Wisconsin Parents Tell Joe Biden To Stuff Masking Their Children Where The Sun Don’t Shine: ‘These Are Not Your Children’

Moms will save this country. G-d willing.

‘These Are Not Your Children’: Wisconsin Parents Tell Joe Biden To Stuff Masking Their Children Where The Sun Don’t Shine

By: Jordan Davidson, July 31, 2021:

Nearly 40 advocacy groups representing more than 20,000 families in Wisconsin ripped into President Joe Biden and Democrat Gov. Tony Evers for the new wave of potential mask mandates and lockdowns facing their state.

In the letter, organizations including We The Parents, Wisconsin United for Freedom, and No Left Turn in Education Wisconsin pledge to reject any mask requirements on children in schools

“Simply put, these are not your children. They are ours and they too, are Americans with rights. They are our responsibility and our most beloved. They are not yours,” the letter states.

The parents also said they would refuse to allow the government “to use your private sector counterparts to enforce invasive mask mandates on our children in various stores or at community activities” and “subject our children to any further local, regional, or national lockdowns or movement restriction.”

“We have watched the last week unfold in abject horror – observing our government institutions and leaders failing our children at every turn, again,” the letter continues. “Your renewed calls for lockdowns, enforced mask mandates, and masking in schools is not rooted in science and is objectively cruel to the most vulnerable in our society, our children. We believe that you are in fact aware of this and continue to play political games with our children, despite our efforts to work with you over the last twelve months.”

Just this week, the Biden administration endorsed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s newest mask recommendations for vaccinated Americans. Some schools in Wisconsin were already planning on requiring face coverings for everyone even before the most recent CDC decision. Now, the state’s health department is doubling down to back the CDC’s flip-flop and encourage children as young as two years old to mask up.

“We must protect our children as they head back to school this fall, along with all other Wisconsinites who are at an increased risk for being hospitalized from COVID-19. Vaccines and the additional protection from wearing masks are the best combination of tools to achieve this goal,” Wisconsin Department of Health Services Secretary Julie Willems Van Dijk said.

While Biden also threatened another round of lockdowns and Evers is known to go back on all of his pandemic promises, the parents said they refuse to give up their parental choice.

“We are strong. We are united. We are in control. We have never and will never co-parent with the government,” the letter concludes.

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Medical Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

Democrats take a wrecking ball to yet another venerated field of science rendering it …… a tragic joke.

Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

Professors are apologizing for saying ‘male’ and ‘female.’ Students are policing teachers. This is what it looks like when activism takes over medicine.

By: Katie Herzog, July 27, 2021:

Today we bring you another installment of Katie Herzog’s ongoing series about the spread of woke ideology in the field of medicine. Her first story focused on the ideological purge at the top medical schools and teaching hospitals in the country. “Wokeness,” as one doctor put it, “feels like an existential threat.”

Katie’s latest reporting illustrates some of the most urgent elements of that threat. It focuses on how biological sex is being denied by professors fearful of being smeared by their students as transphobic. And it shows how the true victims of that denial are not sensitive medical students but patients, perhaps most importantly, transgender ones. 

Some of you may find Katie’s story shocking and disconcerting and perhaps even maddening. You might also ask yourself: How has it come to this? How has this radical ideology gone from the relatively obscure academic fringe to the mainstream in such a short time?

Those are among the questions that motivate this newsletter. We feel obligated to chronicle in detail and in primary accounts the takeover of our institutions by this ideology — and the consequences of it. 

So far, it has taken root in some of our leading medical schools. Some. Not all. But I’m left thinking: What state will American medicine — or any other American institution —  find itself in after being routed by this ideology?  

If you think reporting like Katie Herzog’s is important I hope you’ll support us by subscribing here.

— BW


During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture to apologize for something he’d said at the beginning of class.

“I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it,” the physician says in a recording provided by a student in the class (whom I’ll call Lauren). “Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.”

His offense: using the term “pregnant women.”

“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”

It wasn’t the first time Lauren had heard an instructor apologize for using language that, to most Americans, would seem utterly inoffensive. Words like “male” and “female.”

Why would medical school professors apologize for referring to a patient’s biological sex? Because, Lauren explains, in the context of her medical school “acknowledging biological sex can be considered transphobic.”

When sex is acknowledged by her instructors, it’s sometimes portrayed as a social construct, not a biological reality, she says. In a lecture on transgender health, an instructor declared: “Biological sex, sexual orientation, and gender are all constructs. These are all constructs that we have created.”

In other words, some of the country’s top medical students are being taught that humans are not, like other mammals, a species comprising two sexes. The notion of sex, they are learning, is just a man-made creation.

The idea that sex is a social construct may be interesting debate fodder in an anthropology class. But in medicine, the material reality of sex really matters, in part because the refusal to acknowledge sex can have devastating effects on patient outcomes.

In 2019, the New England Journal of Medicine reported the case of a 32-year-old transgender man who went to an ER complaining of abdominal pain. While the patient disclosed he was transgender, his medical records did not. He was simply a man. The triage nurse determined that the patient, who was obese, was in pain because he’d stopped taking a medication meant to relieve hypertension. This was no emergency, she decided. She was wrong: The patient was, in fact, pregnant and in labor. By the time hospital staff realized that, it was too late. The baby was dead. And the patient, despite his own shock at being pregnant, was shattered.

Professors Running Scared of Students

To Dana Beyer, a trans activist in Maryland who is also a retired surgeon, such stories illustrate how vital it is that sex, not just gender identity — how someone perceives their gender — is taken into consideration in medicine. “The practice of medicine is based in scientific reality, which includes sex, but not gender,” Beyer says. “The more honest a patient is with their physician, the better the odds for a positive outcome.”

The denial of sex doesn’t help anyone, perhaps least of all transgender patients who require special treatment. But, Lauren says, instructors who discuss sex risk complaints from their students — which is why, she thinks, many don’t. “I think there’s a small percentage of instructors who are true believers. But most of them are probably just scared of their students,” she says.

And for good reason. Her medical school hosts an online forum in which students correct their instructors for using terms like “male” and “female” or “breastfeed” instead of “chestfeed.” Students can lodge their complaints in real time during lectures. After one class, Lauren says, she heard that a professor was so upset by students calling her out for using “male” and “female” that she started crying.

Then there are the petitions. At the beginning of the year, students circulated a number of petitions designed to, as Lauren puts it, “name and shame” instructors for “wrongspeak.”

One was delivered after a lecture on chromosomal disorders in which the professor used the pronouns “she” and “her” as well as the terms “father” and “son,” all of which, according to the students, are “cisnormative.” After the petition was delivered, the instructor emailed the class, noting that while she had consulted with a member of the school’s LGBTQ Committee prior to the lecture, she was sorry for using such “binary” language. Another petition was delivered after an instructor referred to “a man changing into a woman,” which, according to the students, incorrectly assumed that the trans woman wasn’t always a woman. But, as Lauren points out, “if trans women were born women, why would they need to transition?”

This phenomenon — of students policing teachers; of students being treated as the authorities over and above their teachers — has had consequences.

“Since the petitions were sent out, instructors have been far more proactive about ‘correcting’ their slides in advance or sending out emails to the school listserv if any upcoming material has ‘outdated’ terminology,” Lauren tells me. “At first, compliance is demanded from outside, and eventually the instructors become trained to police their own language proactively.”

In one point in the semester, a faculty member sent out a preemptive email warning students about forthcoming lectures containing language that doesn’t align with the school’s “approach to gender inclusivity and gender/sex antioppression.” That language included the term “premenopausal women.” In the future, the professor promised, this would be updated to “premenopausal people.”

Lauren also says young doctors are being taught to declare their pronouns upon meeting patients and ask for patients’ pronouns in return. This was echoed by a recent graduate of Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. “Everything was about pronouns,” the student said. The student objected to this, thinking most patients would be confused or offended by a doctor asking them what their pronouns were, but she never said so — at least not publicly. “It was impossible to push back without worrying about getting expelled,” she told me.

This hypersensitivity is undermining medical training. And many of these students are likely not even aware that their education is being informed by ideology.

“Take abdominal aortic aneurysms,” Lauren says. “These are four times as likely to occur in males than females, but this very significant difference wasn’t emphasized. I had to look it up, and I don’t have the time to look up the sex predominance for the hundreds of diseases I’m expected to know. I’m not even sure what I’m not being taught, and unless my classmates are as skeptical as I am, they probably aren’t aware either.”

