there may be limitations, the ability to experience intimacy with a partner in a way that is affirming, or simply to be naked and comfortable in one’s body around another person, is worth so much more to them. I know this is not “a study” but it is the experience so many patients have shared with me.”
Puberty blockers stop the maturation process of the reproductive organs, leaving boys with a small penis and lacking the penile tissue needed for vaginoplasty — a sex change surgery that uses genital tissue to create an imitation vagina for men. Rafferty discussed this in his email to the law firm.
“I will also say that a risk you do not mention for trans females who start on blockers early in puberty is that there may not be enough penile tissue to do an inversion and achieve a full depth vaginal cavity. They may take tissue from the GI track or elsewhere to try to extend the cavity but that has led to complications (e.g. GI tissue tends to secrete a lot of mucous and foul odor),” wrote Rafferty.
Rafferty also noted there had been an increase in “top surgery” among teenagers, which he attributed to Medicaid coverage making the surgeries more accessible.
“Today, we have 3 surgeons in [Rhode Island] doing these surgeries and probably half a dozen in [Massachusetts] plus a pediatric plastic surgeon at Boston Children’s specializing in gender surgeries. Most if not all now take Medicaid – very few patients are paying the fully cost of surgery out of pocket. So, the point is that my experience is not that surgery is ‘more popular’ but just more (or simply just) accessible.”
Rafferty did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Pursuit Of Excellence
On September 15, 2022, WPATH released the SOC-8 without age minimums for child sex-change surgery. Upon its release, Hudson sent an internal memo with the AAP’s statement on the SOC-8, which included a FAQ about the AAP’s policy positions. The FAQ included the question, “What is the AAP’s position on the leaked recommendations on surgeries for minors?” The document gave the following answer: “AAP does not recommend surgical interventions for individuals younger than 18, except in rare cases.”
In December 2022, Jeff Hudson was awarded a Pursuit of Excellence award from the AAP for his work on behalf of “trans” youth, according to a LinkedIn post.
“I am extremely honored to have been awarded the AAP Pursuit of Excellence award for my work on behalf of trans and gender diverse youth,” Hudson wrote in the post.
The AAP previously provided the DCNF with a statement that confirmed their partnership with WPATH but explained that the AAP and peer organizations “develop policy guidance independently.”
“The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) routinely partners with relevant U.S. medical and mental health associations and global health organizations on a wide range of health issues, including the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH),” an AAP spokesperson told the DCNF.
“While this collaboration is important, the AAP develops policy guidance independently, as do its peer organizations.”
The American Academy of Pediatrics and Jeff Hudson did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-21 20:51:292024-11-21 20:51:29EXCLUSIVE: Here’s How A Small Band Of Pediatricians Pushed Medical Org Into Nixing Age Minimums For Sex Changes
Transgender activists using litigation to push child sex changes simultaneously sponsor an organization that teaches judges to view cases through the lens of gender ideology.
The Judicial Education Program at UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute partners with courts and judicial associations across the country to provide trainings that persuade judges to bring gender ideology into the courtroom, offering primers on the spectrum of sexual identities and suggesting they use pronouns when introducing themselves.
Meanwhile, its donors and corporate sponsors have for years been on the frontlines of lawsuits advancing LGBT causes, from legalizing same-sex marriage to opposing state child sex change bans.
Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, told the Daily Caller News Foundation he has “long called upon federal judges not to attend subject specific ‘training’ and ‘education’ programs” like the ones offered by Williams Institute.
“Judges can learn about subjects such as LGBT issues and economics on their own without ‘training’ funded by lawyers who argue cases in front of them or organizations that are parties to cases before them,” Painter told the DCNF. “In screening potential Supreme Court nominees for ethics issues, I remember asking about attendance at such ‘free’ seminars.”
One of the reasons Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito passed ethics clearance for appointment to the Supreme Court is because they did not participate in these kinds of programs, Painter noted.
Thousands of judges and their staffs have encountered training material produced by the Williams Institute.
Todd Brower, director of the Judicial Education Program at the Williams Institute, wrote in a 2019 letter to the House Judiciary Committee that he has trained “over 5000 judges, court staff and related court professionals from virtually every state in the United States on sexual orientation and gender identity issues for nearly 15 years.”
The institute’s Judicial Education Program, which operates alongside the International Association of LGBTQ+ Judges and the LGBTQ Bar Association, has offered trainings at venues including the New Mexico Judicial Conference, National Association of State Judicial Educators and National Judicial College, according to its website.
Brower taught a webinar for Ohio court personnel in November 2022 titled, “Sexual Identity and Gender Identity in the Courts,” according to a list previously obtained by the DCNF. He taught a course on incorporating pronoun usage and an awareness of gender identity into the courtroom at the Nevada Supreme Court in July 2023, the DCNF previously reported.
