All articles from July 9, 2021


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

  • Nothing is published in Video on July 9, 2021.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on July 9, 2021.

News

Biden wants kids in pre-K at younger ages as part of ‘Build Back Better’ plan

As part of his ‘Build Back Better’ campaign, Biden proposes adding four years to public education: two early years of preschool and two free years of community college.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 8:18 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – President Joe Biden proposed extending public education to send children as young as three years old out of their homes as part of his “Build Back Better” agenda.  

On Wednesday, Biden tweeted, “12 years of education is no longer enough to compete in the 21st Century.” American public education is currently 13 years, from kindergarten to grade 12.  

Biden continued, “That’s why my Build Back Better Agenda will guarantee four additional years of public education for every person in America – two years of preschool and two years of free community college.” 

— 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 unclear if the additional two years of preschool would be mandatory, since it would mean forcing toddlers at age three out of their homes.  

In 2019, then-Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris received backlash after she proposed extending school days to 10 hours. This suggestion was allegedly to help parents work longer hours without being forced to find childcare services.   

In November 2018, an article from the Foundation for Economic Education laid out some of the risks, disadvantages, and proven negative outcomes of placing children in school at younger and younger ages and asked, “As New York City expands its universal pre-K program to all of the city’s three-year-olds, will compulsory schooling laws for preschoolers follow?” 

RELATED: 

Biden’s rhetoric shows support for elites’ ‘Great Reset’ to usher in New World Order


  build back better, community college, great reset, joe biden, preschool, public education

News

Nigerian Catholic priest kidnapped and being held by Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram

Father Elijah Juma Wada was apparently abducted on June 30 and hasn't been seen since then.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 7:02 pm EST
Featured Image
Father Elijah Juma Wada
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

BORNO, Nigeria, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A Catholic priest ministering in the Nigerian Diocese of Maiduguri was kidnapped June 30 by members of the country’s notorious Muslim terrorist faction, Boko Haram. 

Father Elijah Juma Wada, who is the priest at St. Paul Catholic Parish of Buma, in Shani, was traveling on the road between Damboa and Maiduguri when he was abducted by members of the brutal Boko Haram group, responsible for the murders of an estimated 40,000 people in Nigeria in the decade or so since their rise to prominence. 

The news was confirmed in a statement from a priest in Wada’s diocese, Father John Bakeni, to ACI Africa, in which he requested prayers “for the quick and safe release of Rev. Fr. Elijah Juma Wada, who was abducted by suspected members of Boko Haram sect along Damboa Maiduguri road in Borno State on Wednesday, June 30.” 

“He spent the night in Biu Local Government Area before proceeding on his journey the following day (Wednesday, June 30) along Biu-Damaturu when he was abducted. There has not been any official communication with those that abducted the Priest,” the statement reads. 

There are conflicting reports on the reason for Wada’s travel, with some saying he was on his way to a Mass in thanksgiving for a priest-friend, Father Yakubu Inda Philibus, who was celebrating his 10th anniversary since being ordained. 

Elsewhere, reports claim that Wada was asked to provide relief for a neighboring parish in the diocese after the local priest was relocated. It was while driving to St. Patrick Church that Wada was abducted, according to a report in Vanguard News Nigeria. 

Image
Father Wade's Toyota Corolla was found abandoned.

Wada’s car was said to be found “riddled with bullets” and off the road “near Buratai town, a few kilometres from Biu,” an alleged friend of the priest, Mallam Yamta, told Vanguard. 

Boko Haram released images of the priest’s vehicle, a silver Toyota Corolla, as evidence that they were responsible for his capture. The picture does not seem to portray any bullet hole damage, contradicting Yamta’s account. 

The bishops of Nigeria have condemned the recent rise in kidnappings in the country, many of which are used to demand ransoms, and others result in the murder of the abductees. In May, demonstrators took to the streets of the national capital, Abuja, to protest rampant terrorism, blockading roadways and chanting “we must stop the kidnappings.” 

Earlier in the month, two Catholic priests were snatched by an unknown band of criminals. One of the priests, 30-year-old Father Alphonsus Bello, was found dead the next day. The second priest, 75-year-old Father Joe Keke, remained in captivity for some weeks, only being released at the beginning of June. Father Chris Omotosho, director of communications for the Diocese of Sokoto, confirmed the priest’s release in a statement June 3. “We announce that Fr. Keke has been released from the hands of his captors. We thank those who prayed for his release.” 

Archbishop Stephen Dami Mamza of the Diocese of Yola criticized the lack of effort by the government to safeguard its people in the wake of his brother priest being abducted and killed, saying “[c]itizens are losing faith in the government because it fails to fulfil its main constitutional responsibility which is the protection of the life and property of its citizens.” 

Father Moses Iorapuu, director of social communications for the Diocese of Makurdi, addressed the “inability of the authorities to stop the fundamentalists as they continue to kill, rape, destroy homes, cultivated fields and kidnap.” The priest said the unwillingness of the government to intervene “is a confirmation of the complicity on the part of the federal authorities.” He added that “[a]mong the thousands killed … were also priests, catechists.” 

In February, the Bishops Conference of Nigeria released a joint statement on the situation, declaring that the country is “really on the brink of a looming collapse, from which we must do all we can to pull back before the worst overcomes the nation.” 

LifeSiteNews co-founder and editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen spoke with Nigerian priest Father Innocent Sunu in May about the continuing persecution of Christians in the region, including many priests losing their lives for remaining steadfast in the faith.  

“So many of our fore-pastors have been kidnapped. They’re not just being kidnapped. They are being murdered in front of people openly,” Sunu lamented. 

<iframe class="rumble" width="640" height="360" src="https://rumble.com/embed/vemwev/?pub=7phg5" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> 

The priest described his initial arrival at the parish in Madagali where he ministers, explaining that the church, rectory, school, and clinic had been “completely destroyed” by Boko Haram terrorists. Despite this, and the daily threat of harm, Sunu believes he has the responsibility and God-given mission to make “something happen in that place.” 

Sunu told LifeSiteNews that he contacted the parents of Fr. Wada on Friday, whose simple message was to “let the will of God be done.” 

LifeSite has set up a LifeFunder page  for Fr. Sunu and his courageous work. Please prayerfully consider making a donation to make a difference in the lives of faithful, persecuted Catholics in the violence-torn country of Nigeria. You can securely donate here

RELATED: 

Heroic Nigerian priest shines light on religious persecution from Boko Haram 


  abduction, boko haram, catholic, elijah juma, kidnapping, nigeria

News

Father Altman speaks about suspension: ‘I’ve had incredible peace, regardless of what happens to me’

Altman was informed yesterday that he has been removed as pastor of St. James the Less parish, and that his priestly faculties have been suspended indefinitely.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:43 pm EST
Featured Image
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

Donate to Fr. Altman's fight for the Faith at LifeFunder.com.

LA CROSSE, Wisconsin, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In an exclusive interview with LifeSite, Father James Altman said that in the face of suspension of his priestly faculties by his bishop, he is at peace.

“I’ve had incredible peace, regardless of what happens to me. Just peace. I said it this way, if this door closes, another one will open. And I’ve had that experience in my life. Smaller doors opening to bigger doors and then [those] closing and opening up to even bigger doors,” Altman said in an interview yesterday with LifeSiteNews.

“I’m not expecting God to give me some blinking neon sign saying, ‘this is where you’re going to go next.’ That’s not the way He works, because then we wouldn’t be exercising our free will,” he added.

Altman was informed yesterday that he has been removed as pastor of St. James the Less parish, and that his priestly faculties have been suspended indefinitely.

As Bishop William J. Callahan’s decree explains, this means he is forbidden from celebrating “The Holy Eucharist” with any members of the faithful present, except for his elderly parents. He is also “no longer allowed to preach,” administer baptism, or assist at marriages.

Altman said that he wasn’t issued restrictions from hearing Confessions or Anointing of the Sick.

— 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 decree also states that he is to continue to live within the Diocese of LaCrosse, where he has been instructed to meet with the Vicar for Clergy at least once a month, and has been “invited to begin” a month-long “spiritual retreat” to help him to “spiritually heal” and “address the issues that caused the issuance of this decree.”

The order states it is in effect as long as “cause” is present, but it does not specify what the cause is. Callahan said he asked Altman to resign on May 23 for being “divisive and ineffective.”

Altman first triggered backlash from his bishop when his video “You cannot be a Catholic and a Democrat. Period” went viral last year. Altman shared that in response to this, his office “got the most vile, despicable phone calls, letters” and “some terrible, really foul messages.”

Callahan criticized Altman at the time for his “manner and tone,” to which Altman countered, “what about the manner and tone of the 10,000 babies that are chopped up last Saturday?”

“What I would hope would always come through no matter what people think about my manner and tone, is that they would recognize that what’s coming through there is God’s love,” Altman told LifeSiteNews. “A love that I recognize because He’s loved me, and I didn’t deserve that.”

“If I seem angry at times, it has nothing to do with me, it has to do with the people. And I asked the question recently, how can they love? If you love, how can you not feed your children?”

In late April, Altman chided the U.S. bishops for needlessly shutting churches and denying the faithful sacraments during the COVID-19 pandemic, saying the hierarchy showed “an abundance of cowardice.”

In his interview with LifeSite, Altman alluded to the fact that some don’t like seeing him “upset.”

“I’m thinking well, if you’re denying my child food, the Bread of Life – [Bishop Fulton J. Sheen] said, if you can’t get angry about stuff like that then you can’t love either. Because greater love has greater anger towards those things that are contrary to the salvation of eternal souls, which is the only thing that matters in the end,” said Altman.

“I don’t care what they do to me, honestly, in the end… what troubles me is the interference with the feeding of God’s children, which is through word and through the sacrament. Both of which were denied to people over the past 15 months” he continued.

Altman believes that the current documented numbers of fully practicing Catholics are “proof” that the bishops aren’t doing their job.

“Here [are] the condemning statistics. 80 percent of Catholics now don’t go to Mass. 80 percent of Catholics pretty much don’t believe in the Real Presence. At what point are they gonna say ‘Hey, we’re not doing our job.’ Those are objective criteria that show you you’re not doing your job. There’s the proof,” said Altman.

He pointed out that recently, in his own parish, the number of families who joined was three times the number of those who left: “We’ve had close to 50 families join the parish in the last 15 months.”

Father Dave Nix pointed out, regarding the decree against Altman, that “No canon of crime or even ‘disobedience’ is quoted.”

Crisis magazine editor-in-chief Eric Sammons had this to say about Altman’s situation:

“If, upon hearing the news that Fr. Altman's faculties have been suspended, your only concern is the need for Fr. Altman to obey, while ignoring the injustice of the command given by his bishop, then you've succumbed to the distorted one-sided modern Catholic view of obedience.”

The Diocese of La Crosse did not respond to a request for comment.

Contact information for respectful communication:

Catholic Diocese of La Crosse
Bishop William Callahan
3710 East Avenue South
P.O. Box 4004
La Crosse, WI 54602-4004
United States
+1 (608) 788-7700

Very Rev. William Dhein, Msgr. Michael J. Gorman, and Msgr. Joseph Diermeier, Vicars General
+1 (608) 791-2655

Rev. Woodrow Pace, Vicar for Clergy
+1 (608) 791-2652

Online contact form

RELATED:

EXCLUSIVE: Fr. Altman reacts to bishop suspending his priestly faculties

BREAKING: Bishop suspends Fr. Altman’s faculties, removes him as pastor


  catholic, diocese of la crosse, father james altman, fr. james altman, james altman, william callahan

News

Official reveals ‘unmarked graves’ in Canada are part of an overgrown cemetery

“There’s no discovery, we knew it was there, it’s a graveyard,” Pierre said. “The fact there are graves inside a graveyard shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.”
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:07 pm EST
Featured Image
Kootenay Residential School at St. Eugene Mission Shutterstock
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

CRANBROOK, British Columbia, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) - After initial reports alleged finding “unmarked graves,” a former British Columbia chief has revealed that the existence of these graves is common knowledge, as they are part of an actively-used graveyard.

This week, mainstream media reported that ground-penetrating radar discovered 182 unmarked graves at the site of the former Kootenay Residential School at St. Eugene Mission just outside Cranbrook, B.C.

Former chief of the St Mary’s Indian Band and former student of this school, Sophie Pierre, told Global News that this was not news to the community. “There’s no discovery, we knew it was there, it’s a graveyard,” Pierre said. “The fact there are graves inside a graveyard shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.”

She explained that the graves had been marked with wooden crosses which had either been burned or deteriorated over time. Currently, the use of wooden markers is still common practice among many Indigenous communities across Canada.

Additionally, Pierre revealed that the graves may contain the bodies of children from the residential schools; however, this is not confirmed. “There could very well be, and in good likelihood, some children that were in the residential school that died here because of [tuberculosis] or other diseases, and were buried there,” Pierre said. “But it’s a graveyard.”

“To just assume that every unmarked grave inside a graveyard is already tied to a residential school, we’ve got to be a little bit more respectful of our people who are buried in our graveyards,” Pierre continued.

This graveyard is still being actively used. “We just buried one of our people there last month,” she said. “Anyone who died in my community would be buried there.”

— 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

Most mainstream media reports blame the Catholic Church, neglecting to mention the excessively high rates of tuberculosis among Indigenous children and the substantial lack of proper financial support from the Canadian government, which forced Indigenous children into those schools in the first place.  

Once the government mandated attendance at the schools in the 1920s, children were forcibly removed from their families and parents threatened with prison if they did not comply. Upon arrival at school, children rarely saw their families, with many disappearing or never seeing their families again.

Catholic author Michael O’Brien, who attended residential schools, gave testimony to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. He previously told LifeSiteNews that the chief underlying issue in the residential school saga was the institutional abuse of children being removed from their families by the state authorities, and then taken to the schools, noting the “long-term psychological and social effects of this.”

An important element to the residential school narrative, often ignored by the mainstream media, is that, citing financial costs, the Department of Indian Affairs refused to ship home the bodies of children who died at the government-mandated schools, meaning that they had to be buried there.

Additionally, mortality rates for children under the age of five had been recorded as 296.75 deaths per 1,000 births in 1900. That figure only dropped beneath 100 deaths per 1,000 births in 1935, with high rates of child mortality consistently seen from 1910 through 1920.

Indeed, the First Nations people have historically been noted to be less resilient against infectious diseases, such as influenza epidemics, measles, and smallpox.

As media outlets publish allegations and grossly overexaggerated accounts, many Catholic churches are being burned to the ground while others are vandalized. These churches serve Indigenous Catholics, who are now left without parishes or access to necessary sacraments. Some officials are even encouraging these acts on social media.


  british columbia, canada, kootenay residential school, residential schools, sophie pierre, unmarked graves

News

EXCLUSIVE: Doctor who pioneered hydroxychloroquine/zinc treatment for COVID-19 speaks to LifeSite

'It’s conspiracy – but not theory – and it’s a conspiracy to commit genocide by a group of sociopaths who think that they’re God...This is a war against God.'
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 5:54 pm EST
Featured Image
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

Important Correction: This article originally incorrectly reported that Dr. Zelenko recommended “Corcidin, vitamin C, vitamin D, and zinc’” as a treatment protocol for COVID. The correct first item is actually Quercetin and NOT Corcidin. We apologize for the error that resulted from transcription of the audio that appeared to sound like Corcidin.
Also:
In the video interview, Dr. Zelenko mentions that Michael Yeadon has stated that most people vaccinated with the Covid-19 vaccines will die within 2 years after vaccination. It was instead Prof. Dolores Cahill who made that statement, about which Dr. Yeadon has been recorded stating he "would not go that far".

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, the New York doctor who pioneered the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and zinc as treatment for COVID-19, gave a lengthy interview to LifeSiteNews explaining why this protocol has been so successful. Speaking with LifeSite’s Claire Chretien, Zelenko discussed coronavirus vaccines and the “group of sociopaths” that wants to administer these injections to the entire world, as well as the rampant censorship of information about treating the virus.

Zelenko has been a family physician for two decades in upstate New York. COVID-19 swept through that area at the advent of the coronavirus outbreak in March 2020. Of the more severe cases of the Wuhan coronavirus at that time, most patients were put on respirators, but “80 to 90 percent of people on a respirator were dying, so that wasn’t a very good treatment model,” Zelenko noted.

From 3,000 COVID-positive patients under his care, Zelenko identified 1,000 as “high risk” with whom his HCQ- and zinc-based medical intervention “reduced the death rate from 7.5 percent, to less than half a percent.”

“That is an 84 percent reduction in hospitalization and death.”

“Out of the 600,000 dead Americans that we have, we could have prevented 510,000 from going to the hospital and dying.”

Yet this protocol hasn’t been widely adopted by the medical community. Many Americans who caught the coronavirus found their doctors wouldn’t prescribe Hydroxychloroquine, or pharmacists wouldn’t fill prescriptions for it.

“It has been embraced by world-leading physicians who are honest and capable of deductive reasoning and are not indoctrinated,” Zelenko told LifeSite, but “unfortunately, 90 percent of physicians in this country are incapable of independent thought.”

“The net result is that they follow blindly the recommendations of their employers or government agencies without using common sense. They just follow orders, like the Nazis did.”

However, Zelenko drew attention to a number of prominent doctors such as Peter McCullough, M.D., cardiologist and professor of medicine at Texas A&M University Health Sciences Center, and Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor of epidemiology at Yale University, both of whom have successfully utilized his HCQ protocol for the treatment of COVID-19. They have testified, including before the U.S. Senate, that “early intervention in the pre-hospital setting is the key to overcoming this health problem.”

“There are dozens of studies that corroborate” his approach to treating the virus, Zelenko added, before adding that his protocol is not the only effective remedy: Ivermectin is one of the more powerful preventative measures against illness from the virus.

Despite government restrictions on the distribution of HCQ, a necessary component of the protocol, Zelenko found an over-the-counter alternative which works in the same way to help zinc penetrate the cells and inhibit viral replication.

“This is the cure for tyranny,” he stated, adding that the principal reasons a patient will die from COVID-19 infection are centered on “the government you live under, and the doctor you choose,” rather than the virus itself.

Explaining, Zelenko said, “if I can tell you ‘Go to the pharmacy and get quercetin, vitamin C, vitamin D, and zinc’ which are all over the counter, and if you use them in the right dosage, you will get better and stay healthy, all of a sudden I have empowered the individual not to be subjugated or brutalized by terrible governance and physician malfeasance and malpractice.”

‘There is no medical necessity for this experimental liquid’

Given the success of his treatment regimen, Zelenko said that “there is no medical necessity for this experimental liquid,” in reference to the mRNA gene therapy vaccines being administered around the world. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), people under 18 years of age have a “99.998 percent recovery from COVID with no treatment,” Zelenko noted.

This contrasts with the approximately 7,000 deaths, and many hundreds of thousands of adverse events reported following injection with an mRNA vaccine, the physician said, adding that the risk of harm to children from the vaccines could be as high as 50 to one.

“It’s not a risk, it’s murder,” he stated.

Among the 18- to 45-year-old demographic, Zelenko explained the recovery rate drops marginally to 99.95 percent. Similarly, the safety risks in taking an experimental substance outweigh any potential benefits, of which Zelenko admits the efficacy is “questionable,” even among those in higher risk categories for whom his medical protocol has had demonstrable benefit.

‘Conspiracy to commit genocide by a group of sociopaths who think that they’re God’

Characterizing the coronavirus crisis as “the biggest psychological warfare in human history,” Zelenko went on to explain that the entire world has been filled “with pathologic fear.”

“That fear is then used to manipulate human behavior,” he said, recalling how some of the most powerful men in the world, like Microsoft founder and billionaire Bill Gates, whom he called “a sociopath,” have used fear to push an agenda “that the world population has to be reduced.”

Regarding the current public health takeover, “in 2020, Gates said that seven billion people will need to be vaccinated,” with a solution that remains dangerous and untested.

Recognizing the gargantuan task of convincing seven billion people to take a vaccine, Zelenko suggested that this end can only be achieved by “generating such pathologic fear, and then offering an artificial solution. You become their saviour.”

“There have always been tyrants and despots who have delusions that they are a deity, or godlike, and feel that they are entitled to set the course of human history.”

The basis of human nature, Zelenko said, can be thought of in two main ways.

First, “you can look at a human beings as made in the image and likeness of God … that means our lives have sanctity … that means our lives have human rights.”

— 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

“If that’s the case, it’s not in the realm of the human being to decide how many people should be in the world and how long we should live.”

In opposition, said Zelenko, is the “Darwinist … eugenics approach which is that the dominance hierarchy of humanity is dependent on superior genetic makeup.”

“The Nazi ideology was exactly that,” he said. The Nazis felt entitled to eradicate “those that they considered subhuman,” including those that didn’t agree with them politically, he added. “The same thing is happening now, except it’s not anti-Semitic.”

According to Zelenko, Gates and the World Economic Forum’s Klaus Schwab, the latter of whom wrote the book The Great Reset, are part of a “group of sociopaths.”

This group believes they have “evolved into a higher being,” a type of “superhuman.”

“They’re pushing this transhumanist agenda,” Zelenko warned, as well as encouraging the eradication of private property and fossil fuels, and trying to vaccinate every person on earth.

“It’s conspiracy – but not theory – and it’s a conspiracy to commit genocide by a group of sociopaths who think that they’re God … This is a war against God.”

“We are living in World War Three … the problem is the weapon that’s being used [fear] is a silent killer,” he said.

The doctor exhorted people, “Don’t give into fear.”

“You are being tested by God. Who are you going to bow down to?”

Zelenko himself has faced persecution for his unwillingness to stay quiet about his research. Regardless of the efficacy of his protocol in saving patients’ lives, he has been banned from Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, all on account of his successful, counter-narrative approach to COVID-19.

In no uncertain terms, Zelenko described the suppression of his information on life-saving treatment, and the life-saving information provided by others, as part of a “conspiracy to commit murder.”

“I think that all the death that we have suffered as a society and a world has been intentional, wilful, malicious, and due to nefarious governance,” he decried. “This is a crime of historic and biblical scale.”