Other conditions that present differently and at different rates in males and females include hernias, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and asthma, among many others. Males and females also have different normal ranges for kidney function, which impacts drug dosage. They have different symptoms during heart attacks: males complain of chest pain, while women experience fatigue, dizziness, and indigestion. In other words: biological sex is a hugely important factor in knowing what ails patients and how to properly treat them.

Carole Hooven is the author of T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us and a professor at Harvard who focuses on behavioral endocrinology. I discussed Lauren’s story with her and Hooven found it deeply troubling. “Today’s students will go on to hold professional positions that give them a great deal of power over others’ bodies and minds. These young people are our future doctors, educators, researchers, statisticians, psychologists. To ignore or downplay the reality of sex and sex-based differences is to perversely handicap our understanding and our ability to increase human health and thriving.”

A former dean of a leading medical school agrees: “I don’t know the extent to which the stories you relate are now widespread in medical education, but to the extent that they are — and I hear some of this is popping up at my own institution — they are a serious departure from the expectation that medical education and practice should be based on science and be free from imposition of ideology and ideology-based intimidation.”

He added: “How male and female members of our species develop, how they differ genetically, anatomically, physiologically, and with respect to diseases and their treatment are foundational to clinical medicine and research. Efforts to erase or diminish these foundations should be unacceptable to responsible professional leaders.”

There is no doubt the rules are changing. According to the American Psychological Association, the terms “natal sex” and “birth sex,” for example, are now considered “disparaging”; the preferred term is “assigned sex at birth.” The National Institutes of Health, the CDC, and Harvard Medical School have all made efforts to divorce sex from medicine and emphasize gender identity.

When Asking Questions Can Destroy Your Career

While it’s unclear if this trend will remain limited to some medical schools, what is perfectly clear is that activism, specifically around issues of sex, gender, and race, is impacting scientific research and progress.

One of the most notorious examples is that of a physician and former associate professor at Brown University, Lisa Littman.

Around 2014, Littman began to notice a sudden uptick in female adolescents in her social network who were coming out as transgender boys. Until recently, the incidence of gender dysphoria was thought to be rare, affecting an estimated one in 10,000 people in the U.S. While the exact number of trans-identifying adolescents (or adults, for that matter) is unknown, in the last decade or so, the number of youth seeking treatment for gender dysphoria has spiked by over 1,000 percent in the U.S.; in the U.K., it’s jumped by 4,000 percent. The largest youth gender clinic in Los Angeles reportedly saw 1,000 patients in 2019. That same clinic, in 2009, saw about 80.

Curious about what was happening, Littman surveyed about 250 parents whose adolescent children had announced they were transgender — after never before exhibiting the symptoms of gender dysphoria. Over 80 percent of cases involved girls; many were part of friend groups in which half or more of the members had come out as trans. Littman coined the term “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” to describe this phenomenon. She posited that it might be a sort of social contagion, not unlike cutting or anorexia, both of which were endemic among teenage girls when I was in high school in the ’90s.

In August 2018, Littman published her results in a paper called “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Study of Parental Reports” in the journal PLOS One. Littman, the journal, and Brown University were pummeled with accusations of transphobia in the press and on social media. In response, the journal announced an investigation into Littman’s work. Several hours later, Brown University issued a press release denouncing the professor’s paper.

Littman’s paper was republished in March 2019 with an amended title and other minor, mostly cosmetic changes. The journal has since confirmed that, while the paper was “corrected,” the original version contained no false information.

But Littman’s career was forever altered. She no longer teaches at Brown. And her contract at the Rhode Island State Health Department wasn’t renewed.

Littman is hardly alone. Trans activists have also targeted Ray Blanchard and Ken Zucker in Toronto, Michael Bailey at Northwestern, and Stephen Gliske at the University of Michigan for publishing findings they deemed transphobic. In a recent case, trans activists shut down research that was to be conducted by UCLA psychiatrist Jamie Feusner, who had hoped to explore the physiological underpinnings of gender dysphoria.

Nor is this limited to academia. Journalists who question the new ideological orthodoxy, like Abigail Shrier and Jesse Singal (with whom I co-host a podcast), have also been smeared for their work. After the American Booksellers Association included Shrier’s book, Irreversible Damage, in a promotional mailing to bookstores, activists went ballistic, prompting the ABA’s CEO to apologize for having done “horrific harm” that “traumatized and endangered members of the trans community” and “caused violence and pain.”

I had a similar experience in 2017 after writing about de-transitioners — people who transition to a different gender and then transition back — for the Seattle alt-weekly The Stranger. After the piece came out, people put up flyers and stickers around Seattle calling me transphobic; someone burned stacks of the newspaper and sent me a video of it. I lost many friends, and later ended up moving out of the city in part because of the turmoil.

But far more concerning than the treatment of journalists chronicling this story is the treatment of patients themselves.

Patients Are Suffering

Julia Mason is a pediatrician in the Portland suburbs who, unlike most doctors I spoke to, allowed me to use her name. Mason explained that she works at a small private practice and her boss is a libertarian. In other words: she won’t get fired for being honest.

Mason has been practicing for over 25 years, but it wasn’t until 2015 that she saw her first transgender patient: a 15-year-old trans boy who Mason referred to a gender clinic, where the patient was prescribed testosterone.

Since that first patient, she says there have been about 10 more requests for referrals to gender clinics. As this number increased, Mason started wondering about the advice her patients are getting at these clinics.

“A 12-year-old female came to see me, and the dad told me that they went to a therapist, and in the first five minutes, the therapist was like, ‘Yep. He’s trans,’” she told me. “And then they went to a pediatric endocrinologist who recommended puberty blockers on the first visit.”

Mason generally avoids prescribing puberty blockers, which inhibit the development of secondary sex characteristics like breasts or facial hair. The reason, she says, is that because there have been no controlled studies on the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoric youth, the long term effects are still unknown. (In the U.K., a recent review of existing studies found that the quality of the evidence that puberty blockers are effective in relieving gender dysphoria and improving mental health is “very low.”)

In girls, Mason says, blockers inhibit breast development, but “you end up shorter, and the last thing a female who wants to look male needs is to be shorter.” Other side effects may include a loss of bone density, headache, fatigue, joint pain, hot flashes, mood swings and something called “brain fog.” In boys, blockers inhibit penis growth, which can make it harder for them to achieve orgasm and for surgeons to later construct those penises into “neo-vaginas,” a procedure known as vaginoplasty.

Trans activists often claim the effects of puberty blockers are fully reversible, but this remains unproven, and studies show that the overwhelming majority of teens who start on puberty blockers later take cross-sex hormones (testosterone for females and estrogen for males) to complete their transition. The combination of puberty blockers followed by hormones can cause sterility and other health problems, including sexual dysfunction, and the hormones must be taken for life — or until detransition. Little is known about their long-term effects. While the line that blockers are “fully reversible” is oft-repeated by activists and the media, last year, England’s National Health Service back-tracked this unsubstantiated claim on its website.

Mason is one of several doctors who voiced concerns about the fast-tracking of adolescents seeking to transition — and the new normal in the medical establishment, which seems to encourage that fast-tracking.

In 2018, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended that pediatricians “affirm” their patients’ chosen gender without taking into account mental health, family history, trauma, or fears of puberty. The AAP recommendations say nothing about the many consequences, physical and psychological, of transitioning. So perhaps it is not surprising that surgeons are performing double mastectomies, or “top surgery,” on patients as young as 13.

One leading clinician, Diane Ehrensaft, has said that children as young as three have the cognitive ability to come out as transgender. And the University of California San Francisco Child and Adolescent Gender Center Clinic, where Ehrensaft is the mental health director, has helped kids of that age transition socially.

But not all clinicians have cheered these developments. In a paper responding to the AAP guidelines, James Cantor, a clinical psychologist in Toronto, noted that “every follow-up study of [gender dysphoric] children, without exception, found the same thing: By puberty, the majority of GD children ceased to want to transition.” Other studies of gender-clinic patients, stretching back to the 1970s, have found that 60 to 90 percent of patients eventually grow out of their gender dysphoria; most come out as gay or lesbian.

In an email to me, Cantor said: “The deafening silence from AAP when asked about the evidence allegedly supporting their trans policy is hard to interpret as anything other than their ‘pleading the 5th,’ as you in the U.S. put it.”

Erica Anderson, a clinical psychologist at the UCSF Child and Adolescent Gender Center Clinic and a trans woman herself, also voiced skepticism about the AAP’s approach to would-be transitioners. Unlike Mason, Anderson says withholding puberty blockers from dysphoric children is “cruel.” But she is suspicious of the sharp spike in young people, and especially young women. While she doesn’t like phrases like “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” or “social contagion,” she said something is definitely going on.

