All articles from January 12, 2021


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

  • Nothing is published in Video on January 12, 2021.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on January 12, 2021.

News

BREAKING: In new lockdown, Ontario threatens fines, jail for leaving home

Ontarians can be fined and prosecuted for leaving home for 'non-essential' activities under the new stay-at-home order.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 8:29 pm EST
Featured Image
JL IMAGES / Shutterstock.com
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

ONTARIO, January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The Ontario government has declared a second state of emergency and is issuing a stay-at-home order for the province beginning January 14, to last at least 28 days.

Contact your MPP today: New Ontario lockdown must be opposed! Sign the petition here.

Premier Doug Ford announced today that the order allows people to leave their homes only for “essential” purposes, “such as going to the grocery store, pharmacy, accessing health-care services, exercising, or essential work.” In addition, “[o]utdoor organized public gatherings and social gatherings are further restricted to a limit of five people with limited exceptions.”

The order is “aimed at limiting people's mobility and reducing the number of daily contacts with those outside an immediate household,” according to the news release announcing the second state of emergency.

The new restrictions were announced following new projections of ICU occupancy by COVID-19 patients, which is now over 400 beds and “is projected to be as high as 1,000 beds by early February which has the potential to overwhelm Ontario's hospitals,” the news release states.

According to Solicitor General Sylvia Jones, "[s]trong, new measures will be enforced to stop the spread of COVID-19.”

“We are taking extraordinary action to provide law enforcement officers with the tools and support they need to protect the health and wellbeing of Ontarians,” reported Jones.

These new “extraordinary” measures include allowing law enforcement to “issue tickets to those who breach the order and disperse crowds larger than five people, if they’re not part of the same household.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Ontarians found violating the stay-at-home order face a fine and prosecution under the Reopening Ontario Act and the Emergency Management and Civil Emergency Management (EMPCA). Penalties include up to a year in jail, according to Solicitor General Jones.

“We have made great strides in vaccinating tens of thousands of Ontarians, and we can’t let these efforts go to waste,” stated Christine Elliott, deputy premier and minister of health. “Urgent action is required to break this deadly trend of transmission, ensure people stay home, and save lives.”

Just weeks ago, Ontario emergency room (E.R.) doctor Dr. Gil Nimni called out his “colleagues” who say the E.R. is “crazy” when he has observed that it is “empty.” 

Nimni acknowledged that COVID-19 is real and serious but expressed concerns on Twitter that “lockdowns are resulting in economic devastation but also resulting in fewer people accessing care in a timely manner.”

“The sad tragedy in all of this is when the government tells people to lock down, unfortunately that translates into people not seeking care for things they should. You see a lot of late presentation in things that should have been dealt with weeks earlier. Those are the concerning issues,” Nimni stated in a Toronto Sun report.

“Locking down people and sending people into financial ruin and worsening mental-health issues isn’t really the right answer,” he added.

A recent Gallup survey found that lockdowns have contributed to a record mental health decline, with social distancing and stay-at-home orders identified by the CDC as likely culprits of “adverse mental or behavioral health conditions.”

The American Institute for Economy Research (AIER) also released a report in November affirming that virtually all aspects of day-to-day life, including mental health, the economy, unemployment, and crime, have been harmed by the COVID-19 lockdowns.


  big brother, coronavirus, doug ford, lockdown, ontario, police state, stay-at-home order

News

Parler CEO John Matze receives death threats as censorship intensifies

Google, Apple and Amazon have banished the growing social media outlet and purged other conservative accounts.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 8:25 pm EST
Featured Image
John Matze, CEO of Parler. American Thought Leaders - The Epoch Times / YouTube
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – After the removal of social media platform Parler from the Google PlayStore and the Apple Store on smartphones and its subsequent removal by Amazon from its web hosting service, CEO John Matze told Fox News host Tucker Carlson that he feared for his safety with “people threatening (his) life.”

“It is disgusting,” Matze said about the threats on his life. “I can’t go home tonight (…) This is not just, you know, our civil liberties. They can shut down a half a billion dollar company overnight.”

Parler was shut down by the tech giants Apple, Google, and Amazon on Saturday as the social media platform was performing exceptionally well on app stores, sitting in the number one spot for free app downloads:

The popularity of the app rocketed after Twitter banned the account of President Donald Trump on its platform. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey celebrated the supplanting of Parler from its number one spot, a consequence of the Big Tech companies working in concert to suppress the app, in a tweet that drew condemnation from the Twittersphere.

Twitter has also been accused of purging numerous conservative accounts, as right-wing commentators began tweeting that they were losing followers by the thousands. PragerU said that they had “lost over 5K followers.” Matt Walsh of The Daily Wire also tweeted out that he lost “about 5,000 followers.” 

Walsh laid the blame on Twitter itself, claiming that the social media platform is targeting conservative voices: “It’s clear that Twitter is wiping out conservative accounts. That’s why your follower counts are going down. This is the biggest purge we’ve seen, and not the last.”

A Twitter spokesman told the Daily Caller News Foundation that, “in line with our policy on Coordinated Harmful Activity,” and as a result of “the renewed potential for violence,” Twitter will take “strong enforcement action,” and will “permanently suspend accounts that are solely dedicated to sharing QAnon content.”

Commenting on the removal of Parler from its App Store, Apple claimed that Parler allowed “threats of violence and illegal activity” and “has not taken adequate measures to address the proliferation of these threats to people’s safety.” Matze noted his surprise at the recent shutdown as he told Carlson he had received no notification from Apple, Google, or Amazon, who canceled his social media service “without any prior warning.”

“We didn’t get a notice from Google; we read it online in the news first,” Matze explained. “That is shocking. And then after they set that example, you know, we get email after email. It’s almost like you’re just waiting, who’s going to be next dumping us.” He anticipates that “within 24 hours our (Parler’s) email will be shut off too.”

Matze professed to not going down without a fight, biting back at the companies responsible for Parler’s shutdown: “We will be back eventually because we are not going to give up.” He doubled down on this promise, saying “we’re going to do it. We’re going to be back online one day. And hopefully soon, as soon as possible. But this is a real challenge. We have to build our own infrastructure — our own everything in order to do it.”

Commenting on the difficulty of re-establishing the business online, Matze noted that, without the availability of Big Tech platforms, it may take some time to implement a new infrastructure. “(S)oon is difficult, you know,” he said, explaining that, in talks with server providers, “right at the last minute they just bailed (…) someone said something: we can’t host you.” 

In response to Amazon removing the social media platfom from its web hosting service, Parler is suing Amazon. The lawsuit states that Amazon Web Services terminated Parler’s account based on political hostilities, violated antitrust laws, and did not fulfil its contractual obligation to give Parler 30 days’ notice of termination.


  amazon, apple, big tech, daily caller, google, jack dorsey, john matze, matt walsh, parler, prageru, the daily wire, twitter

News

House Homeland Security chair: Those contesting election results incited ‘domestic terrorism’

Rep. Bennie Thompson suggested individuals such as Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley should be placed on the no-fly list for 'inciting insurrection.'
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 7:37 pm EST
Featured Image
Democrat U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi Wikimedia Commons
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The chair of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security said that those “seeking to overturn” the contested election results are guilty of inciting domestic terrorism.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, issued a statement on Jan. 7 claiming that “What occurred yesterday at our nation’s Capitol was – pure and simple – domestic terrorism incited by President Trump, his enablers, and those seeking to overturn the results of a legitimate election.”

Thompson echoed those sentiments in an interview with Joe Madison on SiriusXM’s The Joe Madison Show, saying he thinks Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley should be placed on the no-fly list if found liable for “inciting” “insurrection” at the Capitol on Jan. 6.

"There’s talk about liability for inciting this insurrection falling, maybe, in the laps of Senator Hawley and Senator Cruz and a member of Congress who may have Facetimed or led people to (Nancy) Pelosi’s office. If these folks are found liable, should they be on the no-fly list?” Madison asked Thompson on his show Monday morning.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“Well, there’s no question about it,” Thompson replied. “There’s no exemption for being put on the no-fly list.”

“Even a member of Congress that commits a crime, you know, they expel from the body. There are ethics charges that can be brought against those individuals. And people are looking at all this. What Hawley did and what Cruz did was horrible,” Thompson continued. 

Hawley and Cruz’s “horrible” transgression consists of their objections to the certification of contested 2020 presidential election returns. Penn Live noted that other lawmakers have “blamed Cruz and others objecting to the election results for the violence,” according to The New York Times

In addition, Fox News reported that some have “accused Cruz and Hawley of promoting sedition and lawlessness by repeating the president's baseless rhetoric that the election was rigged.”

Several other congressmen have castigated Senators Cruz and Hawley for their objection to the electoral results, including Senator Sherrod Brown, who has gone so far as to accuse Cruz and Hawley of having “betrayed their oaths of office and abetted a violent insurrection on our democracy.”

“I am calling for their immediate resignations. If they do not resign, the Senate must expel them,” Brown said over the weekend. 
Accusations of inciting violence have also been leveled against Senators Hawley and Cruz by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, and Rep. Cori Bush, D-Missouri. Bush has introduced a resolution calling for the expulsion from Congress of GOP members who “attempted to overturn the election and incited a white alsupremacist attack.”

Hawley and Cruz have both condemned unlawful activity at the Capitol in strong terms, with Senator Hawley calling for those who broke the law to be prosecuted and Senator Cruz calling for the Department of Justice to “vigorously prosecute everyone who was involved in these brazen acts of violence.”


  bennie thompson, donald trump, joe madison, josh hawley, nancy pelosi, ted cruz, u.s. capitol, u.s. house committee on homeland security

News

BREAKING: Supreme Court says FDA can limit telemed abortions

Although the 'public health experts' running the FDA right now support the just-reinstated very small restriction on abortion pills, it is highly unlikely the 'public health experts' of a Biden regime will feel the same way.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 7:26 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The U.S. Supreme Court tonight granted the Trump administration’s request for the reinstatement of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules requiring an in-person doctor visit before a woman obtains abortion pills.

This action allows the FDA to enforce the in-person requirements for the abortion pill under Mifeprex’s Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy (REMS) while litigation continues in the Fourth Circuit Court. The litigation could still end up back at the Supreme Court at a later date to be debated on the merits.

However, the Supreme Court’s ruling is premised on the federal government having the power to decide FDA regulations, and so although the order may save some babies over the next week, it is all but certain that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will suspend or permanently scrap the basic health and safety regulation soon after taking power. 