Zelenko also told LifeSiteNews that early during the coronavirus outbreak, when he began speaking out about using HCQ and zinc to treat the virus, then-President Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows called him to talk about Zelenko’s findings. Zelenko said he has treated a number of high-profile patients including former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

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


  coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine deaths, coronavirus vaccine for children, coronavirus vaccines, great reset, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, vitamin d, vladimir zelenko, zinc

News

Couple sues to get their money back after donating to pro-LGBT, ‘woke’ Catholic school

'The continued indoctrination of your twisted version of social and racial justice, equity, inclusion, sexuality and today’s politically correct narrative has permeated like a stench through the halls of the Academy,' Anthony Scarpo told the Academy of the Holy Names in Tampa.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 5:53 pm EST
Featured Image
Academy of the Holy Names school in Tampa, Florida
Raymond Wolfe Follow
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

TAMPA, Florida, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A Florida couple is suing to get their money back after donating to a Catholic high school that has since gone “woke.” 

Anthony and Barbara Scarpo pledged $1.35 million in 2017 to the Academy of the Holy Names, a high school in Tampa, Florida, that both of their daughters attended.  

The Scarpos donated to help disadvantaged students and advance the academy’s master plan and were chairs of the school’s fundraising campaign, the Tampa Bay Times reported. The school’s auditorium was renamed the “Scarpo Family Theatre” in their honor.  

Last week, however, the couple filed a lawsuit to retract their pledge and have their donation returned. The 13-count complaint slams the Academy of the Holy Names.

“The Academy lost its way, distancing itself from mainstream Catholicism, and embracing the new, politically correct divisive and ‘woke’ culture where gender identity, human sexuality and pregnancy termination among other ‘hot-button issues’ took center stage,” the Scarpos’ lawsuit states. 

The complaint, filed in Hillsborough County Circuit Court on June 26, also asks the academy to give the family’s tuition money to Catholic charities of their choosing. Tuition and fees for high school students at the Academy of the Holy Names run as high as $22,450. 

The Scarpos are also asking for the school to stop advertising itself as Catholic and that it no longer be accredited by the Florida Catholic Conference. Their lawsuit names the academy, former president Author Raimo, chairman of the board Ernie Garateix, and other members of the school’s leadership, as well as the Florida Catholic Conference, Newsweek said.  

Gregory Hearing, a lawyer for the Academy of the Holy Names, called the action against the school “attention-seeking.” 

“For a court to delve into whether the substance of matters taught by a Catholic school are consistent with a Catholic education would entangle the court in excessively religious matters, and thereby violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution,” he wrote in a letter to the Scarpos’ lawyer, Adam Levine. “That we should need to educate you on this is absurd.” 

“This is not asking the courts to get involved in a religious issue, but this is a simple breach of contract. If you’re paying for a Catholic education, that’s what you should be getting,” Levine said, according to the Tampa Bay Times.  

“It’s about the failure to deliver on a promise.” 

— 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

Newsweek reported that the Academy of the Holy Names plans to file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit and may file a counterclaim demanding the Scarpo family give all of their pledge. The Scarpos have donated $240,000 as of 2018, their complaint said, and have raised more than $9 million for the academy.  

Anthony Scarpo had previously spoken out against the direction of the academy, writing a letter after his elder daughter’s graduation blasting the school, according to his lawsuit. 

“The continued indoctrination of your twisted version of social and racial justice, equity, inclusion, sexuality and today’s politically correct narrative has permeated like a stench through the halls of the Academy and been allowed to seep into the minds of our children, causing stress, anger, guilt and confusion,” Scarpo wrote.   

“You were always eager to solicit our hard-earned money and take what you could but held firm as you dragged dozens if not hundreds of conservative families and teachers through your reimagined, highly progressive world, even as parents and students asked you … pleaded with you to stop, slow down,” he continued. The Scarpo family ultimately transferred their younger daughter to a different high school. 

In their lawsuit, the Scarpos highlighted a blackboard in a school common area that promoted becoming an LGBT “ally.” The academy’s message “utterly fails to put any part of this explanation into perspective within mainstream Catholicism,” they said. 

They also noted a letter issued by Raimo and Garateix about the creation of a “justice, equity, diversity and inclusion committee.” The letter claimed that “racism and hatred” were “reflected in the deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, George Floyd and Breonna Taylor” and stressed the need for “uncomfortable” race-related conversations.  

Raimo and Garateix did not “recognize the harm to their White, non-Diverse students by making them believe that they and their families are personally responsible for the historic harm(s) some members of our society have visited on other members of our society,” the Scarpos’ complaint read.  

Emily Wise, a spokeswoman for the academy, told Newsweek that the school’s curriculum is “based on Catholic values and rigorous academic standards.” “The Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, the school’s founding order, are dedicated to the full development of the human person through education, social justice, contemplation and the arts,” she said.  

The Sisters of the Holy Names is an increasingly pro-LGBT order of nuns. This year, the order’s leadership team signed onto a statement led by an LGBT activist group and joined by dissident bishops that told homosexuals and transgenders “God is on your side.” The statement made no mention of the intrinsic evil and grave health hazards of homosexuality and transgenderism.  


  academy of the holy names, catholic, catholic high school, florida catholic conference, gender identity, human sexuality, lgbt, wokeness

News

Government may ‘have to go out and find’ unvaccinated people, New Zealand official says

'Of course, I want every New Zealander to come forward,' New Zealand COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said, 'but human behavior suggests that there will be some people that we have to actually really go out and look for.'
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 5:46 pm EST
Featured Image
New Zealand COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins Getty Images
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow
By

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — In an interview in which he confirmed that a “handful” of “severe” adverse reactions to the experimental Pfizer jab had been reported, New Zealand’s COVID-19 Response Minister suggested that his government would need to “go out and find” any Kiwis who were still unvaccinated next year.

Hon. Chris Hipkins, a member of parliament in New Zealand’s House of Representatives and the country’s minister for COVID-19 response, told The AM Show Tuesday that the injections were currently being rolled out to those in the over-65 age category and affirmed that some New Zealanders had experienced severe reactions to the shot.

“Yes there have been a few people who have experienced side effects and that is not unusual for this vaccine, that applies with almost every vaccine that does get rolled out,” he said.

A recently published Medsafe study confirmed 4,521 reports of adverse reactions among New Zealanders after taking the Pfizer injection, of which 180 were serious. Eight deaths were reported, though it is unclear whether they were directly caused by the Pfizer shot.

Newshub reported that serious reactions have included facial paralysis, hemorrhage, pulmonary embolism, reduced vision, seizure, stroke, and thrombosis.  

Hipkins said that the shots would be available to younger and less-vulnerable age categories moving forward, and that everyone will have the chance to get the Pfizer product.  

“Early next year we’ll be in the phase of chasing up people who haven’t come forward to get their vaccination or who have missed their bookings and so on,” Hipkins said. “So, everyone will be able to get a vaccine between now and the end of the year.”

— 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

“Of course, I want every New Zealander to come forward,” Hipkins continued, “but human behavior suggests that there will be some people that we have to actually really go out and look for.”

Hipkins said the government is committed to making the drugs available to everyone by the end of 2021, but added “I can’t say that we’re not going to have some hesitant people, or some people who just haven’t come forward that we don’t have to go out and find next year.”

Simulations conducted in New Zealand have suggested that 83 percent of the population would need to be vaccinated to gain herd immunity against the “original strain” of the coronavirus. But experts now claim that the allegedly more infectious “Delta variant” will require a vaccination rate of 97 percent.

Hipkins’ comments about “go[ing] out and look[ing] for” unvaccinated New Zealanders have raised eyebrows among those skeptical of the hastily produced experimental shots and the politicization of vaccination by government officials.  

The New Zealand minister’s remarks were made within hours of U.S. President Joe Biden’s announcement that he was launching a “community by community, neighborhood by neighborhood, and oftentimes door by door” campaign, “literally knocking on doors to get help to the remaining people.”  

The comments by the Biden administration sparked immediate backlash among social media users and Republican lawmakers, who slammed the policy for infringing on Americans’ privacy.

A Florida legislator called the practice “sick,” suggesting he would introduce legislation to ban door-to-door solicitation of the medical products.

Meanwhile in Arizona, Attorney General Mark Brnovich wrote a letter to President Biden expressing concern that the White House “might be in possession of medical records revealing the contact information of Americans who have not been vaccinated.”  

Brnovich said if the White House did indeed have such information, it would amount to “a severe breach of privacy” which he “will not tolerate” in his state.

In an interview on MSNBC Wednesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who has repeatedly flip-flopped on his COVID-19 advice and admitted to skewing numbers related to herd immunity based on polling data, told Americans who don’t want to take the experimental drug to “get over it.”

“You’ve gotta ask: What is the problem?" Fauci said. “Get over it. Get over this political statement. Just get over it and try and save the lives of yourself and your family.”

Fauci repeated a claim he has made before, saying that varying vaccination rates in different U.S. regions might lead to “two Americas.”

“So, what we will have, because certain sections are not going to want to get vaccinated, is this smoldering threat that’s always there,” Fauci claimed.  

“If we keep allowing the virus to circulate, wherever it is, whatever red states or whatever states are not the ones that are getting vaccinated, then you have the threat of the entire system getting in trouble because you have a new variant,” Fauci said.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 67 percent of Americans over the age of 18 have received at least one shot, with more than 157 million “fully vaccinated.”

However, a Washington Post-ABC News poll published last week suggested that almost three in 10 Americans (29 percent) will likely choose not to get vaccinated, including 20 percent who said they definitely will not get the shot.

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


  adverse reactions, biden administration, chris hipkins, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19 vaccine, new zealand, vaccine mandates

News

Biden officials defend door-to-door vaccine campaign: ‘Absolutely’ gov’t's business if you’ve been vaccinated

The prospect of a representative of the federal government going straight to private citizens’ homes to urge them to make a specific medical decision sparked a swift backlash, with many framing the plan as intrusive and coercive.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 5:03 pm EST
Featured Image
Pool / Getty
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

CONTACT YOUR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS: Tell them to reject door to door vaccinations! Click to contact your lawmakers now.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 8, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The Biden administration is doubling down on its intentions to go door-to-door to pressure Americans into taking a COVID-19 vaccine, calling it “absolutely” the government’s business whether someone is vaccinated and impugning those who have expressed civil-liberty concerns.

“Now, we need to go community by community, neighborhood by neighborhood, and oftentimes, door to door — literally knocking on doors — to get help to the remaining people protected from the virus,” President Joe Biden said Tuesday, following the revelation that the administration had not met its goal of at least partially vaccinating 70% of the country by July 4. 

— 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

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed this was not merely a figure of speech by explaining that the first pillar of Biden’s vaccination outreach plan is “targeted, community-by-community, door-to-door outreach to get remaining Americans vaccinated by ensuring they have the information they need on how both safe and accessible the vaccine is.”

The prospect of a representative of the federal government going straight to private citizens’ homes to urge them to make a specific medical decision sparked a swift backlash, with many framing the plan as intrusive and coercive:

Biden administration Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra hit back in a CNN interview, arguing that because “the federal government has spent trillions of dollars to try to keep Americans alive during this pandemic,” it is “absolutely the government’s business” to know who is and is not vaccinated. Following backlash that comment generated, Becerra later said via Twitter that the administration “has no database” to track vaccinations:

Psaki also denied keeping a database or having any plans to do so, while adding that “when people are critical of these tactics, it’s really a disservice to the country and to the doctors, faith leaders, community leaders and others who are working to get people vaccinated.”

To the frustration of Democrats and their allies, vaccination rates stalled after an initial flurry as many Americans remain concerned that the three coronavirus vaccines currently available in the United States have not been sufficiently studied for negative effects, while some harbor ethical reservations about the use of cells from aborted babies in some of the vaccine candidates’ development. Still others simply consider the vaccine unnecessary for them given COVID-19’s high survivability among most groups, low risk of asymptomatic spread, and research indicating that post-infection natural immunity is equally protective against reinfection.

While many officeholders and media figures blame online “misinformation” for lingering vaccine hesitancy, considerably less contemplation has been spent on how the government’s own actions contribute to mistrust, such as mixed messaging on various aspects of the pandemic, as well as the fact that clinical trials for the currently-authorized COVID-19 vaccines were performed in less than a year, when such trials traditionally take a minimum of two to four years. 

One of the innovations of the Trump administration’s “Operation Warp Speed” was conducting various aspects of the development process concurrently rather than sequentially, but that does not fully account for the condensing of clinical trial phases — each of which can take anywhere from 1-3 years on its own — to just three months apiece.


  coronavirus, covid-19, covid-19 vaccines, jen psaki, joe biden, privacy, xavier becerra

News

French study suggests lockdowns led to ‘catastrophic’ impact on children’s health

'We’ve never seen anything like this. Sporty kids without any health or weight issues gained between 5 and 10 kilograms because they stopped practicing their sport. And not all have resumed any kind of physical activity.'
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 1:08 pm EST
Featured Image
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Follow Jeanne
By Jeanne Smits

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A soon to be published long-term study involving 90 second and third-grade children in central France has revealed a spectacular decline in physical and cognitive capacities during COVID-19 lockdowns. “The numbers are catastrophic,” according to Martine Duclos, head of the sports medicine department of the University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand and director of the National Observatory of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviors (ONAPS).

The implications of the situation are indeed dire. Obesity and sedentarism are expected to lead to an increase in chronic diseases in this population in years to come.

The study was initiated in September 2019, months before France’s first lockdown that led to the closure of schools and “stay-at-home” orders in mid-March, 2020, giving the researchers the ability to compare “before and after” data within a stable set of youngsters in primary schools in Vichy (24,000 inhabitants) and Riom (19,000 inhabitants).

Among the most serious effects of almost two months of total lockdown for these children aged between 7 and 9 were weight gain, shortness of breath and an average loss of cognitive capacity of 40 percent between September 2019 and September 2020.

In one year, the children’s body mass index – which measures corpulence – went up by 2 to 3 points on average, with negative consequences for their fitness. “We’ve never seen anything like this. Sporty kids without any health or weight issues gained between 5 and 10 kilograms because they stopped practicing their sport. And not all have resumed any kind of physical activity,” said Duclos.

Speaking with Le Monde, she described how many now have difficulty running fast between pads placed 10 meters apart. The researchers used this classic shuttle run test that measures oxygen take-up capacity and found that “some children, already badly out of breath, did not manage to reach the first pad before the first beep.” This was also unprecedented, she underscored, adding that some were now incapable of doing a motor skills course, in which they are expected to complete a timed obstacle race.

Measurement of the 2nd and 3rd-graders cognitive capacity was accomplished using a number of simple exercises such as asking the children to connect letters with numbers in alphabetical order within a given time. All succeeded this test in September 2019. One year later, a large proportion were unable to finish within the set time limit, leading Martine Duclos to comment: “One year of confinement has had catastrophic results, at a crucial point of neural plasticity.”

— 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

To be precise, only about two months of the researched period (from March 2020 to September 2020) were during full lockdown; after classes resumed in primary schools, there were still restrictions on collective and indoor sports, public swimming baths and the like. The time segment also included two months of summer vacation. Wearing masks at school all day, including during recess outdoors, only became compulsory for the 6-11 age group as of November 2020.

According to a previous study by ONAPS published last January, only 4.8 percent of the 5-11 age-group (2.8 percent of girls and 6.5 percent of boys) got at least one hour of daily physical activity during the first confinement, while only 0.6 percent of teenagers (11 to 17 -year-olds) reached this recommended level of physical activity (as compared with an already meagre pre-lockdown proportion of 13 percent).

At the same time, multiple studies in various countries quoted a rise in screen time among 60 percent of children and adolescents, with teleworking of adults appearing as an aggravating factor. 25 percent of children under 6 years of age spent less time in active play (but 50 percent spent more, according to their parents) during lockdown. School is compulsory in France from ages 3 to 16.

The report concluded: “How can one be surprised at these reports that clearly show a decrease in physical activity and an increase in sedentarism when even before COVID-19… the majority of our children and adolescents already failed to respect recommendations. The setting up of a lockdown, which de facto set a limit on social interaction and physical liberties, could do nothing else than reinforce this alarming situation and make it worse.” Its authors expected that the second French lockdown in France, albeit less severe, would reveal similar deterioration; they stressed the need for further research into these periods of time.

More largely, a study published online by ONAPS last February assessing all age-groups quoted the following worrying results:

Forty-two percent of children, 58.7% of adolescents, 36.4% of adults, and 39.2% of older people had reduced physical activity levels. Particularly, active transportation and endurance practices showed a significant decrease, while domestic, muscular strengthening, and flexibility activities increased. Sitting time and screen time increased, respectively, in 36.3% and 62.0% of children, 25.5% and 69.0% in adolescents, 24.6% and 41.0% in adults, and 36.1% and 32.1% in seniors.

But instead of noting that lockdowns do more harm than good and could lead to lasting and widespread damage in large sectors of the population, and therefore urging the authorities not to have recourse to such measures again, the authors concluded that the population simply needed to alter its behavior during future lockdowns.

The COVID-19 confinement period led to important modifications in individual movement behaviors at all ages, particularly favoring decreased physical activity and increased sedentariness. These findings suggest that the authors need to inform and encourage people to maintain and improve their physical activities and to change their sedentary time habits during post-confinement and during the period of a potential future lockdown.

In other words, the authors suggest that yet more government messaging and recommendations should accompany existing COVID measures and take for granted that further lockdowns are on the cards. 


  lockdowns, martine duclos

News

Trump makes the case for suing Big Tech in Wall Street Journal op-ed

'To restore free speech for myself and for every American, I am suing Big Tech to stop it.'
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 12:29 pm EST
Featured Image
Michael M. Santiago / Staff / Getty
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Former President Donald Trump took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal Thursday to elaborate on the lawsuit he announced this week against Facebook, Google, and Twitter for deplatforming him and scores of like-minded Americans.

On Wednesday, Trump announced he would be the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit seeking the restoration of his and other social media accounts plus punitive damages. The suit is backed by the America First Policy Institute, a relatively new organization led by former Trump officials Linda McMahon and Brooke Rollins.

“One of the gravest threats to our democracy today is a powerful group of Big Tech corporations that have teamed up with government to censor the free speech of the American people,” Trump’s op-ed begins. “This is not only wrong — it is unconstitutional. To restore free speech for myself and for every American, I am suing Big Tech to stop it.”

Calling the internet “the new public square” akin to town halls and traditional media, Trump argued that the owners of the world’s largest communication platforms have grown “increasingly brazen and shameless” in blocking the “free flow of information on which our democracy depends.”

The former president highlighted various examples of legitimate discussion subjects tech giants have suppressed, including the Chinese government’s culpability in the COVID-19 outbreak, the potential of hydroxychloroquine as a COVID treatment, and a story alleging corruption involving Trump’s 2020 opponent, President Joe Biden, and his son Hunter.

— 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

“Jennifer Horton, a Michigan schoolteacher, was banned from Facebook for sharing an article questioning whether mandatory masks for young children are healthy,” the piece continues. “Later, when her brother went missing, she was unable to use Facebook to get the word out. Colorado physician Kelly Victory was deplatformed by YouTube after she made a video for her church explaining how to hold services safely. Kiyan Michael of Florida and her husband, Bobby, lost their 21-year-old son in a fatal collision caused by a twice-deported illegal alien. Facebook censored them after they posted on border security and immigration enforcement.”

Trump highlights two main arguments the suit appears to be relying on: that Big Tech is acting behind the cover of a special government benefit – Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which exempts them from potential liability for user content – and that congressional Democrats are “exploiting this leverage to coerce platforms into censoring their political opponents” via browbeating tech CEOs in Capitol Hill hearings and the “guidance” of agencies such as the US Centers for Disease Control.

“The Supreme Court has held that Congress can’t use private actors to achieve what the Constitution prohibits it from doing itself,” Trump argued. “In effect, Big Tech has been illegally deputized as the censorship arm of the U.S. government. This should alarm you no matter your political persuasion. It is unacceptable, unlawful and un-American.”

It’s not yet known whether Trump plans to run for president again in 2024, but if he does, not being on Twitter is expected to have a significant impact. Trump’s deplatforming led to “Americans’ consumption of media about Trump...dropping to lower levels than at any point since he first announced his bid for the presidency in 2015,” Axios reports. “Clicks to Trump stories fell 81% from January to February, another 56% from February to March and 40% from March to April, according to exclusive data from SocialFlow.”


  big tech, donald trump, facebook, free speech, google, lawsuits, social media, social media censorship, twitter, wall street journal

News

Chicago Public Schools to give condoms to 10-year-olds

The policy was passed in December but will start being implemented this upcoming school year.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 12:00 pm EST
Featured Image
Screengrab from The War on Children
Matt Lamb
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

CHICAGO, Illinois, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Children as young as fifth grade can begin receiving free condoms at Chicago Public Schools (CPS), without their parents’ knowledge, this school year.

“Schools that teach grade 5th and up must maintain a condom availability program. CPS provides guidance regarding the notification to parents and access to condoms by approved school representatives,” the December policy said. “Condoms are provided at no cost by the Chicago Department of Public Health in an ongoing effort to mitigate the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV infection, and unintended pregnancy among CPS students.”

This means that “all but a dozen, which enroll only younger grades, of the more than 600 CPS schools will have condoms,” the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

“Young people have the right to accurate and clear information to make healthy decision[s],” Kenneth Fox, a pediatrician employed by the school district, told the Chicago newspaper.

However, an anti-child sex trafficking advocate warned that the new policy will sexualize children.

“In Chicago, 5-year-olds are taught masturbation, so now fifth graders need condoms,” Jaco Booyens, an anti-sex trafficking advocate, said recently. “Why? Because they are being hypersexualized. They're now engaging in activity and conversation way prematurely. There's not a child on the planet in fifth grade that can make ‘healthy sexual decisions.’”

— 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

Lila Rose, president and founder of Live Action, also criticized the new policy.

“Giving condoms to 10-year-olds–who are not psychologically equipped to consent to sex–is perverse,” Rose wrote on Twitter

Chicago is not the first major school district to distribute free condoms without informing parents.

The San Francisco United School District voted in 2016 to hand out free condoms to 6th graders and older.

“Students will need to meet with a nurse or school social worker for assessment and education before they can receive the free condoms,” a CBS affiliate reported, “but under state law do not need parental consent, district officials said.”

“The district has been providing condoms to high school students under a similar policy since 1992,” CBS reported.


  abortion, chicago, children's rights, children's safety, condoms

News

Refusal by Supreme Court to hear case of persecuted florist is another major blow for religious liberty

Where are the rights of believing Christians as they are increasingly faced with demands that go against their consciences?
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 11:40 am EST
Featured Image
Barronelle Stutzman the Christian proprietor of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, has been forced into court for refusing to provide flowers for a customer’s same-sex "wedding" ceremony
Don Hart
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (Family Research Council) – It was a devastating day for Barronelle Stutzman. The florist from Washington State, who's become a symbol of the struggle for religious liberty in America, learned last week that the U.S. Supreme Court will not hear her case, in which she declined to design flower arrangements for a same-sex wedding in accordance with her Christian beliefs.