“What makes us think that gender is the one exception to peer influence?” she told me. “For 100 years, psychology has acknowledged that adolescence is a time of experimentation and exploration. It’s normal. I’m not alarmed by that. What I’m alarmed by is some medical and psychological professionals rushing kids into taking blockers or hormones.”

Because Anderson has been so vocal, including a recent 60 Minutes appearance in which she discussed detransitioners, she regularly gets calls from frantic parents. She told me she’d gotten off the phone with the parents of a 17-year-old who had announced that they were trans and wanted hormones. “It’s alarming to these parents,” Anderson said.

Anderson isn’t opposed to pediatric transition when patients are properly diagnosed, but she wants to see more individualized care rather than the activist-driven, one-size-fits-all approach. That, however, goes against current AAP guidelines.

Will Science Prevail?

Medicine is not impervious to trends.

“In the 90s, when I was training, everything was about controlling pain,” said a pediatrician in the Midwest who declined to be named for fear of repercussions. “We were taught that it was really hard to become addicted to narcotics. Look where that got us.”

Around the same time, she says, there was a rash of kids being diagnosed with bipolar disorder, something we now know is exceedingly rare in children. Before that, there was the recovered memory craze, multiple personality disorder, and rebirthing therapy, a bizarre treatment for attachment disorders that lead to the deaths of several children in the U.S. So how does this happen?

“Some idea will get picked up by major medical associations that put out reports and their members turn to those instead of the actual literature,” this pediatrician said. “And when you get too far ahead of the research, that’s when you get into trouble. That’s what’s happening now.”

For her part, Lauren, the medical student in California, is both hopeful for the future — and not. “On the one hand, I have this idea that the truth will eventually come out and science will ultimately prevail,” she said.

But the difference between things like rebirthing therapy or multiple personality disorder and the new gender ideology is that the latter is portrayed as a civil rights movement. “It seems virtuous. It seems like the right thing to do,” she said. “So how can you fight against something that’s being marketed as a fight for human rights?”

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Georgetown’s Bridge Initiative: Manufactured ‘Islamophobia’

Georgetown University’s Bridge Initiative, a project of its Saudi-founded Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU), claims it exists to combat the pernicious spread of “Islamophobia.” ACMCU’s June 30 webinar featuring former Bridge research fellow Jordan Denari Duffner offered further evidence that Bridge’s real mission is to depict all Muslims as victims and silence critical commentary on Islam. Like the term “Islamophobia” itself, Bridge exists to end, rather than advance, debate.

Bridge senior research fellow Mobashra Tazamal interviewed Denari Duffner about her recently published book, Islamophobia: What Christians Should Know (and Do) about Anti-Muslim Discrimination. Currently a Georgetown doctoral student in theological and religious studies, she has a long history of erroneous statements concerning Islamic doctrine. Now she worries that Christians “only see kind of negative manifestations of Islam in the media” and “are not aware of all the ways that Muslims are doing good for them” — virtues she never elucidated.

Denari Duffner condemned past New York City police surveillance of Muslim neighborhoods and individuals, including Asad Dandia, who led a “Muslim charity group.” Yet American police have used similar techniques in ethnoreligious communities to find criminal elements, such as the Italian mafia. Foreign police forces also regularly surveil radical mosques.

The New York City program “was basically created with the premise that Muslims are inherently suspect; that Muslims are prone to violence, are seditious,” Denari Duffner said, as if Muslim communities could not be legitimate targets of policy scrutiny. “Some of these programs around the country actually are looking to stir up trouble” with “entrapment, luring Muslims into committing crimes that can then be charged for terrorism,” she claimed. Yet such “sting” operations are again a normal law enforcement tool, no less necessary for catching criminally minded individuals when dealing with jihad terrorism than any other crime.

”‘Islamophobia’ brings the Right and the Left together,” Denari Duffner lamented. Progressives “have made some of the most anti-Muslim comments that I have ever heard,” she elaborated, while failing to acknowledge that Islam sparks controversies apparent to people from diverse backgrounds. “So much of our self-definition as Western people is contingent on having this view of Muslims as the opposite of whatever we see ourselves to be,” she stated, “as progressive and supportive of women’s rights, and democratic and peaceful.”

To exemplify this “Islamophobia” across the political spectrum, Denari Duffner highlighted the collaboration between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Robert Spencer. Ali, a “former Muslim who gained a huge following in a lot of liberal circles,” is often “talking about the ills of Islam to your NPR audience,” Denari Duffner said.

Denari Duffner further displayed her superficiality when discussing Spencer, an authority on Islam and bestselling author. Using sweeping comments she condemns in others, she claimed Spencer operates “in these neocon circles,” a common euphemism for Jewish intellectuals. Moreover, Spencer has consistently criticized neoconservative democratic regime change strategies in Muslim-majority countries like Iraq.

Spencer was again mentioned in the discussion over what Tazamal called the “Catholic wing of the ‘Islamophobia’ industry,” as the Catholic Denari Duffner had analyzed. Before leaving the Catholic Church, Spencer “for many years was writing specifically for Catholics,” Denari Duffner stated. She also criticized the Turning Point Project of the Catholic William Kilpatrick, an insightful former Boston College professor, which works “to basically freak Catholics out about Islam,” she said.

Denari Duffner tried to downplay centuries of jihadist assaults upon Christian communities that eradicated Christianity from its historic homeland in the Middle East. “We often see ourselves with these rose-colored glasses,” she said, acknowledging that “both sides have harmed one another but have also done tremendous good for the other.”

This pollyannaish view of Islam undergirds Denari Duffner’s broader claim to “actively debunk stereotypical or untrue claims made about Islam.” She asserted that “Muslims are just as indigenous to India as Hindus,” a blatantly ahistorical claim given that Muslim conquerors subjugated India after many centuries of Hindu preeminence. Breezily overlooking troublesome Islamic doctrines like wife-beating, she dismissed that some “Muslim men have a penchant for being oppressive to women” as a view that reduces “Muslims to dehumanized, threatening people.”

Supposedly behind all this “Islamophobia,” as Tazamal quoted ominously from Denari Duffner’s book, are “nefarious forces” that are “propped up by industry and imperialism.” People “warp these terms” like “sharia” or “jihad,” Tazamal asserted without evidence, “to justify violence or discriminatory policies against Muslim communities.” Denari Duffner concurred about an “intentional marginalization of a community so that another community can benefit.”

“Anti-Muslim tropes are tools that governments can use,” Denari Duffner stated, as if jihadist threats are figments of imagination. For Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, “whenever he wanted to try to delegitimize the opposition, they were cast as terrorists,” she stated. But studies have documented the presence of jihadists among Assad’s opposition.

Likewise, “Israel is able to justify its policy of dominance of the Palestinians,” Denari Duffner said, as “Palestinians are the quintessential terrorist Muslims” for Israelis and others. Such sympathy for the Palestinians whitewashes the jihad they and other Muslims have waged against Zionism and Israel. Yet she asserted that Israel gets a “blank check to do whatever they want.”

An uncritical approach to Islam undercuts Denari Duffner’s belief that interactions with Muslims will end “Islamophobia.” “I have had such positive experiences getting to know Muslims as classmates in college, and if everyone could have this experience, then this problem of ‘Islamophobia’ would go away,” she once assumed. Unlike her, however, many others base their worldviews on empirical facts rather than fantasy. Thus, she has come to realize that “‘Islamophobia’ isn’t going to go away if people simply get to know Muslims.”

Denari Duffner combines a willful blindness toward all things Islamic with an ahistorical, highly critical approach to the West in general and Christianity in particular. It is a virtue to see the humanity of others, but it is the job of the scholar to tell the truth regardless of the cost. In finding fault primarily with her own kind while denying inconvenient facts about the “Other,” Denari-Duffner rejects this key academic obligation. Legislators, policymakers, theologians, and others should reject Georgetown’s peddlers of “Islamophobia” for what they are: charlatans undermining the West’s ability to define and defend itself.

COLUMN BY

Andrew E. Harrod, a Middle East Forum Campus Watch Fellow, freelance researcher, and writer, is a fellow with the Lawfare Project. Follow him on Twitter: @AEHarrod. This article is crossposted from The American Spectator.