Under the guise of the coronavirus outbreak, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and other pro-abortion groups sued the FDA over its regulations that require doctors writing prescriptions for abortion pills see their patients in-person. If abortionists don’t see women in person, there can be a host of complications for the mother as well as the child who is killed.

The abortion pill regimen is designed to kill babies during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, but without seeing the mother in-person for an ultrasound, an abortionist could dispense the pills to women farther along in pregnancy than 10 weeks or who have ectopic pregnancies. This could make the abortion pill more dangerous for the mother than it already is. 

Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan dissented. 

“The majority of American women seeking abortion care [sic] during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy rely on medication abortion,” wrote Sotomayor and Kagan in a joint dissent that played up the danger of the coronavirus, citing the Centers for Disease Control. “Medication abortion involves taking two prescription drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol, which together induce the equivalent of an early miscarriage.”

Abortion is the deliberate killing of an embryonic or fetal human being whereas miscarriage is his or her natural death.

“Although the COVID–19 pandemic has only worsened since October, the Court now grants the Government’s request,” they lamented. “Due to particularly severe health risks, vastly limited clinic options, and the 10-week window for obtaining a medication abortion, the FDA’s requirement that women obtain mifepristone in person during the COVID–19 pandemic places an unnecessary and undue burden on their right to abortion. Pregnancy itself puts a woman at increased risk for severe consequences from COVID–19. In addition, more than half of women who have abortions are women of color, and COVID–19’s mortality rate is three times higher for Black and Hispanic individuals than non-Hispanic White individuals.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, who has sided with a number of pro-abortion and pro-LGBT rulings, simply wrote, “The question before us is not whether the requirements for dispensing mifepristone impose an undue burden on a woman’s right to an abortion as a general matter. The question is instead whether the District Court properly ordered the Food and Drug Administration to lift those established requirements because of the court’s own evaluation of the impact of the COVID–19 pandemic...I do not see a sufficient basis here for the District Court to compel the FDA to alter the regimen for medical abortion.”

Roberts also wrote that he believes “that courts owe significant deference to the politically accountable entities with the ‘background, competence, and expertise to assess public health,’” referencing South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom. In that ruling, the Supreme Court declined to intervene on behalf of California churches who were being targeted for closure supposedly because of the coronavirus. 

Although the “public health experts” running the FDA right now support the just-reinstated very small restriction on abortion pills, it is highly unlikely the “public health experts” of a Biden regime will feel the same way.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

  abortion, abortion pill, abortion pills, coronavirus, coronavirus restrictions, fda, joe biden, president trump, supreme court

News

LifeSite journalist: Big Tech is ‘subverting’ the Constitution, attacking Trump supporters

Stephen Kokx appeared on WOOD radio Tuesday to discuss social media censorship of LifeSite.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 4:54 pm EST
Featured Image
Justin Barclay (left) and Stephen Kokx (right) discussed Big Tech censorship Tuesday, January 12, 2021.
LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

January 12, 2021, GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN (LifeSiteNews) — During an appearance on West Michigan Live with Justin Barclay earlier today, LifeSite journalist Stephen Kokx said that social media’s decision to ban President Trump is a sign that “corporate authoritarianism” is on the rise in the United States. 

Kokx, who lives in Grand Rapids, Michigan, was speaking with Barclay about Big Tech censorship when he said that he believes the real goal of Facebook and Twitter’s ban is not to merely silence the president but instead to attack patriotic conservatives and Christians who supported him over the last four years. 

Barclay asked Kokx to appear on the hour-long, terrestrial radio program — aired locally on 106.9 FM and on 1300 AM — to talk about censorship issues that LifeSite has been facing in recent days. 

Last Friday, social media scheduling app Buffer cancelled LifeSite’s account without any warning. LifeSite had been using the app for more than four years to send its stories out to Facebook and Twitter.

On Monday this week, scheduling app Sendible also banned LifeSite from using its services after just one day of use. LifeSite has not received a response from either Buffer or Sendible as to how their terms of service were violated. 

Barclay is a Christian radio host who gives motivational speeches and makes public appearances in Western Michigan and elsewhere. He regularly shares Bible verses on his Facebook and Twitter accounts. He also has a free “good news” email newsletter you can sign up for by clicking here. 

Kokx informed Barclay about the months-long investigation LifeSite conducted in 2020 titled Uncensored: Big Tech vs. Free Speech. That investigation provided irrefutable evidence that pro-life and Christian groups across the country have been censured and attacked by social media giants over the last several years. 

Barclay asked Kokx where he thinks things will go from here, to which Kokx said that in all likelihood it will only get worse. Kokx said Christians need to make sure they are self-sufficient in the communities they live in and that they need to build their own social media platforms as best they can, while also finding unique ways to stay in touch with one another and help one another out. He pointed to LifeSite’s LifeFunder tool as an example of that. Kokx believes that praying for perseverance and being willing to be a martyr is what people should focus on in the days, months, and years ahead. 


  2020 election, big tech, facebook, president trump, twitter, uncensored: big tech vs. free speech

News

UK government funding COVID ‘vaccine passports’ just weeks after saying there were no plans for them

On December 14 Nadhim Zahawi, the minister overseeing the rollout of the vaccine, said twice during a parliamentary debate that the government had 'no plans to introduce so-called vaccine passporting.'
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 4:02 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
Paul Smeaton Paul Smeaton Follow Paul
By Paul Smeaton

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

UNITED KINGDOM, January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The U.K. government is funding the trial of COVID-19 vaccination passports, less than a month after the government minister responsible for COVID-19 vaccines stated that “we have no plans to introduce so-called vaccine passporting” and urged businesses “not to even think about that.” 

U.K. newspaper The Telegraph report that biometrics firm iProov and cybersecurity firm Mvine will provide thousands of Britons with a free app which will enable them to digitally prove that they have received a vaccine.

According to the report “[t]he trial will be overseen by two directors of public health” with the government providing £75,000 in funding. 

The report further states the companies developing the passports say that if they are successful they could be “expanded to millions of people.”

The Telegraph report notes “that the Government has contradicted itself on the use of vaccine passports,” citing contradictory statements from senior officials.

“In December, Michael Gove said that they were ‘not the plan’ but Nadhim Zahawi, the minister overseeing the rollout of the vaccine, said they were ‘looking at the technology’,” the report notes.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Gove, a senior government official and Minister for the Cabinet Office, said in a Sky News interview in December that a vaccine passport was “not being planned.” 

“I certainly am not planning to introduce any vaccine passports and I don't know anyone else in government,” Gove said.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4 at the end of November, Zahawi said that whilst the vaccine would not be compulsory, he expected immunity passports to be used, especially in businesses. “I think you’ll probably find that restaurants and bars and cinemas and other venues, sports venues, will probably also use that system – as they have done with the app [NHS Track and Trace app].”

“People have to be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to be vaccinated or otherwise,” he told the BBC.

“But, I think the very strong message that you will see, this is the way we return the whole country, and so it’s good for your family, it’s good for your community, it’s good for your country to be vaccinated. And, ultimately people will have to make a decision,” he continued. 

“I think that in many ways, the pressure will come from both ways, from service providers who'll say, ‘Look, demonstrate to us that you have been vaccinated.’ But, also, we will make the technology as easy and accessible as possible.”

Asked specifically about vaccine passports, Zahawi said that the government was “looking at the technology.”

But speaking during a December 14 parliamentary debate on whether restrictions would be imposed on those who are not vaccinated against COVID-19, Zahawi walked back his previous comments and said twice that the government had “no plans to introduce so-called vaccine passporting.”

Linking such passports with penalties for those who refuse a COVID-19 vaccine, Zahawi said: “while I am aware that other nations may consider immunity passports alongside vaccination, it is my fervent belief that we must not penalize people who remain unconvinced.” 

During that debate Zahawi joined with other politicians present in speaking against mandatory vaccinations, describing them as “discriminatory and completely wrong.”

Zahawi also addressed the matter of vaccine cards, which are to be issued to people after they have received the jab. In addressing concerns that these could effectively become vaccine passports, Zahawi said: “that does not constitute a so-called vaccine passport; nor can it be used as a form of identification. That would be absolutely wrong.”

Yesterday the New York Post reported that Denmark is likewise developing a digital vaccine passport.

Commenting on the prospect earlier this week, political cartoonist and lockdown sceptic, Bob Moran, wrote: “Health Passport. Vaccine Certificate. Immunity Card. Society Permit. Freedom Pass. Whatever they call it, if you accept the concept you will never be free again.”

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page.  View it here. 


  coronavirus restrictions, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19, michael gove, nadhim zahawi, vaccine passports

News

‘Very healthy’ Miami obstetrician, 56, dies 16 days after receiving Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine

‘In my mind his death was 100 percent linked to the vaccine. There is no other explanation,’ his widow said.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 3:42 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Patrick Delaney Patrick Delaney Follow
By

MIAMI BEACH, Florida, January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A “very healthy” 56-year-old obstetrician has died 16 days after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

According to his widow, Heidi Neckelmann, Gregory Michael, MD, who practiced at Mount Sinai Medical Center (MSMC), was in good physical shape, active, and had no pre-existing conditions prior to receiving the vaccine on December 18, 2020.

Three days later, he noticed severe broken blood vessels on his feet and hands which prompted him to seek immediate medical attention at MSMC.

There, according to the DailyMail, he was diagnosed with ITP, also known as severe thrombocytopenia. Under this condition “the immune system mistakes platelets for foreign objects and instructs the spleen to destroy them,” and thus too, their function of helping the blood to clot in prevention of bleeding.

Though remaining in the hospital for ongoing attention, Michael died suddenly on Sunday, January 3, from “a hemorrhagic stroke caused by the lack of platelets,” Neckelmann lamented on her Facebook page.

“In my mind his death was 100 percent linked to the vaccine. There is no other explanation,” she said.

“He was in very good health. He didn’t smoke, he drank alcohol once in a while but only socially. He worked out, we had kayaks, he was a deep sea fisherman.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“They tested him for everything you can imagine afterwards, even cancer, and there was absolutely nothing else wrong with him,” she said.

According to News4JAX, the Florida’s Department of Health referred the case to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for investigation. A CDC spokesperson said “they will evaluate the situation as more information becomes available and provide timely updates on what is known and any necessary actions.”

Pfizer acknowledged they were aware of Michael’s “highly unusual” death and were investigating it further. Their spokesman added, however, “We don’t believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine.”