It was a case that has become all too familiar since the legalization of same-sex marriage in the U.S. Where are the rights of believing Christians who work in the public square as they are increasingly faced with demands that go against their consciences? So far, the high court has sent very conflicting messages with regards to this fundamental question of religious freedom. In its Obergefell v. Hodges opinion that foisted same-sex marriage on all 50 states, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that "Many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here." In a narrowly-worded victory for wedding cake baker Jack Phillips in 2018, the high court gave some amount of meaning to these words.

But with this latest failure to take up what should be a clear-cut case, the Supreme Court is leaving believers out in the cold when it comes to protecting their constitutional right to hold religious views and live out those views in the public square. This latest action is also leaving conservatives wondering how a court with three constitutionalist picks from President Trump and a 6-3 overall conservative majority could drop the ball so badly when it comes to defending the most fundamental and deeply held freedoms enshrined in the Constitution.

"It's a grievous injustice," said Kristen Waggoner, general counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, on "Washington Watch." "It's deeply disappointing. And it's honestly hard to wrap your mind around how and why the U.S. Supreme Court didn't give her justice in some way. There were options."

— 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

Waggoner, who has represented Stutzman from the very beginning of her legal fight, went on to detail how despite this latest loss, the fight for religious freedom for Stutzman and others like her is far from over.

"It's important to remember that this case is focused on Washington State, and a denial to hear a case by the Supreme Court does not make new law," she noted. "What it means is that Barronelle is denied justice in Washington, but we have been able to prevail in similar cases in other jurisdictions. The Arizona Supreme Court ruled the opposite of the way that the Washington Supreme Court has done, and they've protected freedom. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has protected freedom, and we expect that a decision will come out of the 10th Circuit in Colorado on a similar issue shortly. So there will be a circuit split, and the [U.S. Supreme] Court will need to address that split as we're seeing the more leftist states essentially make the justice system an arm of cancel culture."

Waggoner also underscored the crucial importance of what hangs in the balance. "What we know is that the principle that's at stake here protects all Americans," she said. "It doesn't matter whether you're on the left or the right, Democrat or Republican – the right to be able to express ourselves, to have freedom of speech, the right to be able to live consistent with our convictions is one that all humans should enjoy. And it's not one that the government gives us. It's something that God gives us and it's constitutionally guaranteed."

So how long can the Supreme Court continue to avoid this fundamental issue? Not for long. "I can guarantee you that this question will continue to come before the U.S. Supreme Court," Waggoner concluded. "You can't have a pluralistic free republic – a durable nation – if you don't have the fundamental freedom to speak or not speak and the right to practice your faith."

Published with permission from the Family Research Council.

RELATED

Barrett, Kavanaugh join liberals in refusing to hear case of persecuted Christian florist


  barronelle stutzman, freedom of speech, religious liberty, us supreme court

News

Election investigations move forward in Pennsylvania, other states, as Arizona audit winds down

A final report by auditors is expected later this summer, and Arizona senate president Karen Fann has already said that the audit has turned up evidence of 'serious issues.'
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 9:04 am EST
Featured Image
Arizona senate president Karen Fann has said that the Arizona audit has turned up evidence of 'serious issues.' Arizona Public Media / YouTube
Raymond Wolfe Follow
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The forensic election audit in Maricopa County, Arizona, is winding down, but investigations into the 2020 election are just getting started in swing states across the country.

Contractors last month finished a hand recount of around 2.1 million ballots in Maricopa, Arizona’s largest county, and are now examining records of problematic ballots. Arizona senators ordered the audit, which finally began in April after months of legal challenges by Maricopa officials and the Democratic Party. 

A final report by auditors is expected later this summer, and Arizona senate president Karen Fann has already said that the audit has turned up evidence of “serious issues.”

In the meantime, lawmakers and concerned citizens in other states that certified narrow victories for Joe Biden last year have launched new election reviews, including in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Wisconsin, while some Republicans continue pushing for audits in states like Michigan and Nevada.

Pennsylvania

On Wednesday, Pennsylvania state senator Doug Mastriano (R-Franklin) announced that he requested election materials from Philadelphia County and at least two other counties for

a “forensic investigation.” Mastriano, chairman of the state senate’s Intergovernmental Operations Committee, told the Epoch Times his audit would be “even deeper” than Arizona’s. 

“It takes a hard look at software, machine, scanners, in addition to looking at all the ballots themselves to see if they were hand-filled in or copied by a machine,” he said. “So a scientific approach to get to the bottom of what happened, what went right, what went wrong in an election. It takes out all bias.” 

Counties could face subpoenas if they refuse to respond to Mastriano’s requests before July 31. Pennsylvania Democrats and local officials are likely to sue, however, as with the Maricopa audit. Pennsylvania’s anti-Trump attorney general, Josh Shapiro, has pledged that his office would “do everything” to fight any subpoenas issued by Mastriano. 

The Nov. 3 election in Pennsylvania was notoriously marred by irregularities, like the loss of thousands of mail-in ballots, a rash of machine glitches, and theft of election equipment in Philadelphia. In an op-ed about his audit initiative, Sen. Mastriano cited “hundreds of affidavits alleging firsthand fraud, irregularities, and illegal behavior witnessed at polling places.” 

Further concerns raised by Republican legislators include the confirmed existence of over 11,000 illegal immigrants on voter rolls ahead of the 2020 election, as well as millions of dollars of private election process funding by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. 

Republican leaders clashed over the possibility of an Arizona-style audit prior to Mastriano’s announcement on Wednesday, and former President Donald Trump has indicated that he may back primary challengers of those who do not support an audit. Pennsylvania lawmakers recently passed a provision to create a state bureau of election audits, though that measure was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf. 

Georgia

In Georgia, Henry Superior Court Judge Brian Amero ruled in June that an analysis of over 145,000 mail-in ballots in Fulton County, which includes Atlanta, could move forward. Poll watcher Garland Favorito and a group of voters had sued county officials for a review of the ballots. 

Judge Amero was reportedly moved by the testimony of election monitors, some of them Democrats, who said that they observed potentially thousands of ballots for Joe Biden that looked photocopied, according to RealClearInvestigations. Biden was certified the winner of Georgia in 2020 by just under 12,000 votes. 

A ruling handed down by Amero on June 24 named five members of the Fulton County election board as respondents in Favorito’s lawsuit and allowed an investigation of the ballots continue, Just the News reported

The decision came after revelations that officials with the office of Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger inspected hundreds of Fulton ballots after Amero put them under a protective order. Raffensperger did not reveal the investigation to the judge or to the public, RealClearInvestigations found. 

Last month, Just the News also published a contractor’s report to Raffensperger that detailed “serious” election issues in Fulton County on Election Day. The contractor, Carter Jones, reported what appeared to be double-counting of ballots, poor security protocol, and “a massive chain of custody problem,” among other things.

Wisconsin

Wisconsin Republicans announced last week that they will be hiring a former state supreme court justice to lead a probe into 2020 election irregularities and possible wrongdoing by activists connected to Mark Zuckerberg. 

The investigation follows reports in March that activists with the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), a nonprofit that Zuckerberg funded with over $350 million last year, had access to Wisconsin ballot storage rooms before the general election. A recent analysis by a Wisconsin think tank determined that millions of dollars of Zuckerberg’s uneven election process funding likely led to thousands of additional votes for Democrats in the Badger State.

Investigators tapped by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature will have subpoena power and will include retired law enforcement officers, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said in May. 

Trump has criticized Vos, however, for not initiating for a forensic audit, saying that Vos is “actively trying to prevent” an audit. 

At least one Wisconsin resident has begun his own investigation of the 2020 election. Earlier this week, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that Peter Bernegger has been analyzing thousands of ballots in various municipalities with his own equipment, according to local officials. “We’re finding a lot of interesting things,” Bernegger has 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

Michigan, Nevada

Election investigations face greater hurdles in neighboring Michigan, where top Republicans have largely rejected reports of fraud, despite more than 7,000 affidavits alleging voter fraud that were delivered to the state capitol last month. 

Two weeks ago, commissioners of Michigan’s Cheboygan County requested a county-wide audit to confirm whether results were “accurately reported by the county’s Dominion vote tabulator and Election System and Software machine.” That request is likely doomed, however, as it needs approval from Democratic secretary of state Jocelyn Benson, who has repeatedly attacked election integrity efforts. 

The same day that Cheboygan requested an audit, state Rep. Steve Carra (R-Three Rivers) proposed a bill to mandate a statewide election review, though it is unlikely that Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) would sign the bill if passed. Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey has said that he is “watching” the Arizona audit “carefully.”

Republican leaders in Nevada have called for a forensic audit, GOP chairman Michael McDonald saying that the state should “duplicate” Arizona’s process. “We intend to take and look at every legal option we have of bringing an audit here to Nevada,” he said in June.

The Republican Party of Nevada submitted around 4,000 accusations of election violations earlier this year, the Epoch Times reported. Nevada’s Secretary of State, Barbara Cegavske (R), nevertheless has said that a probe by her office that has been criticized by fellow Republicans turned up no “evidentiary support” to support allegations of “widespread voter fraud.”

“I think at best they investigated three or four percent of the complaints we turned in. So at that point I knew we had to basically find a way to maneuver this,” McDonald said. McDonald and Republican officials from several states, like Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia, have toured the Maricopa audit. 


  2020 election, donald trump, election audit, mark zuckerberg

News

Biological man prohibited from participating in women’s Olympic trials due to testosterone levels

CeCe Telfer had previously competed in the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) men’s Division II 400-meter runs as recently as 2016 and 2017; he ranked 200th in 2016 and 390th in 2017. He then switched to the women’s Division II in 2019, coming in first in the 400-meter run.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 7:41 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
Eric Lendrum
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (American Greatness) – In a victory for women’s sports, a man who falsely identifies as a woman was barred from participating in the Olympic trials for the women’s 400-meter hurdle event, the Daily Caller reports.

The athlete in question is CeCe Telfer, a black man who has identified as a man for the majority of his life. Telfer had previously competed in the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) men’s Division II 400-meter runs as recently as 2016 and 2017; he ranked 200th in 2016 and 390th in 2017. He then switched to the women’s Division II in 2019, coming in first in the 400-meter run.

However, his bid to compete in the Olympics on behalf of the United States was shut down after World Athletics confirmed that he failed to meet their guidelines on “testosterone suppression” for so-called “transgender” athletes. Any events ranging from 400 meters to one mile are inaccessible to athletes who possess testosterone levels above 5 nonomoles per liter for a year.

USA Track & Field released a statement on the decision, stating that the World Athletics’ “conditions had not yet been met” by Telfer by the initial date of June 17th. Subsequently, “USATF provided CeCe with the eligibility requirements and, along with World Athletics, the opportunity to demonstrate [his] eligibility so that [he] could compete at the U.S. Olympic Team Trials. According to a subsequent notification to CeCe from World Athletics on June 22nd,” the statement continued, “[he] has not been able to demonstrate [his] eligibility.”

— 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

With ongoing efforts to mainstream the notion of “transgenderism” – the false and biologically-disproven notion that one can change their gender whenever they feel like it – there has been a spike in so-called “transgender” athletes trying to compete in the other gender’s team, with the overwhelming majority of these cases being men who now claim to be women. Like Telfer, this has resulted in many mediocre male athletes suddenly becoming dominant “female” athletes over all of the biological women.

As such, a majority of states have taken some action against this dangerous trend. Five states – Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Mississippi, and Tennessee – have passed laws banning men from competing in women’s sports. Twenty-six other states have seen such bills introduced in their legislature.

Published with permission from American Greatness.


  gender ideology, girls sports, transgenderism, women's sports

News

Trudeau’s former right-hand man joins Canadian PM in saying church burnings ‘may be understandable’

'Failed Liberal brainiac Gerry Butts thinks burning indigenous churches "may be understandable." Wonder when he'll find it politically expedient to shrug off the burning of mosques and synagogues,' Postmedia columnist Terry Glavin wrote in response to the recent comments.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:54 am EST
Featured Image
Former Justin Trudeau advisor Gerald Butts Dave Chan / Stringer / Getty
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

ONTARIO, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A former adviser and close friend to Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau is being called out for saying the recent rash of arson and vandalism attacks on mostly Catholic churches are “understandable.” 

The comment was made by Gerald Butts, who was an advisor to Trudeau until he resigned in the wake of the SNC Lavalin scandal in 2019. 

On Tuesday, he wrote on Twitter that “it may be understandable” that people want to burn down churches in light of the discovery of unmarked graves at now-closed indigenous residential schools once run by the Church.  

The controversy began after Postmedia columnist Terry Glavin took issue with some on social media who have come to the defense of Harsha Walia, executive director of the British Columbia (B.C.) Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA). 

Walia recently sparked online fury after openly calling for violence against Catholic parishes, writing on Twitter in response to news of Catholic churches being torched to “Burn it all down.”  

Canadian lawyer Naomi Sayers came to the defense of Walia, saying publicly said that she would help “burn” down Catholic churches, as well as offering to help defend anyone caught attempting arson. 

Butts first took a swipe at Glavin for calling our Walia’s remarks, to which Glavin replied, “So Gerry, defending the ‘burning churches is cool’ crowd?” 

It was then that Butts replied with his “understandable” remark. 

Glavin was not finished in calling out Butts, writing, “Failed Liberal brainiac Gerry Butts thinks burning indigenous churches ‘may be understandable.’ Wonder when he'll find it politically expedient to shrug off the burning of mosques and synagogues.” 

This elicited a response from Butts, who again said it was “understandable” that churches are being burned. 

“Look buddy, I'm not going to break the Crash Davis rule, and will ignore the personal insult. But I was an altar boy in a small Atlantic Canadian parish in the early 1980s. I can understand why someone would want to burn down a church, though I do not condone it,” wrote Butts

Butt’s remarks come after Trudeau himself also said that it is that it is “understandable” that churches have been burned, while at the same time saying it is “unacceptable and wrong.” 

Sun columnist Brian Lilley blasted Butts in an opinion piece for his remarks.  

“And with those words, Trudeau, and now Butts, have given an excuse to those who have and continue to carry out these attacks. These very same attacks have been denounced by First Nations leadership in stronger terms and it has rightly been pointed out that it does nothing for reconciliation,” wrote Lilley on Wednesday.

Heavy media coverage of the unmarked graves at the now-closed Kamloops Indian Residential School located in British Columbia as well as in Saskatchewan has resulted in over 35 churches, most of them Catholic, being either burned or vandalized.  

An online map posted by True North News shows the locations of these churches.

Trudeau has also blasted the Catholic Church publicly, saying he expects “the Church to step up and take responsibility for its role in this.”  

However, the Catholic Church in Canada as well as in Rome has already acknowledged that some Catholics were at fault in the government-mandated residential school system. 

— 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 April 2009, Pope Benedict XVI met with First Nations representatives and apologized for the abuse children suffered in the schools. 

Phil Fontaine, then-national chief of the Assembly of First Nations, emerged from the meeting satisfied, saying, “What we wanted the Pope to say to us was that he was sorry and … that he deeply felt for us. 

“We heard that very clearly today,” Fontaine added.

The Kamloops Indian Residential School was run by the Catholic Church from 1890 until 1969 and was closed by the federal government in 1977. 

Although the residential school system was founded by the secular government in the 19th century, and then woefully underfunded by the state, and although different religious groups were asked to run the schools, the Catholic Church has borne the brunt of recent criticism. 

After the government mandated attendance at the schools in the 1920s, children were forcibly removed from their families and parents threatened with prison if they did not comply. Upon arrival at the school, children rarely saw their families, with many disappearing or never seeing their families again. 

A priest who spoke to LifeSiteNews under condition of anonymity after the first two churches on indigenous land in British Columbia were set ablaze, said that First Nations Catholics will suffer the loss of their churches, but that sadly we can “expect more” burnings to come. 

report from the early 1900s by a medical inspector showed high rates of tuberculosis among Indigenous children as well as a lack of proper funding from the government. 

In a recent report published by LifeSiteNews well-known Canadian Catholic author Michael O’Brien, who himself attended a residential school for three years, cautioned against using the discovery of the graves as a reason to attack the Catholic Church. 

Another report published by LifeSiteNews highlights how Cree playwright Tomson Highway, as well as the late Inuvik Dene band chief Cece Hodgson-McCauley, said that attending the schools set them up for success later in their adult life. 


  attacks on churches, church burnings, first nations, gerald butts, justin trudeau

News

27 experts launch citizen petition demanding FDA ‘Slow down and get the science right’ before approving COVID vaccines

A group of 27 prominent health experts and scientists are inviting public comment on their petition calling on the FDA to withhold full approval of COVID vaccines until efficacy and safety measures are met.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:40 am EST
Featured Image
Megan Redshaw, J.D.
By Megan Redshaw J.D.

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) – A group of 27 clinicians, researchers and advocates last week [June 3] filed an urgent Citizen Petition with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urging the agency not to prematurely grant full approval to any COVID vaccine.

“Premature FDA approval of any COVID-19 vaccine could negatively impact the health and safety of U.S. residents, with global ramifications considering the international importance of FDA decisions,” the group said.

The FDA citizen petition process, described in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR Part 10), allows individuals and community organizations to request the agency make changes to health policy. At any time, any “interested person” can request the FDA “issue, amend or revoke a regulation or order,” or “take or refrain from taking any other form of administrative action.”

In their petition, the group outlined many unanswered questions surrounding the efficacy and safety of COVID vaccines, and detailed how data must be collected before the FDA considers granting any vaccine full approval.

“We are concerned that the premature licensure of a COVID-19 vaccine can seriously undermine public confidence in regulatory authorities, particularly if long-term safety issues were to emerge following licensure,” petitioners wrote.

In an op-ed published today in The BMJ, four of the petition’s signatories, writing on behalf of the group, said:

“The message of our petition is ‘slow down and get the science right — there is no legitimate reason to hurry to grant a license to a coronavirus vaccine.’ We believe the existing evidence base — both pre- and post-authorization — is simply not mature enough at this point to adequately judge whether clinical benefits outweigh the risks in all populations.”

The petition states a COVID vaccine should be fully approved only when substantial evidence demonstrates the benefits of a specific product outweigh the harms for the indicated, recipient population. The petitioners “respectfully” requested the FDA act on the petition by June 11. They plan to seek judicial relief if the petition is denied.

The FDA granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to three COVID vaccines — PfizerModerna and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) — allowing rapid and widespread vaccine rollout across the U.S. However, the EUAs were granted without a built-in expiration date, which means they can lawfully be distributed even after a “public health emergency” no longer exists.

The 20-page citizen petition and supporting documents are filed under Docket ID FDA-2021-P-0521 on regulations.gov. Anyone can comment on the petition, or read others’ comments, including the FDA’s official reply once it arrives.

Petitioners ask the FDA to implement eight efficacy and safety measures before granting a COVID vaccine full FDA approval:

  1. Complete at least two years of follow-up of participants originally enrolled in pivotal clinical trials, even if the trials were unblinded and now lack a placebo control. All vaccine manufacturer phase 3 trials were already designed with this planned duration.
  2. Prior to including in the list of populations for which a vaccine is approved, ensure there is substantial evidence that clinical effectiveness outweighs harms in special populations including: infants, children and adolescents; those with past SARS-CoV-2 infection; immunocompromised; pregnant women; nursing women; frail older adults; and individuals with cancer, autoimmune disorders and hematological conditions.
  3. Require thorough safety assessment of spike proteins being produced by body tissues following vaccine administration, and spike proteins’ full biodistribution, pharmacokinetics and tissue specific toxicity.
  4. Complete vaccine biodistribution studies from administration site and safety implications of mRNA translation in distant tissues.
  5. Require data of all severe adverse reactions reported following COVID vaccination, such as deaths, reported in VAERS and other pharmacovigilance systems.
  6. Assess safety in individuals receiving more than two doses.
  7. Include gene delivery and therapy experts in the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), in recognition of the fact that the novel COVID vaccines work on the premise of gene delivery, in contrast to conventional vaccines.
  8. Enforce stringent conflict-of-interest requirements to ensure individuals involved in data analysis and BLA-related decision-making processes have no conflict of interests with vaccine manufacturers.

The petitioners provided a rationale for each requested action and a list of what they said were invalid reasons for rushing full approval of COVID vaccines. They explained that approving COVID vaccines for the purpose of ensuring they are accessible after the public health emergency has ended, or in an effort to ensure adequate access to vaccines across the population, are two objectives that can be accomplished with current EUAs.

The group also said giving full approval to a COVID vaccine in an effort to pave the way for vaccine mandates or to bolster public confidence, were outside the scope of the FDA’s purview.

— 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

“Premature FDA approval of any COVID-19 vaccine could negatively impact the health and safety of U.S. residents, with global ramifications considering the international importance of FDA decisions,” the group said.

The petition author and co-authors include:

  • Linda Wastila, BSPharm, MSPH, PhD and professor at University of Maryland School of Pharmacy
  • Peter Doshi, PhD, associate professor at University of Maryland School of Pharmacy
  • Patrick Whelan, MD, PhD associate clinical professor of pediatrics David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
  • Hamid A. Merchant, BPharm, MPharm, PhD, RPh, CQP, PGCertHE, FHEA, SRPharmS and subject leader department of pharmacy at University of Huddersfield
  • Donald W. Light, PhD and professor of comparative health policy and psychiatry at Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine
  • Florence T. Bourgeois MD and associate professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School
  • Robert M. Kaplan, PhD and distinguished research professor UCLA Fielding School of Public Health
  • Peter A. McCullough, MD and professor at Texas A & M College of Medicine
  • Anthony J Brookes, PhD and professor of genetics University of Leicester
  • David Healy, MD, FRCPsych and professor of psychiatry McMaster University Ontario, Canada
  • Byram Bridle, viral immunologist and associate professor at University of Guelph, Ontario
  • Kim Witczak, founder and CEO of Woodymatters and global drug safety advocate
  • Christine Stabell Benn, MD, PhD and professor of global health at University of Southern Denmark
  • Matthew Herder, JSM, LLM, Director, Health Law Institute at Dalhousie University Nova Scotia, Canada
  • Tom Jefferson, MD, MRCGP FFPHM, British epidemiologist who works with the Cochrane Collaboration, advisor to the Italian National Agency for Regional Health Services and is senior associate tutor at University of Oxford
  • Peter Collignon, infectious disease physician, microbiologist at Canberra Hospital and professor at the Australian National University Medical School
  • Peter C. Gøtzsche, Professor, DrMedSci, MD, MSc Director Institute for Scientific Freedom Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Peter Aaby, MSc, DMSc, Head of Bandim Health Project, Guinea-Bissau University of Southern Denmark
  • Ulrich Keil, MD, MPH, PhD, FRCP professor emeritus University of Münster, Germany
  • Juan Erviti, PharmD, PhD Unit of Innovation and Organization Navarre Health Service, Spain
  • Iona Heath, CBE FRCGP and past president of the Royal College of General Practitioners London, UK
  • Joseph A. Ladapo, MD, PhD associate professor of Medicine David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
  • Barbara Mintzes, BA, MSc, PhD, associate professor, School of Pharmacy at the University of Sydney, Australia
  • Huseyin Naci, MHS, PhD associate professor of Health Policy London School of Economics and Political Science
  • Angela Spelsberg, MD, Comprehensive Cancer Center Aachen, Germany
  • Erick Turner, MD, associate professor of psychiatry at Oregon Health & Science University
  • Allyson M Pollock, MBChB, FRCPH, FRCP,  FRCGP, clinical professor of Public Health Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University and director of the Newcastle University Centre for Excellence in Regulatory Science.