RELATED ARTICLES:

2,000 Muslim migrants gather in northern France, ready to cross English Channel into UK

Pakistani Taliban top dog: Taliban victory in Afghanistan is victory for the entire Muslim people in the world

Iran says jihad ‘suicide drone’ on oil tanker was revenge for Israeli airstrike on military airport in Syria

Iraq: Islamic State jihadis open fire on funeral procession, murder 13 people, injure 45

Niger: Muslims murder 19 civilians in jihad raid on village

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

Goal of Critical Race Theory Is to Set Up ‘Dictatorship of the Anti-Racists’

Culture critic Dr. James Lindsay, author of Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity–and Why This Harms Everybodytold Breitbart News last weekend that the goal of Critical Race Theory (CRT) is to set up a “dictatorship of the anti-racists” in the same way Karl Marx wanted to set up a dictatorship of the proletariat.

Lindsay defined Critical Race Theory as “the belief that systemic racism was created by white people to be the fundamental organizing principle of society”: “In other words, they think about race and racism the same way that the Marxists thought about capitalism — [that] it’s the fundamental superstructure that organizes all of society.

“And everything has to be thought about on those terms, everything has to be thought about in terms of the power dynamics generated by race and racism, just the same way that Marx thought about the power dynamics created by the bourgeoisie and capitalism,” he added

“White people or ‘whiteness’ becomes the mark of the bourgeoisie, it’s exactly the same ideology,” Lindsay explained of CRT. “Critical Race Theory is trying to build a dictatorship of the anti-racists to march us through a ‘racial socialism,’ into an ‘equity’ phase that’s a racial communism,” in the same way “Marx was looking to build a dictator of the proletariat to march us through socialism as a transitional stage to communism.”

Lindsay also warned that CRT champion and intellectual fraud Ibram X. Kendi “wants to build a department of anti-racism that’s above the branches of government, backed by a constitutional amendment that gives it absolute authority.”

“Dictatorship of the anti-racists. That’s what the goal of Critical Race Theory is,” Lindsay warned.


Critical Race Theory

5 Known Connections

Founded by the late Derrick Bell, critical race theory is an academic discipline which maintains that society is divided along racial lines into (white) oppressors and (black) victims, similar to the way Marxism frames the oppressor/victim dichotomy along class lines. Critical race theory contends that America is permanently racist to its core, and that consequently the nation’s legal structures are, by definition, racist and invalid. As Emory University professor Dorothy Brown puts it, critical race theory “seeks to highlight the ways in which the law is not neutral and objective but designed to support white supremacy and the subordination of people of color.”

To learn more about Critical Race Theory, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

FORCED SCHOOL MASK MANDATE: ‘It Isn’t Based In Science’

Florida Governor  Ron DeSantis’ Office Blasts CDC Over K-12 In-School Mask Edict.


DOOCY: “If vaccines work — then why do people who have the vaccine now need to wear masks?”


Children are the least susceptible to COVID and the most vulnerable to panic mongering. There is been a spike in suicide attempts in children under the age of thirteen. “Rates of suicidal ideation are highest among youth,” a 2020 report stated. A large Brown University study show mask mandates are NOT associated with reduced infection among students or staff.

As Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch pointed out,

“Anyone who promotes wearing masks to control spread of coronavirus is doing so without scientific basis. There is no “Fauci standard” study that masks work — or that mask mandates work. To require children to wear them in school is abusive.”

They’re telling everyone, vaccinated or not, to wear masks (Washington Post). Many Republican governors are telling the CDC and the Biden Administration they are nuts (Fox News). From Erielle Davidson: Wear a mask for 15 days. For a month. For the summer. For the year. Now–for the next year. Time to say enough. The risk to kids 14 and under is virtually non-existent (Twitter). From Arizona Governor Doug Ducey: Arizona does not allow mask mandates, vaccine mandates, vaccine passports or discrimination in schools based on who is or isn’t vaccinated. We’ve passed all of this into law, and it will not change (Twitter). From Mark Hemingway: That makes three GOP govs on record that I’ve seen basically telling the CDC to shove it (Twitter). From Nikki Haley: Stop the madness. Don’t ask people to get vaccines and then punish them by taking their rights away. Punishing kids and well meaning adults is abusive at best (Twitter). From Marc Thiessen: The data is clear: According to the CDC, as of July 19, a grand total of 4,072 vaccinated Americans had been hospitalized with symptomatic breakthrough infections, out of more than 161 million who have been fully vaccinated. That is a breakthrough hospitalization rate of less than 0.003 percent. Better still, of those hospitalized, only 849 have died of covid-19. That means the death rate from those breakthrough infections is 0.0005 percent. To put that in perspective, your chance of dying from a lightning strike is .0007 percent, and your chance of dying from a seasonal flu is 0.1 percent. If you’re vaccinated, you have a much greater chance of dying from a hornet, wasp or bee string, a dog attack, a car crash, drowning, sunstroke, or choking on food than you do of dying from covid-19 (Washington Post).

‘It Isn’t Based In Science’: DeSantis’s Office Blasts CDC Over K-12 In-School Mask Guidelines

By  Daily Wire • Jul 27, 2021:

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s office blasted the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tuesday for suggesting that all individuals in K-12 schools should wear face masks regardless of whether they’ve been vaccinated, castigating the agency for what he called an unscientific approach to the COVID-19 virus.

The CDC revised its guidelines for mask-wearing on Tuesday, announcing that, in light of the spread of the COVID-19 Delta variant, it was returning to recommending indoor mask-wearing, even for vaccinated individuals, if they are living in areas where COVID-19 cases are spiking. The CDC also recommended that, in order to return to full-time in-person instruction, all individuals in K-12 institutions mask up, even if they are fully vaccinated.

DeSantis’s spokesperson criticized the latter approach, rebuking the CDC and reiterating the Florida governor’s long-held position, opposing mask mandates for children.

“It isn’t based in science. There is no indication that areas with mask mandates have performed any better than areas without mask mandates. In fact, this policy could actually backfire,” DeSantis press secretary Christina Pushaw told Fox News on Tuesday.

“Mandating masks for vaccinated people erodes public trust and confidence in the effectiveness of the vaccines. To me it appears that the government wants to be perceived as ‘doing something’ during a seasonal infection surge, even if their policy does not necessarily make people safer,’” Pushaw added.

DeSantis himself has been vocally opposed to mandating masks for children who attend school in person, telling a roundtable event on Monday that “our view” is that “this should absolutely not be imposed.”

“I think our fear is that seeing some of those rumblings, that there be an attempt from the federal level or even some of these organizations to try to push for mandatory masking of school children. And so our view is that this should absolutely not be imposed,” DeSantis said at the event. “It should not be mandated.”

“[I]n Florida, at this point, our school districts have proposed the mask [as] optional,” DeSantis noted. He even went so far as to say that the Florida legislature is “interested in coming in, even in a special session to be able to provide protections for parents and kids who just want to breathe freely and don’t want to be suffering under these masks during the school year.”

As the Daily Wire noted earlier Tuesday, the CDC appears to have followed recommendations made by the nation’s largest teachers unions — the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association — in suggesting that “everyone in K-12 schools wear a mask, regardless of their vaccination status,” per CNN.

AFT president Randi Weingarten, who reportedly had a direct influence on CDC policy regarding a return to classrooms for in-person instruction, according to Fox News, has continued “to push for face masks to be worn in schools,” per Newsweek, even though nearly 90% of teachers who belong to the AFT are vaccinated.

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Fourth Graders in Minnesota Told Not to Tell Parents About Racist, Anti-White Training In School

What parent, what mom, will stand by while their children were abused and radicalized?

Fourth Graders in Minnesota Told Not to Tell Parents About Anti-White ‘Survey’

Fourth graders at a school in St. Cloud, Minnesota, have been told not to tell their parents about the racist, anti-white training at school.
By Warner Todd Huston, Flag and Cross, July 26, 2021:According to reports, fourth graders at a school in St. Cloud, Minnesota, have been told not to tell their parents about the racist, anti-white training they are getting at school. Lids were told to stay mum about an “equity survey” they were required to fill out that informs the white kids about how racist they all are. Per Fox News:According to a video uploaded by Alphanews, when students didn’t understand some of the survey questions, they were told by a teacher in the Sartell-St. Stephen School District to not repeat the survey questions to their parents.

“The survey asked questions that some students didn’t understand. Even after hearing an explanation from their teacher, some still couldn’t comprehend the survey questions,” The Center Square reported.

The George Floyd incident sparked a nationwide conversation on race and the role of policing. School districts across America are pushing critical race theory on students to attempt to contextualize current events on matters of race.

The parents found out, anyway, though. And they are none too happy about their kids being exposed to the woke anti-whit critical race theory curriculum.