The death of Dr. Michael, a father of one, comes in the wake of many concerns regarding coronavirus vaccines, which have been rushed through the process of development, testing, approval, and now distribution, with a new “messenger RNA” technology, no industry-standard animal trials, nor any sufficient studies on long-term effects.

Indeed, in early December, a former vice president and Chief Scientist at Pfizer, Dr. Michael Yeadon, petitioned for the halting of all testing of coronavirus vaccine candidates in Europe due to the significant safety concerns of a growing number of renowned scientists.

These concerns included “allergic” and “potentially fatal reactions,” risks that these vaccines may cause infertility in women, result in an increased vulnerability to the virus, and present unacceptable dangers of long-term effects due to a lack of proper testing.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration also drew up a document this fall listing the possible side-effects from a COVID-19 vaccine, including strokes, encephalitis, auto-immune disease, birth defects, Kawasaki disease, and death.

Present reports reveal that hundreds of individuals injected with these vaccines have been admitted to the hospital while high rates of health care workers continue refusing to receive them.

According to his grieving widow, Dr. Gregory “was a pro vaccine advocate” and that is why he chose to receive the vaccine himself.

Ms. Neckelmann concluded her public Facebook announcement by saying that she believes “people should be aware that side effects can happen,” that the vaccine “is not good for everyone and in this case destroyed a beautiful life, a perfect family, and has affected so many people in the community.

“Do not let his death be in vain please save more lives by making this information news,” she said.

RELATED

Portuguese mother, 41, dies two days after taking Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine

Former Pfizer VP: ‘No need for vaccines,’ ‘the pandemic is effectively over’

FDA: Death, heart attacks, stroke, blood disorders all possible side effects of COVID vaccine

Nurses, hospital staff refuse to take COVID vaccine in large numbers

Research scientist warns coronavirus vaccines have ‘terrible safety record’ historically

Doctor calls Fauci’s demand for mass COVID vaccinations ‘utter nonsense’

COVID-19 ‘warp speed’ vaccines likely not safe and not needed, medical expert says

Pfizer COVID jab warning: No breastfeeding, avoid pregnancy for 2 months, unknown fertility impacts


  cdc, coronavirus vaccine, florida, gregory michael, pfizer, pfizer-biontech

News

BREAKING: Trump calls Big Tech censorship ‘a catastrophic mistake’

‘I think that Big Tech is doing a horrible thing for our country and to our country,’ the president said.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 3:27 pm EST
Featured Image
President Donald Trump at Joint Base Andrews, Jan. 12, 2021 Donald J Trump / YouTube
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — President Donald Trump has called out Big Tech for silencing both himself and many other conservative voices in the past few days, calling it a “terrible mistake” that is “very, very bad for our country.”

Speaking at Joint Base Andrews prior to flying out to Alamo, Texas, the president briefly talked to the gathered media, focusing on the huge and sudden explosion of Big Tech censorship which has seen Trump banned from Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, as well as other platforms, in just a matter of days.

“I think that Big Tech is doing a horrible thing for our country and to our country,” Trump said. “I believe it’s going to be a catastrophic mistake for them. They’re dividing and divisive, and they’re showing something that I’ve been predicting for a long time. I’ve been predicting it for a long time and people didn’t act on it, but I think Big Tech has made a terrible mistake, and very, very bad for our country.”

“And that’s leading others to do the same thing, and it causes a lot of problems and a lot of danger. Big mistake — they shouldn’t be doing it. But there’s always a counter move when they do that. I’ve never seen such anger as I see right now, and that’s a terrible thing, terrible thing.”

Trump also touched on the protests at the Capitol last Wednesday: “And you have to always avoid violence, and we have tremendous support. We have fought, probably like nobody’s ever seen before. Always have to avoid violence.”

As reporters questioned him about what role they thought he may have played in the protest, Trump noted, “People thought that what I said was totally appropriate, and if you look at what other people have said, politicians on a high level, about the riots during the summer, the horrible riots in Portland, Seattle and various other places, that was a real problem what they said.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“But they’ve analyzed my speech and my words and my final paragraph, final sentence, and everybody to a T thought it was totally appropriate,” he concluded.

In his January 6 speech, Trump declared that “the media is the biggest problem we have as far as I’m concerned, single biggest problem, the fake news and the Big Tech, Big Tech is now coming into their own.”

“They rigged it like they’ve never rigged an election before,” he continued, adding that the “Big Tech media” were amongst those “who want to deceive you and demoralize you and control you.”

Shortly before arriving at Joint Base Andrews today, the president had spoken to the media outside the White House regarding the Democrat’s second attempt to impeach him just days before former Vice President Joe Biden is due to be inaugurated: “And on the impeachment, it’s really a continuation of the greatest witch hunt in the history of politics. It’s ridiculous. It’s absolutely ridiculous.”

“This impeachment is causing tremendous anger, and you’re doing it, and it’s really a terrible thing that they’re doing. For Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to continue on this path, I think it’s causing tremendous danger to our country and it’s causing tremendous anger. I want no violence.”


  big tech, censorship, donald trump, social media

News

PBS lawyer caught saying ‘Homeland Security’ should seize Trump supporters’ kids, put them in ‘re-education camps’

Calling Trump 'close to Hitler,' BS Principal Counsel Michael Beller declares in remarks taped prior to the election that if Trump won he would 'go to the White House and throw Molotov cocktails.'
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 2:34 pm EST
Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – PBS has fired an attorney who was caught on tape celebrating the deaths of Republican voters to COVID-19 and advocating that they be put into “re-education camps.”

Conservative watchdog group Project Veritas released the video Tuesday, in which PBS Principal Counsel Michael Beller expresses his hatred for President Donald Trump and his voters in a variety of ways.

Calling Trump “close to Hitler,” Beller declares in remarks taped prior to the election that if Trump won he would “go to the White House and throw Molotov cocktails.” He adds that Trump voters are “raising a generation of intolerant, horrible people,” the cure for which would be to “go for all the Republican voters and Homeland Security will take their children away” and “put them into the re-education camps,” or “enlightenment camps,” which would “have Sesame Street characters in the classrooms, and they watch PBS all day.”

“Americans are so f***ing dumb,” the PBS attorney continues. “You know, most people are dumb. It’s good to live in a place [Washington, D.C.] where people are educated and know stuff. Could you imagine if you lived in one of these other towns or cities where everybody’s just stupid?”

“What’s great is that COVID is spiking in all the red states right now,” Beller adds. “So that’s great … because either those people won’t come out to vote for Trump — you know the red states — or a lot of them are sick and dying.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Journalist Matthew Keys subsequently reported that PBS has fired Beller. The network released a statement disavowing his remarks and stressing that he held no influence over PBS policy:

While Beller personally may not have set the taxpayer-funded network’s agenda, his comments are representative of the left-wing disposition seen in its programming, from the inclusion of LGBT themes in children’s shows to a Frontline feature last year in which a woman aborted twins on camera.

Beller’s comments echo sentiments liberals have voiced openly at other outlets about “cleansing” and “deprogramming” Trump supporters.


  donald trump, left-wing hate, liberalism, michael beller, pbs, project veritas, republicans

News

‘Problematic’: German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticizes Twitter for booting Trump

The right to express one's own opinion is of 'elementary significance.'
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 2:23 pm EST
Featured Image
Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel in Brussels, Belgium, April 29, 2017. Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

GERMANY, January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized Twitter for shutting down President Trump’s account, calling it “problematic.”

Twitter permanently deleted Trump’s account from its social media platform on January 8, no longer allowing the president to reach his 88 million followers. Twitter cited as its reason the “risk of further incitement of violence” following the Jan. 6 breach of the Capitol building.

According to Merkel, as related through spokesman Steffen Seibert at a news conference in Berlin, Big Tech executives "bear great responsibility for political communication not being poisoned by hatred, by lies and by incitement to violence," adding however, that the right to express one's own opinion is of "elementary significance."

"This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators – not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms," Merkel added through her spokesman.   

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

"Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the U.S. president have now been permanently blocked," the spokesman said.

Merkel’s criticism is also shared by the French government. Junior Minister for European Union Affairs Clement Beaune told Bloomberg on Monday that he was “shocked” to see a private company silences the American president.

“This should be decided by citizens, not by a CEO,” Beaune said, adding: “There needs to be public regulation of big online platforms.”

A number of prominent conservatives are expressing outrage over Twitter permanently suspending President Donald Trump’s account last week by voluntarily abandoning the social media platform. Some of these include Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, Fox host and conservative commentator Mark Levin, and Fox News host Greg Gutfeld.

Shares of Twitter dropped 12 percent after the market opened on Monday. Twitter shares reached a low of $45.17 compared to $51.48 on Jan. 8. The social media company has lost $5 billion in market value.

A screen grab of Trump’s last tweets is available below. 

Image
Screen grab of President Donald Trump's last tweets before Twitter suspended his account on Jan. 8, 2021.

  angela merkel, censorship, donald trump, january 6, twitter, twitter ban, twitter censorship

News

Mexico’s president voices misgivings over Twitter’s Trump ban

'I don't like censorship.'
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 2:22 pm EST
Featured Image
Andrés Manuel López-Obrador, president of Mexico. Carlos Tischler / Shutterstock.com
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The populist and left-leaning president of Mexico said he does not like anybody “being censored” on social media in light of U.S. president Donald Trump being banned from Twitter and Facebook late last week.

“I always say what I think, something that I did not like yesterday about the Capitol affair, nothing more than respect, respect. But I don’t like censorship. I don’t like anyone being censored or taking away the right to transmit a message on Twitter or Face[book]. I do not agree with that; I do not accept that,” said Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador last Thursday at a press conference, as translated from Spanish to English.

“We all have to limit ourselves and guarantee freedom. How is it that I censor you and you can no longer transmit if we are for freedoms?”

Last Friday, Twitter permanently banned Trump’s account after first giving him a 12-hour suspension from the site.

Twitter alleged that Trump broke the platform’s Glorification of Violence policy, which limits posts that “glorify, celebrate, praise or condone violent crimes, violent events where people were targeted because of their membership in a protected group[.]”

Facebook and its subsidiary, s subsidiary, Instagram, said they were banning Trump “indefinitely” as well.

López made comments about social media censorship as part of a long answer in response to whether he was interested in monetizing his popular official government YouTube channel.  

He responded that he does not like the idea of monetizing his channel, as he is a “public official, a public servant.”