Earlier this month, Children’s Health Defense Chairman (CHD) Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dr. Meryl Nass, on behalf of CHD, filed a Citizen Petition with the FDA requesting the agency not only refrain from licensing COVID vaccines, but also immediately revoke the vaccines’ EUAs.

CHD submitted 72 references supporting the request for revocation and restraint. To read the full CHD petition text, download it from the FDA website or read the full petition here — then submit your comments using this form.

© June 8, 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.


  children’s health defense, coronavirus vaccines, covid-19 vaccine, emergency use authorization, fda, johnson & johnson, moderna vaccine, pfizer-biontech

News

Pro-life groups call for criminal investigation after discovery of an illegally dumped, dismembered second trimester aborted baby

Identifying information for 30 women who recently visited the Northeast Ohio Women’s Center were also illegally dumped in violation of HIPAA.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:00 am EST
Featured Image
Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

CUYAHOGA FALLS, Ohio, July 9, 2021 (Operation Rescue) – Three pro-life organizations announced yesterday that they are asking the Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost to initiate criminal proceedings against The Northeast Ohio Women’s Center, an abortion facility located in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, after the remains of a 16-18 week dismembered aborted baby were found discarded in an unsecured dumpster last month.

The pro-life groups included Right to Life of Northeast Ohio, Ohio Right to Life, and Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, the latter of which discovered the body parts remains and photographed them during searches that took place from June 7 through June 29, 2021. 

Image

Denise Leopold, Director of the Right to Life of Northeast Ohio, described the discoveries during a press conference streamed live on Facebook earlier today.

According to Leopold, recognizable remains include a left hand and a left foot and other body parts. Other tissue and organs remain unrecognizable due to the nature of the Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) dismemberment abortion procedure used to abort the baby in the womb.

During the press conference, Monica Migliorino Miller, Ph.D, Director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, who photographed the remains of the aborted baby, noted, “The baby was literally ripped apart.”

Miller called for the Northeast Ohio Women’s Center to be shut down, along with an affiliated abortion pill clinic in Shaker Heights.

“That would be vindication for this baby,” she said.

The remains are currently in the custody of a local funeral home, with a funeral date to be announced later.

View photos of this baby’s remains. (Warning: Images of actual human remains.)

More evidence

Image
This photo is one of 16 images presented by pro-life groups depicting discoveries made at an unsecured NEOWC dumpster. It shows full urine cups and and documents with patient names. This is evidence of illegally discarded infectious waste and Federal HIPAA violations.

Along with the grisly discovery of the aborted baby, an assortment of bloody biohazard medical waste was found, including bloody sheets and cannulas (tubes used to suction tissue during the abortion), along with full urine cups, which displayed the names of women who had recently visited the Northeast Ohio Women’s Center. Patient names and, in some cases, contact information were discovered on items found in the trash along with the aborted baby’s remains.

Over 30 patient names were recovered from the unsecured clinic dumpster.The names of clinic owner David Burkons and another abortionist, Rebecca Lowenthal, were found amongst the trash that contained the aborted baby remains and biomedical waste.

One photo showed a prescription slip that appeared to be written for Christine Slotta, who is an abortionist that has been known to work at the Northeast Ohio Women’s Center.  However, her listed address on the discarded prescription is the location of the Toledo Women’s Center, also known as Capital Care of Toledo, not the Northeast Ohio Women’s Center.

The discoveries posed a general public hazard, particularly to school children who lived in an apartment complex located behind the clinic. Those children often use the clinic’s driveway as a short-cut on the way home from school and would have had easy access to the unsecured dumpster.

Violations

Ohio law requires aborted baby remains to be disposed of in an “humane manner.” A newer law, known as Senate Bill 27, the Fetal Remains Law, was signed by Gov. Mike DeWine on December 31, 2020. That law requires that aborted baby remains must be either buried or cremated.

It is unknown if the new law went into effect in time to charge under that new statute. If not, the older law could be used to bring charges.

The reckless disposal of private patient information for thirty women would represent violations of the Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, also known as HIPAA. HIPAA requires private patient information be held or disposed of in a secure fashion so as not to compromise patient privacy. 

NEOWC troubles

The Northeast Ohio Women’s Center (NEOWC) and its current owner, David Burkons, have repeatedly run afoul of basic standard of care requirements and other regulations.

Image

Once known as the Capital Care Network Akron, the facility’s license was revoked for egregious violations listed in a 34-page deficiency report by the Ohio Department of Health in March 2013.  David Burkons then purchased the business, changed the name, and was then issued a new facility license even though no substantive changes were made in the facility conditions or staffing.

The facility has since failed three inspections between 2014-2017.

Burkons’ Ohio medical license was suspended for six months in July 2017, after the State Medical Board of Ohio found that he was illegally prescribing medications and operating what amounted to a “pill mill.” After his suspension, he was placed on supervised probation, which ended in February of this year.

On July 5, 2020, an ambulance was called to the NEOWC for a 29-year-old woman who suffered “uncontrolled bleeding” after a botched abortion procedure, according to records obtained by Operation Rescue.

During that life-threatening medical emergency, NEOWC was operating on a facility license that expired on March 31, 2019. Although the license indicates it is “Active,” the license has not been renewed since its 2019 expiration date.

— 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

Given the long history of problems at the Northeast Ohio Women’s Center, Operation Rescue joins with Right to Life of Northeast Ohio, Ohio Right to Life, and Citizens for a Pro-Life Society in calling for abortion facility to be shut down.

“How many times does Burkons and his abortion business need to be caught red-handed hurting women, mistreating human remains, and otherwise breaking the law before they are shut down for good?” asked Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. 

“The fact that Burkons’ abortion center continues to operate on an expired facility license is telling of the Ohio Department of Health’s failure to exercise oversight.  It’s time to stop turning a blind eye to his abortion abuses and instead put the lives of women and children ahead of the pocketbooks of the abortionists.”

Reprinted with permission from Operation Rescue


  aborted baby parts, abortion, david burkons, operation rescue

News

New Wuhan-linked emails show nine grants from Fauci’s NIAID to EcoHealth for bat coronavirus research

'These documents are of world-wide interest, as they suggest that the Wuhan lab had major bio-safety issues and the American government was carefully monitoring its activities from a national security perspective even while funding it,' said Judicial Watch President.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 5:50 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Judicial Watch
By Judicial Watch

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

WASHINGTON D.C., July 9, 2021 (Judicial Watch) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 301 pages of emails and other records from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials in connection with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, revealing significant collaborations and funding that began in 2014. These new records reveal that NIAID gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself.

These records also include an email from the Vice Director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.

Additionally, a World Health Day announcement lists “successful activities” of the U.S.-China collaboration that included “detailed surveillance throughout China and in other countries on the emergence of coronaviruses” and NIH’s receipt of influenza samples from China to “assess risks associated with emerging variants for pandemic and zoonotic threat.”

The records further show that, in 2018, Dr. Ping Chen, the NIAID Representative in China, learned of a “type of new flu vaccine using nano-technology from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology,” and discovered that the Chinese had blocked all Internet links to reports on the new technology. This led Chen to write an urgent “night note” to U.S. Government officials. The note said, “The intranasal nano-vaccine can target broad-spectrum flu viruses and induces robust immune responses.”

The documents also include a picture of the Wuhan facility building taken by Dr. Chen.

The documents were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records of communications, contracts and agreements with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-00696)). The lawsuit specifically sought records about NIH grants that benefitted the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The agency is only processing 300 pages records per month, which means it will take until the end of November for the records to be fully reviewed and released under FOIA.

The nine grants to EcoHealth Alliance include the following:

  • One grant awarded each year between 2010-2012 to EcoHealth Alliance, working with Chinese collaborator Jinping Chen of Guangdong Entomological Institute, to study in China “Risk of Viral Emergence from Bats.”
  • One grant awarded each year from 2014-2017 to EcoHealth Alliance, working with Chinese collaborator Changwen Ke of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of Guangdong, in a project titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
  • grant was issued in 2012 to EcoHealth Alliance, working with Xiangming Xiao of the East China Normal University, in a project titled “Comparative Spillover Dynamics of Avian Influenza in Endemic Countries.”
  • grant was issued in 2018 to EcoHealth Alliance, again working with Ke in the project called “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”

The new records include an email on March 20, 2020, that is labeled, “navigating politics,” which NIH virologist Jens Kuhn forwards to NIH colleagues Cliff Lane (NIAID Deputy Director) and Connie Schmaljohn (senior NIAID official); a 2016 email of “high importance” that Kuhn received from Wuhan Institute of Virology Vice Director Yuan Zhiming, with the subject line “asking for help.”

In his 2016 email, Zhiming told Kuhn:

I am writing to you to ask your help. Our laboratory is under operation without pathogens, and we are now looking for the disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and surface decontamination indoor decontamination. We have tried several ones do [sic] determine their antiviral efficacy and corrosion to pipeline and wastewater treatment equipment. Unfortunately, we have found a good candidate. I hope you can give us some help, to give us some suggestion for the choice of disinfectants used in P4 laboratory.

What kind of disinfectants for decontamination of airtight protective clothes?

What kind of disinfectants for surface decontamination in door?

What kind of disinfectants for air decontamination in door?

What kind of disinfectants for infectious materials indoor?

What is the approval procedure for the choice of disinfectants in laboratory?

I am sorry to disturb you and I really hope you could give us some suggestion and cooment

[sic].

Best regards and looking forward to seeing you in Wuhan.

Yuan Zhiming

After the new coronavirus emerged, on March 20, 2020, and continuing on this email chain, Zhiming writes to Kuhn:

The 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak is a major challenge for global public health security. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with serious acute respiratory distress syndrome with large number of patients’ hospitalization and relatively high mortality. We had a very hard time in combating the infection in Wuhan, the epicenter of the COVID-19 in China, and now we can see the situation goes in good direction, with no reported confirmed case, no reported suspected case in last two days here.

My colleagues and I, have been working on characterization of pathogens, antiviral screen, vaccine development, animal modeling since the early January this year, and some progresses have been made. I hope our understanding of the virus and the technology could be valuable in the global fighting to the virus.

As I can see from the media, the virus is spreading in your country, and more people are infected during the last days, and the situation worries me a lot. I am confident that we could finally curb the spreading of the virus with our joint effort, and our life will return back to the normal soon. I do not know what I can do for you in the special moment and I hope you could protect you and your family.

Kuhn tells Lane and Schmaljohn, “I know Zhiming for quite some time and also met him personally in Wuhan twice … He used to be responsible for the BSL-4 there.”

Some of Kuhn, Lane and Schmaljohn’s follow-on comments about Zhiming’s emails are redacted under “deliberative process” exemption.

In an email exchange on August 11, 2014, between Chen and the head of the NIH-funded biosecurity lab at the University of Texas in Galveston, Dr. James Leduc, Leduc provides the initial contact between NIAID (via Chen) and officials at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Leduc told Chen that he had been working on an initiative to “form long-term scientific and technical collaborations with the new BSL4 laboratory” in Wuhan, under the direction of Dr. Yuan Zhiming, with whom Leduc had met “repeatedly.” Leduc adds, “we are already attempting to build the kind of partnership [with the Wuhan Institute of Virology] that I think is envisioned under the GHSA [Global Health Security Agenda].”

— 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

A chart labeled “NIH Extramural Projects with a Chinese Collaborator, by IC, FY2010-2018,” indicates NIH provided a total of 2,221 grants between 2010-2018 for projects involving a “Chinese Collaborator,” with Anthony Fauci’s NIAID providing the most grants among all NIH subagencies, furnishing 490 grants. The remaining 1,731 grants were from 19 different NIH subagencies.

An additional chart shows that the NIAID financial grants increased steadily over those eight years, with a particular spike in 2013; and the number of grants jumped from 34 in 2012 to 61 in 2013.

Another spreadsheet shows the 2,221 grants disbursed among 261 universities, laboratories, and private companies. The vast majority are in the U.S., but others are in China, the U.K., Canada, Thailand, and Australia.

Additional spreadsheets detail the 2,221 grants, including:

  • A grant to Wayne State University, working with Chinese collaborator Xiaoyi Fang, to study in China “Venue-based HIV and alcohol use risk reduction among female sex workers in China.”
  • A grant to Purdue University, working with Chinse collaborator Yinlong Jin, to study in China “Selenium, other risk factors and cognitive decline in rural elderly Chinese.”
  • A grant to Peking University, working with Chinese collaborator Yaohui Zhao, in a project in China titled “China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study.”
  • A grant to Boston College, working with Chinese collaborator Wei Sun of Renmin University of China, to study in China “The impact of Long-Term Care Insurance.”
  • A grant to Florida International University, working with Chinese collaborator Sheng Li of Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences, to study in China “Regulation of juvenile hormone titers in mosquitoes.”
  • A grant to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, working with Chinese collaborator Yue Long Shu of the Chinese National Influenza Center, in a project titled “Southeast Regional Centers of Excellence for Biodefense & Emerging Infectious Di[seases].”
  • A grant to Zhejiang University, working with Chinese collaborator Shulin Chen, to study in China “Collaborative Care for Depressed Elders in China.”

In an email on October 26, 2017, Chen sends a “trip report” to NIH colleagues advising them that she visited the Wuhan Institute of Virology. She includes a photo of the lab and states,

My contact who helped arrange the visit is Dr. Zhengli Shi, who is a Chinese collaborator on a NIAID grant to EcoHealth for SARS like corona virus project. The P4 lab is located in a new developing zone about one hour car ride from the current institute location in central Wuhan city. The location will be the new campus for the entire institute in the near future (a lot of construction is going on right now). Since we are not allowed to take photos so only the photo from the outside is attached. 

In an email marked “high importance” on August 6, 2014, with the subject “Harbin Wuhan China Global Health Security,” Chen discussed collaborating more with Chinese health officials with her NIH colleagues. Chen states:

I had a meeting with [HHS Health Attache to China] Liz Yuan and Liz updated me with regarding the activities involving Global Health Security Agenda. China’s National Health and Family Planning Commission (Ministry of Health) and China CDC are supportive and should commit to be a part of the network. We do want to expand the Chinese participation in the network to include other partners and sectors, including agriculture and veterinary.

We could not so far identify any direct NIAID collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). However, from a quick search we found Dr. James Leduc of University of Texas at Galveston and Dr. Jian Han of the Hudsonalpha Institute of Biotechnology at Birmingham recently visited WIV… James Leduc is the head of the national lab at Galveston and I believe NIAID funded the establishment of the lab (biosecurity lab) … And please find if both James Leduc and Han Jian have any NIAID funded grants.

In an email on February 26, 2018, Chen messaged her NIH colleagues to report that she had learned of a, “type of new flu vaccine using nano-technology from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology” and discovered that the Chinese had blocked all Internet links to reports on the new technology.

Working with the State Department’s Environment, Science, Technology, and Health (ESTH) officer Sarah Oh, Chen then wrote a “night note” about this development. In the note she cites Cui Zongqiang, head of the Wuhan research group stating, “The intranasal nano-vaccine can target broad-spectrum flu viruses and induces robust immune responses,”

Chen adds, “‘In our study, an intranasal nanovaccine worked well against infections of H1N1 and H9N2 virus in mice,’ Cui said.” NIH official Gray Handley responded to Chen, saying, “Thanks, Ping. All quite interesting developments.”

In a January 20, 2017 report to NIH colleagues, Chen describes the, “Global Virome Project,” which is sponsored by USAID and other organizations, and would be led by the U.S. and China. Chen notes:

The purpose of the project is to identify viruses present in the wildlife with potential crossing over to humans, causing human infection and disease. Following the identification of the viruses is the development of vaccines to protect human population… One of the partners in this project is EcoHealth Alliance. Peter Daszak from EcoHealth Alliance is one of the leaders for the GVP project and he has NIAID grant from RDB looking at the coronaviruses in Bat populations in China in collaboration with Wuhan Institute of Virology.

In an email exchange dated July 14, 2015, Chen, tells NIH colleagues that she has been coordinating projects and visits with the Wuhan Lab.

Chen states that she’s “been working with Ken [presumably the U.S. Health Attaché in Beijing Ken Earhart] on preparing for the pre advance team visit in preparation for the possible HHS Secretary visit to China in Sept. 9-11. The pre advance team will be in Beijing this Wednesday. I will meet them on Wednesday to brief on the NIAID activities in China.”

Chen then identifies the individuals who she has been coordinating with in Wuhan:

I visited three Chinese PIs [presumably Principal Investigators] on NIAID funded projects in Wuhan (I contacted 5 PIs, one was not available and one never responded) last week. Briefly, one PI at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Dr. Shi Zhengli, is known as the bat lady. She studies the viruses carried by the Chinese bats trying to identify the viral reservoirs, particularly focusing on coronaviruses such as SARS and MERS. She has identified bat viruses that are genetically very close to the SARS virus that caused the outbreak in China in 2003. Another PI I visited is Dr. Yang Dongliang … Dr. Yang has one of the one-year programs where he collaborated with US PI on universal HIV vaccine research. His role in the collaboration was to collect HIV isolates from Chinese patients, sequencing the viruses, and close the envelope genes for the US collaborators to screen for conserved epitopes via a novel screening technology. The third PI I visited is Dr. Wu Jiangguo, who is the head of the state key lab of virology in Wuhan University. [Redacted]. George Gao [likely top Chinese CDC official George Fu Gao] is a close collaborator with the lab. In addition to basic research on virology, the lab also does translational research in antivirals, vaccines and reagents with industry partners.

In a previous March 16, 2015, email update to NIH colleagues, Chen informed them that “First week of May, visit Wuhan Institute of Virology with Ken to see its BSL4 lab and talk about common interests. While in Wuhan, I will meet the Chinese PIs on NIAID grants.”

In a report dated January 12, 2015, Chen advised her NIH colleagues on her attempts to get an invitation to the ceremony of the completion of the BSL4 lab:

I sent a request to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for invitation to attend the BSL4 laboratory completion ceremony. I got a message from the contact I have that limited number of international people outside France will be invited to the ceremony as it is the French who helped with the construction of BSL4 lab. I just received a reply that I won’t be able to attend the ceremony but will have the opportunity to visit the institute at a later time. 

I received a message from ESTH [the State Department’s Environment, Science, Technology and Health Office] asking the representatives from US Fed agencies to provide information on China’s biosecurity. The message says: State’s office that deals with biosecurity has sent to Embassy Beijing the email below regarding China’s policies, capabilities, and activities related to a range of biological threats and risks: including infectious diseases, biosecurity, biological weapons, and bio-terrorism.”

In a proposed program that Chen provided to NIH colleagues for an upcoming virology conference which was to be held on March 9-10, 2015 in Beijing, titled “Advancement in Our Scientific Understanding of Avian Influenza and MERS as Emerging Respiratory Threat to Public Health in Asia and Beyond – From Viral Evolution to Animal and Human Hosts,” one of the scheduled speakers was Matt Frieman of the University of Maryland School of Medicine, who was going to address the topic “Repurposing FDA Approved Drugs for Coronavirus Infection.” Another speaker, Xinquan Wang, of Tsinghua University, was going to address the topic, “Potent Neutralization of MERS-Cov by Human mAbs to the Viral Spike Glycoprotein.”

In a redacted email dated November 3, 2014, Chen notes to her NIH colleagues that the Chinese government had begun screening people who merely came from Ebola effected regions of Africa:

Chinese government has been screening people who come from the Ebola regions of Africa. Two US CDC people in Beijing were sent to Sierra Leone one month ago and were scheduled to return. Last Friday I was able to help Ken [presumably the US Health attaché in Beijing, Ken Earhart] to acquire the information on the monitoring process and guarantee procedures that are implemented in three Beijing’s infectious disease hospitals through my contacts. The concern is [redacted].

In an email on March 6, 2018, Chen informs NIH colleagues that the U.S. Embassy in Beijing was “collecting US-China collaboration stories in preparation for the World Heath Day on April 7.” One of the U.S.-China collaborations labeled “successful activities,” was “Coronavirus: NIH-funded investigators are conducting detailed surveillance throughout China and in other countries on the emergence of coronaviruses (such as SARS and MERS-CoV) and studying the dynamics of viral transmission from animals to humans, which may identify potential outbreak threats to the U.S. and other parts of the world.”

Another “success story” was titled, “Influenza: NIH receives influenza samples and information on circulating viruses from China and Hong Kong to assess risks associated with emerging variants for pandemic and zoonotic threat and to monitor the prevalence and evolution of the novel H7N9 and H10N8 viruses in China. These strains are otherwise unavailable and they are essential to the development of vaccines needed for a potential influenza pandemic.”

“These documents are of world-wide interest, as they suggest that the Wuhan lab had major bio-safety issues and the American government was carefully monitoring its activities from a national security perspective even while funding it,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Dr. Fauci and his colleagues have some more explaining to do.”

Also from this lawsuit, in June 2021, Judicial Watch revealed that the NIAID under Fauci gave the Wuhan lab $826,000 for bat coronavirus research from 2014 to 2019.

In March 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered emails and other records of Fauci and Dr. H. Clifford Lane from HHS showing that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020. Additionally, the emails reveal an independent journalist in China pointing out the inconsistent COVID numbers in China to NIAID’s Deputy Director for Clinical Research and Special Projects Cliff Lane.