Kelsey Yasgar said that although parents were “informed that the equity audit was taking place, they were not informed on the date of the activity and not given other details.” She explained further that due to the lack of transparency from the school district and from Equity Alliance Minnesota, the third party that administered the survey, parents were not informed of the questions being asked to the students.

Yasgar was “very upset” when her daughter told her that she was instructed by teachers not to repeat any of the questions being asked of them.

“I do want to say though I believe that this wasn’t a single case that her teacher made this decision. We had been informed that this came down from the administration and Equity Alliance of Minnesota instructed them to make sure the children did not share this information with their parents and that should pose a great concern in any parents’ eyes,” Hayley said.

Folks, don’t just blink and pass over this story. It is being repeated in every single school in the U.S.A.

If you have kids in school, they ARE being exposed to this racist crap.

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

CHILD ABUSE: “Biden” Good with Kids Wearing Masks at School Again

This torment must stop. Children are not at risk. And another study shows carbon dioxide levels from wearing masks “suggest(s) that children should not be forced to wear face masks.”

Thankfully, Governor Ron DeSantis said he will oppose any move by the federal government to require children to wear masks in the upcoming school year.

Biden: Kids Wearing Masks in School a Matter of “Community Responsibility”

Daybreak Insider, July 23, 2021:

As he concedes that will likely be the CDC recommendation (NBC News). Texas governor Greg Abbott said of his state “There will be no mask mandate imposed. And the reason for that is very clear, there are so many people who have immunities” (Hot Air). From Bethany Mandel: Some districts decided not to serve lunch in school, because kids have to take their masks off to eat. Recess is out. So is music. And if children suffer, who cares?  We have the luxury of ignoring other ridiculous pronouncements from the CDC in every other area of our lives, but our kids can’t escape its reach. America’s kids are going to be trapped behind masks because of the CDC in classrooms and anywhere else in public. The question they can’t and won’t answer is: Why? (NY Post). From Karol Markowicz: In March, when Texas and Mississippi dropped their mask mandates, President Joe Biden criticized the moves as “neanderthal thinking” and said it was too soon to stop wearing masks. The blue-check media predicted a COVID holocaust in these states. That didn’t happen. Case numbers collapsed in the months after the mandates ended. But, as I’ve been writing in these pages all along, we were wearing masks all wrong anyway (NY Post). Meanwhile, from Dr. Scott Gottlieb: “I happen to believe that we’re further into this delta wave than we’re measuring. So this may be over sooner than we think” (Twitter).

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

VIDEO: Marxist Critical Race Theory: the Ugly Truth, the Racist Facts!

Critical Race Theory is born of Karl Marx. Patriotic, thinking Americans must fight this internal attack on the very foundation of the Republic as if the Chi-coms were invading Iowa. This is war and it’s a battle we must win by defeating the Marxists behind CRT.

Graham Ledger speaks with patriot and CRT opponent Harriette Reid about how and where you must fight this assault on the constitution.

©The Ledger Report. All rights reserved.

Teaching Black History is Broken

A discerning look at public school history books, grades six through twelve, will reveal that the teaching of black history is, indeed, broken. Excluded are most of the exceptional accomplishments of blacks throughout American history. History textbooks are the dominant educational tool that shapes students’ views. Our children are missing some of the greatest inspirational stories ever told when American history books are inadequately represented and devoid of black history.

In recounting the history of the 1619 arrival of the first blacks, history books do not share that some were treated as indentured servants, as was Anthony Johnson. Anthony arrived on the English ship, White Lion, eventually became a landowner through the “headright system” and a slave owner. Anthony, a black man, won a court case in Northampton County Court on March 8, 1655, to keep his slave, John Casor. It was the case that changed the American landscape, for it was the first legal sanction of slavery in the Virginia Colony.

How many students know about the black heroes of the Revolutionary War? Thousands of free and enslaved blacks fought in every major battle from Lexington and Concord to Yorktown and served in an integrated army. Some blacks were fighting for the promise of freedom, while others were fighting for their country’s independence. By 1779, fifteen percent of the Continental Army was black. Peter Salem was born a slave and joined the Massachusetts Minutemen, and was a sharpshooter who played a vital role in the Battle of Bunker Hill. Salem was honored in John Trumbull’s painting, “Battle of Bunker Hill.” James Armistead posed as a runaway slave and gained the trust of the British and gave strategic information of troop movements to the Continental Army resulting in success at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781.

Students learn about the Abolitionist movement and Harriet Tubman, but what about Levi and Catherine Coffin, who helped more than 3,000 slaves escape to freedom? Or what about the escaped slaves Ellen and William Craft, who became active in the Abolitionist movement? Or the wealthy free black James Forten family of Philadelphia, who were instrumental in the fighting for slave freedom.

By the time the American Civil War commenced, more than 488,000 free blacks were in the North and South. Thousands of free and enslaved blacks fought in every major campaign in the last two years of the Civil War. Twenty-six blacks were Medal of Honor recipients. Landsman Aaron Anderson (U.S.S. Wyandank), enlisted at the age of 52, was singled out for courage under heavy fire; Sergeant William H. Carney (54th Massachusetts Infantry) received his award for the Battle of Fort Wagner; and Sergeant Christian A. Fleetwood (4th U.S.C.T.), a graduate of Ashmun Institute, said he enlisted “to save the country from ruin.”

Frederick Douglass was a great well-known orator, but what about Robert B. Elliott?  Robert B. Elliott was a U.S. Congressman whose speech “The Shackle is Broken” addressed the Civil Rights Bill of 1875, which enriched the meanings of liberty and citizenship. Elliott’s speech was so brilliant that some doubted if he wrote it.  Additionally, more than 2,000 black leaders during Reconstruction at the local, state, and national levels contributed invaluable leadership to America.

There are thousands of stories about inspirational leaders: inventors such as Granville T. Woods, called the black Thomas Edison, was awarded more than forty-five patents for his inventions, or the first black woman physician, Dr. Rebecca Crumpler, who graduated from medical school in 1864, or people in business such as the “Potato King” Junius G. Groves who produced more white potatoes than anyone in the world, or explorers such as the first black woman astronaut Mae Jemison, or the NASA pioneer mathematician Katherine Johnson of Hidden Figures fame, and the gifted surgical teacher, Vivien Thomas who never went to college, but was awarded an honorary doctorate from Johns Hopkins University in 1976.

Yocum African American History Association (YAAHA) was founded by two women, one black and one white, who forged a partnership and began their journey to uncover hidden black history. These two women, Frances Presley Rice who is black and the undersigned, created YAAHA, a non-profit organization, to provide educational resources that celebrate black history and prove that black history is American history.

The founders of YAAHA co-authored “Black History 1619-2019: An Illustrated and Documented African-American History” that is an in-depth look at the events which shaped the lives and contributions of the African American community in the United States of America. Now in its third printing, the book is available at Amazon.com and through bookstores nationwide. Proceeds from book sales are donated to YAAHA.

The Headmaster of Bridgeport International Academy wrote:

“Our Academy refers to this excellent and objective review of Black History that sheds light on many chapters of American history in clear, objective, and precise language backed up by thorough research and many compelling photos and individual stories. It enables real conversation and constructive thinking about race in this country instead of the propaganda that seeks racial division for economic and political gain. I encourage other schools to use it when developing their American History courses, particularly during Black History month, as it is a wealth of resources for lesson planning.”  – Frank LaGtotteria, D.Min.,Headmaster, Bridgeport International Academy

The article “Let’s Celebrate America’s Black Patriots” by Burgess Owens, the U.S. Representative for Utah’s Fourth district, that was published in the Newsweek online magazine includes a reference to the book, plus information extracted from it.

For more information about the YAAHA educational resources, visit: www.YocumBlackHistory.org.

©Sandra K. Yocum. All rights reserved.

The Time for School Choice Is Past Due

An old story tells of a big, successful store with a plaque in the employees’ lounge which read:

“Rule #1. The customer’s always right. Rule #2. If you ever think the customer is wrong, reread Rule #1.”

I bring this up because the public school education establishment (to be distinguished from the rank and file teachers, many of whom are dedicated public servants), often treat their customers as if they’re wrong and as if the education elites know better than the dumb parents.

School choice is the ultimate answer to America’s education crisis, and there ought to be bipartisan agreement on it. School competition makes education better, and gives all parents more options for their children. But the Left opposes it adamantly, though even a liberal newspaper surprisingly spoke out recently in favor of school choice.