His answer then drifted to the topic of the censorship of Trump by Twitter and Facebook.

“How can you censor someone? ‘Let’s see, I, as the judge of the Holy Inquisition, will punish you because I think what you’re saying is harmful.’ ... Where is the law, where is the regulation, what are the norms? This is an issue of government; this is not an issue for private companies,” said López.

“Imagine that Twitter as a company decides: ‘You do not — because what you are saying is harmful, harmful or damaging, it goes against the good customs of the police and good government side.’ Let’s say that, because if social networks are censored, what will be left? ... So freedom is fully expressed on social media[.] ... If there begins to be censorship, there is cause for concern.”

In November of 2020, Obrador said Mexico “cannot act recklessly” in congratulating Joe Biden as the “potential” winner of the 2020 U.S. presidential elections until official results were posted.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

He was one of the last world leaders to congratulate Joe Biden, doing so only in late December, having sent a letter to Biden to congratulate him on his “triumph.”

According to an AP report about López’s remarks regarding censorship, his confidant and spokesperson Jesús Ramírez said the censorship of Trump from social media means there should be a call for a “debate” on free thought on the internet and the role of social media giants.

“Facebook’s decision to silence the current leader of the United States calls for a debate on freedom of expression, the free exchange of information on the web, democracy and the role of the companies that administer [social] networks,” said Ramírez.

Last Wednesday, Trump gave a speech to a large crowd at the White House Ellipse in Washington, D.C. saying, “We will never concede when theft is involved” regarding the 2020 presidential elections.

Trump’s speech took place as a joint session of Congress was being held to certify the results of the Electoral College’s votes.

Shortly after speaking, the vast majority of participants at the rally marched peacefully to the Capitol to voice their concerns over alleged election fraud claimed by Trump.

A small number of protesters stormed the Capitol Building, some with alleged ties to Antifa. A few of them made it inside, seemingly without going through any security. This resulted in the joint session of Congress being promptly postponed, with politicians inside ushered away to an undisclosed location.

A video that has over 33 million views apparently shows U.S. Capitol Police quietly relinquishing erected barricades, allowing a few protesters to access the Capitol Building.

In the early hours of January 7, Congress confirmed the electoral vote for Joe Biden as the next president of the U.S. Trump then said he would commit to an “an orderly transition” of power.

Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran of 14 years, was shot to death in the resulting chaos. A Capitol Police officer also died from injuries during the incident.

Trump later told the protesters on Capitol Hill to go home “in peace,” a message Twitter promptly flagged with the message, “This claim of election fraud is disputed, and this Tweet can’t be replied to, retweeted, or liked due to a risk of violence.”

Trump also denounced the protesters who had entered the U.S. Capitol, calling the action “heinous.”

In one of his last tweets before his account was shut down, Trump said he will not be attending the inauguration of Biden next week.

As for López, he noted that he is not planning on attending Biden’s inauguration, either.

The AP report also notes that López was hesitant to provide a comment regarding last Wednesday’s events at the Capitol in D.C., stating that his administration does not “meddle in the affairs of other nations.”

López is not the only high-profile world leader to question the social media ban of Trump from Twitter. Recently, German chancellor Angela Merkel declared that she found the ban “problematic.”


  andrés manuel lópez obrador, big tech, censorship, donald trump, mexico, twitter

News

Victims of domestic violence sue NY state, say pro-abortion law not constitutional

Women’s Alliance Against Violence decries the impact of the Reproductive Health Act on New York’s women and children.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 1:35 pm EST
Featured Image
New York State Capitol Shutterstock
LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Today, victims of domestic violence and others filed a class action lawsuit against Governor Andrew Cuomo challenging the constitutionality of New York’s pro-abortion Reproductive Health Act (RHA). This is the first time a New York abortion law is challenged for violating both women’s rights and the rights of children, including viable unborn children.

The complaint, among other things, asks the court to acknowledge First Amendment rights for women whose unborn children are killed by assailants, to clarify dangerous ambiguities in the RHA that impact women, and to affirm existing, but previously unrecognized, rights for near-term unborn children and children who survive abortion.

Plaintiffs are represented by a team of attorneys serving as special counsel to the Women’s Alliance Against Violence, an initiative formed to challenge the RHA and other laws that increase violence against women and children.

In January 2019, New York enacted the RHA. This controversial law introduced a number of changes to New York law, including ones that, according to the Women’s Alliance Against Violence, an initiative of the Thomas More Society, harm children and incentivize domestic and intimate partner violence against pregnant women.

The changes include a new definition of “person” under New York criminal law. New York now excludes all unborn children, including viable unborn children — or fetuses capable of surviving outside the womb, with or without medical intervention — from the legal definition of “persons” who can be victims of homicide. This change alters nearly two hundred years of New York criminal law, according to the suit.

“This new definition is devastating,” states Christen E. Civiletto, one of the attorneys filing the federal action. Civiletto, an experienced litigator who handles complex federal and state court lawsuits, explains that “because a criminal assailant can no longer be separately charged for the death of an unborn child, the RHA escalates the threat of harm to women and unborn children and incentivizes deadly violence against women.”

“New York has stripped women and their families of their ability to pursue justice for those deaths,” adds Civiletto. “That’s outrageous. In fact, it is contrary to the stated policy of the RHA itself: to affirm the “fundamental right [of women] to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child.”

According to the most recent data published by New York State’s Division of Criminal Justice Services, domestic violence against women in New York has increased. News reports also reveal multiple lethal attacks against pregnant women in New York since the RHA’s passage, states the complaint, with the latest having been recorded on surveillance video.

“Violence against women and girls, including pregnancy violence, is a human rights violation of epic proportions. We should be enacting, rather than repealing or amending, laws created to deter violence and save human lives. How can we speak of progressivism and feminist ideals yet turn a blind eye to laws that escalate violence against women in the name of ‘choice’?” challenges attorney Michele Sterlace, Executive Director of Feminists Choosing Life of New York.

“The RHA represents a willful and tragic exaggeration of abortion rights,” says attorney Teresa S. Collett. She notes, “The new law converted a woman’s liberty interest in terminating her pre-viable pregnancy into a novel right to kill near-term unborn children and inexplicably extended this right to criminal assailants.” Civiletto agrees, “The RHA unconstitutionally authorizes the killing of near-term children in utero based on a ‘right’ that finds no warrant in Roe v. Wade.”

“People believe that women’s reproductive rights and the recognition of rights for near-term children are mutually exclusive. They are not,” Collett adds.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

The plaintiffs assert additional constitutional problems with the RHA.

It permits the killing of viable fetuses for any reason up to 24 weeks of pregnancy, or at any time thereafter when a healthcare practitioner considers the abortion necessary to protect a woman’s life or “health.” The term “health” is not defined. It has been interpreted, however, to include all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age — relevant to the well-being of the patient. To the extent the RHA permits post-viable terminations based on factors other than a substantial threat to the mother’s health, the plaintiffs charge, it violates existing but unrecognized rights of viable unborn children.

“Viable unborn children are the last remaining category of human beings denied human rights,” Civiletto points out. “It’s time to change that.”

The plaintiffs also challenge the ambiguity associated with the term “healthcare practitioner.”

“These vague terms in New York’s Reproductive Health Act leave women and their babies unprotected in dangerous ways,” explains Collett. “The law now allows almost ‘any healthcare practitioner’ to perform abortions, including surgical third trimester abortions. Who is a ‘healthcare practitioner’?” continues Collett. “The language of the RHA provides little guidance beyond a reference to ‘scope of practice,’ which simply does not answer the question.”

“There are numerous cases where women have died or been injured during abortions performed by unqualified and untrained clinic staff,” states Catherine Glenn Foster, a leading human rights attorney and counsel to the Women’s Alliance Against Violence. She adds, “National studies of abortion facility conditions reveal hundreds of significant violations of state laws regulating abortion facilities, with many reports of abortions performed by people with almost no medical training.”


  abortion, andrew cuomo, domestic violence, reproductive health act, thomas more society, women’s alliance against violence

News

Facts ignored, questions remain about death of police officer in Capitol protests

Officer Brian D. Sicknick of the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) was on duty throughout the day on Wednesday, January 6. During some violence outside the Capitol building, he sustained injuries, of which he subsequently died the next evening, 9:30 p.m. on January 7, 2021.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 1:09 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com and uscp.gov
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library. 

ANALYSIS

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – While the left and mainstream media have rushed to hail the murdered Capitol Policeman as a martyr for the liberal cause, they have collectively ignored certain key facts about his own support of President Trump.

Officer Brian D. Sicknick of the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) was on duty throughout the day on Wednesday, January 6. During some violence outside the Capitol building, he sustained injuries, of which he subsequently died the next evening, 9:30 p.m. on January 7. The official statement from the USCP stated that he “was injured while physically engaging with protesters,” then “returned to his division office and collapsed.  He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.”

Reports have suggested that Sicknick was hit in the head with a fire extinguisher. A video from the New York Post appears to show the moment the fire extinguisher hit Sicknick’s head. The rioter who threw the fire extinguisher was wearing a backpack.

“The death of Officer Sicknick will be investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch, the USCP, and our federal partners,” the USCP said in a statement.

In the aftermath of last Wednesday’s events, Democrats and Republicans have turned on Trump, and Biden went so far as to call the Trump supporters “rioters, insurrectionists, and domestic terrorists.” Whilst there is no denying that some violence occurred, as an unarmed woman was killed by police, others wounded, and police officers reportedly injured, the majority of those gathered were peacefully demonstrating for Trump.

In the face of this, left-wing politicians and the mainstream media have been swift to use Officer Sicknick’s death as a political tool, with the New York Post commenting that “Democratic leaders have presented Sicknick as a martyr of the #Resistance against President Trump and his dangerous supporters.”

The New York Times wrote that Sicknick’s death “exposed one of the many contradictions of the Trump presidency,” saying Trump “incited a riot that led to the death of a member of the law enforcement community.”

Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stated: “The violent and deadly act of insurrection targeting the Capitol, our temple of American Democracy, and its workers was a profound tragedy and stain on our nation’s history. But because of the heroism of our first responders and the determination of the Congress, we were not, and we will never be, diverted from our duty to the Constitution and the American people.”