The institute was also involved in a May 2023 “Pride & Pronouns” training hosted at the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County.
This work, along with the institute’s research, is funded by several major law firms that do pro bono work to support LGBT-related activist litigation, from opposing child sex-change bans in red states to filing amicus briefs in key Supreme Court cases, according to a packet listing current and former sponsors.
“When a group like UCLA’s Williams Institute or the Climate Judiciary Project, for example, seeks behind-the-scenes access to judges, it is worth asking questions about the group’s funding and sponsors,” Carrie Severino, president of the conservative legal advocacy group JCN, told the DCNF. “Who are the sponsors we don’t know about? Why is the group interested in conducting such a training?”
One sponsor, Covington & Burling, records that it spent 10,200 pro bono hours in 2023 on LGBTQ+ matters, including leading an effort by medical associations to oppose child-sex change bans by filing amicus briefs in cases challenging the red state laws.
The firm represented the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in a case challenging Alabama’s ban on child sex changes. Discovery in the Alabama case revealed WPATH allowed political concerns to influence its Standards of Care (SOC-8) guidelines, succumbing to pressure from the Biden administration and “social justice lawyers.”
Two firms, Akin Gump and Sidley Austin, were part of an effort launched in 2019 with the Human Rights Campaign to bring strategic litigation to “combat the relentless attacks on LGBTQ equality by the Trump-Pence administration.”
Akin Gump joined the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and another firm to challenge Tennessee’s ban on child sex change procedures last year.
The Supreme Court will consider the Biden administration’s challenge to the same Tennessee law this term.
Another sponsor, Baker McKenzie, partnered with Lambda Legal and the Southern Poverty Law Center to fight Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill in court. The firm received an award from the LGBT advocacy group Stonewall for its litigation to “support and advance opportunities for LGBTQ+ young people across the country.”
The law firm Sheppard Mullin Richter serves as the national pro bono counsel for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), meaning its attorneys “regularly attend board meetings and represent the GLAAD when litigation arises,” according to the firm’s website.
Latham & Watkins helped the Williams Institute file its amicus brief in the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court case, which legalized same-sex marriage. Research from the brief was ultimately cited in the ruling.
Other firms that support the Williams Institute and engage in pro bono LGBT litigation include Kirkland & Ellis, Munger, Tolles & Olson and O’Melveny & Myers,
The Williams Institute operates with an over $4.5 million annual budget, according to its website.
“The funding of such ‘training’ of judges by law firms with a stake in LGBTQ-related case outcomes doesn’t pass the smell test,” Sarah Parshall Perry, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, told the DCNF. “And frankly, it would also be a violation of the lawyer’s code of professional ethics to allow private law firms to sponsor these one-sided trainings designed to reach preferred courtroom outcomes.”
These kinds of training are why state courts “have been overtaken by the despotism of ideological newspeak,” she said.
“Within the domestic relations field, for example, there have been increasingly problematic determinations from state judges on issues such a child custody, when a parent who does not automatically affirm a minor child’s expression of gender identity is subsequently divested of custody under the auspices that automatic affirmation by the other parent would be in the child’s ‘best interest,’” Perry said.
EXCLUSIVE: Biden-Harris Admin Paves Way For Bureaucrats To Take Gender-Confused Kids From ‘Non-Affirming’ Parents 🧵 pic.twitter.com/1ezojfWBxU
The Williams Institute is tied to organizations that spearheaded the push for child gender transitions.
The institute’s faculty advisory committee now includes Jillian T. Weiss, executive director of Transgender Legal Defense & Education, and Mark Schuster, CEO of the Kaiser Permanente School of Medicine in California.
Multipledetransitioners, such as Chloe Cole, have sued Kaiser Permanente for administering sex-change procedures like puberty blockers and double mastectomies to them as children.
The institute’s nonprofit donors backed the legal and medical groups that helped erase safeguards for children.
The Chicago-based Tawani Foundation, founded by transgender activist Jennifer (formerly James) Pritzker, has given the Williams Institute more than $1.4 million since 2018, according to tax documents.
Pritzker, a father and retired army lieutenant colonel who now identifies as a woman, is a major funder of WPATH. He received a philanthropy award from the organization for offering “longstanding support” and aid to produce the SOC8 guidelines.
Court documents unsealed in a case challenging Alabama’s ban on sex change procedures for minors revealed WPATH avoided evidence reviews for its SOC8 guidelines on the advice of “social justice” attorneys. Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine also successfully pressured WPATH to remove its minimum age recommendations.
The Tawani Foundation awarded $275,000 to WPATH between 2019 and 2020, tax records show.