Foxnews.com reports (7/9/2021):

“The liberal Washington Post editorial board on Thursday broke rank with the left and pondered why Democrats are so opposed to giving poor children a choice in schooling.”

The Washington Post opined,

“For 17 years, a federally funded K-12 scholarship program has given thousands of poor children in D.C. the opportunity to attend private schools and the chance to go on to college. And for many of those 17 years, the program has been in the crosshairs of unions and other opponents of private school vouchers…Their relentless efforts unfortunately may now finally succeed with House Democrats and the Biden administration quietly laying the groundwork to kill off this worthy program.”

What a tragedy. And who will suffer the most? Inner-city families.

The Left is all about power. But true public service is always about empowerment—empowering others, regardless of their socio-economic background—so that people can fulfill their God-given destiny.

The pandemic over the past year-and-a-half showed how the teachers unions held hostage many schools from re-opening in person.

During the shutdown, many parents discovered the option of homeschooling. In an interview for Christian television, Mike Donnelly of the Home School Legal Defense Association told me, “The U. S. census bureau issued a report recently that showed that homeschooling households doubled from about five and a half percent, before the virus, to over almost 12%.”

Homeschooling is not as radical as it sounds. Many of our founding fathers and key American leaders, like Abraham Lincoln, were home-taught.

In August 2020, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, observed, “If there was one positive outcome I could point to from the Coronavirus Pandemic…was the fact that public schools were shut down and kids were at home. Parents were to a larger degree, involved in what their kids were learning ….And I’ve heard from a number of parents, who are now rethinking education in terms of how they’re going to go about it post Coronavirus Pandemic.”

Fast forward to the present time and we see many parents revolting against some of what the education establishment is trying to cram down their throats, such as Critical Race Theory (CRT), a racist set of doctrines disguised in anti-racist garb.

CRT is a Marxist attempt to destroy America from within by teaching that white people always oppress minorities. Always.

When parents learn about CRT-type curricula in their schools, they have spoken out against it. Even many minority parents and parents in heavily-Democratic areas have opposed it. It certainly flies in the face of the goals of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that America become color-blind and judge people according to the content of their character not the color of their skin.

But the major teachers’ unions have not backed down from the teaching of CRT. With the unions’ blessing, about 5000 teachers recently pledged to teach CRT, even if it’s illegal.

For example, President Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, promises to “legally defend” members of their union who teach CRT, even if in that particular school district it is illegal.

CRT has different manifestations in our schools. Gary Bauer notes in his End of Day (7/9/2021): “For example, at least 25 school districts around the country are using a book called ‘Not My Idea.’ Here’s how Amazon describes the book: ‘Not My Idea’ is the only children’s picture book that roots the problem of racism in whiteness and empowers white children and families to see and dismantle white supremacy.”

School choice seems to be the best answer to our education crisis, of which CRT is just the latest manifestation. And yet the Democrats are trying  to shut it down, as in the poor sections of the District of Columbia.

Ironically, those who claim to champion “choice,” by which they mean killing preborn babies, want a one-size-fits-all approach to education in a diverse country like America.

I think the teachers unions need to reread Rule #1.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Take ‘The 1776 Pledge’ To Save Our Schools

During the recent CPAC meeting held last weekend in Texas, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) was one of the conservative speakers (7/11/21). During her talk, she made a passing reference to “The 1776 Pledge to Save Our Schools.” Being unaware of the pledge, I decided to look it up. It was developed by a group called, “1776 Action,” an organization dedicated to “Stopping the Anti-American Indoctrination of our Children and Grandchildren.”

I am told, this is a by-product of the “1776 Commission” as established by President Trump to support “Patriotic Education.” The Commission was quickly dissolved following the inauguration of President Biden.

There are actually two pledges listed in the “1776 Action” web site; one for citizens and one for candidates, such as school board members.

CITIZEN PLEDGE

As a citizen, I believe that:

  • The United States of America is an exceptional nation whose people have always strived to form a more perfect union based upon our founding principles.
  • Our Founding Fathers – including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson – as well as leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass and Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. were among the greatest Americans to ever live, and they deserve to be honored as heroes.
  • Our children and grandchildren should be taught to take pride in their country, to respect our founding principles of liberty and equality, and to have a sense of American history that is both truthful and inspiring.
  • Civics education should focus on the serious study of our founding documents and principles – not coerce students into engaging in extracurricular political action on behalf of contemporary policy positions.
  • Our young people should be taught to view one another not according to race or gender, but as individuals made in the image of God.
  • Teaching children to hate their country and each other is immoral and deeply harmful to our society and must be stopped.

THEREFORE, I PLEDGE to help replace elected officials, school board members, education commissioners, principals, deans, and university presidents who promote a false, divisive, and radical view of America and our fellow citizens with new leaders who respect our history, our values, our rights, and the God-given dignity of every person.

CANDIDATE PLEDGE

THEREFORE, I PLEDGE to the voters of (enter District/location name) that I will take concrete steps to do the following in our K-12 public schools:

  1. Restore honest, patriotic education that cultivates in our children a profound love for our country.
  2. Promote a curriculum that teaches that all children are created equal, have equal moral value under God, our Constitution, and the law, and are members of a national community united by our founding principles.
  3. Prohibit any curriculum that pits students against one another on the basis of race or sex.
  4. Prevent schools from politicizing education by prohibiting any curriculum that requires students to protest and lobby during or after school.

Frankly, I see nothing wrong with either pledge as this is how things worked years ago when I went to school. In essence, it is a throwback to another era.

As I interpret the pledges, this is obviously a reaction to today’s perception of academia which appears to be more interested in indoctrination as opposed to education. Case in point: a Virginia school district who recently came under fire for allegedly teaching Critical Race Theory (CRT) and promoting transgender policies. Other school boards are also coming under fire for similar policies. Not surprising, attendance at school board meetings by concerned parents are increasing dramatically across the country, thereby denoting the politics involved.

If all citizens and School Board members signed these simple pledges, it might very well quell the uproar at such meetings. Then again, if they do not, the intensity may increase. It is simply a matter of whether you agree with the pledges or not. As for me, I agree.

CLICK HERE to visit the 1776 Action site to take the pledge.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – For a listing of my books, click HERE.

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

No, Fidel Castro Didn’t Improve Health Care or Education in Cuba

Cuba has made less educational and health care progress than most Latin American countries over the last 60 years, data show.


On CBS’s 60 Minutes, Senator Bernie Sanders recently praised the achievements of communist Cuba. An interviewer asked him about his 1985 comments that Cubans supported communist dictator Fidel Castro because he “educated their kids, gave their kids health care, totally transformed society.” In response, Sanders defended those comments, by stating that when “Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program.”

But Castro did not give Cubans literacy. Cuba already had one of the highest literacy rates in Latin America by 1950, nearly a decade before Castro took power, according to United Nations data (statistics from UNESCO). In 2016, the Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler debunked a politician’s claim that Castro’s rule significantly improved Cuban healthcare and education.

In today’s Cuba, children are taught by poorly paid teachers in dilapidated schools. Cuba has made less educational progress than most Latin American countries over the last 60 years.

According to UNESCO, Cuba had about the same literacy rate as Costa Rica and Chile in 1950 (close to 80 percent). And it has almost the same literacy rate as they do today (close to 100 percent).

Meanwhile, Latin American countries that were largely illiterate in 1950—such as Peru, Brazil, El Salvador, and the Dominican Republic—are largely literate today, closing much of the gap with Cuba. El Salvador had a less than 40 percent literacy rate in 1950, but has an 88 percent literacy rate today. Brazil and Peru had a less than 50 percent literacy rate in 1950, but today, Peru has a 94.5 percent literacy rate, and Brazil a 92.6 percent literacy rate. The Dominican Republic’s rate rose from a little over 40 percent to 91.8 percent. While Cuba made substantial progress in reducing illiteracy in Castro’s first years in power, its educational system has stagnated since, even as much of Latin America improved.

Contrary to Sanders’ claim that Castro “gave” Cubans healthcare, they already had access to healthcare before he seized power. Doctors frequently provided free healthcare to those who couldn’t afford it. As the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler noted:

As for health care and education, Cuba was already near the top of the heap before the revolution. Cuba’s low infant mortality rate is often lauded, but it already led the region on this key measure in 1953-1958, according to data collected by Carmelo Mesa-Lago, a Cuba specialist and professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh.