His death is indeed a tragedy, and his killer must be brought to justice. However, this appropriation of Sicknick’s death by the political left runs directly contrary to the wishes of Sicknick’s family.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

In a statement issued to the press on Friday, Sicknick’s brother Ken asked that politics be left out of his brother’s death. “Many details regarding Wednesday’s events and the direct causes of Brian’s injuries remain unknown and our family asks the public and the press to respect our wishes in not making Brian’s passing a political issue,” Ken Sicknick declared.

The family added, “Brian is a hero and that is what we would like people to remember.”

Another question also remains about the circumstances of Sicknick’s injury, as Steven Sund, the former chief of USCP who resigned after Wednesday’s protests, revealed that in-house security officials of the House and the Senate actually refused his own requests for assistance from the National Guard. Sund stated that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving had concerns about the “optics” of the presence of the National Guard, as well as officials in the Pentagon. Despite six requests from Sund for assistance during the protests, each of those requests was either “denied or delayed.”

“If we would have had the National Guard we could have held them at bay longer, until more officers from our partner agencies could arrive,” Sund said. The Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger, informed Sund that he would ask his boss Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), to accelerate the authorization of the National Guard, but Sund never learnt the result of this.

The light police presence outside the building was also due to the wishes of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, who also seemed concerned about optics.

But another aspect about Officer Sicknick himself has been avoided by the left in their use of his death, for though he is being hailed as a “martyr” of the leftist, Democrat cause, he was a staunch supporter of Trump.

Caroline Behringer, a former staffer for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, reported how on their daily encounters outside the Capitol, Sicknick would engage in friendly exchanges about their opposing political affiliations in the run up to the 2016 election: “We would kind of trade jabs about who was going to win and kind of make fun of each other for our sides being in the lead.”

Behringer described Sicknick as “an outspoken Trump supporter.”

He also strongly opposed Trump’s impeachment, writing “letters to his congressman opposing Trump’s impeachment.” Sicknick’s Rep. was Democrat Congressman Donald S. Beyer Jr. Of Virginia.

Presenting a brief history of the man himself, the New York Post explained how Sicknick had much in common with the Trump supporters who are now being heavily censored. Fresh from school, he joined the New Jersey Air National Guard in 1999, deploying to Saudi Arabia and Kyrgyzstan, becoming a “vocal critic” of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. 

In 2001, Sicknick also expressed his disenfranchisement with the political establishment, regarding a dispute with his employer: “I have written a staggering number of letters to elected officials in both the state and federal governments. Only one state senator responded. This is one of the main reasons I will not be enlisting for a second term in the National Guard. I am no longer going to risk my life in hostile environments for a government that does not care about the troops.”

The Post wrote that “[a]fter serving his country and observing the workings of its government, Sicknick had come to believe that America is governed by a self-interested, unresponsive and unaccountable oligarchy.”

“When they smear Trump voters, they dishonor Officer Sicknick’s memory,” the Post concluded.


  2020 election, brian sicknick, jan. 6 capitol protest, president trump

News

World leaders, even left-wing ACLU raise concern about Big Tech’s censorship purge

The ACLU says it is worried about what it describes as Twitter’s 'unchecked power' 
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 11:28 am EST
Featured Image
pcruciatti / Shutterstock.com
Victoria Gisondi Follow Victoria
By Victoria Gisondi

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library. 

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The left-wing American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has raised concerns about Twitter and Facebook’s power of censorship after the tech giants banned the President of the United States from their platforms recently.  

The Twitter blog announcing Trump’s ban stated: “After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”

The ACLU is not worried about Trump or even about ordinary conservative voices being silenced. In fact, their national board of directors is calling for the impeachment of President Trump. However, the organization is worried about what it describes as Twitter’s “unchecked power.” 

In response to Twitter’s censorship, Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel said on Friday in a statement: “We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier.”

ACLU is not the lone voice objecting to the abuse of power by tech giants. 

World leaders, including both opponents and supporters of Trump, have shared concerns about Big Tech controlling freedom of speech. German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, yesterday described thesocial media bans of President Trump as “problematic.” 

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Steffen Seibert, Merkel’s spokesperson, explained that the German leader’s concern is about the impact that such decisions by Big Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter will have on fundamental rights.

“This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators—not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms,” Seibert said. "Seen from this angle, the Chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the U.S. president have now been permanently blocked."

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador called Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg “arrogant” and compared Big Tech’s draconian move silencing Trump to the Inquisition. “It’s like a censorship court is being created, like the Holy Inquisition, for the management of public opinion,” he said.

“[W]hat about freedom and the right to information?” he asked. “We can’t allow one corporation that is the owner of Facebook, or of Twitter, decide who it can and who it can’t grant the possibility to communicate.”

Russian political dissident Alexey Navalny also posted a series of tweets criticizing Twitter's action. Navalny, who was allegedly poisoned by Vladimir Putin’s government and survived, called it “an unacceptable act of censorship...based on emotions and personal political preferences which could serve as a precedent to clamp down of freedom of speech elsewhere.”


  aclu, big tech bias, big tech censorship, facebook, twitter

News

Former Pennsylvania state rep. leaves teaching role after being targeted for attending DC protest

Pro-life Republican Rep. Rick Saccone, 62, who served for eight years in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives (2011-2019) uploaded a post on Facebook while attending the rally which triggered a hostile social media response
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 9:42 am EST
Featured Image
Rick Saccone (right) pictured at last week’s DC rally with Pennsylvania Sen. Doug Mastriano (R-Adams) Rick Saccone / Facebook
Patrick Delaney Patrick Delaney Follow
By

LATROBE, Pennsylvania, January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A former Pennsylvania state representative and U.S. Congressional candidate has resigned his teaching position at St. Vincent College following his participation in the January 6 March to Save America Rally in Washington, DC.

Pro-life Republican Rep. Rick Saccone, 62, who served for eight years in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives (2011-2019) uploaded a post on Facebook while attending the rally which triggered a hostile social media response, including a “change.org” petition demanding his termination, TribLive reports.

The post, which was later removed, said “We are storming the capitol. Our vanguard has broken through the barricades. We will save this nation. Are u with me?” 

Saccone, who fell short in a 2018 U.S. congressional race by a 0.3% margin, said he certainly didn’t intend the comment to be taken literally. In fact, he told LifeSiteNews he was unaware that anyone actually entered the building by the time he and his wife had left the grounds.

He lamented the disingenuousness of his political adversaries putting the worst interpretation on his words. “You can’t use hyperbole, you can’t use figures of speech, you can’t use metaphor because it’ll be twisted into something negative,” he said.

Later, when seeing news reports of a forced entry into the building, violence, and damage to property, he was puzzled. In a follow-up interview he referred to it as a “total tragedy,” which “should be condemned by everybody.” He also expressed hope that those responsible for any and all crimes would be promptly identified and prosecuted. 

A tale of two capitals

Asked to give his impressions on the overall event and its media coverage, Mr. Saccone called it a “tale of two capitals.” 

“On the west side of the Capitol you have half-a-million or more people peacefully exercising three of the first five rights of the First Amendment: freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom to petition the government for a redress of grievances,” he said.

“Everyone is in a happy mood, they’re singing along the route, there is music, there are guys on stilts with Uncle Sam pants on, it’s almost like a carnival,” Saccone said. When this group arrived near the Capitol, the police removed the barriers “and let them up on the steps” to fly their flags, to “let the Congress know that there are half-a-million people outside who want them to do the right thing and hear their voice,” he said.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“On the east side of the Capitol,” according to what he saw in the news, there are maybe “just a few hundred people” engaged in “violence, property damage, destruction, [and] injuring people,” yet “the violence on the east side is being attributed to the people on the west side [who] were doing nothing more than exercising their first amendment rights,” he said.

“And this is very wrong. The media has not been able to discern and distinguish who is actually responsible and put the blame where it lies and not on innocent people who are actually just doing the right thing,” he stated.

Saccone contrasted media coverage of this event to the “100 days in Portland where people were burning, looting, setting police cars on fire, people were getting killed, but [there was] no mention. Those are ‘peaceful protests’ according to the media, but our peaceful protest is an ‘insurrection’ This kind of thing has got to stop in our country, we have to be fair-minded and look for the whole truth not just something that confirms our bias,” he said. (Sources herehere and here.)

He further criticized the security policy of the Capitol, stating that when he was in the state legislature, it was normal to “let the protesters in right up to the door of the House [chamber]” while they were in session he said. “We didn’t go cower to our desks. We stayed there and we couldn’t even hear ourselves talk sometimes because they were chanting right outside the door. But we didn’t try to throw them out, we didn’t shoot anybody … and we didn’t cancel session for it.”

This same policy held true in other states such as Wisconsin in 2011, when hundreds of radical left protesters were allowed to occupy the state capitol for two straight weeks, causing significant and costly damage to the building and grounds. 

Furthermore, during confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Bret Kavanaugh in 2018, pro-abortion protests were sponsored by Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and others, and 128 people were arrested by Capitol Hill police for “unlawfully demonstrating” outside of senators’ offices.

Following media coverage of Saccone’s Facebook posts, St. Vincent College officials launched an immediate investigation. In response, the former representative resigned. “I decided to resign for the betterment of the school,” Saccone told the Tribune-Review. “I’ve been there 21 years. I didn’t want all this terrible media kerfuffle to tarnish the school. I decided it would be better if I just resigned,” he said.

RELATED

Remember: leftist rioters killed people, ransacked D.C., while Democrats cheered them on

Double-standard: Taxpayer-funded NPR to call Capitol stormers ‘pro-Trump extremists’

LIVE: President Trump’s speech at the March to Save America

Trump supporters flood DC on eve of Jan. 6 rallies


  anti-conservative bias, jan. 6 capitol protest, rick saccone

Opinion

Tucker Carlson unloads on Big Tech oligarchs for post–Jan 6 censorship

The usually ebullient Tucker is manifestly upset.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 9:22 pm EST
Featured Image
Tucker Carlson. Fox News
Andrea Widburg
By Andrea Widburg

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

Editor's note: LifeSiteNews has uploaded the video of Tucker Carlson's monologue to our Rumble channel (here) and has embedded it in the following story.

January 12, 2021 (American Thinker) — On his Monday Fox News program, Tucker Carlson spelled out what America's corporate overlords are doing in America. Essentially, they are "de-personing" anyone who dares to question what happened in America on November 3–8 or who even supports Trump. In a world run on computers, they are unplugging everyone who does not toe their party line.

I will not link to the video on YouTube because that site is one of the major tech monopolists silencing all who dissent from their political beliefs. I also can't embed Fox videos here. However, you can see Tucker's entire monologue here.