In a related lawsuit, in October 2020, Judicial Watch received from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 300 pages of emails of Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, including his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.

Reprinted with permission from Judicial Watch


  anthony fauci, covid-19 origins, ecohealth alliance, fauci emails, judicial watch, niaid, nih, wuhan institute of virology, wuhan lab leak

Opinion

Full testimony of former HHS Covid Adviser: ‘Asymptomatic transmission more myth than reality’

We restate emphatically that the concept of ‘asymptomatic spread’ of the COVID-19 virus was devised to frighten the population into compliance and, contrary to what we were told, it was not central to this pandemic.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 4:09 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
Paul Elias Alexander, PhD Follow
By

As discussed recently on the TrialSite, the world's leading online media platform and social network dedicated to objectively tracking clinical trials, an Op-Ed contributor questioned the practice of shut downs associated with asymptomatic COVID-19 spread.  

Hamilton, Ontario, July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Paul Elias Alexander, PhD, a former COVID-19 advisor to WHO-PAHO and to Health and Human Services (HHS), United States, has written the following testimony. He has presented his and his colleagues’ arguments against the idea that asymptomatic people who are positive for COVID-19 are “drivers” of the pandemic. Alexander also vigorously rejects the use of COVID-19 vaccines on children and condemns the harms the lockdowns--which he believes were unnecessary--has done to so many people. 

We will start this discussion on the notion of ‘asymptomatic spread’ by stating that there should be no vaccination of children with COVID vaccines. Zero. 

These vaccines have no long-term safety assessments, and they do not work like standard vaccines. 

Today we talk about vaccinating millions of healthy infants, children, and adolescents, and we know they do not have a substantial risk of acquiring the infection and becoming severely ill or dying. The risk of severe outcome in infants, young children, and young adults is very low: essentially statistical zero (to be precise, the rate of survival in persons aged 0-19 is 99.997%). The risks of these vaccines to children, however, can be catastrophic. 

The question is, therefore, why would we subject our child to a vaccine that provides them with no benefit? To do so would be illogical, irrational, absurd, reckless, and dangerous. We say at this time, no, stop, put an immediate pause on this. We are very concerned with the potential harm to children if this is not done. Get the proper safety data collected and assessed first. The threshold for safety must be set at the highest. The use of the vaccine on young persons considered high-risk should be pondered on a case-by-case basis, and any decision should be based on an ethical informed assessment of the balance of the risk versus benefits. 

We are not against vaccines and are in no way anti-vaxxers; rather, we support vaccines that are developed properly. Improperly developed vaccines have harmed children in the past. We are pro-vaccine but against these vaccines as their harms are potentially catastrophic. They could set up children for a lifetime of disability or even early death. We cannot just rush into the mass vaccination of healthy people, most importantly children, until we properly assess the risks. How can we be told that vaccines take 10 to 15 years to develop, and yet the COVID-19 vaccines, which were developed in 3 months, are safe? How is this possible when we bypassed the proper animal studies and safety assessment? We need to assess if there are potentially unsafe blood clots and bleeding connected to the vaccines. We have to assess the myocarditis and pericarditis risks. These are all a pressing concern now as alleged cases have emerged, and this is now a real catastrophe unfolding. 

We knew very early on that COVID-19 is amenable to risk stratification [categorizing people based on their health status and other factors] and that your baseline risk was measured for mortality. Why not the same approach for these vaccines? Why are members of the public not allowed to have an open public discussion if they think they have been vaccine injured? They must also be given care urgently and treated optimally. Their adverse outcome information must be collected for us to make an accurate assessment of the risk subsequent to vaccination. Moreover, we are talking about the US, Canada, Britain, France, Australia, Italy, all of Europe, the Caribbean, African nations, all of the globe. Every single person on this earth is important and all our lives matter, especially our minority children who often bear the worst from any illness. We are trying to help save all lives.

Claim asymptomatic transmission of COVID drove pandemic ‘not credible’

We will now address the issue of asymptomatic spread. 

The claim that ‘asymptomatic’ spread or transmission of COVID-19 is a key driver of the pandemic or even a driver of minimal infection is not credible. Not only is this our hypothesis, we feel strongly that the asymptomatic spread claim was bogus from the start and was used to justify the lockdowns. It had, and still has today, no basis. This was part of pandemic corruption. We have looked at the evidence gathered across the last 16 months and can safely say this was a false narrative that, along with masking, lockdowns, social distancing, and school closure policies, visited crushing harms on society, hurting the USA and the world immensely. That the US Pandemic Task Force and these illogical, irrational, unscientific medical experts could use this falsehood to shutter society, causing so much destruction of life, wealth and property is a shameful and unforgivable scandal. This pandemic response was all about corruption, and there certainly were ingredients other than science at play throughout. 

Some of us had the pleasure of working with members of the US Task Force and can attest that some of them are incredibly smart, good people. But they were and are flat wrong on everything related to COVID-19. Every policy was based on their input and guidance, and they created a disaster. Many thousands of people died due to their policies. Never has a President been as ill-served as by these Task Force members. They misled and undercut President Trump at each turn, and one continues to mislead the current administration. On a day-to-day basis, we were watching a clown car in the daily briefings. Their hypothesis on asymptomatic spread cannot be borne out, and we have decided to examine the evidence on asymptomatic spread and give our view. The COVID-19 response should have never been about their supposition, speculation, and assumptions, let alone their whimsy. This is not evidence-based research; this is not science. Speculation and assumption are not science. The Task Force failed catastrophically and must not be allowed to rewrite their history. 

As we present our opinions and the evidence that underpins our reasoning, we ask any of the scientists to put forth their data, their science, their proof of its credibility. Once this is shown and proven, we will gladly adjust our position and conclude otherwise. We also apologize for our blunt writing on this matter, for we are angry at the catastrophic failures of the Task Forces and these unsound, irrational experts who have caused so much damage. 

The issue of ‘asymptomatic spread’ was such a significant aspect of the pandemic policy decisions that it could not be based on ‘possibility’ or assumptions. We are afraid, however, that it was, and this had catastrophic consequences. They, these absurd and unscientific medical experts, made ‘asymptomatic spread’ the cornerstone of the societal lockdowns, and they did this with no credible basis. There was no strong data or any evidence to support this, and even if this was assumed for several weeks, and even if we took a more cautious approach initially and this was reasonable, we used and kept this false narrative in place far too long to keep draconian and punitive lockdown restrictions in place that had no basis. As a result, lives were lost. 

For us to buy “asymptomatic spread,” we need to see the evidence and data, and there is and was none. We operate in a world of evidence-based medicine and research whereby policies must be supported by credible evidence, and even if it is ‘anecdotal’ ‘real-world evidence’, it must have some basis. This had none. The reality is that there is no verifiable, credible evidence, even today, that people have developed COVID-19 from asymptomatic spread. You must torture the data or infections to find a case, and even then it is plagued with the very questionable RT-PCR results. 

You just cannot discuss this asymptomatic issue without factoring in the very flawed RT-PCR test with its 97% to 100% false positives at cycle counts (Ct) of 34 to 35 and above (optimal Ct of 24 to 25 denotes real infectiousness and predictive of serious outcomes). This disastrous RT-PCR  test cannot be omitted from mention, for it was part of the ‘asymptomatic’ deception.  

This duplicitous ‘asymptomatic’ assertion doomed the pandemic response from the start, for all the societal shutdowns and school closures revolved around the premise of asymptomatic spread. Dr. Anthony Fauci can be credited with perhaps the greatest falsehood told to the American population and President Trump. He continues to advance this misleading and duplicitous narrative to the current administration. 

‘Lockdown lunatics failed to protect public health’

All these lockdown lunatics failed to protect public health and our elderly in nursing homes. These bureaucrats and technocrats, this ruling elite, these television medical experts. They were flat wrong on everything COVID, yet they run around extolling each other and patting each other on the back. For what? The destruction they caused? We begged them to secure the elderly and high-risk people, but they did not and did not stop the lockdowns. Had we protected the elderly properly from the start, we would have not lost the lives we did. Had we allowed early outpatient treatment using a multi-drug approach (hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, corticosteroids, anti-blood clotting drugs, etc. under clinician supervision), we would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. With multi-drug early treatment, we could minimize or stop symptoms and thus spread, which would reduce hospitalization and death. Early treatment can be much more effective than vaccines in stopping transmission. 

These lunatic lockdown advocates, these medical experts, pretended there was no harm in their lockdowns. It was deliberate, a perverse cruelty. Look at health decline from lockdown isolation (the mental health costs, the dementia), the inactivity, the loss of education due to school closures, lost medical care, loss of  employment, and loss of income. As Dr. Jonathan Ketcham wrote in Collateral Global,  “Some of these costs, sadly, remain ahead of us, including deaths from delays in cancer screening and treatment, rising opioid overdose, and harms to the life expectancy of today’s children due to lost schooling.”  Alarmingly, we see how COVID-19 wreaks havoc differentially due to baseline risks, often elevated in the underprivileged, but also in the case of the underprivileged in terms of the effects of the lockdowns. For example, “while breast cancer screening in Washington state fell by 50% for women overall, the drop was even more precipitous among minorities”. Look at how we have allowed the elderly in nursing homes to suffer, how our aged populations have died lonely, in fright, isolated, confused, in the last days of their lives. It is a scandal. 

— 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

Duplicity of the CDC in reporting teenage hospitalizations for COVID-19

Before we lay bare this ‘asymptomatic’ fraud, let us show just how duplicitous and incompetent these public health agencies can be and how many lies they (and their leaders) spew in an attempt to deceive and confuse the public. Now they wish to drive fear in parents so as to push them to vaccinate their children. As public health leaders at the CDC and NIH, they must rise above politics and work to inform the public with truth and evidence, and make it their quest to help, not mislead and confuse. 

Recently the CDC put out a statement (based on their June 11th 2021 MMWR report) that there is a troubling rise in teens being hospitalized for COVID-19. The first fact that jumps out at us is that there were no deaths. CDC stated that adolescent hospitalization rates increased during March and April 2021 after decreases in January and February 2021. This message went viral in the media 24/7. This misinformation and lie by the CDC and clear effort to lie to the public was couched as a ‘troubling rise’. But the truth is that although there was a rise in March and April, there was a decrease in May back to the level current at the close of February 2021. What garbage, what drivel the CDC has stated here.

The CDC and its director Rochelle Walensky should have known that the hospitalization rate had decreased, but they cherry-picked a portion of the graph and data (the upside of the graph) and presented that without the downside portion that shows the decline. What hubris and deceit by Walensky! Did she not read the data?  This incident shows, once again, a badly misinformed or prepared CDC director. And we have no reason to think she is incapable; in fact, her credentials are stellar. We have no reason to think she is that inept. We think something other than science is at play here. People in her agency must be feeding her the garbage to undermine her, and doing it repeatedly. 

We ask her, “Please read and study the junk they are giving you before you make a public statement. It is not only your reputation, Dr. Walensky, but that of this brand-name agency, the CDC.  The CDC must not be dragged through the mud this way, exposed to ridicule. The public is well-informed and understands much more than public health officials think they do, and thus the preparation and public statements by the CDC must be open, transparent, explicit, and above all, accurate. No lies, no spin, no half-baked tripe. Just pure evidence and truth, balanced information so that the public is informed for their decision-making. Do not mislead the public!”

On the other hand, Dr. Walensky must have known that this was a cherry-picking of the data to drive an erroneous misleading message because hospitalizations had declined across all age-groups during the prior 6 to 8 weeks. She must have known this: “Allen says the latest data from May showed that hospitalization rates declined to 0.6 on May 29.” The real atrocity in this reporting by the CDC is that they did not include the data from May 2021. This was purely an effort to mislead the public because the same data used in the report showed a significant decline in the month following the slight increase. So, the CDC took data that showed an increase in April 2021 and then reported it in June as if the May data of the clear decline did not exist.  Why is April data now being reported? How incredibly duplicitous. What arrogance to think the American people are that stupid that they cannot see the decline in May. 

Dr. Walensky was actually mis-reporting (seemingly deliberately given the data was right there for her to see) CDC’s own data. Why? And is this the first time a CDC MMWR report was junk pseudo-science based on falsehoods? This MMWR report depended on a population-based surveillance system of laboratory-confirmed, COVID-19 associated hospitalizations in 99 counties across 14 states, covering approximately 10% of the U.S. population. Daniel Horowitz of The Blaze was beside himself as he discussed this duplicity by the CDC and rightly so. 

Dr. Walensky stated she was ‘deeply concerned by the rise.’  Yet she knew she was being deceitful, in plain view, understanding that the media cartel would gobble up the erroneous tripe, and the public would be too lazy to do the reading just a bit further down in the MMWR to understand the mis-information. “It turns out they picked arbitrary start and end points-an old trick they’ve used with mask studies,” Horowitz wrote. Or was it that Dr. Walensky cannot read the science or understand the data or graphs? Or those reporting to her? Dr. Walensky also made this type of deceitful error and omission when she reported and misled on the risk of outdoors transmission (< 1% but claiming it is more like 10%), among many others. There were similar issues with summer camp rules and spread after vaccination, with flips and flops between Walensky and Fauci. Someone was or is lying, but who? And importantly, why? 

Dr. Marty Makary of Johns Hopkins stated that “the CDC did not report the key issues in that report. No child died, and the CDC should have said this. This is the great news! The hospitalization rate was lower for COVID than it was for influenza. This should have been CDC ‘s headline. One of the failures of the CDC is their ignoring of natural immunity and this insane rush to mass vaccinate people already immune…we are seeing another set of talking points on the Delta variant scare.”

CDC refusal to recognize natural immunity to COVID-19  

Joel S. Hirschhorn writes eloquently about this refusal to recognize natural immunity as a major player in COVID. “The reason is simple,” he said.  “The more that natural immunity is accepted, the more reason there is to reject getting one of the experimental COVID vaccines.  Half the US population from kids to adults likely have natural immunity, even though most never suffered any serious ill effects from being infected.”  

CDC knew the number was coming down for months but misled in their report when they knew it was 20 hospitalizations per day of about 25 million teens, so a rate of approximately 0.00008%. This was to drive panic about a troubling rise in teen hospitalizations, even when the very small number was going down, not up. The CDC knew the percentage was very low. They duplicitously picked only one piece of data, so as to exploit the fears of parents. This was to drive vaccinations, even after learning of myocarditis among teenagers who are vaccinated for COVID-19. The CDC’s very own VAERS database has nearly 6,000 deaths linked to the vaccine. The CDC pretends this does not exist, and yet the deaths thus far from COVID vaccines are more than all deaths from all vaccines across the last 30 years. Do you understand this? This is not our data, this is CDC’s data. 

Then there’s the study in Israel that involved over 6 million participants and discovered natural immunity from SARS-CoV-2 infection was equivalent to, or even better than, vaccination immunity in reducing risk of COVID infection. “Our results question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals,” it concluded.  

How about the results from the Cleveland Clinic study that looked at 52,238 employees of Cleveland Clinic Health System in Ohio? Here 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22,777 (41%) of 49,659 not previously infected. Any subject who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at least 42 days earlier was considered previously infected. One was considered vaccinated 14 days after receipt of the second dose of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. The study revealed that “[n]ot one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study.” This led researchers to conclude that people who have already had a SARS-CoV-2 infection would be unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination. But CDC and the media medical cartel are pretending these studies and their great news do not exist. 

Dr. Walensky apparently does not get these research reports and instead prefers to mislead the nation and parents with inaccurate and half-presented data. How low has the CDC fallen. How come they have no common sense? Why is there this incessant drive by the CDC day in, day out, to mislead the public, and how long has this been going on? Why are they working to undermine President Biden and his administration? For this can only damage his administration’s credibility. 

What about the CDC’s HEROES-RECOVER study? Look at that duplicity by the CDC. They stated in their protocol that “one of the study’s primary objectives was to ‘Examine post-vaccine immunologic response in those previously infected’.” Yet, despite the fact that there were prior infected persons in the study, they were excluded from the study results.  It states: “Among 5,077 participants, those with laboratory documentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection before enrolment starting in July 2020 (608) or identified as part of longitudinal surveillance up until the first day of vaccine administration (240) were excluded.” Why would CDC do this when this was a group that was part of the study and a key group in terms of the primary purpose? Where did these people vanish to? 

What about the misleading statements reported in the New York Post by the CDC and Walensky recently about outdoor transmission risk, grossly over-stating it and seeking to drive fear. They had to retract and clarify. What about the director trying to blame the journal the CDC took the data from? Do they at the CDC not read what they are publishing for accuracy or validity? This is shocking. Why must the CDC try each time to mislead the public? Why would the director do this given her prominent role? 

This is how the last 16 months have been with the CDC’s actions and reporting: late and false, always a year behind the science. Always misleading. Politicized.  

We will address the lie of ‘asymptomatic spread’ by using the exact words of Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIAID.  Fauci previously stated the following as he advocated shutting down society: “historically people need to realize that even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all history of respiratory viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there is a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers”. Soon, and without scientific evidence, he and his fellow Task Force people reversed the narrative

We believe that he knew, yet sought to lie to the nation. In asymptomatic individuals, the viral load is typically very low, and the infectious period is also short in duration. Asymptomatic virus-positive persons (assuming they really are positive and have not been diagnosed based on an incorrect test) may still exhale virus particles which another person may encounter. However, the overall likelihood of transmitting the disease to others is negligible. Vanishingly small. Exceedingly small. Thus, asymptomatic cases are not the major drivers of epidemics. 

Dr. Fauci and his staff, assisted by the media, repeatedly misled the nation, for they repeatedly told us that we would have to wear masks, socially distance, close schools, and shut everything down because of asymptomatic spread. Dr. Fauci’s recent emails, which exposed the issue of asymptomatic spread as being a non-issue, highlight the misinformation he broadcasted to the public. Recently uncovered emails show that Fauci stated that “most transmissions” of virus “occur from someone who is symptomatic” and “not asymptomatic.” His comments, repeated scores of times by national and international media, caused a loss of life, property, liberty and wealth to an entire generation.

Equally misleading was the premise that all infections equated to severe illness and potential death. This was not only an untruth but has led to scores of teenagers and people in their 20s fearful for their lives. They cower below their beds thinking they have the same risk as their 85-year-old grandmother with three grave medical conditions. This has not only devastated their outlook on the future, but driven them into a state of depression which has led to an increase in suicides in that cohort. We as a nation (and world) were fed mistruths, lies, and half-truths by what we can only describe as ‘fallen’ nonsensical, illogical, irrational, and specious medical experts on television, on the stage with their government bureaucratic leaders and academics.

Media and medical experts are trying to scare us into vaccination

We knew very early on that COVID-19 was amenable to risk stratification and that your chances of dying of the disease was determined principally by age and obesity, along with renal disease, diabetes and heart disease. We realized early on that a more focused ‘targeted’ approach was needed and not the ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach that would be devastating. 

Similarly, we know that the FDA is misleading the public with its guidance about natural immunity. It claims: “If you have not been vaccinated, be aware that a positive result from an antibody test does not mean you have a specific amount of immunity or protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection.” What utter nonsense by the FDA and they know it is nonsense. They know there is empirical evidence to refute this fully.  Dr Makary has stated “There’s ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable, and public-health leaders should pay it heed.”  A huge number of Americans have natural immunity because, although “[o]nly around 10% of Americans have had confirmed positive Covid tests .... four to six times as many have likely had the infection… [and] the effect of natural immunity is all around us. The plummeting case numbers in late April and May weren’t the result of vaccination alone, and they came amid a loosening of both restrictions and behavior.” Turner et al. published in the journal Nature recently that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells, a source of protective antibodies, in humans. The authors concluded that “prior Covid infection induces a ‘robust’ and ‘long-lived humoral immune response,’ leading some scientists to suggest that natural immunity is probably lifelong”.  

Additional US research, published in Lancet, that tracked population-based SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity duration using observational data from a national clinical laboratory registry of patients tested by nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) and serologic assays, showed an encouraging timeline for the development and sustainability of antibodies up to ten months from natural infection. A similar  study, published in Nature, showed that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces a robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune response in humans. Moreover, a pre-print paper shows that without vaccination, the antibodies in the infected person are roughly stable for 6 to 12 months. Combined with the Israeli data and the Cleveland data, the case for natural immunity has been built and is indeed compelling. 

Similarly, we know that the job of the media cartel and the inept medical experts on television is now to scare us and the parents of children into vaccination. This led Makary to write: “Some health officials warn of possible variants resistant to natural immunity. But none of the hundreds of variants observed so far have evaded either natural or vaccinated immunity with the three vaccines authorized in the U.S.” They are trying through the media and incompetent medical experts to drive fear, claiming children can die of COVID-19. We say not so; show us the evidence. Stop the lies. 

Makary  weighed in on even this, stating: “In reviewing the medical literature and news reports, and in talking to pediatricians across the country, I am not aware of a single healthy child in the U.S. who has died of COVID-19 to date…We found that 100% of pediatric COVID-19 deaths were in children with a pre-existing condition.”  Makary further stated that “CDC’s own data show that MIS-C overwhelmingly targets black and Latino children, ‘likely due to the disproportionate rates of childhood obesity and chronic conditions in these populations.’ While three dozen have died, the weekly rate of COVID-associated MIS-C is now at zero”.

It’s all a lie, we say, all part of the bogusness to drive needless fear in parents. This could lead them to harm their children with potentially dangerous vaccines. Children must never be vaccinated with these vaccines, these ‘untested to exclude harms’ vaccines. We are not saying a child could die from this, but we are arguing that such a child (tragically) would likely be very ill absent of COVID, and COVID would do what it has done and done well: it exploits risks. 

There were so many falsehoods thrown at the American people by persons in authority and with many credentials behind their names, and these are the very people who have sucked at the teats of the tax-payers’ Treasury purse for decades. You would think at least our tax-payer research grant money would be well spent, and these lunatics could at least tell us the truth and not mislead us. Take the use of the issue of re-infections to frighten you into rushing to vaccinate. We have looked at the published evidence and can conclude, based on the existing body of evidence, that reinfections are very rare, if they occur at all. The evidence is based on typically one or two instances with questionable confirmation of an actual case of re-infection, e.g. often easily explained by flawed PCR testing etc. (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24). A very recent study in Qatar, published in Lancet, found that “natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months”.