The foundation also funds a slew of LGBT litigation efforts. Since 2018, it has awarded the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund $437,500, the National Center for Transgender Equality $125,000 and $100,000 to GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, per tax records.
The San Francisco-based Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund has given the Williams Institute $282,500 since 2016. Over the same time period, it awarded nearly $1.27 million to the National Center for Transgender Equality, $1.08 million to the Transgender Law Center, $80,000 to the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, $1.7 million to the National Center For Lesbian Rights and $435,500 to Lambda Legal, per tax records.
The left-wing Tides Center works with and financially sponsors the fund’s Haas Leadership Initiatives program, which offers grants to organizations to support litigation that increases “the legal privileges of LGBT people,” according to Influence Watch.
The Williams Institute has also received a total of $283,348 from the David Bohnett Foundation since 2004, according to grants reported on its website. Most recently, the organization gave $5,000 for its 2024 gala.
Bohnett Foundation president Michael Fleming is married to his same-sex partner, California Court of Appeal Justice Luis A. Lavin, according to his bio. Lavin spoke at the Williams Institute’s LGBTQ Bench webinar in 2021.
The David Bohnett Foundation has donated to various other groups pushing cases through the legal system, such as the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, the Transgender Law Center, Lambda Legal and the National Center for Lesbian Rights.
The Williams Institute, Covington & Burling, Akin Gump, Sidley Austin, Baker McKenzie, Sheppard Mullin Richter, Latham & Watkins, Kirkland & Ellis, Munger, Tolles & Olson and O’Melveny & Myers did not respond to requests for comment. Pritzker also did not respond to a request for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-20 05:52:542024-11-20 05:52:54Top Law Firms Backing Child Sex Changes Funneled Money Into Org That Trains Judges On Gender Ideology
As once-and-future President Donald J. Trump strode to the podium to deliver his victory speech after winning the 2024 presidential election, he made his exuberant followers a solemn vow: “I will govern by a simple motto: Promises made, promises kept.” President Trump, who made greater efforts to keep his campaign pledges as the 45th president than perhaps any modern president in decades, has vowed to protect children from irreversible surgeries, uproot extreme transgender ideology from government, enshrine parental rights, and end the weaponization of government against Christians and pro-life advocates.
Here are some of President-Elect Donald Trump’s most important 2024 campaign promises on transgender issues, abortion, and education.
President Donald Trump’s 2024 Promises on Transgender Ideology
The Biden-Harris administration’s advocacy of extreme transgender ideology did more to return the 45th president to office than any other issue. The Democratic polling firm Blueprint found that swing voters said the top reason they voted against the Democratic candidate in 2024 is that “Kamala Harris is focused more on cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class.” And Republicans spent $65 million on ads highlighting the Democratic Party’s transgender extremism in three months.
But long before the election, President Trump had vowed to reel in the radicalism of the Obama-Biden-Harris administrations.
“Probably number one on my list … I will sign a law prohibiting child sexual mutilation — think of it, sexual mutilation — in all 50 states,” President Trump promised during his speech to the 2023 Pray Vote Stand Summit. He denounced governors like Minnesota’s Tim Walz (D) and California’s Gavin Newsom (D) for signing “depraved new laws that strip parents of parental rights and that encourage minors to be transported across state lines for sexual mutilation. … We will prosecute those involved in this sick California scheme for violating federal laws against kidnapping, sex trafficking, child abuse, and the deprivation of their civil rights.”
President Trump has long recognized the overreach, and political value, of extreme gender ideology. No later than February 2023, President Trump included a robust, 11-point plan to end gender “madness” in his “Agenda47” blueprint for his next administration. Trump posted these pledges on the Trump-Vance campaign website and articulated these points in a video posted on Rumble on February 1, 2023.
“Here’s my plan to stop the chemical, physical, and emotional mutilation of our children,” said the president.
“On day one, I will revoke Joe Biden’s cruel policies on so-called ‘gender-affirming care,” which Trump called “ridiculous.” As he did at the Pray Vote Stand Summit, he promised to oppose “a process that includes giving kids puberty blockers, mutating their physical appearance, and ultimately performing surgery on minor children.”
“I will sign a new executive order instructing every federal agency to cease all programs that promote the concept of sex and gender transition at any age,” he said.
“I will then ask Congress to permanently stop federal taxpayer dollars from being used to promote or pay for these procedures and pass a law prohibiting child sexual mutilation in all 50 states,” he said, forecasting, “It’ll go very quickly.”