The usually ebullient Tucker is manifestly upset, even angry at what's happening in America. As we all must now, to protect ourselves, he opens by stating that his show immediately and repeatedly denounced the violence at the Capitol (true) because his show is completely opposed to political violence and supports law and order.

He then castigated the new selective enforcement of laws, which means they're not laws or justice at all. They are merely tyrannical whims. What's happening now is collective punishment, attacking Americans who had nothing to do with events at the Capitol.

One after another, Tucker details the corporate attacks on people who dared attend or listen to the Trump rally — people who had nothing to do with what happened at the Capitol. (We here at American Thinker also condemn strongly the small number of people who engaged in violent and manifestly illegal activity. We believe absolutely in the Constitution and the rule of law. That doesn't mean that we don't believe that there were Antifa and other provocateurs in D.C. intentionally inflaming people and inducing them to act illegally.)

Back to Tucker...

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

PayPal suspended the account of a group that paid for Trump-supporters to travel to Washington. Rocker Ariel Pink's record label dropped him for attending the rally. A flight attendants' union has demanded that all "insurrectionists" no longer be allowed to travel commercially anywhere in the United States.

And what's an "insurrectionist"? According to a letter from congressional Democrats, "it is anyone who sympathizes with what happened on Wednesday."

Everyone should be afraid of this definition and its consequences. People should push back, but corporate America is piling on, instead. People who control our money, health, and ability to travel are nailing anyone who questions the election.

Democrats are now trying to eject all congresspeople who asked to have an audit of the election. Tucker points out that, beginning in 2000, Democrats routinely objected to Electoral College certifications, except that it wasn't "insurrection" then. These same corporate oligarchs (yes, oligarchs, just as in Russia) are also making it impossible to donate money to the Republican politicians who did what their Democrat peers did in past years. It's a new standard that cuts only one way.

The new ruling class also wants to destroy people's livelihoods. A Forbes editor announced that any company that hires someone from the Trump administration will pre-emptively be assumed to be corrupt. Joe McCarthy could only have dreamed of this level of guilt by association.

Tucker notes that the irony of a Biden administration is that Americans were encouraged to vote for him because they'd get normalcy. Theoretically, that would include normalcy from the unending hysteria and violence leftists brought to the Trump administration. Democrats were daily encouraging Americans to attack Trump and his supporters — and one man took that invitation up and tried to assassinate a huge group of Republican congresspeople, almost killing Steve Scalise.

Back then, corporations said nothing and did nothing about violence. Instead, they fell over themselves funding Black Lives Matter organizations — and cheerfully funded bailing out violent BLM protesters. (Kamala Harris approved, as she approves of censoring opposing political ideas.) Something big and bad is happening in America, as overwhelmingly powerful corporations, who aren't answerable to anybody and who have the government in their pockets, go on a rampage against half of America.

Biden added fuel by comparing Sens. Cruz and Hawley to Goebbels. Pelosi is also urging disunity, explicitly race-baiting. And here's the important point: they have to do this because they built their party on a foundation by dividing Americans into inherently oppositional special interest groups. The only way to keep those groups together is to make sure they still hate you.

There's more, but I'm out of space — and you really need to watch the whole thing here.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.


  2020 election, big brother, big tech, cancel culture, censorship, fox news, tucker carlson, voter fraud

Opinion

Trump should pardon ex-lesbian who fled with daughter from abusive ‘partner’

The case is strange and disconcerting, involving drugs, divorce, a sperm donor, fatherlessness, and a biased and unreasonable family court.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 9:07 pm EST
Featured Image
Lisa Miller and her daughter Isabella.
Ruth Institute
By

January 12, 2021 (Ruth Institute) — A few years ago, The Ruth Institute analyzed the case of Lisa Miller, who fled the country with her biological daughter, to protect the daughter from the alleged abuse of Lisa’s former partner. Lisa, a former lesbian, was damaged and harmed by the Sexual State. Lisa's former partner used the power of the family courts to force Lisa to share custody with her, by redefining the "presumption of paternity" to the gender-neutral "presumption of parentage." Now Lisa Miller is back in the news — hoping to receive a presidential pardon.

The case is strange and disconcerting for anyone who is familiar with it. Lisa Miller (interviewed for her story in 2008 by LifeSiteNews) — had a difficult life: by the time she was seven she was paying the mortgage, making sure food was on the table, and dealing with her parents’ divorce. Due to that and her mother’s mental illness, she got addicted to speed, and when she was married, her husband introduced her to alcohol. After a failed suicide attempt while recovering from alcoholism in the hospital, she was transferred to a psych ward.

While in the psych ward her therapists decided, without consulting her husband, that the reason she had so many struggles was because she was a lesbian. Clearly, they told her, the struggles she was facing came from difficulties “coming out.” Later, after divorcing her husband, she followed their advice.

The therapists encouraged her to be a lesbian (rather than working out her relationship with her husband), and told her that even if her first relationship with a woman didn’t work out (it didn’t), that doesn’t mean that the second one wouldn’t (it didn’t either).

The incredible thing was that she had all of this childhood trauma (what 7 year-old should be balancing checkbooks and taking speed?) that the therapists hardly delved into and didn’t really discuss with her. Talking a patient into a sexual identity based on the therapists’ hunch, and disconnected from the facts of the patient’s case, seems like it might be malpractice.

This also brings up another question about the immutability of sexual preference. After both of her failed relationships with different women, and the abusive, though longer-term relationship with Janet Jenkins, she decided that actively living a lesbian lifestyle wasn’t for her (not to mention her doubts about her sexual preference during that span of time). Can sexual preference be immutable if people’s sexual preference changes? If sexual preference is immutable for some people but not others, how is the law to deal with a category like that?

Lisa’s life became more difficult as she moved in with, and later became joined in a civil union with, Janet Jenkins. Lisa said, “Janet and I did not have a typical relationship. We were together — however, there was rarely any intimacy. Maybe once or twice a year and this was consistent throughout the relationship. I personally did not feel that way. This upset Janet a great deal and a lot of the abuse centered around that, as well, with name-calling and things like that… I actually, ended up leaving her in 1999 because the relationship had turned violent.”

While many of us may be confused as to why Lisa might stay in a relationship that became more and more abusive, Lisa explained it in terms of a comfort zone. “For me, being with her, and this is going to sound weird, but it was like a comfort zone because I was used to being abused growing up… with women, what I was trying to do was trying to recreate a mother/daughter bond that I never had.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

After Lisa and Janet got back together, they moved to Vermont and obtained a civil union in 2000. In 2001 Lisa decided to have a daughter via artificial sperm donation. Janet generally maintained that she wasn’t interested in the child, and was not helpful during the pregnancy. The birth certificate lists only Lisa Miller as the parent.

According to Lisa, even though Jenkins was granted some parental rights after the dissolution proceedings began (though they lasted more than 5 years). Jenkins’ involvement with the child was minimal, even skipping the court ordered dates for visitation.

As far as the sordid allegations of the proceedings go, what Lisa Miller alleges Jenkins did isn’t pretty. She recounts that her daughter said that Jenkins would bathe naked with her (as a 5-year-old girl!), and that her daughter would come back from the few visits she did have and mime committing suicide. After that, Lisa cut off visits, and eventually fled the country to protect her daughter from an allegedly abusive and erratic ex-partner.

Dr. Morse said of this heartbreaking case, “Lisa Miller was one of the early victims of the Sexual State. Her case convinced me that redefining marriage would redefine parenthood in ways that few people were taking seriously. Lisa Miller entered into a civil union with another woman and had a child through an anonymous sperm donor. Lisa no doubt believed that she was the mother of the child. The government redefined parenthood, right out from under her. She had no idea that by entering into a civil union, she had given parental rights to the other woman, something that does not happen in stepparent situations.

“When those visits became abusive, Lisa tried to prevent them. The bias of the court in favor of the non-parent was so strong and the power of the family court so arbitrary, that Lisa could not protect her child. She fled the country with her daughter. She had the assistance of two brave Mennonite pastors and a Christian businessman.

“I support a presidential pardon for Lisa Miller, and for Philip Zodhiates, Timothy Miller and Kevin Miller.”

Support Lisa Miller by signing the petition at LifeSiteNews today!

Published with permission from the Ruth Institute.


  courts, divorce, fatherlessness, lisa miller, sperm donation

Opinion

The coming darkness: Punishment and purification

'I believe we are in another time of chastisement. Unpleasant as the word may sound to us, it’s a time of punishment for our sins and failings — as a society and as individuals.'
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 1:51 pm EST
Featured Image
Protestors storming the U.S. Capitol BBC / screenshot
Fr. Michael P. Orsi
By

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The Scripture readings for last weekend present some interesting parallels to the situation in which we find our country just now.

The first (Isaiah 55) is a product of the Babylonian Exile, a period of chastisement for the Children of Israel. In it the prophet calls out, “… turn to the Lord for mercy; to our God, who is generous and forgiving.”

The Gospel reading (Mark 1) recounts Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan. The image at the center of the story — water — has always been understood to recall Moses’ parting of the Red Sea, by which the Hebrew slaves were delivered from bondage in Egypt, the land of sin and death. It’s a powerful symbol of salvation.

Even though they were headed for freedom, we know that they would undergo another period of punishment and purification, 40 years of wandering in the desert, before reaching the land God had promised them.

Each of these readings thus evokes a time of great darkness. I can’t help pondering them in terms of the darkness that has covered the world in recent months and seems to be growing thicker.

Right now, we’re experiencing chaos in our country. We’ve witnessed rioting in some of our major cities. Just a few days ago, we saw a number of protesters enter the Capitol building.

Such chaos suggests that the Evil One is present. And this suggestion is supported by many telling signs. For instance, one of the invaders of the Capitol was wearing a headdress with horns.

What can we deduce from that? Was this character just an exhibitionist? Perhaps he was mentally ill. Or maybe he was making a statement.

It could be that Satan was “outing” himself in this small way. After all, traditional representations of the Devil often show him as horned.

Whatever the case, it certainly seemed that the Evil One had his finger in this odd display. Expect his works to multiply in days to come.

It’s pretty much a given, for instance, that we’ll see an increase in abortions. Ample resources will be provided, both within our country and abroad. The Mexico City Policy, by which U.S. funding of abortions in other countries was prohibited, will be ended — as will the Hyde Amendment, which has blocked federal money from being used for abortions here at home.