Cuba led virtually all countries in Latin America in life expectancy in 1959, before Castro’s communists seized power. But by 2012, right after Castro stepped down as Communist Party leader, Chileans and Costa Ricans lived slightly longer than Cubans. Back in 1960, Chileans had a life span seven years shorter than Cubans, and Costa Ricans lived more than two years less than Cubans on average. In 1960, Mexicans lived seven years shorter than Cubans; by 2012, the gap had shrunk to just two years.

(Today, life spans are virtually the same in Cuba as more prosperous Chile and Costa Rica—if you accept the rosy official statistics put out by Cuba’s communist government, which many people do not. Cuba has been credibly accused of hiding infant deaths, and exaggerating the life spans of its citizens. If these accusations are true, Cubans die sooner than Chileans or Costa Ricans).

Cuba has made less progress in health care and life expectancy than most of Latin America in recent years, due to its decrepit health care system. “Hospitals in the island’s capital are literally falling apart.” Sometimes, patients ”have to bring everything with them, because the hospital provides nothing. Pillows, sheets, medicine: everything.”

As The Washington Post’s Kessler noted:

Reporters have also documented that Cuban hospitals are ill-equipped. A 2004 series on Cuba’s health-care system in Canada’s National Post said pharmacies stock very little and antibiotics are available only on the black market. “One of the myths Canadians harbor about Cuba is that its people may be poor and living under a repressive government, but they have access to quality health and education facilities,” the Post said. “It’s a portrait encouraged by the government, but the reality is sharply different.”

Under communism, Cuba has also fallen behind on more general measures of human development. As the progressive economist Brad DeLong pointed out:

Cuba in 1957—was a developed country. Cuba in 1957 had lower infant mortality than France, Belgium, West Germany, Israel, Japan, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Cuba in 1957 had doctors and nurses: as many doctors and nurses per capita as the Netherlands, and more than Britain or Finland. Cuba in 1957 had as many vehicles per capita as Uruguay, Italy, or Portugal. Cuba in 1957 had 45 TVs per 1000 people—fifth highest in the world …Today? Today the UN puts Cuba’s HDI [Human Development indicators] in the range of … Mexico. (And Carmelo Mesa-Lago thinks the UN’s calculations are seriously flawed: that Cuba’s right HDI peers today are places like China, Tunisia, Iran, and South Africa.) Thus I don’t understand lefties who talk about the achievements of the Cuban Revolution: ‘…to have better health care, housing, education.’

As Michael Giere notes, Cuba was prosperous before Castro’s communists seized power:

A United Nations (UNESCO) report in 1957 noted that the Cuban economy included proportionally more workers who were unionized than in the U.S. The report also stated that average wages for an eight hour day were higher in Cuba than in “Belgium, Denmark, France, and Germany.”…PBS explained in a 2004 retrospective, that

“Havana [prior to Castro] was a glittering and dynamic city. Cuba ranked fifth in the hemisphere in per capita income, third in life expectancy, second in per capita ownership of automobiles and telephones, first in the number of television sets per inhabitant. The literacy rate, 76%, was the fourth highest in Latin America. Cuba ranked 11th in the world in the number of doctors per capita. Many private clinics and hospitals provided services for the poor. Cuba’s income distribution compared favorably with that of other Latin American societies. A thriving middle class held the promise of prosperity and social mobility.”

But after Castro took over, the prosperity came to an end:

Castro’s destruction of Cuba cannot be over dramatized. He looted, murdered, and destroyed the nation from the ground up. Just one factoid explains it all; Cubans once enjoyed one of the highest consumption of proteins in the Americas, yet in 1962 Castro had to introduce ration cards (meat, 2 ounces daily), as food consumption per person crashed to levels not seen since the 1800s.

Hunger became so widespread that a visiting Swedish doctor, Hans Rosling, had to warn Cuba’s dictator in 1992 about widespread protein deficiency among Cubans. Roughly 40,000 Cubans had been reported to have been experiencing “visual blurring and severe numbness in their legs.” Rosling investigated at the invitation of the Cuban embassy in Sweden, and with the approval of Castro himself. Rosling travelled to the heart of the outbreak, in the western province of Pinar del Río. It turned out that those stricken with the disorder all suffered from protein deficiency. The government was rationing meat, and adults had sacrificed their portion to nourish children, pregnant women and the elderly. Dr. Rosling told Fidel Castro about this.

During this period of widespread hunger, Bernie Sanders was peddling the myth that hunger was non-existent in Cuba. In 1989, he published a newspaper column claiming that Fidel Castro’s Cuba had “no hunger, is educating all of its children and is providing high quality, free health care.”

This article was reprinted with permission from Liberty Unyielding.

COLUMN BY

Hans Bader

Hans Bader practices law in Washington, D.C. After studying economics and history at the University of Virginia and law at Harvard, he practiced civil-rights, international-trade, and constitutional law.

RELATED ARTICLES:

My Visit to Cuba — An American in Havana

The Economic Cost of Cuban Socialism

Cuban protesters can overwhelm regime targets with ‘people power’

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

Shattering Critical Race Theory!

Today’s article comes from Amac and is written by Daniel Roman. My neighbor Steve directed me to it. Please read it then SHARE it using the share on this blog far and wide! It is a longer read than normal but so worth it.


The Graph That Shatters CRT: July 4, 1776 Set Slavery on the Path to Worldwide Extinction

As America celebrates the 245th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence this July 4, the legacy of the Declaration is under attack like perhaps never before. Much of the American left has adopted the view—one even espoused by Joe Biden’s Ambassador to the United Nations—that the Declaration is a “white supremacist” document. This is among the central notions of what has become known as Critical Race Theory. Yet this idea, so crucial to the thinking of the modern left, is not only not true, but the clear historical record shows that the exact opposite is true. The Declaration of Independence did not forever enshrine slavery and racism into the soul of America—it set slavery on the path to inevitable global extinction.

The question goes to the heart of the faith which has animated liberal thought toward race since long before it was formalized in the New York Times’ 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory—a belief not just that America has sins, or was imperfect, but that America was and is uniquely sinful and worse than everyone else.

In this version of American history, the truth of 1776 is not merely that the Founders were forced to make pragmatic compromises with reality and take time to achieve the aspirations they set themselves. It is not simply that Thomas Jefferson, despite his repeated personal desire to do so, failed to see the elimination of slavery in his lifetime.

No, the 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory’s historical claim is much bigger than that. They claim that Jefferson and the Founders never cared to see the end of slavery at all, and above all, they claim that the American Revolution itself was fought specifically to entrench slavery, driven by fears that Britain might abolish it.

As has been noted even by a number of liberal and partisan Democratic historians, these claims are total nonsense.

The abolition of slavery in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia followed rather than preceded the Declaration of Independence and it did so for a simple reason. The British, far from being a force for emancipation, were a force against it. In fact, they opposed any move toward emancipation for the same reason the American Revolution was necessary in the first place. London sought control of all trade and economic activities in the colonies for revenue raising purposes. The British Exchequer profited from the buying and selling of slaves in American ports, and British banks invested heavily in loans to slave trading firms. Any attack on the slave trade would have been as much an act of rebellion against Britain as the attack on the tea trade was.

Reality is the inverse of the 1619 Project’s thesis. Rather than being an effort to avert any moves toward emancipation or restrictions on slavery, American Independence was a prerequisite for any legal limitations to it.

And the evidence is that far from being empty words, many of those who signed their names to the Declaration in 1776 meant what they said about all men being created equal. In 1776, slavery was legal in every single colony. In the years to come it was outlawed in Pennsylvania in 1780, New Hampshire and Massachusetts in 1783, and Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1784. After the Constitution was ratified, it was abolished in New York (1799) and New Jersey (1804).

Indeed, the period around 1776 marked a pivot point that set off a wave of abolitions around the globe. In his 2011 book Better Angels of our Nature, scholar Stephen Pinker illustrates this trend perfectly with a graph charting the progress of abolitionism worldwide:

What explains this remarkable chart, and the rapid succession of American states that abolished slavery shortly after independence?

One answer is that the ideas of the American Declaration of Independence did not emerge out of thin air. As countless scholars have argued, and Pinker explained in his 2018 book Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, America’s founding document represented an encapsulation of the ideas and values of the European Enlightenment, which challenged certainties about the social order and the world. All institutions—monarchs and Popes, empires and even slavery—were forced to justify themselves based on reason. In other words, simply having existed for centuries was no longer enough.

That’s one reason why the Declaration of Independence stood out at the time – its language was a radical departure from what had come before.