”I will declare that any hospital or health care provider that participates in the chemical or physical mutilation of minor youth will no longer meet federal health and safety standards for Medicaid and Medicare and will be terminated from the program immediately.” For instance, Boston Children’s Hospital received $1.4 million from the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS) of Massachusetts for inflicting “gender transition services” between January 2015 and May 2023. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) also awardeda $3.3 million grant to build a website targeting young people in other states who identify as transgender.
“Furthermore, I will support the creation of a private right of action for victims to sue doctors who have unforgivably performed these procedures on minor children,” said Trump. Within one week, two former victims of the transgender industry — Chloe Cole and Camille Kiefel — sued the doctors who misdiagnosed their mental illness as gender dysphoria and recommended surgical amputations.
“The Department of Justice will investigate Big Pharma and the big hospital networks to determine whether they have deliberately covered up horrific long-term side effects of sex transitions in order to get rich at the expense of vulnerable patients — in this case, very vulnerable,” promised the 45th president. Economic considerations undeniably play a role in Dr. Shayne Taylor convinced Nashville’s Vanderbilt University to begin carrying out transgender surgeries, because “they require a lot of follow-ups. They require a lot of time, and they make money —they make money for the hospital.”
”We will also investigate whether Big Pharma or others have illegally marketed hormones and puberty blockers, which are in no way licensed or approved for this use,” said Trump about the off-label, experimental uses of drugs intended to temporarily suspend precocious puberty only until it could safely begin.
“My Department of Education will inform states and school districts that if any teacher or school official suggests to a child that they could be trapped in the wrong body, they will be faced with severe consequences, including potential civil rights violations for sex discrimination and the elimination of federal funding,” he said.
“As part of our new credentialing body for teachers, we will promote positive education about the nuclear family, the roles of mothers and fathers, and celebrating rather than erasing the things that make men and women different and unique,” said President Trump.
“I will ask Congress to pass a bill establishing that the only genders recognized by the United States government are male and female, and they are assigned at birth. The bill will also make clear that Title IX prohibits men from participating in women’s sports,” said the president-elect. The injustice of having female athletes like Riley Gaines lose scholarships, prizes, or other opportunities to middling male athletes drove voters toward the Trump-Vance ticket, polls show.
“And we will protect the rights of parents from being forced to allow their minor child to assume a gender which is new and an identity without the parent’s consent,” Trump vowed. When one mother’s former lesbian partner began to teach her four-year-old son about extreme gender ideology, she said the boy’s preschool sent her “edicts by email,” with no consideration that he, or she, may not be fully committed to his social transition.
“No serious country should be telling its children that they were born in the wrong gender,” said President Trump.” Under my leadership, this madness will end.”
President Donald Trump’s 2024 Promises on Abortion
Although the Trump 2024 presidential campaign retreated to a less committed policy on protecting the unborn, the Trump-Vance ticket promised to end the weaponization of the federal government against pro-life advocates and left the door open to some additional pro-life measures.
After the 2022 Dobbs decision, the Biden-Harris administration stood by as Jane’s Revenge attacked pro-life women’s resource centers and churches. It then established a federal task force to prosecute peaceful — often elderly — pro-life sidewalk counselors on flimsy charges that they violated the 1994 Federal Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.
“To reverse these cruel travesties of justice, tonight I’m announcing that the moment I win the election, I will appoint a special task force to rapidly review the cases of every political prisoner who’s been unjustly persecuted by the Biden administration … so that I can study the situation very quickly and sign their pardons or commutations on day one,” President Trump told the 2023 Pray Vote Stand Summit. “Never again will the federal government be used to target religious believers.”
As president in 2017, President Trump strengthened pro-life policies that protected U.S. taxpayer funds from underwriting abortion around the world. He later enacted regulations preventing those who receive Title X funding from advocating abortion — which led Planned Parenthood to withdraw from the federal family planning program rather than give up abortion advocacy. The administration appears amenable to reenacting these measures. “On the question of defunding Planned Parenthood, look, I mean, our view is we don’t think that taxpayers should fund late-term abortions. That has been a consistent view of the Trump campaign the first time around. It will remain a consistent view,” said Vice President-Elect J.D. Vance last month.
Vance also personally distinguished between a “national abortion ban” and a “minimum national standard,” such as a bill to protect unborn babies from abortion after 15 weeks — although Trump has not registered his support for the measure.
President Trump kept his promise after he became the first candidate to release a list of potential Supreme Court justices’ names during the 2016 election. After seeing the hand of God deliver him from two assassination attempts, President Trump has found a divine purpose in carrying out his campaign promises. If he keeps these promises, which won the Republican Party eight out of 10 white evangelical voters and more than nine out of 10 pro-life votes, he will go far toward his goal to make America great again.
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.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2024-11-19 17:51:252024-11-19 17:51:25Here Are Donald Trump’s ‘Promises Made’ on Transgenderism and Abortion