Jesus is the Lord of life; Satan is the lord of death. You can guess whose lordship this will serve.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

In addition, the Church will undergo persecution. We see it openly already in China, where churches are being closed, religious leaders imprisoned, Christians killed.

In our own country we can expect attempts to force on churches — on our Catholic Church, in particular — a morality that is inconsistent with what we accept as proper, and an ideology we find abhorrent. Under the guise of “equality,” we will be called upon to accept, in our schools and Catholic institutions, people who proclaim a lifestyle that contradicts what the Church teaches and believes. There will also be attempts to require religious organizations to provide contraception and abortion coverage in their medical insurance plans.

This attack on religious freedom is already in progress. Accompanying it is a concerted assault on freedom of speech.

Until recently, everyone of any political persuasion — be it libertarian, conservative, liberal, socialist, even communist — has had the right to express their views openly. This was ensured by the First Amendment to our Constitution, which was always seen as the cornerstone of American liberty.

No longer. The restrictions on opinion imposed by social media companies and the growth of the so-called “cancel culture,” in which people are losing jobs, financial services, professional credentials, and other basics because of their opinions and even their private comments is creating a climate of fear and intimidation unprecedented in this country.

It is not only affecting religion, it is bringing us to something very much like a totalitarian state. All of our rights are in jeopardy. All of our freedoms are in danger of being taken away.

There is darkness in the land. Satan is on the prowl.

I believe we are in another time of chastisement. Unpleasant as the word may sound to us, it’s a time of punishment for our sins and failings — as a society and as individuals.

Chastisement is a long process. There’s no quick fix for our national dilemma, no one figure who has the answer, not even the Church which has often failed to preach the Gospel clearly and consistently. We’ve all fallen short — the clergy, the laity — and many of us will not see a resolution of this crisis in our lifetimes.

But we mustn’t despair. Because even as the image of water in the Gospel reading evokes an earlier struggle, Mark describes Jesus emerging from the Jordan, the Holy Spirit descending, and the voice of God declaring, “This is my beloved Son.”

And that’s the solution to this current chaos: Jesus.

We must turn off the news, and listen to Him. We must stop allowing ourselves to be manipulated by parties and demagogues and “enlightened” entertainers. Those are all lethal to our souls.

Jesus does not bring chaos. Jesus is the Prince of Peace. There is no peace if Jesus is not present. So we must keep him before us always. We must open our Bibles, and strengthen ourselves through the Word of God.

And we must pray.

A priest of the Diocese of Camden, New Jersey, Rev. Michael P. Orsi currently serves as parochial vicar at St. Agnes Parish in Naples, Florida. He is host of “Action for Life TV,” a weekly cable television series devoted to pro-life issues, and his writings appear in numerous publications and online journals. His TV show episodes can be viewed online HERE.


  abortion, biden presidency, catholic, chastisement, michael orsi

Blogs

How can we explain the breathtaking COVID hypocrisy of the world’s leaders?

These elite rule-breakers are like the elites of wartime who pulled strings to exempt their children from conscription.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 9:30 pm EST
Featured Image
Gavin Newsom, governor of California. Matt Gush / Shutterstock.com
By Dr. Joseph Shaw

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — An ever-lengthening list of politicians and media personalities who have been fierce advocates of coronavirus restrictions have turned out to have flouted them. Recently the TV journalist Piers Morgan, who has turned publicly shaming minor celebrities for failures to toe the line on the epidemic into an art form, is now accused of popping off to Antigua for a holiday, against the rules. The Scottish member of Parliament Margaret Ferrier, who is facing trial over her bizarre journeys criss-crossing the country while she was waiting for a test result, had earlier demanded the resignation of Dominic Cummings, a government adviser, for doing something similar. It may be difficult to top the shamelessness of Gavin Newsom, governor of California, going to a party at a famous restaurant in breach of rules he had personally imposed on his state. But I think Neil Ferguson manages it: he was the U.K. Government’s scientific adviser, a man more responsible for the “lockdown” policy than anyone else in the country, who broke the rules in order to commit adultery.

At least Ferguson resigned. Although some heads have rolled, many other people are still in their jobs after issuing unconvincing apologies. It is not difficult to understand the anger of ordinary people at the behavior of these elite individuals, but as the restrictions have become ever more severe and of ever greater duration, there’s a real danger that there would not be enough seedy politicians and corrupt journalists left to do all those vital jobs if the COVID rule-breakers were sacked — and wouldn’t that be terrible?

These individuals are often described as hypocrites. The root idea of hypocrisy, as the word is used by Jesus Christ in the gospels, is a show of piety that does not come from the heart.

Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like to whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men’s bones, and of all filthiness. (Mt. 23:27)

This isn’t quite what is going on with these individuals. Their sin is not exactly to make a show of being good, but to hold other people to rules that they don’t themselves follow.

This could be simply be a matter of weakness of the will. As Shakespeare’s heroine Portia remarks in his play The Merchant of Venice, “[t]he brain may / devise laws for the blood, but a hot temper leaps / o’er a cold decree.” People know what they should do, they are tempted, and they do the wrong thing.

However, that doesn’t seem to be quite what’s happening, either. Consider Ferguson’s explanation of his action. While acknowledging that what he did was contrary to the letter of the rules, he told reporters, “I acted in the belief that I was immune, having tested positive for coronavirus, and completely isolated myself for almost two weeks after developing symptoms.”

In other words, because of his specific circumstances, he thought there was no need for him to follow the rules. The problem is that he did not want to give that room for reasonable judgment to everyone else. It is reserved to him, presumably because he is frightfully clever and important.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

I think other members of our political elite might say something similar. It is important for them to travel, or go for holidays or have celebrations, because, so they think, they are Important People. What difference can it make if a tiny number of Important People break the rules, as long as everyone else follows them?

I think these elite rule-breakers are like the elites of wartime who pulled strings to exempt their children from conscription and their assets from taxation or being requisitioned for the war effort. Did they want their country to be defeated? Almost certainly not. They just didn’t want to make personal sacrifices to defend it. Other people’s sons could die, other people’s land could be built over by the army, other people’s businesses liquidated.

The Neil Fergusons and Gavin Newsoms of this world are not genuine, self-sacrificing puritans, nor are they hypocritical fake models of uprightness. They are bad in a different way. They are lacking not so much sincerity as solidarity. They want something done about the epidemic, but not by them. They don’t regard themselves as part of the great mass of people who need to follow the rules to “beat the virus.” The rules are for the little people, not for them.

When Buckingham Palace in London was bombed during the Second World War, just as the poor and densely populated area of docks and shipyards in the “East End” of the city had been, the British Royal Family still refused to move out of it to safer accommodation in the countryside. The queen remarked, “I am glad we have been bombed. It makes me feel I can look the East End in the face.” The trouble with our elites today is that they have no wish to look the rest of us in the face.


  coronavirus, gavin newsom, hypocrisy, lockdown, neil ferguson

Blogs

The unborn babies used for vaccine development were alive at tissue extraction

Pamela Acker is a biologist and author of a recently released book on vaccinations.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 7:16 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Today I had the great pleasure of sitting down with Pamela Acker, one of the most knowledgeable people in the world on vaccines and on what goes into them. Acker actually spent time in a vaccine research lab for nine months before encountering the ethical and moral issue of the HEK-293 cell line.

Our conversation today was one of the most enlightening but also deeply disturbing interviews I’ve ever done for my podcast The John-Henry Westen Show. 

Acker is a biologist and author of the recently released (and extremely informative) book Vaccination: A Catholic PerspectiveIn it, she reveals precisely how Catholics should be thinking about vaccines. You can buy it from our friends at the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation. 

Unfortunately – depressingly really – under Pope Francis, the Vatican has largely downplayed if not entirely ignored the importance of bioethics. 

Francis himseljust last week endorsed the COVID-19 vaccine, saying that “it must be done.” 

Acker and I spoke about many topics today for over an hour. Please watch the entire interview if you can. The most revealing aspect of our conversation, I think, was when we discussed the various fetal cell lines being used in vaccinesspecifically.  

There are a number of fetal cell lines in existence right now. There’s WI-38, MRC-5, HEK-293, PER C-6, and WALVAX-2; WALVAX-2 is not currently being used in any vaccines, but does have the potential to be used and is currently used in therapeutic treatments. As Acker and I agreed, most people have this understanding that it was one or two babies that died and will simply dismiss these cell lines.  

Acker speaks about her research into the HEK-293 cell line specifically, and talks about the number that’s at the end of that cell line name. “HEK” stands for Human Embryonic Kidney and the “293” actually reveals the number of experiments that a specific researcher did to develop that cell line.  

It doesn’t mean there were two hundred and ninety-three abortions, but for two hundred and ninety-three experiments, you would certainly need far more than one abortion. We’re talking probably hundreds of abortions,” Acker shares.  

Acker goes on to discuss why researchers would choose a fetal cell line over an adult cell line. The details boil down to one answer: because they’ll last longer, having a much longer lifespanHowever, these cell lines encounter some dangerous side effects, such as the genes are given cancer promoting genes (but more on that inside the interview).  

Acker dispels the myth that these cell lines are created using spontaneous abortions, simply by understanding that these cells have to be gathered within five minutes of the abortion. A miscarriage would simply not provide cells that were alive enough for researchers to be able to use the cells.  

This is where things get very disturbing, because in most cases it’s not a “simple abortion,” but rather, Acker says:  

“They will actually deliver these babies via cesarean section. The babies are still alive when the researchers start extracting the tissue; to the point where their heart is still beating, and they’re generally not given any anesthetic, because that would disrupt the cells that the researchers are trying to extract. 

So, they’re removing this tissue, all the while the baby is alive and in extreme amounts of pain. So, this makes it even more sadistic.” 

While our discussion is broad, we do highlight the Moderna and Pfizer COVID vaccines specifically. The above is a small sample of the vital information Pamela Acker and I discussed today. I encourage each one of you to listen to the full interview, and share with your friends and family.  

The John-Henry Westen Show is available by video on the show’s YouTube channel and right here on my LifeSite blog.

It is also available in audio format on platforms such as SpotifySoundcloud, and ACast. We are awaiting approval for iTunes and Google Play as well. To subscribe to the audio version on various channels, visit the ACast webpage here.

We’ve created a special email list for the show so that we can notify you every week when we post a new episode. Please sign up now by clicking here. You can also subscribe to the YouTube channel, and you’ll be notified by YouTube when there is new content.

You can send me feedback, or ideas for show topics by emailing [email protected].