On this subject Makary wrote, “Reinfection is extremely rare and even when it does happen, the symptoms are very rare or [those individuals] are asymptomatic.”  Importantly, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recently (May 10th 2021 Scientific brief, WHO/2019-nCoV/Sci_Brief/Natural_immunity/2021.1) alluded to what has been clear for a year: people are very rarely re-infected. The WHO was very late, but better late than never.

Similarly, it was evident that the RT-PCR tests had large numbers of false positive results when Thermal Cycle Thresholds of greater than 30 were used. This led to erroneous quarantines and closures when a positive test emerged. In fact, as Dimitri Mouliou states: “New technologies have loss of standardization as the countless PCR kits vary in methods and cutoff values, thus, test results are paralleled in unassociated weights, and a realistic comparison between cases is trammeled. Thus, by preserving the existence of misleading COVID-19 cases in such a way, [the] scientific community is being prevented from clear-sighted advances. Since PCR assay cannot distinguish between active and residual RNA, a better assay … needs to be designed.”

We knew that what mattered most was the number of hospitalizations, ICU bed use, and deaths, not the infections. An infection did not mean one was a disease ‘case’. It was also likely a false positive. We became aware early on that a cycle threshold (Ct) of 24 was the limit in RT-PCR testing, and everything above the limit was likely to be a false positive, picking up viral dust, fragments, old coronavirus, old recovered infection, etc. We knew the CDC had set the Ct at 40, and this contributed to the hundreds of thousands and millions of positive cases that were not positive, leading to wrongful policy mandates of school closures and unnecessary quarantine. We were aware and publicized that children were at near-zero risk of acquiring the infection, spreading it, or getting ill from it, but the experts and the media continued their narrative, frightening parents. The CDC, the teachers’ unions, and the television medical experts have spent the last 15 to 16 months scaring parents needlessly, lying openly about the risk to children. 

Similarly, we know that the vaccines were approved for emergency use based on exceptionally and grossly inadequate studies evaluating safety and effectiveness. Similarly, we know that the vaccine rollout during a pandemic is driving the mutant variants. Similarly, we know that vaccinating now is fruitless given the original spike is no longer dominant, and that this will be a boon for the vaccine developers who will   manufacture new versions routinely, with yearly booster shots, etc. We know all of this, and we know especially that, save for high-risk individuals with pre-existing medical conditions, we had all that we needed societally to handle COVID, and that a vaccine was not needed. It was definitely not needed for low-risk populations and children.  

We have stated previously and continue to repeat that those individuals who have been infected with the SARSCoV2 need not be vaccinated since they have a durable and long-lasting immunity to the virus. We compare this to the vaccine that confers antibodies directed against the Spike Protein only. Perhaps such immunity against a selected and limited part of the virus is limited, and we believe it might also drive the viral variants due to selection pressure.

No prior immunity was a lie. We had also commented that T-cell immunity was out there and represented a large portion of people who were not candidates for vaccines and were already strongly immune to COVID, e.g., had prior infection with other coronaviruses and common cold coronaviruses that confer ‘cross-protection’ cellular immunity via T-cell immunity, etc. (Weiskopf , Grifoni, Le Bert, Mateus, Tavukcuoglu, Cassaniti, Dykema, Echeverría, Bonifacius, Nelde, Ansari, Ma, Lineburg, Borena; references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14). The reader can draw their own conclusions. 

We have also advocated that early outpatient treatment (references 1, 2, 3, 4) was very successful in reducing the risk of hospitalization and death (McCullough, Risch, Zelenko, Tenenbaum, Kory, Smith, Bernstein, Fareed, Ladapo, etc.). Unfortunately, the scientific community rejected early treatment. More evidence continues to emerge from well-designed studies that are proving the previous narrative wrong. We have been advocating for thorough testing of the vaccines prior to mass vaccinations for fear of Serious Adverse Events that might accrue over time from such a policy mandate. It appears our fears are well-founded, as we are now seeing in CDC’s very own VAERS database. Given the risks and harm exposed on the CDC VAERS site, we have argued that children must not be vaccinated with mRNA vaccines for fear of short-term and longer-term harm. The short-term harms are being revealed in the media news daily while the longer-term harm may unfold over time. There must be no EUA for children, and only high-risk children should be considered for the vaccine. This assessment must be based only on free and informed consent of the parents, doctor, and child after the balance between the benefits of vaccine versus the harms is considered. 

Certain political and scientific experts have maintained a ‘ZERO COVID’ view which is ill-thought-out and ludicrous because it is impossible to attain. There is no way we could eliminate every infection/case as COVID is now endemic and all around us. ZERO was never possible.  As the Nature survey of scientists states, “It’s a beautiful dream, but most scientists think it’s improbable. In January, Nature journal asked more than 100 immunologists, infectious-disease researchers and virologists working on the coronavirus whether it could be eradicated. Almost 90% of respondents think that the coronavirus will become endemic — meaning that it will continue to circulate in pockets of the global population for years to come.” We knew this while they forced their absurd intention to destroy the society by enforcing lockdowns to attain ZERO. Enforcing lockdowns forces the pathogen to mutate more infectiously. Dr. Christopher Martin stated that “most experts believe the answer is no and predict that the virus will continue to circulate indefinitely, transitioning from the current pandemic to a steady, but much lower, endemic rate of infection.” We have always advocated that simple enhanced handwashing and isolation of only the symptomatic ill/sick persons are the best societal measures in controlling the viral infection. We have stated previously that the SARS-CoV-2 will eventually become endemic, less virulent, and circulate through the population mutating as it does, mostly to find harmony with its human hosts. Thus, any advocacy of “ZERO COVID” must be considered entertainment for those who have taken leave of all science and reason and wish to impose undue harm on the populace.

We have advocated against the masks previously, and current data shows that cloth face masks are ineffective and dangerous to children, with no clear benefit, impacting their health and well-being. It is also confirmed that the social distance rule of 6 feet was made up, not based on credible science.  

In showing the gross efforts to mislead on asymptomatic spread, we also have had to examine issues around lockdowns, school closures, masking, and mask mandates. What did we know about lockdowns and school closures and masks? What evidence accumulated, very early? We recommend that you judge for yourself. We link here to the various catastrophic harms (consequences) and failures of lockdowns (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58) and school closures (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56). The basis for the societal lockdowns was that 40% to 50% of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 could potentially spread it due to being asymptomatic. “But fears that the virus may be spread to a significant degree by asymptomatic carriers soon led government leaders to issue broad and lengthy stay-at-home orders and mask mandates out of concerns that anyone could be a silent spreader,” wrote Jeffery Tucker for the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER). However, the evidence in support of common asymptomatic spread remains largely non-existent and, we argue, was overstated and potentially made with no basis. 

We were aware of the catastrophic harms due to mask use: (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24).

And of the ineffectiveness of masks (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35) and the failure of mask mandates (references 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,7, 8). 

During the past 16 months, the “experts” and their willing accomplices have amassed great fortunes while the lockdowns and school closures have placed an astronomical burden on the poorer in society. The COVID pandemic created billionaires in the pharmaceutical industry while small business operators languished or lost everything. The nation has lost productive and innovative citizens because of academic sloppiness and overt politicization of a pandemic. 

We suggest a complete halt to testing asymptomatic individuals for the virus, both because of false positive results, which drive fear, and because it serves no purpose. Contact tracing to control a full-blown pandemic is worthless from any scientific point of view. We remain confident enough, based on the existing literature, to agree also that ‘it is a dangerous assumption to believe that there is persuasive, scientific evidence of asymptomatic transmission’. We feel that only symptomatic individuals should be tested for the SARSCoV2 virus, period. “Searching for people who are asymptomatic yet infectious is like searching for needles that appear and reappear transiently in haystacks, particularly when rates are falling”. 

Further scientific evidence against asymptomatic spread

A high-quality review study by Madewell published in JAMA sought to estimate the secondary attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 in households and determine factors that modify this parameter. In addition, researchers sought to estimate the proportion of households with index cases that had any secondary transmission, and compared the SARS-CoV-2 household secondary attack rate with that of other severe viruses and with that to close contacts for studies that reported the secondary attack rate for both close and household contacts. The study was a meta-analysis of 54 studies with 77,758 participants. Secondary attack rates represented the spread to additional persons, and researchers found a 25-fold increased risk within households between symptomatic positive infected index persons versus asymptomatic infected index persons. “Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%)”. This study showed just how rare asymptomatic spread was within a confined household environment. “The real impact of asymptomatic transmission is likely to be even smaller than this figure because the study combines asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic individuals”. 

A study published in Nature found no instances of asymptomatic spread from positive asymptomatic cases among all 1,174 close contacts of the cases, based on a base sample of 10 million people. AIER’s Zucker responded: “The conclusion is not that asymptomatic spread is rare or that the science is uncertain. The study revealed something that hardly ever happens in these kinds of studies. There was not one documented case. Forget rare. Forget even Fauci’s previous suggestion that asymptomatic transmission exists but does not drive the spread. Replace all that with: never. At least not in this study for 10,000,000.”  

One study in May 2020 examined the 455 contacts of one asymptomatic person. Researchers found that “all CT images showed no sign of COVID-19 infection. No severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was detected in 455 contacts by nucleic acid test”. 

The World Health Organization (WHO) also stated that asymptomatic spread/transmission is rare. This issue of asymptomatic spread is the key issue being used to force vaccination in children. The science, however, remains contrary to this proposed policy mandate.

Additionally, a high-quality robust study in the French Alps examined the spread of Covid-19 virus via a cluster of Covid-19 positive individuals. They followed one infected child who visited three different schools and interacted with other children, teachers, and various adults. They reported no instance of secondary transmission despite close interactions. These data have been available to the CDC and other health experts for over a year, and while one must tease out the concept of no asymptomatic spread, though we argue it is an easy argument to make, it clearly shows that children do not spread the virus. 

Ludvigsson published in the New England Journal of Medicine a seminal paper on Covid-19 among children 1 to 16 years of age and their teachers in Sweden. From the nearly 2 million Swedish children who were followed in school, it was reported that, with no mask mandates, there were zero deaths from Covid, few instances of transmission and minimal hospitalization. We include this study for it is seminal in showing that masks were never needed and children do not spread the virus or get sick or die from it. But importantly, if asymptomatic spread was so vast, and there were 2 million children, would there not be much more elevated numbers of infection reported?

A June 10, 2021 opinion piece sheds more confirmatory light that asymptomatic spread was more a myth than a reality. Abir Ballan and Helen Tindall wrote: “People presenting with symptoms of Covid-19 are almost exclusively responsible for transmitting SARS-CoV-2… [S]erious infection usually results from frequent exposure to high doses of SARS-CoV-2, such as health care workers caring for sick Covid-19 patients in hospitals or nursing homes and people living in the same household.” They explain further that the myth was driven by a single case report of an asymptomatic woman from China who had spread the virus to approximately 16 contacts in Germany. “Later reports showed that, at the time of contact, this woman was taking medication for flu-like symptoms, invalidating the evidence provided for the theory of asymptomatic transmission,” they wrote.

Ballan and Tindall further explain that “a person showing no symptoms of Covid-19 may test positive for SARS-CoV-2 on a PCR test, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they are infectious. There are four ways in which this can happen: i) the test may give a false positive result due to several faults in the testing process or in the test itself (the person is not infected), ii) the person may have recovered from Covid-19 in the last three months (the person is not currently infected but dead debris of the virus are being picked up by the test), the person may be pre-symptomatic, i.e, the person is infected but still in the early stages of the disease and has not yet developed symptoms, and iv) the person may be asymptomatic, i.e. the person is infected but has pre-existing immunity and will never develop symptoms”.

Dr Clare Craig, a pathologist, and her colleague Dr Jonathan Engler have examined the research evidence behind the claim that Covid-19 can be transmitted by asymptomatic individuals. They wrote that “harmful lockdown policies and mass testing have been justified on the assumption that asymptomatic transmission is a genuine risk.” Given the harmful collateral effects of such policies, the precautionary principle should result in a very high evidential bar for asymptomatic transmission being set. However, the only word which can be used to describe the quality of evidence for this is woeful. A handful of questionable instances of spread have been massively amplified in the medical literature by repeatedly including them in meta-analyses that continue to be published, recycling the same evidence base. 

It is important to carefully distinguish the purely asymptomatic (individuals who never develop any symptoms) from pre-symptomatic transmission (where individuals do eventually develop symptoms). To the extent that the latter phenomenon, which has in fact happened only very rarely, is deemed worthy of public health action, appropriate strategies to manage it (in the absence of significant asymptomatic transmission) would be entirely different and much less disruptive than those currently adopted.

How the pandemic should have been handled from the start

We restate emphatically that the concept of ‘asymptomatic spread’ of the COVID-19 virus was devised to frighten the population into compliance and, contrary to what we were told, it was not central to this pandemic. Evidence to support its existence remains absent. We close by offering our opinion on how this pandemic should have been handled from the start. 

We would have begun with a strong protection of the high-risk elderly populations. If this was not done first and properly, there would have been no success. We would have fostered improved hand-washing hygiene and isolation of only the ill/sick/symptomatic persons. No asymptomatic person would have been quarantined and there would have been testing of only symptomatic persons or when there was strong clinical suspicion an individual had the virus. We would have promoted education in improving support for the immune system, such as public service messages about vitamin D supplements (especially in societies with limited sunlight) and allow the rest of the low-risk society to live largely unfettered daily lives, taking sensible safety precautions. This would have allowed them to mingle and be exposed to each other harmlessly and naturally, and this would have driven population level immunity. At the same time, we would have offered early outpatient treatment to high-risk positive persons (in nursing homes or their private homes). This would have included the elderly, younger people with underlying medical conditions, and obese individuals. 

We feel that had this approach been enacted from the very beginning, the devastating losses incurred by businesses and the economy overall, as well as the deaths of despair among business owners, employees, and our children would have been avoided. There were crushing harms to our societies and especially our children due to the lockdowns and school closures. This is unforgivable, for the data was always available and from March 2020 we have been loudly predicting tragedy if our governments followed the course they had set. The narrative and falsehood of ‘asymptomatic spread’ helped damage the pandemic response, for it caused devastating personal and economic losses to accrue needlessly. It was especially bad for our children and the poorer among us. 

We conclude by asking CDC, NIH, FDA and all of these alphabet agencies that have been failing us for so long, to show us the evidence. We ask them to stop spewing nonsense and to stop lying to the nation about our immune systems. They are way more robust than you give them credit for.  In fact, you are denying basic immunology and virology.  “Natural immunity and vaccinated immunity are equally effective and “probably life-long,” says Dr. Makary. 

Until you, the CDC and NIH, get your house in order, the nation must turn you off and tune you out. Focus now on rebuilding the credibility you have destroyed. Hopefully the FDA can unshackle itself from you and return to a non-political regulatory role it must hold, for the safety of the nation. You talk about “following the science”; well, show us. Begin by following it. 

Shame on all of you so called experts. 

An earlier version of this text appeared June 15 on TrialSiteNews.com.


  asymptomatic spread, coronavirus vaccine, coronavirus vaccine for children, covid-19

Opinion

The biggest crime committed during the vaccine heist is the censorship of Ivermectin

While the list of crimes committed by authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic is a long one, perhaps the biggest crime of all is the purposeful suppression of safe and effective treatments, including Ivermectin. This appears to have been done to protect the COVID 'vaccine' program.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 1:30 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
Dr. Joseph Mercola
By Dr. Joseph Mercola

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • While the list of crimes committed by authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic is a long one, perhaps the biggest crime of all is the purposeful suppression of safe and effective treatments, including ivermectin. This appears to have been done to protect the COVID “vaccine” program
  • The COVID shots were brought to market under emergency use authorization (EUA), which can only be obtained if there are no other safe and effective alternatives available
  • Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies looked at ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection. A rapid review performed on behalf of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) in the U.S., January 3, 2021, found the drug “probably reduces deaths by an average 83% compared to no ivermectin treatment”
  • According to a more recent review and meta-analysis, ivermectin, when used preventatively, reduced COVID-19 infection by an average 86%
  • Another recent scientific review concluded ivermectin produces large statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance

July 9, 2021 (Mercola) – While the list of crimes committed by authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic is a long one, perhaps the biggest crime of all is the purposeful suppression of safe and effective treatments. At this point, it seems quite clear that this was done to protect the COVID jab rollout.

The COVID shots were brought to market under emergency use authorization (EUA), which can only be obtained if there are no other alternatives available. In a sane world, the COVID gene therapies would never have gotten an EUA, as there are several safe and effective treatment options available.

One treatment that stands out above the others is ivermectin, a decades-old antiparasitic drug that is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medications.

What makes ivermectin particularly useful in COVID-19 is the fact that it works both in the initial viral phase of the illness, when antivirals are required, as well as the inflammatory stage, when the viral load drops off and anti-inflammatories become necessary. It’s been shown to significantly inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro, (1) speed up viral clearance and dramatically reduce the risk of death.

Gold standard review supports use of Ivermectin

Dr. Tess Lawrie, a medical doctor, Ph.D., researcher and director of Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd (video above) (2) in the U.K., has been trying to get the word out about ivermectin. To that end, she helped organize the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) panel (3) and the International Ivermectin for COVID Conference, (4) which was held online, April 24, 2021.

Twelve medical experts (5) from around the world shared their knowledge during this conference, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data. All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org. (6)

Lawrie has published several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies looking at ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection. A rapid review performed on behalf of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) in the U.S., January 3, 2021, found the drug “probably reduces deaths by an average 83% compared to no ivermectin treatment.” (7)

Her February 2021 meta-analysis, which included 13 studies, found a 68% reduction in deaths. This is an underestimation of the beneficial effect, because one of the studies included used hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the control arm. Since HCQ is an active treatment that has also been shown to have a positive impact on outcomes, it’s not surprising that this particular study did not rate ivermectin as better than the control treatment (which was HCQ).

Two months later, March 31, 2021, Lawrie published an updated analysis that included two additional randomized controlled trials. This time, the mortality reduction was 62%. When four studies with high risk of bias were removed during a subsequent sensitivity analysis, they ended up with a 72% reduction in deaths.

(Sensitivity analyses are done to double-check and verify results. Since the sensitivity analysis rendered an even better result, it confirms the initial finding. In other words, ivermectin is unlikely to reduce mortality by anything less than 62%.)

Lawrie reviewed the February and March analyses and other meta-analyses in an interview with Dr. John Campbell, featured in “More Good News on Ivermectin.” Lawrie has now published her third systematic review. According to this paper, published June 17, 2021 in the American Journal of Therapeutics: (8)

“Meta-analysis of 15 trials found that ivermectin reduced risk of death compared to no ivermectin (average risk ratio 0.38 …) … Low-certainty evidence found that ivermectin prophylaxis reduced COVID-19 infection by an average 86% … Secondary outcomes provided less certain evidence.

Low-certainly evidence suggested that there may be no benefit with ivermectin for ‘need for mechanical ventilation,’ whereas effect estimates for ‘improvement’ and ‘deterioration’ clearly favored ivermectin use. Severe adverse events were rare among treatment trials …”

World Health Organization refuses to recommend Ivermectin

Despite the fact that most of the evidence favors ivermectin, when the WHO finally updated its guidance on ivermectin at the end of March 2021, (9, 10) they largely rejected it, saying more data are needed. They only recommend it for patients who are enrolled in a clinical trial.

Yet, they based their negative recommendation on a review that included just five studies, which still ended up showing a 72% reduction in deaths. What’s more, in the WHO’s summary of findings, they suddenly include data from seven studies, which combined show an 81% reduction in deaths. The confidence interval is also surprisingly high, with a 64% reduction in deaths on the low end, and 91% on the high end.

Even more remarkable, their absolute effect estimate for standard of care is 70 deaths per 1,000, compared to just 14 deaths per 1,000 when treating with ivermectin. That’s a reduction in deaths of 56 per 1,000 when using the drug. The confidence interval is between 44 and 63 fewer deaths per 1,000.

Despite that, the WHO refuses to recommend this drug for COVID-19. Rabindra Abeyasinghe, a WHO representative to the Philippines, commented that using ivermectin without “strong” evidence is “harmful” because it can give “false confidence” to the public. (11)

Why Ivermectin has been censored

If you’ve been trying to share the good news about ivermectin, you’re undoubtedly noticed that doing so is incredibly difficult. Many social media companies are banning such posts outright.

Promoting ivermectin on YouTube, or even discussing benefits cited in published research, violates the platform’s posting policies. DarkHorse podcast host Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., is but one of the victims of this censorship policy.

His interviews with medical and scientific experts such as Dr. Pierre Kory, a lung and ICU specialist, former professor of medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and the president and chief medical officer (12) of the FLCCC, and Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology, (13) have been deleted from the platform. The interview with Malone had more than 587,330 views by the time it was wiped from YouTube. (14)

But why? Why don’t they want people to feel confident that there’s treatment out there and that COVID-19 is not the death sentence they’ve been led to believe it is? The short answer is because ivermectin threatens the vaccine program. As explained by Andrew Bannister in a May 12, 2021, Biz News article: (15)

What if there was a cheap drug, so old its patent had expired, so safe that it’s on the WHO’s lists of Essential and Children’s Medicines, and used in mass drug administration rollouts?

What if it can be taken at home with the first signs COVID symptoms, given to those in close contact, and significantly reduce COVID disease progression and cases, and far fewer few people would need hospitalization?

The international vaccine rollout under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) would legally have to be halted. For an EUA to be legal, ‘there must be no adequate, approved and available alternative to the candidate product for diagnosing, preventing or treating the disease or condition.’

The vaccines would only become legal once they passed level 4 trials and that certainly won’t happen in 2021 … The vaccine rollout, outside of trials, would become illegal.

The vaccine manufactures, having spent hundreds of million dollars developing and testing vaccines during a pandemic, would not see the $100bn they were expecting in 2021 … Allowing any existing drug, at this time, well into stage 3 trials, to challenge the legality of the EUA of vaccines, is not going to happen easily.”

The WHO and drug companies are severely compromised

The WHO’s rejection of ivermectin only makes sense if a) you take into account the EUA requirements; and b) remember that the WHO receives a significant portion of its funding from private vaccine interests.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the second largest funder of the WHO after the United States, and The GAVI Alliance, also owned by Gates, is the fourth largest donor. The GAVI Alliance exists solely to promote and profit from vaccines, and for several years, the WHO director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, served on the GAVI board of directors. (16)

— 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

As reported by Bannister, Merck, the original patent holder of ivermectin, also has severe conflicts of interest that appear to have played a role in the rejection of ivermectin. He writes: (17)

“Ivermectin has been used in humans for 35 years and over 4 billion doses have been administered. Merck, the original patent holder, (18) donated 3.7 billion doses to developing countries … Its safety is documented at doses twenty times the normal …

Merck’s patent on Ivermectin expired in 1996 and they produce less than 5% of global supply. In 2020 they were asked to assist in Nigerian and Japanese trials but declined both.