Previous British and European rebellions had generally tried to contest that they were in fact rebelling at all. Their proclamations often read like complex legal briefs, referencing obscure land rights cases from 1231. When America’s Founding Fathers issued their declaration, however, they did something different. They made bold appeals to Enlightenment ideas such as universal rights. In their declaration, all men were equal not because a royal charter said so, but because God created them that way. Their rights existed not because a King granted them or a Parliament passed them into law, but because they were unalienable.

These Enlightenment ideas generally, and the American Revolution specifically, set the end of slavery in motion in several very practical ways.

As we have seen, no territory in America outlawed slavery under British rule, and the British in fact did not allow any territory they ruled to exercise that sort of autonomy in any other case either prior to that point or subsequently. Meanwhile, every northern U.S. state was able to outlaw slavery by 1804, yet the British Empire did not do so until 1833.

“Aha” the leftists will say, “but slavery remained in the American South until the Civil War was over in 1865.” This is true, of course, but there is no reason to believe the British would have tried to abolish slavery if it would have risked conflict or cost.

On the contrary, it is almost impossible to imagine that there even would have been an abolitionist movement anywhere in the world without the success of the American Revolution.

For one thing, the British abolitionist movement itself emerged as a propaganda move during the wars against Napoleon. The French Revolution, which by the way was directly inspired by the American example, had abolished slavery throughout French territory. French slaveholders in the Caribbean resisted these decrees, and when slaves and supporters of the French Revolution tried to enforce them, the French slaveholders called in the British Royal Navy, which happily seized French sugar islands under the pretext of “suppressing a slave rebellion.” Public revulsion against this use of British military force to reintroduce slavery spread in Britain, driven by those who had sympathized with or supported the American cause. The first British abolitionists overlapped with the American sympathizers of the 1770s.

On a wider level, the abolition of slavery anywhere was the clear and direct consequence of those enlightenment ideas which inspired the American Declaration and which the American Revolution had given real credence in a non-theoretical sense for the first time, transforming the relationship between governments and the governed.

For centuries, political thought in Europe had been defined not in terms of the “rights” of individuals as people, but rather through the privileges of classes and offices. The Magna Carta of 1215 might have been progressive in that it restricted the power of the English King, but it restricted the power of the King over a class, his nobles. The right of nobles to govern their estates as they saw fit, to avoid taxation without their consent, and to be guaranteed a jury of their peers in any legal proceeding, meant that peasants unlucky enough to live on their estates, or Jews living in their towns, lost the ability to appeal to the King for protection.

In this environment—the pre-American Revolution environment—any effort by a King to abolish slavery would have been seen as an act of tyranny, one in which a despot stripped the property of “citizens” without their consent.

It is thus no coincidence that when slavery was abolished in U.S. states, it was done not by a King, but by governments that could claim to be elected by the people. In the new American republic, elected officeholders who abolished slavery were exercising the people’s sovereign right to self-government to fulfill the moral imperatives of the Enlightenment. It was the ideas and institutions put in place by the Revolution that made this possible at all.

Before the Revolution, no state had ever abolished slavery, and arguably no state could. After it, the pressure was irresistible, and it became seen as a requirement of republican self-government not just in America, but everywhere.

The authors of the American Declaration intentionally lit a beacon for the world, an example for other nations and peoples to follow. Nonetheless, unlike the French Revolution, the American Founders pursued their radical and uncompromising goals through conservative means, protecting property, respecting the rule of law, and giving American society enough time to actually realize the rights of human equality and freedom far beyond the dreams of the Founders.

The survival of their republic two and a half centuries later, and the total equality under the law of all men and women, races, and religions is a testament to that approach.

In time, America was able to abolish slavery in the 1860s in the bloodiest war of its history, and a century later bring to about a civil rights movement which brought this final measure of equality. These events stand out as among the only times in human history when a society has drastically reformed itself, as opposed to being transformed by foreign invasion or a murderous dictator.

The historical fact is that the American project launched on July 4, 1776 was a work in progress which took time to reach its full potential. But if the American Declaration of Independence did not abolish slavery overnight, or bring about racial equality the following day, it set the nation on the path that made those things inevitable. In fact, it set the entire world on a path where they seemed only a matter of time.

Contrary to the claims of the 1619 crowd and the Founding’s other detractors, it is impossible to see how slavery or racial equality would have developed in a world in which the Americans failed, the authors of the Declaration were hanged, and the British proved that rights and power did not derive from the consent of the governed or God, but from what Kings felt inclined to grant. In that world, everyone would have remained slaves.

COLUMN BY

DANIEL ROMAN

Daniel Roman is the pen name of a frequent commentator and lecturer on foreign policy and political affairs, both nationally and internationally. He holds a Ph.D. in International Relations from the London School of Economics.

©All rights reserved.

Teachers Unions Go All in For Spreading Critical Race Theory

The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) announced that it would feature Critical Race Theory (CRT) huckster Ibram X. Kendi Wednesday during its biennial TEACH (Together Educating America’s Children) professional development conference.

AFT’s five-day conference will also spotlight addresses by first lady and Vogue token cover model Jill Biden, and voter fraud proponent Stacey Abrams. The union lauded what it called a “galvanizing national speech” by its president Randi Weingarten, who vowed to defend any teacher who is prevented from teaching “honest history” in states that have banned the teaching of CRT.

“We have a legal defense fund ready to go,” Weingarten threatened. “Teaching the truth is not radical or wrong. Distorting history and threatening educators for teaching the truth is what is truly radical and wrong.”

Critical Race Theory is not honest or truthful history, nor is it, as Weingarten also misrepresented, “a method of examination… that helps analyze whether systemic racism exists.” It is a poisonous, Marxist ideological weapon, the very purpose of which is to inculcate racial division and anti-Americanism.

“Let’s be clear: critical race theory is not taught in elementary schools or high schools,” Weingarten continued. This is a complete lie. Apart from the fact that CRT was already spreading like wildfire throughout grades K-12 in America, the National Education Association (NEA), the nation’s largest teachers’ union, proudly announced just last week that Critical Race Theory would be incorporated into the curricula of K-12 schools all across the country.

The field of education has become Ground Zero in the nation’s battle for the future of America. And the enemy is Critical Race Theory and its propagandists.


Critical Race Theory

4 Known Connections

Critical race theory holds that because racism is so deeply ingrained in the American character, classical liberal ideals such as meritocracy, equal opportunity, and colorblind justice are essentially nothing more than empty slogans that fail to properly combat—or to even acknowledge the existence of—the immense structural inequities that pervade American society and work against black people. Thus, according to critical race theorists, racial preferences (favoring blacks) in employment and higher education are not only permissible but necessary as a means of countering the permanent bigotry of white people who, as Bell put it, seek to “achieve a measure of social stability through their unspoken pact to keep blacks on the bottom.”

To learn more about Critical Race Theory, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TEACHING HATE: Only a Third of America’s Students Proud to Be American

This is a stunning indictment of the left’s takeover, takedown of the American public education system.

Look what they wrought…..

Treasonous Schools: Only a Third of American Students Proud to Be American

A recent poll revealed just how treasonous our schools have been by showing that only a third of students saying they are proud to be an American.

By Warner Todd Huston, July 6, 2021:

A recent poll revealed just how treasonous our schools have been by showing that only a third of students saying they are proud to be an American.

Once again, we see leftists are winning the culture war by warping the minds of our children in government schools. The poll found that only 36 percent of the respondents of the poll felt they were proud Americans.

Per Newsmax:

Only 36% of respondents aged 18 to 24 said they were very or extremely proud to be American, a new Issues & Insights/TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and Politics survey found. That made the age group the only tracked demographic in which pride falls below 50%.

The poll found an almost identical percentage (35%) of the 18-24 group saying they are only slightly or not proud at all to be an American.

The question was as of 1,424 adults:

Among age groups, those 65+ (86%) had the most people who responded favorably, followed by 45-64 (75%) and 25-44 (59%).

Overall, 68% of respondents said they were extremely or very proud to be an American. Another 15% were “moderately” proud.

Only 6% say they “aren’t proud at all,” being an American, and 8% say they are only “slightly proud.”

In what tippinsights said was somewhat of a surprise because of universities having become bastions of the left, the poll found that 75% of college graduates are extremely/very proud to be an American, compared with 62% of those with only a high school diploma.

Naturally, conservatives were far prouder (at 81 percent), while moderates were proud at 66 percent and Democrats only 55 percent.

RELATED ARTICLE: America’s Woke Culture Is ‘Racializing’ France, President Macron Says

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

Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permanently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Help us fight the great fight.

And if you can, please contribute to Geller Report. YOU make the work possible.