Subscribe

* indicates required
 

By clicking subscribe, you are agreeing to receive emails about The John-Henry Westen Show and related emails from LifeSiteNews.

 


  abortion, bioethics, coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19 vaccine, fetal tissue, john-henry westen show, the john-henry westen show

Blogs

Spain’s number of births per year at new low

Secularized Spain seems to be losing its reason to live.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 5:42 pm EST
Featured Image
Map of Spain Shutterstock
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent
By Jeanne Smits

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Spain registered its lowest number of births ever in 2019, according to final demographic data for that year published recently by the official statistics agency, INE. Only 359,770 babies were born, 13,007 (or 3.48 percent) less than the previous year.

Of these, some 260,000 births were native Spanish women, with immigrant mothers or mothers of foreign descent accounting for almost 28 percent of all births. 418,703 deaths were registered over the same period, meaning that Spain’s population is not only shrinking — and has been since 2013, apart from immigration — but that the proportion of inhabitants with a foreign background is growing thanks to higher fertility in this population group.

One in five pregnancies were “terminated” by legal abortion in Spain in 2019, a historical high: 21 % percent of unborn babies were killed, as well as their potential descendants.

As a nation, Spain has been in the process of reaching “demographic winter” since 1981 when for the first time its fertility rate decreased under 2.1 children per woman, which is the generation replacement limit in developed countries, at 2.04. It would never recover: ten years later, it had gone down to 1.31 child per woman, plummeting even lower to 1.13 in 1998 before a slow but slight improvement starting in 2000 that newer reached higher than 1.44 (in 2008).

In 2016, the fertility rate was still slightly higher than today, at 1.34 (410,583 births). It has continued its descent since then and is expected to fall even more in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 crisis which hit Spain particularly hard, both as to the number of deaths attributed to the disease and as to crippling lockdown measures and subsequent economical duress.

The last time Spain had such a disastrous birthrate was in 1941, just after the Civil War — but at the time, Spain’s total population was just under 26 million, while today it is almost 47 million (of which, to be sure, a larger proportion is beyond childbearing age as average age increases).

According to estimates Spanish women gave birth to similar numbers in the 18th century — with a population five times smaller than today. Francisco José Contreras, a professor of the philosophy of law at the University of Seville and deputy of the conservative “Vox” movement in the Spanish parliament, underscored these facts in an op-ed for gaceta.es, also noting that in the 1960s, close to 700,000 births were registered in Spain every year with a population two thirds lower than today.

Among women of Spanish extraction, the birthrate has fallen most spectacularly. In 2019, their fertility rate dropped to 1.17 children per woman, meaning that the generation to which they are giving birth will be only slightly more than half the size of their own. Overall, births in Spain represented 44 percent less than would be necessary to replace the present generation.

The “true existential threat to our country,” wrote Contreras, “is not a hypothetical rise of temperatures of two or three degrees Celsius by 2100 (that would imply a sea-level rise of only 60 centimeters that could easily be managed by our grand-children), but socio-economical collapse through lack of contributors and man-power by 2035.”

Spain is facing an impressive increase of pensioners as baby-boomers of the 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s, the most numerous cohorts in Spanish history, are reaching retirement age. Dwindling generations of later years will have to pay for their upkeep and health costs. While the COVID-19 crisis has led world leaders to promote state-funded (that is, tax-payer-funded) healthcare, it is already clear that the socialized “welfare state” will be gravely compromised in aging societies such as Spain.

Contreras observed that “climate change,” “male chauvinism,” “homophobia” and “racism” are routinely represented as Spain’s main problems. Official surveys of the Spanish population’s foremost concerns quote these and other reasons to worry about the future, but “demography is never included,” he noted.

When the authorities address demographic problems, he added – as they did in a “National Strategy” developed in 2019, they talk about internet and cellphone access, administrative simplification in the smaller municipalities and women’s freedom of residence – and, of course, “managing legal and orderly migration, to be deployed over the whole territory.” Rural depopulation is seen as a problem, the birth dearth is brushed over.

Contreras’ own party, Vox, has repeatedly proposed the adoption of political measures to promote childbearing — only to face backlash from other parties, sometimes even from the supposedly conservative Partido Popular. Asking for support for families and young mothers is seen as “male chauvinist” and wanting to “relegate women to a merely reproductive role.” Vox is also slammed for “racism” for “opposing immigration as a panacea,” Contreras remarked.

“Government as well as the larger part of society are prisoners of an ideological grid that allows ecological sustainability to be conceptualized as a problem, but not demography; you can show concern for the Iberian lynx but not for homo hispanicus,” he said.

In fact, the only answers offered by the mainstream Spanish political establishment are “more feminism and more immigration,” although feminism sees childbirth and rearing as “biological slavery.” Women’s competing with men in the workplace, a feminist enterprise, “is what brought us to our present demographic situation,” added Contreras.

He also observed that immigrants cannot fix the funding problem that is already faced by the Spanish welfare state immigrants (from South America and, increasingly, from Islamic African countries): While they make up 12 percent of the total population in Spain, they only accounted for 3 percent of personal income tax collected in 2016.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Immigration brings also with it cultural and religious differences. No less than 10 percent of babies born today in Spain have a Muslim father, according to the Fundación Renacimiento Demographico, recalled Contreras.

As fewer Spanish women are giving birth to less babies, and the number of regularly practicing Catholics for the first time dropped lower — at 22.7 percent — than that self-proclaimed atheists and agnostics (29.1 percent) according to a 2019 survey, secularized Spain seems to be losing its reason to live. The “vacuum” is being filled by more vigorous populations whose relative importance per individual with regard to the total population is increasing.

Spain is the only nation in the world that reversed an established Islamic take-over — it took the Spaniards over seven centuries fighting that culminated in a definitive victory under the command of Isabel the Catholic in Granada in 1492. In refusing the future, the formerly great Catholic nation is likewise turning its back on history.


  demographic collapse, spain

Blogs

Philosophers attack ‘gender critical feminist’ for her critique of gender ideology

The philosophers critical of Stock, however, do not present any philosophical arguments about transgender matters.
Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 4:18 pm EST
Featured Image
Kathleen Stock RoyIntPhilosophy / YouTube
By Dr. Joseph Shaw

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

January 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The British philosopher Kathleen Stock was recently awarded the Order of the British Empire (OBE) for her work in education. She is a “gender critical feminist,” meaning that she is skeptical about some of the claims and proposals of the transgender lobby from a feminist perspective.

Specifically, she wants to preserve at least some women-only spaces, and recently opposed changes to the U.K. Gender Recognition Act which would have removed the need for medical diagnosis or treatment, or prolonged legal process, for people to change the sex recorded on their birth certificates. These legal changes were, in fact, shelved: The government acknowledged the force of objections.

Stock is a philosophy academic, and a group of academic philosophers have protested her honor in an open letter. I am reminded of a famous pamphlet written by the Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe, “Mr. Truman’s Degree,” in which she objected to President Truman being given an honorary degree by Oxford University in 1956, because of his decision to drop nuclear bombs onto Japanese civilians.

Anscombe argued that the bombing of civilians is never justifiable. The philosophers critical of Stock, however, do not present any philosophical arguments about transgender matters. They have ganged up simply to denounce her. The claims being made in the letter are not about the truth or falsity of her (or anyone’s) position on sex and gender, but are about the harm they say she has done, and about how their own letter does not infringe her academic freedom.

Both questions are relevant, and even philosophical in nature, but there is something very odd about a group of philosophers gathering to condemn a fellow philosopher for holding certain views without regard for the cogency of the views themselves. Surely, that must come into it. Surely, if Stock is correct, then any possible harmful fall-out from publicizing these opinions should be managed in some way other than by publicly shaming her? It is almost as if these critics are not confident about the force of their arguments, but hope to win the point by weight of numbers, joined with the fashionable nature of their own position.

What is this claim that her views are harmful? The petitioners say that her “discourse” served “to restrict trans people’s access to life-saving medical treatments, encourage the harassment of gender-non-conforming people, and otherwise reinforce the patriarchal status quo.”

I imagine that what they mean by “life-saving medical treatments” is the claim that young people who are delayed in their “transition” may commit suicide: an inflammatory claim which, as I have discussed before on LifeSite, has been removed from the website of the National Health Service. It is not at all clear why anything Stock has written might encourage harassment. Her maintenance of the “patriarchal status quo” is an interesting item on the charge sheet; I’d be interested to know how a feminist does this, but like the other accusations there is no explanation or justification. They are all just bald assertions.

Equally sketchy is the argument the petitioners use regarding academic freedom. They write:

We do not say Stock should not be permitted to say the things she does. We believe in the principles of academic freedom, and note that objecting to someone being lauded or honored for their speech simply does not conflict with those principles. Academic freedom comes with responsibility; we should not use that freedom to harm people, particularly the more vulnerable members of our community. Conflating concern about the harms of Stock’s work with threats to academic freedom obfuscates important issues.

One question this raises is: What exactly is this open letter intended to achieve? If they have decided that it would look bad to call for Stock to be sacked, what are they asking for? On the face of it, nothing: The letter is a pure act of virtue-signaling, in which signatories assert that they “stand against” her actions and “denounce transphobia in all its forms.”

For all that, this is clearly an attempt to humiliate Stock, and to make her the kind of person respectable institutions want to have no dealings with — as has happened to so many people who have dared to question the dogmas of wokery.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

It is an attack on academic freedom in another way as well. They say Stock should be condemned for supporting a law which slows “transitioning” down because this is harmful. The recent Bell judgement in the U.K. indicated ways in which failing to slow down “transitioning” can be harmful: leading to lost childhoods and ruined lives. It is, from any point of view, a controversial matter: something which must be discussed. For the partisans of one side of such an issue to demand that no discussion take place because discussion is harmful is precisely an attack on the freedom necessary, not just for the academy, but for society as a whole.


  cancel culture, feminism, gender ideology, kathleen stock

Featured Image

EpisodesAbortion, Culture of Life Tue Jan 12, 2021 - 8:01 pm EST

The origin of the abortion-tainted vaccines will sicken you

By John-Henry Westen   Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

  aborted fetal cell lines, aborted fetal cells, covid-19 vaccine, pamela acker, the john-henry westen show, vaccine, vaccine studies, vaccines


In today's episode of The John-Henry Westen Show, Westen interviews Pamela Acker, one of the most knowledgeable people in the world on vaccines and on what goes into them.