In 2021 Merck released a statement claiming that Ivermectin was not an effective treatment against Covid-19 and bizarrely claimed, ‘A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies’ of the drug they donated to be distributed in mass rollouts, by primary care workers, in mass campaigns, to millions in developing countries.

The media reported the Merck statement as a blinding truth without looking at the conflict of interests when days later, Merck received $356m from the US government to develop an investigational therapeutic.

The WHO even quoted Merck, as evidence, that it didn’t work, in their recommendation against the use of Ivermectin. It’s a dangerous world when corporate marketing determines public health policy.”

FLCCC calls for widespread and early use of Ivermectin

In the U.S., the FLCCC has been calling for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19, (19, 20) and Kory has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 2020 (21) and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel in January 2021. (22)

As noted by the FLCCC: (23)

The data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover.

… numerous clinical studies — including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials — showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together … dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy.”

The FLCCC has published three different COVID-19 protocols, all of which include the use of ivermectin:

  • I-MASK+ (24) — a prevention and early at-home treatment protocol
  • I-MATH+  (25) — an in-hospital treatment protocol. The clinical and scientific rationale for this protocol has been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine (26) in mid-December 2020
  • I-RECOVER (27)— a long-term management protocol for long-haul syndrome

In addition to Lawrie’s meta-analysis in the American Journal of Therapeutics, the FLCCC has also published a scientific review (28) in that same journal.

This paper, “Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19,” published in the May/June 2021 issue, found that, based on a meta-analysis of 18 randomized controlled trials, ivermectin produces “large statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance.”

Ivermectin significantly reduces infection risk and death

The FLCCC also found that when used as a preventive, ivermectin “significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19.” In one study, of those given a dose of 0.4 mg per kilo on Day 1 and a second dose on Day 7, only 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 10% of controls who did not get the drug.

In another, family members of patients who had tested positive were given two doses of 0.25 mg/kg, 72 hours apart. At follow up two weeks later, only 7.4% of the exposed family members who took ivermectin tested positive, compared to 58.4% of those who did not take ivermectin.

In a third, which unfortunately was unblended, the difference between the two groups was even greater. Only 6.7% of the ivermectin group tested positive compared to 73.3% of controls. According to the FLCCC, “the difference between the two groups was so large and similar to the other prophylaxis trial results that confounders alone are unlikely to explain such a result.”

The FLCCC also points out that ivermectin distribution campaigns have resulted in “rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality,” which indicate that ivermectin is “effective in all phases of COVID-19.” For example, in Brazil, three regions distributed ivermectin to its residents, while at least six others did not. The difference in average weekly deaths is stark.

In Santa Catarina, average weekly deaths declined by 36% after two weeks of ivermectin distribution, whereas two neighboring regions in the South saw declines of just 3% and 5%. Amapa in the North saw a 75% decline, while the Amazonas had a 42% decline and Para saw an increase of 13%.

It’s worth noting that ivermectin’s effectiveness appears largely unaffected by variants, meaning it has worked on any and all variants that have so far popped up around the world. Additional evidence for ivermectin will hopefully come from the British PRINCIPLE trial, (29) which began June 23, 2021. Ivermectin will be evaluated as an outpatient treatment in this study, which will be the largest clinical trial to date.

Ivermectin in the treatment of long-haul syndrome

The FLCCC believes ivermectin may also be an important treatment adjunct for long-haul COVID syndrome. In their June 16, 2021, video update, the team reviewed the newly released I-RECOVER protocol.

Keep in mind that ivermectin is not to be used in isolation. Corticosteroids, for example, are often a crucial treatment component when organizing pneumonia-related lung damage is present. Vitamin C is also important to combat inflammation. Be sure to work with your doctor to identify the right combination of drugs and supplements for you.

Last but not least, as noted by Kory in this video, it’s really important to realize that long-haul syndrome is entirely preventable. The key is early treatment when you develop symptoms of COVID-19.

While ivermectin has a good track record when it comes to prevention and early treatment, it can be tricky to obtain, depending on where you live and who your doctor is.

A highly effective alternative that anyone can use, anywhere, is nebulized hydrogen peroxide. It’s extremely safe and very inexpensive. The biggest cost is the one-time purchase of a good tabletop jet nebulizer. To learn more, download Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery,” in which he details how to use this treatment.

Reprinted with permission from Mercola


  front line covid-19 critical care alliance, ivermectin, media bias, mercola, pierre kory, world health organization

Opinion

CNN belittles, bullies parents concerned about racist propaganda in schools

CNN host Elle Reeve badgered one mother for denying that the country was 'structurally racist' and scoffed at her concerns about Antifa and BLM propaganda infiltrating schools.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 12:04 pm EST
Featured Image
CNN
Kristine Marsh
By Kristine Marsh

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (NewsBusters.org) – CNN journalists think it's their job to bully parents and conservatives concerned about liberal propaganda being taught to the next generation. That was obvious on today’s New Day, where one CNN reporter belittled parents protesting Critical Race Theory in their kids’ schools as ignorant and brainwashed by Fox News.

Co-host Brianna Keilar started the segment by noting the controversy between teachers’ unions embracing Critical Race Theory and parents pushing back against it, before diving straight into the mockery and condescension. Correspondent Elle Reeve stated bluntly that parents were just plain wrong:

KEILAR: So Elle, do these vocal opponents of critical race theory actually understand fully what it is? 

ELLE REEVE: No, and why should they? It's an academic theory mostly taught at the grad student level. But what they think it means is teaching white kids that all white people are bad and racist. And so of course they're afraid of that. 

After playing montages of parents emotionally speaking out at a school board meeting in Philadelphia and Fox News personalities warning about Critical Race Theory, Reeve lectured, “Critical race theory says racial inequality is perpetuated by the racism embedded in America's laws. Not by individual bigotry. But relentless propaganda from some conservatives created a panic that white people and especially white children are under attack.”

The reporter went on to try to shame one concerned parent who pulled her kids out of public school after seeing what they were being taught. Reeve badgered the mother for denying that the country was “structurally racist” and scoffed at her concerns about Antifa and BLM propaganda infiltrating schools. Later on, Reeve grilled one anti-CRT protester on his knowledge or lack thereof of specific “scholars and concepts” in Critical Race Theory. Newsflash CNN, you don’t need to go to grad school to understand propaganda like this being taught to kindergarteners is abusive. Even more laughable, the CNN reporter displayed her own ignorance by arguing that the 3/5 compromise clause in the Constitution was racist. 

While attacking parents and critics, Reeve gave a pro-CRT teacher plenty of time to tout its merits, without criticism. The teacher strangely denied teaching CRT, (even though she does teach it), before touting how great it is:

Critical race theory is not being taught in schools. It is a theory, it is a lens by which to view history and the way that law and race kind of overlaps and connects in society. Can it influence the way that some teachers teach? Yeah, but that's a good thing, right? Because race and racism are literally the building blocks of this country. So how can you not talk about it? 

Reeve gave this teacher the last word to end the segment. Just like MSNBC's Eddie Glaude did yesterday, the teacher, and CNN by proxy, suggested critics and conservatives had nefarious political motives behind their concern about the dangerous ideology:

It's really you just don't want kids to learn the truth because not only do they become critical thinkers, they also become voters. And that is what's scaring a lot of these people. They know as this generation gets older, a lot of these people making these laws will be voted out of office. 

Afterwards the co-hosts fawned over Reeve's report. She painted the parents and the right as ignorant, once more: 

All these opponents of critical race theory told us that, sure, racism was a problem in the past. But it's not now. And so we got into these long conversations about when exactly they thought racism had ended in America. And they didn't have a good answer.

CNN's hackery was paid for by sponsor CarShield, contact them at the Conservatives Fight Back page here. 

— 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

Published with permission from NewsBusters.org


  cnn, critical race theory, elle reeve, mainstream media

Opinion

Canceling Jesus

Jesus was a thorn in the side of the major establishment players of his day. They 'cancelled' him because of it.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 11:10 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Fr. Michael P. Orsi
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A recent Gospel reading provides us with an early illustration of “cancel culture.”

The evangelist, Mark, describes Jesus preaching in the synagogue at Nazareth. People are surprised at the wisdom of his words, and somehow can’t accept that such insights are coming from a hometown boy.

“Where did he get all this,” they ask. “Isn’t this the carpenter, the son of Mary?”

They’re actually offended that he would speak in this manner, and a little uncomfortable with his message. So they refuse to take him seriously.

To put it another way, they “cancel” him, because he’s too local.

In response, Jesus offers the timeless observation: “A prophet is not without honor except in his native place…”

This is a perfect scripture passage (Mark 6:1-6) for citing to someone who thinks the Bible is no longer relevant to modern life. Heck, we’re up to our ears in “cancel culture” today. Jesus was ahead of the game.

There’s a human tendency to dismiss the views of people who don’t meet expectations about who’s qualified to speak. This is seen in our cultural preoccupation with credentials. Those highly regarded pieces of academic paper usually trump simple wisdom.

— 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

Of course, there are times when professional expertise is essential. Uninformed laymen can do serious harm diagnosing illnesses based on information they’ve “Googled.”

But there are also times when someone’s accumulated life experience — what used to be called “common sense” — is a far better preparation than formal schooling for making sound judgments or offering wise advice.

These days, the primary concern about “cancel culture” reflects how Facebook, Twitter, and other social media are trying to silence ideas that diverge from the accepted views of the progressive left. Add to that how children are being indoctrinated with Critical Race Theory, along with how both government and our leading institutions promote the idea that American society is fundamentally, irredeemably racist.

There’s good reason to fear that anybody might be “cancelled.”

Our society is coming to resemble the world through which Jesus walked in many uncomfortable ways. We have an intellectual elite, including educators, media, and literary types, whose “correct thinking” and “settled science” are every bit as rigid as how the Scribes and Pharisees interpreted the Torah.

We have our masters of industry and technology who are as singularly focused on protecting their business interests as the Priests and Levites guarded the prerogatives of the Temple.

We have politicians and their operatives who are as obsessed with enlarging their sphere of control and protecting their power as were the Roman occupiers of biblical Palestine.

We even have our equivalents to the Zealots in today’s various radical groups. Their devotion to transforming society is every bit as fanatical as that of those biblical revolutionaries.

All of these groups share a common set of assumptions. And it appears they’ve come to a tacit agreement that voices speaking out in conflict with the prevailing orthodoxy must be silenced.

It’s not just a matter of blocking the flow of information. Dissenting organizations have seen their operations challenged by legal action (what’s termed “lawfare”). Financial service providers have disrupted their channels of income. Books, media materials, and other products have been banned by major outlets.

Criminal charges have been brought. Facilities have been subject to attack. Individuals have been threatened, and even physically assaulted.

Churches and religious organizations have felt these effects as well. We haven’t quite reached the extreme levels of anti-Christian violence as other places (within the past few weeks several churches have been burned in Canada). However there has been vandalism. And religious services have been disrupted.

There have even been occasional church shootings. So far these appear to have been the work of lone crackpots, rather than organized attackers. But that could change.

Jesus was a thorn in the side of the major establishment players of his day. They “cancelled” him because of it.

As his followers, we’re called upon to stand up today for the principles that caused so much consternation back then. And there’s no doubt that’s scary.

But remember, his cancellation didn’t last. In the end he came back in a big way.

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 at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyFbaLqUwPi08aHtlIR9R0g


  big tech censorship, cancel culture, critical race theory

Opinion

The endgame is in sight: Participate in the mass delusion of trans ideology or face sanction

If Republican politicians challenge their Democratic opponents on the transgender issue, Republicans will win every fair election.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 10:40 am EST
Featured Image
Jeanette Ward and Jonathan David Farley
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (American Greatness) – This month, Florida banned males from entering your daughter’s locker room. In 2019, then-Housing and Urban Development Secretary Dr. Ben Carson expressed concern about “big hairy men” infiltrating women’s shelters. You would think feminists would cheer. But Democrats ignore their base on this one.

It’s a disturbing trend: “Non-binary” pronouns in Merriam-Webster dictionaryA male “Miss Spain”A transsexual pimp on the evening news. And don’t forget Victoria’s Secret caving in to pressure to include a man pretending to be women in its famous fashion shows or magazines like Men’s Health profiling that man, as if the majority of its readers would be interested. 

2015 Fox News article says, “Caitlyn Jenner and other transgender celebrities have been greeted with almost universal acceptance.” Forgetting the lesson of the Trojan Horse, Fox News program “Gutfeld!” invited Bruce Jenner on as a guest this month, but that show’s hosts used female pronouns for the male Bruce Jenner, and happily called him “Caitlyn.”

The Chicago Sun-Times published, then pulled and apologized for, an essay stating that female impersonator “Laverne Cox is not a woman,” and the federal government under former President Obama warned that not acknowledging the self-proclaimed sex of any individual could constitute harassment.

School District U-46 in the Chicago suburb of Elgin, like many districts across the country caught up in (or intimidated by) the cult-like fervor of the “trans” movement, changed its anti-bullying policy within its mandatory student code of conduct to include “gender identity.” Parents “must” agree to the code of conduct in order to enroll their children, according to district officials.

Yet the resistance to this science-denying ideology also grows.

A protest at Hillsboro High School in Missouri against a boy’s use of the girls’ bathroom — the boy claims he is a girl despite having all his original parts — is just one of many cultural events that suggest claims of universal acceptance are greatly exaggerated. 

During a U-46 Board Meeting, one of this commentary’s writers, Jeanette Ward, asked if a student’s refusal to use a gender-dysphoric peer’s preferred pronoun could result in a charge of bullying. Two board members indicated that such a refusal would constitute bullying, and the remaining four remained silent. It would appear that the government is compelling minors to lie or face discipline.

Now that hatred has been redefined, stating facts is deemed hate speech and bullying. Finally, the endgame is in sight: Participate in the mass delusion or face sanction, not at the hands of a tiny, statistically insignificant and aberrant group — albeit one that can generate a lot of email and lawsuits — but at the hands of the government.

The media uses the pronoun “she” to describe biologically male students who wish they were girls, and in so doing denies science and the very basis for sex-segregated restrooms and locker rooms. If biological sex does not determine restroom usage, there is no reason to prohibit any student from using any restroom, locker room, or shower that he, she or “ze” desires. “Indecent exposure” becomes meaningless.

What really gets the goat of one of this commentary’s writers, African-American Jonathan Farley, is when defenders of this nonsense claim that trans identity is analogous to race, based on nothing other than the fact that both blacks and opposite-sex impersonators have been discriminated against. This fallacious analogy ignores that racism is based on objective, behaviorally neutral conditions akin to eye color, whereas opposite-sex impersonation involves subjective, often fluid feelings, and volitional behavior — including acts that violate the privacy of others. 

— 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

We should have compassion for a girl whose peers facilitate her confusion or delusion by electing her homecoming king, or for the sex-confused Cornell University student who uses “they” to describe himself. It is not mean-spirited to say that the feelings and beliefs of such young people are not “normal.” Nor is it bullying to refuse to participate in their delusional thinking. It is no more compassionate to pretend a boy is a girl than it is to pretend that someone is Napoleon or to pretend that an anatomically whole person who experiences Body Integrity Identity Disorder is an amputee. 

It’s not the Chicago Sun-Times that should have apologized. It’s Time Magazine that should apologize for putting Laverne Cox — a biological male who pretends to be a woman — on the cover where even children at the supermarket will see adult deviance. Public libraries with “drag queen story hours” to expose children to deviance — libraries that would call the cops if a man dressed in a normal suit wanted to have children roll on top of him — should apologize. It’s absurd to claim, as “trans” ideologues do, that if you don’t like such images, don’t look at them. No one has that choice today — not even mothers with young children — because such images and ideas are ubiquitous and even put in kindergarten curricula in Washington State.

If Republican politicians challenge their Democratic opponents on this single point, Republicans will win every fair election. This is the issue the GOP should seize to win back the government.

Facing the Inquisition, astronomer Galileo Galilei (according to legend) retracted his claim that the Earth went around the sun rather than vice versa. But Galileo whispered defiantly, “And yet it moves.”

We applaud Dr. Carson and the state of Florida for taking a stand. It’s time for Galileo’s pendulum to swing back.

Reprinted with permission from American Greatness


  gender identity disorder, lgbt ideology, transgender surgery, transgenderism

Opinion

Study claims that for every three deaths prevented, the COVID-19 jabs kill two

The reported rate of death from COVID-19 shots now also exceeds the reported death rate of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 9:30 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Dr. Joseph Mercola
By Dr. Joseph Mercola

Editor’s note, July 12, 2021: LifeSite pulled this article on July 11 upon learning the medical journal Vaccines retracted this study. LifeSite will provide more information as it becomes available.

Image

  coronavirus vaccines, covid-19 vaccines, mercola, vaccine deaths, vaccine side effects

Opinion

New warning of Supreme ‘coup to overthrow nation’s judiciary’

If the coup succeeds the legitimacy of the Supreme Court could be undermined, the separation of powers would be lost, religious liberty would be gone, the high court would forever be politicized and court rulings would no longer have the confidence of the public, a new report has warned.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 9:16 am EST
Featured Image
WND Staff
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

July 9, 2021 (WND News Center) – There’s a deliberate coup attempt that right now is targeting the Supreme Court of the United States, and other courts, according to a new report from new report from First Liberty Institute.

It’s already begun, with the first federal judicial nominations from President Biden.

“The U.S. Senate recently confirmed the first five (5) federal judges of the Biden administration, including Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the influential D.C. Circuit of Appeals, largely considered the ‘second highest’ court in the country after the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as a handful of judges to the lower district courts,” the report explains, with Brown a top contender for the Supreme Court if Justice Stephen Breyer were to retire.

“Although the appointment of such few judges to the lower courts might appear a slow start to the confirmation of Biden’s judicial picks, this shouldn’t lull us into complacency, and especially not Americans who value and cherish religious freedom,” the report said.

What’s happened already “could possibly indicate what’s to come in the next several months — a future in which the far Left doubles down in its push to stage a coup of the Supreme Court and the lower courts.”

It explains Democrats already have committed to restoring the “balance” in American courts, but that’s no more than a “jab” at the administration of President Trump, and the 230 judges in got confirmed.

“Second, because President Biden inherited less than half the number of vacancies of his predecessor at inauguration, it’s no surprise why the current administration is so fixated on exploring ways to ‘reform’ the courts,” the report said. “If the vacancies aren’t there for President Biden to install his judicial nominees, and more vacancies are needed, then the obvious answer is to create the spots for him to fill.”

That leads directly to court-packing, which would involve Democrats adding to the number of judges, a move that would give Biden the opportunity to make many appointments.

And it warns “slow and steady” is not the key to winning this race, and Democrats will want to appoint as many and as quickly as possible. And while a good number of judges are eligible to retire, that ends up being their decision.

“If future vacancies are not in the realm of control, then that leaves very few alternatives. Here we come full-circle, right back to the scenario where Biden, Schumer and their Democratic allies do have some modicum of control to dictate the number of judges at their disposal: court-packing,” the report said.

“Or, calling it for what it really is, a coup attempt to overthrow our nation’s judiciary.”

“We can likely expect the threat to stage this brazen judicial coup to intensify over the next several months. (Biden’s alleged ‘impartial and bipartisan’ commission on the Supreme Court is underway and will deliver their recommendation for court ‘reform’ sometime in November),” the report said.

A video interview with legal scholar Patrick M. Garry on the issue:

The report explains the stages at issue are no less than the nation’s freedoms themselves.

Concern over the concept already has appeared in a bipartisan fashion, with Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican, explaining, “Packing the Court means one very specific thing: expanding the number of justices to achieve a political outcome. It is wrong. It is an abuse of power.”

And Democrat Sen. Jon Ossoff said, “We shouldn’t expand the Supreme Court just because a justice may be confirmed with whom we disagree on policy.”

But Democrat operatives and activists, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., have demanded a court-packing plan, stating that “everything” is on the table.

— 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 Institute reported, “In 2021, President Biden and far-Left members of the Democratic Party have an unquenchable thirst for unbridled power and control.

“Along with Vice President Kamala Harris, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Raphael Warnock, Amy Klobuchar and others, they are conspiring to rig the Senate rules and stack the Supreme Court with liberal justices. And their rigged Court will help rubber-stamp their radical legislation (i.e. the ‘Equality’ Act or the ‘For the People Act’) and fundamentally change America,” the institute reported.

The roadblock for the agenda so far is the Senate filibuster, which requires 60 votes for legislation to move forward in the body that is divided 50-50 Democrat-Republican.

Democrat Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have voiced opposition to killing that procedure, but if it falls, Democrats, by virtue of Kamala Harris’ tie-breaker as vice president, could adopt any legislation they wanted.

If the coup succeeds, the Institute warned, the legitimacy of the Supreme Court could be undermined, the separation of powers would be lost, religious liberty would be gone, the high court would forever be politicized and court rulings would no longer have the confidence of the public, the report said.

Further, America soon would look like Venezuela or Argentina, where court coups were followed by political upheaval, economic chaos and social nightmares, the report charges.

Published with permission from the WND News Center.


  court packing, joe biden, patrick m. garry, scotus, us supreme court

Opinion

COVID-19 censorship kills as decision making is distorted

Censors claim the moral high road; they assure us they are coercing others for our own good. Censorship is the product of an illiberal, anti-science, authoritarian mindset.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 5:48 am EST
Featured Image
Barry Brownstein
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 9, 2021 (America Institute of Economic Research) – Whenever I write an essay critical of expert opinion on COVID, I immediately receive indignant replies. Some assume I must be a bleach-drinking supporter of President Trump. Others label me a dangerous libertarian since, in their view, I challenge the “best” source of expert opinion.

Among my critics are well-meaning people who see no alternative but to follow the policy prescriptions of their favored experts. They do not see they are on the path of illiberal, anti-science, authoritarian thinking that is endangering the well-being of so many people today.

Karl Popper helps us understand why an “authoritarian attitude to the problem of human knowledge” hinders scientific progress. His essay “On the So-Called Sources of Knowledge” appears in his collection In Search of a Better World.  

Popper explains, “The question of the sources of our knowledge, like so many authoritarian questions, is a question about origin. It asks for the origin of our knowledge, in the belief that knowledge may be legitimate itself by its pedigree.”

Popper explains how the mistaken belief that knowledge has a pedigree leads us to seek the “‘best’ or the ‘wisest’” to be our political rulers. We make the mistake of assuming there are ultimate authorities best suited to rule because of the knowledge they possess. Popper explains that there are no such ultimate authorities, and “uncertainty clings to all assertions.”

Popper argues that instead of focusing on who should rule, our focus should be on “How can we organize our political institutions so that bad or incompetent rulers can do the minimum amount of damage?”

Since an “ideal and infallible source of the knowledge” is as impossible as “ideal and infallible rulers,” Popper proposed a better question: “Is there a way of detecting and eliminating error?”

Dr. Fauci claims that to criticize him is to criticize science. Popper would challenge this authoritarian assertion since “pure, untainted and certain sources do not exist.”  

To detect error, Popper advises a mindset of inquiry that criticizes “the theories and conjectures of others.” Importantly, Popper suggests training ourselves to criticize “our own theories and speculative attempts to solve problems.”

Of course, human beings don’t do very well criticizing themselves. Popper says that in a free society that will not be an issue because “there will be others who will do it for us.”

What happens when we don’t criticize our theories? What happens when others are prohibited from criticizing our theories? Without critical inquiry, errors compound since “there are no ultimate sources of knowledge.”

Humility to acknowledge our ignorance motivates inquiry. Popper writes, 

“The more we learn about the world, and the deeper our learning, the more conscious, clear and well-defined will be our knowledge of what we do not know, our knowledge of our ignorance. The main source of our ignorance lies in the fact that our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must be necessarily infinite.” 

Authentic scientific inquiry is impossible when criticism is prohibited.

COVID censorship

Evolutionary biologist Brett Weinstein is a modern-day Popper. Weinstein first came to prominence in 2017 when he was a professor at Evergreen State College in Washington State. A progressive supporter of Bernie Sanders, Weinstein became an early victim of the cancel culture when he refused to support a campus event requiring white people to stay off-campus. Evergreen State’s college president, George Bridges, declined to protect Weinstein and his wife Heather Heying, then a biology professor at Evergreen, from a campus mob. 

Run out of Evergreen State, Weinstein and Heying now produce the YouTube podcast DarkHorse and depend, in part, on advertising revenue for their livelihood. As the audience of DarkHorse has grown they have become independent media stars.

Today, Big Tech is after Weinstein and Heying. Prominent free-speech advocate Matt Taibbi writes, “Weinstein is on the verge of becoming one of the more prominent casualties to a censorship movement that it’s hard not to see as part of a wider Evergreening of America.” 

Why are Weinstein and Heying so dangerous to the orthodoxy? Throughout the COVID crisis, they have considered alternative views. They were among the first to consider the hypothesis that the virus was manufactured. They have considered Ivermectin treatments. Now they are considering the evidence that COVID vaccines are more dangerous than political authorities, the media, and their anointed experts are portraying. Importantly, they have not hesitated to question the integrity of officials such as Dr. Fauci.  

Consider Weinstein’s Popperian assertion that “a movement opposes science when it doesn’t want assertions tested, challenges arithmetic when its claims don’t add up, ridicules ‘merit’ when it wants to triumph by other means, seeks to censor when it fears discussion.” 

Weinstein adds, “Those who coddle such demands sow the seeds of our undoing.” Censorship means risking our economies and our lives. 

To reject scientific inquiry, Weinstein argues, “is effectively an invitation to a dark age, which means an age where progress comes to a halt… We must at all costs prevent this shift in our mindset.”

Recently YouTube removed a DarkHorse podcast panel discussion featuring Dr. Robert Malone. The podcast is now viewable at Odysee, which runs on LBRY, a blockchain file-sharing decentralized platform.  

Malone is the creator of the mRNA technology used in COVID vaccines. Malone warns that the spike proteins may be responsible for various unpredictable side effects, including blood clots and myocarditis. The latter being especially prevalent in children and young adults for whom the risk from COVID is very low. Exhibiting Popperian humility, the panelists allowed their conjectures might not be entirely accurate. Malone and Weinstein have earned this right, not to be obeyed, but to present their ideas without censorship. 

If there is evidence that the spike protein mechanism was not fully understood, to believe in science would mean that you examine the warnings of eminent physicians and scientists. 

One doesn’t have to deny the benefits of the vaccine — and Weinstein does argue the vaccine has saved lives — to realize that the costs and benefits of any medical intervention can only be assessed accurately with uncensored information. Appearing on Tucker Carlson, Malone said of the vaccines’ risks: “We don’t have the information we need to make a reasonable decision.” Malone put it this way:

“One of my concerns is the government is not being transparent with us. I’m of the opinion that people have the right to decide whether to accept vaccines or not, especially since these are experimental vaccines. This is a fundamental right having to do with clinical research ethics.”

Dr. Joseph Ladapo and Dr. Harvey Risch are medical professors at UCLA and Yale. They too are concerned that vaccine side effects are not being fully explored. Evidence points to risks of “low platelets (thrombocytopenia); noninfectious myocarditis, or heart inflammation, especially for those under 30; deep-vein thrombosis; and death.” This failure to examine risk is being fueled by a strategy of ridiculing those who question the COVID orthodoxy. They write: 

One remarkable aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic has been how often unpopular scientific ideas, from the lab-leak theory to the efficacy of masks, were initially dismissed, even ridiculed, only to resurface later in mainstream thinking. Differences of opinion have sometimes been rooted in disagreement over the underlying science. But the more common motivation has been political.

Another reversal in thinking may be imminent. Some scientists have raised concerns that the safety risks of COVID-19 vaccines have been underestimated. But the politics of vaccination have relegated their concerns to the outskirts of scientific thinking — for now.

Ladapo and Risch warn that “political partisanship and science” don’t mix:

Public-health authorities are making a mistake and risking the public’s trust by not being forthcoming about the possibility of harm from certain vaccine side effects. There will be lasting consequences from mingling political partisanship and science during the management of a public-health crisis.

The results of such partisanship have been deadly even for groups of people supposedly receiving the most benefit from vaccines. Lapado and Risch point to the rare honesty of a report issued by the Norwegian Medicines Agency having “reviewed case files for the first 100 reported deaths of nursing-home residents who received the Pfizer vaccine.” The vaccine’s impact was not salutatory: “The agency concluded that the vaccine ‘likely’ contributed to the deaths of 10 of these residents through side effects such as fever and diarrhea, and ‘possibly’ contributed to the deaths of an additional 26.”

— 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 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has acknowledged the reality of vaccine-induced myocarditis. The acknowledgment has come with a statement that the CDC believes the vaccine’s benefits exceed the costs. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a myocarditis warning label.

For some the CDC is the gold standard for medical guidance; for others, their guidance is dangerously flawed. Dr. Vinay Prasad, professor of epidemiology at the University of California wrote about the latest CDC guidance, “The current CDC guidelines are so poor they would recommend a 15-year old boy who recovered from documented covid19 and who got pericarditis from dose 1 go on to get dose 2.” He adds, “Can we pause a minute to contemplate how staggeringly negligent that is?” Dr. Prasad is clear, “Covid vaccines for children should not get emergency use authorization.” 

Faced with censorship in the marketplace of ideas, and faced with cronyism driving public policy, how can a parent weigh the costs and benefits of the vaccine for their child?

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor of medicine at Stanford write, “The idea that everyone must be vaccinated against COVID-19 is as misguided as the anti-vax idea that no one should. The former is more dangerous for public health.”

Kulldorff and Bhattacharya are particularly concerned about “intense [vaccination] pressure on young adults and children.” They write: “Under such uncertainty [about side effects from vaccines], vaccine mandates are unethical. University presidents or business leaders should not mandate a medical intervention that could have dire consequences for the health of even a few of the people in their charge.”

Kulldorff’s and Bhattacharya’s conclusion are like those of Lapado and Risch:

Universities used to be bastions of enlightenment. Now many of them ignore basic benefit-risk analyses, a staple of the toolbox of scientists; they deny immunity from natural infection; they abandon the global international perspective for narrow nationalism; and they replace trust with coercion and authoritarianism. Mandating the COVID-19 vaccine thus threatens not only public health but also the future of science.

Weinstein, Heying, Lapado, Risch, Malone, Prasad and many more disagree with a blanket endorsement for COVID vaccinations. 

In the absence of vaccine mandates issued by colleges and schools, those who disagree with the CDC would be free to do so. The CDC/FDA position is akin to issuing a warning label on cigarettes and then mandating smoking. 

Dr. Francis Christian is a clinical professor of general surgery at the University of Saskatchewan. A self-described “very pro-vaccine physician,” he was fired for issuing a statement urging parents to exercise “informed consent” about COVID vaccines. Christian writes:

The person by whom the drug, vaccine, treatment or intervention is administered must always make the patient fully aware of the risks of the medical intervention, the benefits of the intervention and if any alternatives exist to the intervention. This should apply particularly to a new vaccine that has never before been tried in humans.

He adds, “I have not met a single vaccinated child or parent who has been adequately informed and who then understands the risks of this vaccine or its benefits.”

Dr. Christian points to alternatives. From the outset of this pandemic, Fauci, Bill Gates, and others told us that life could not get back to normal until we achieved herd immunity via vaccinations. For the FDA to issue an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Covid vaccines, there must be “no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.” 

Manufacturers of COVID vaccines are indemnified from liability, and the government has made sure they are also protected against competition. It seems to be a law of cronyism that crony greed is maximal and concern for others is minimal.

Consider Ivermectin, a generic drug with a long history of safety. Weinstein and others argue Ivermectin is not only an effective treatment but a potential prophylactic against COVID. Weinstein, Heying, and their guests have advocated for further study of IvermectinMatt Taibbi recently documented how the consideration and use of Ivermectin has become a political issue. 

Big Tech routinely censors reports of vaccine harm and alternatives to vaccines. Censorship is the product of an illiberal, anti-science, authoritarian mindset. Censorship kills because decision-making is distorted. 

Consider the knowledge of the disinfecting properties of soap and water. In a world where that knowledge was censored in favor of antibiotic treatment for all wounds, people would die needlessly, and antibiotics would be overused. 

Our responsibility

Popper interprets Kant’s principle of autonomy as the “realization that we must never accept the command of an authority, however exalted, as the basis of ethics. For whenever we are faced with the command of an authority, it is always up to us to judge, critically, whether it is morally permissible to obey.” 

Popper allows, “The authority may have the power to enforce its commands, and we may be powerless to resist.” 

Today we are not yet powerless to resist the censors. We can acknowledge our ignorance and engage in inquiry. We can still seek out and find alternative views and consider disconcerting evidence. We can resist the urge to self-censor and instead share what we are observing and learning. We can reject authority as the basis for our personal ethics. Popper writes, “If it is physically possible for us to choose our conduct then we cannot escape the ultimate responsibility.” 

Lex Fridman is a research scientist at MIT and the host of a popular podcast. Recently he had Weinstein on his show to talk about censorship. Fridman said this: “Science is the striving of the human mind to understand and solve the problems of the world, but as an institution, it is susceptible to flaws of human nature, to fear, to greed, power, and ego.” To reduce uncertainty about the best solutions to COVID, Fridman argues, “No voices should have been silenced, no ideas left off the table. Open data, open science, open scientific communication, and debate is the way, not censorship.”

Censors claim the moral high road; they assure us they are coercing others for our own good. Fridman dismantles their authoritarian hubris: “There are a lot of ideas out there that are bad, wrong, dangerous. But the moment we have the hubris to say we know which ideas those are is the moment we lose our ability to find the truth, to find solutions.” The conversation he had with Weinstein is larger than Weinstein’s ideas. Fridman warns that at stake is “the very freedom to talk, to think, to share ideas.” Fridman believes, “This freedom is our only hope.”

Censorship distorts decision-making and destroys hope. For some, COVID is a matter of life or death. Censorship challenges our ability to make responsible health choices for ourselves and those in our care.

In 1644 John Milton wrote, “He who destroys a good book, kills reason itself.” Today, acknowledge the destructive consequences of censorship. Speak out now or we risk allowing Big Tech’s algorithms and community guidelines to continue to destroy reason, hinder science, and undermine hope for humanity.

Reprinted with permission from the American Institute of Economic Research


  american institute for economic research, anthony fauci, cdc, censorship, covid-19 origins, dark horse podcast, fda, media control, myocarditis, vaccine side effects

Blogs

EXCLUSIVE: Fr. Altman reacts to bishop suspending his priestly faculties

Ever since Bishop Callahan asked Altman to resign in late May, this was expected.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:44 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Father James Altman spoke with me in an interview for The John-Henry Westen Show, on the same day that Bishop William Patrick Callahan sent the priest a note via FedEx informing him that he had been removed as pastor. On Thursday, Fr. Altman was also told that his priestly faculties are indefinitely suspended.

He gave his reaction to these latest developments exclusively to LifeSite, and described the steps he will be taking to keep fighting for the faithful.

Ever since Callahan had asked Altman to resign in late May, and he refused, his sacking and the removal of his faculties was expected.

Fr. Altman describes how people all around the world called him to express their support and concerns. He points out that he has experienced complete peace in spite of the situation. He states that he continues to pray for the bishop, saying “I would actually pray that good things happen” to him.

Nevertheless, Father Altman highlights with clarity and truth “the evil” of taking away his priestly faculties to offer Mass, and administer the sacraments. He says that “it's diabolical [that] I can't celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass publicly,” and that Bishop Callahan is denying the faithful food for their souls.

Reiterating his motivation for speaking in defense of the faithful ever since his viral video “You Cannot Be A Catholic and A Democrat” first came out, Fr. Altman states how this latest move is once again an “interference with the feeding of of God's children, which is through Word and through the Sacrament.”

He says that with canon lawyers, he is appealing this decision, and will not give into intimidation, nor will he stop fighting and speaking boldly for the people.

Altman adds, “I have the heart of a pastor [and] I have the heart of a father,” and that he will follow and trust God and where God leads him.

Please pray for Father Altman, that Our Lord will give him wisdom and fortitude to continue being a voice of truth.

Contact information for respectful communication:

Catholic Diocese of LaCrosse
Bishop William Callahan
3710 East Avenue South
P.O. Box 4004
La Crosse, WI 54602-4004
United States
+1 (608) 788-7700

Very Rev. William Dhein, Msgr. Michael J. Gorman, and Msgr. Joseph Diermeier, Vicars General
+1 (608) 791-2655

Rev. Woodrow Pace, Vicar for Clergy
+1 (608) 791-2652

Online contact form

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.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please visit our website.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.


  catholic, father altman, father james altman, james altman, john-henry westen, john-henry westen show, the john-henry westen show, william callahan

Blogs

Pope’s appointment of new synod’s general relator points to his support of German Synodal Path

Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, S.J. is known to support the idea of ordaining married men as priests and of being open to the idea of female “priests.”
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 6:01 pm EST
Featured Image
VATICAN NEWS / YOUTUBE
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

July 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – On July 8, the Vatican announced that Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, S.J. as the general relator of the upcoming 2023 Synod of Bishops on Synodality. The Archbishop of Luxembourg is known to support the idea of ordaining married men as priests and of being open to the idea of female “priests.” Since he is also an open supporter of the controversial German Synodal Path, this papal appointment gives us an idea of where Pope Francis wishes to lead the Universal Church during her upcoming two-year-long synodal process.

In September of last year, the prelate expressed “great respect” for the German Synodal Path “because one dares to ask very large questions.” These questions, he then added, had to be asked.

Further expounding on the German Synodal Path’s themes – which include blessings for homosexual couples, female “ordination,” and married priests – he showed himself open to the idea of “ordaining” women to the priesthood. He stated: “I do not say that they have to become female priests; this I simply do not know. But I am open to it.”

Shortly before he was made a cardinal by Pope Francis in 2019, Hollerich also showed himself to be open to the married priesthood. When speaking to journalists before the Amazon Synod – which discussed possibly ordaining married men – Hollerich stated that it was a great problem that there are entire regions in the Amazon which cannot celebrate the Holy Eucharist.

“When here the ‘viri probati’ [morally proven married men] are a solution, why not?” he added.

Hollerich is currently the president of the Commission of the Bishops' Conferences of the European Union (COMECE).

His role as the general relator at the upcoming 2023 Synod of Bishops with the theme “For a synodal Church: communion, participation and mission” is going to be a crucial one. Not only will he make a presentation at the beginning of the Synod, he will also write the final document.

At the 2019 Amazon Synod, the general relator was Cardinal Claudio Hummes; he played a very strong role and pushed for married priests.

The Pope's decision to appoint now Cardinal Hollerich for the upcoming Synod of Bishops on Synodality will increase the concern of many observers who fear that Pope Francis plans to transfer the controversial and heterodox discussion of the Catholic Church in Germany to the Universal Church. And these concerns are not unfounded: According to the head of the German bishops, Bishop Georg Bätzing, the Pope told him at a private audience on June 24 of this year that he hopes that the German bishops will “help shape” the synodal path of the Universal Church.

This is the more troublesome inasmuch as Cardinal Gerhard Müller, in a recent statement sent to LifeSite, insisted that the agenda of the German Synodal Path “is diametrically opposed to the Catholic faith in form and content.”


  catholic, pope francis, synod on synodality, synodal path

Blogs

Gay Men’s Chorus sings ‘We’ll convert your children, we’re coming for them.’ They’re serious.

These are not victims of a heteronormative society pleading for acceptance or to be left alone; This song, published on social media on the day after ‘pride’ month ended, is a victory lap and a final shot across the bow.
Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 10:45 am EST
Featured Image
Gay Men's Chorus of San Francisco YouTube / screenshot
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

July 8, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Although the composer and lyricist of the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus controversial performance of a song – now universally known as “We’ll convert your children, we’re coming for them” – declare that their song is a parody, the message is loud and clear: We’ve conquered, we’re unstoppable.   

This is not parody. This is about the political power that LGBT forces have amassed, overwhelming every aspect of American culture.     

These are not victims of a heteronormative society pleading for acceptance or to be left alone; this song, published on social media on July 1 – the day after “pride” month ended – is both a victory lap and a final shot across the bow.  

These are arrogant conquerors who, despite their after-the-fact protestations, are letting it be known that the rainbow flag has been firmly planted in American culture, eviscerating science, nature, and morality by rejecting the immutable truth of complementarity. 

We have a message for you:  

You think that we’ll corrupt your kids, if our agenda goes unchecked. 

Fine. Just this once, you’re correct: We’ll convert your children … There’s really no escaping it.

Why would they unselfconsciously declare “There’s really no escaping it?”  

Because it’s true. Activist homosexuals and transgenders have ostensibly won this war.  

  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in the public school they attend. Most teachers, administrators, school boards and teachers unions are 100% on the side of LGBT political forces. They are purveyors of LGBT propaganda. Teachers who dare to refuse to call a girl a boy or a boy a girl swiftly lose their jobs.
  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism at the local public library: Drag Queen Story Hour is intended to accustom young children to men dressed in garish women’s clothing, erasing the clear lines drawn in your child’s head between male and female. One drag queen has said that exposing children to drag queens is no different than exposing them to strippers or porn stars.
  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in children’s TV entertainment – Disney now features gay, lesbian, and “non-binary” characters, as do the Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, and PBS. As Family Research Council President Tony Perkins has noted, “producers seem dead set on turning wholesome, family-friendly stories into a weapon of indoctrination.” Check out: Adventure Time (Cartoon Network), DuckTales (Disney), My Little Pony (Discovery Family), Arthur (PBS), The Loud House (Nickelodeon), Clarence (Cartoon Network), She-Ra and the Princesses of Power (DreamWorks), Andi Mack (Disney), Steven Universe (Cartoon Network), Star vs. the Forces of Evil (Disney XD), and Gravity Falls (Disney).
  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in sports. Every single NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB team hosts “pride” events and sells “pride” shirts, hats, and other items emblazoned with rainbow enhanced team logos. The Washington Nationals have spotlighted a homosexual “marriage” proposal during a game, and the NFL has now declared that “football is gay.”
  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in corporate America, because nearly every major U.S. and global corporation has jumped on the pro-sodomy and gender confusion bandwagon. Over 1,100 companies participated in the most recent LGBTQ Corporate Equality Index survey conducted by LGBTQ lobbying powerhouse, the Human Rights Campaign. A total of 767 companies received perfect scores.
  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in the U.S. military, where an emphasis on sexual orientation and gender identity is taking precedence over military readiness.  
  • Your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in the United States government, because the president, his cabinet, and our Democrat-run Congress are controlled by LGBT political forces, in the same way they are under the thumb of the abortion industry. 
  • And your kids can’t escape the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism in the Catholic Church because of the very confusing messages delivered by Father James Martin, SJ; major prelates such as Cardinals Cupich, Tobin, and Gregory (and many others); and Pope Francis himself.  

This song is a warning to Christians, and to all reasoning men and women: An all-out assault on complementarity has been going on for many years and, despite having gained much ground, ceded by our courts, legislatures, and many important social institutions, the LGBT lobby is not through. They will not stop until sodomy reigns over Christianity and other religions, and the differences between male and female are erased.  

Their prime target for propaganda is children. Keep in mind: One last frontier they have yet to conquer is adult-child or adolescent sex, but it is within their sights and there are plenty of men outside the LGBT world who would also like to see legal prohibitions against pederasty and pedophilia lifted. 

The American Conservative’s Rod Dreher has already noted:

The contempt these men show towards parents who don’t think like them is at the heart of this. The taunting that says, whatever your religious beliefs, we are going to steal the hearts and minds of your children, and there is nothing you hicks can do to stop us. It gives the game away. It gives the game away for them, and for all their corporate allies.

Dreher is correct in that the song “gives the game away,” but I think that was the intention all along. They are unafraid. They are proud. And they are determined to do precisely what they sang about.  

I am a former member of the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, D.C. who cringes at the lyrics – the battle cry – of this song. Don’t dismiss it. Don’t forget it. Don’t let them try to send it down the memory hole.  


  gay men's chorus of san francisco, homosexuality, pedophilia, transgenderism

Featured Image

Episodes Fri Jul 9, 2021 - 4:42 pm EST

Catholic universities are ‘no longer Catholic’ if they mandate abortion-tainted vaccines

By Mother Miriam
By

In today's episode, Mother Miriam talks about how COVID has led to more government control of the human race with fear.

 

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate: https://give.lifesitenews.com/sustainlife?utm_source=mml_070921

 

You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page: http://FB.com/mothermiriamlive

 

Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live at: http://bit.ly/submml