President Was Right: ‘Devil’s Highway’ from Massachusetts to NH Brought Drugs to Granite State

This week the feds busted 38 individuals they say are responsible for addiction and death in New Hampshire.

The operation dubbed “Devil’s Highway” once again brought attention to Trump’s words about how Lawrence, Mass. is a hub for the distribution of dangerous opioids and other drugs throughout New England.

And, it sure looks like ‘new Americans’ are responsible….

MSN News:

President Trump’s Lawrence comments back in spotlight after massive drug bust

“For anyone who said Lawrence is not a hub for distribution, how you looking now?” said N.H. state Rep. Fred Doucette, who was a state co-chair for Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“This definitely solidifies some statements that people took offense to,” Doucette added.

“Incidents like this are proof positive of the fact that Lawrence is a hub.”

The 10-week enforcement operation in the Merrimack Valley targeted drug distribution in Lawrence, and trafficking between Lawrence and destinations in New Hampshire.

These U.S. attorney prosecutions should resonate with New Hampshire voters, said Republican activist Fran Wendelboe.

For details on the bust see Monday’s US Justice Department press release:

Merrimack Valley Operation Results in Arrest of 38 Individuals

See the names of those arrested (no mention of their immigration status).

During the operation, the following defendants were arrested on federal charges:

  1. Jason Medlen, 32, of Methuen, charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl and possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl;
  2. Louis Delvecchio, 51, of Methuen, charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl and possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl;
  3. Santos Obispo Guerrera Lara, 35, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  4. Douglas “Sunny” Grasso, 34, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to distribute fentanyl and possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl;
  5. Brian Brae, 35, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to distribute fentanyl and possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl;
  6. Enel Alfredo Mendez-Aquino, 29, of Lawrence, charged with distribution of fentanyl and cocaine;
  7. Jorge Alexander Andujar Romero, 29, of Lawrence, charged with distribution of and possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  8. Edward Jesis Mar Carmona Ortiz, 42, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  9. Steven de Jesus de Leon Trinidad, 22, of Lawrence, charged with distribution and possession with intent to distribute a heroine/fentanyl mix;
  10. Luis Felix Franco Herrera, 21, of Lawrence, charged with distribution of and possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  11. Jose Rodriquez-Walker, 32, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  12. Johanny Mejia-Nunez, 43, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl;
  13. Ronyel Pena, 18, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  14. Joe Martinez, 24, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  15. Ysrael Nunez, 37, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl; distribution of and possession with intent to distribute fentanyl; distribution of and possession with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl; and aiding and abetting;
  16. William Cabrera, 30, of Lawrence, charged with distribution of and possession with intent to distribute heroin; and possession with intent to distribute heroin and oxycodone;
  17. Oscar Guadalupe Martinez, 37, of North Andover, charged with conspiracy with intent to distribute and distribution of 400 grams or more of fentanyl and 1 kilogram or more of heroin;
  18. Stiven Torres Martinez, 21, of North Andover, charged with conspiracy with intent to distribute and distribution of 400 grams or more of fentanyl and 1 kilogram or more of heroin;
  19. Jason Jimenez, 24, of Bronx, New York, charged with possession with intent to distribute over 40 grams of fentanyl;
  20. Milton Elias Lara, 42, of Lawrence, charged with distribution of and possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of fentanyl;
  21. Alexsander Padro, 28, of Methuen, charged with distribution of 40 grams or more of fentanyl;
  22. John Mena, 24, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute and distribution of 10 grams or more of acryl fentanyl, a controlled substance analogue;
  23. Yunior Darismir Prandys Torres, 22, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute a controlled substance, to wit, fentanyl;
  24. Juan Perez Diaz, 22, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute a controlled substance, to wit, fentanyl;
  25. Jose Ventura, 37, of Lawrence, charged with distribution of and possession with intent to distribute 10 grams or more of fentanyl;
  26. Leisy Baez-Zapata, 21, of Lawrence, charged with conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl; distribution of and possession with intent to distribute 400 grams or more of fentanyl; and aiding and abetting;
  27. Erick Alberto Paulino Amador, 28, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute and distribution of fentanyl;
  28. Bernardito Carvajal, 28, of Haverhill, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  29. Alfredo Rivera, 31, of Haverhill, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  30. Julio Esthil-Cifre, 30, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  31. Edgar Castro, 45, of Revere, charged with conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine;
  32. Julio Ortiz-Chaparro, 47, of Boston, charged with conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine;
  33. Crishanty Aybar Arias, 22, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  34. Cesar Lara Castillo, 36, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute a Schedule I controlled substance; false representation of social security number, and aggravated identity theft;
  35. Santiago Rubel Guerrero Tejeda, 22, of Bani, Dominican Republic, charged with possession with intent to distribute and distribution of fentanyl;
  36. Jesus Maria Aybar Franco, 34, of Lawrence, charged with distribution and  possession with intent to distribute fentanyl;
  37. Marino Amador Baez, 34, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute fentanyl; and
  38. Willin Arias-Castillo, 35, of Lawrence, charged with possession with intent to distribute and distribution of fentanyl.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Biden Spells Extremism L-G-B-T

They may only be four percent of our country — but the LGBT community is getting 100 percent of the Left’s attention. Over the weekend, 10 of the Democrats vying for President Trump’s job tried to persuade Americans that the most pressing issue facing our country is the pursuit of taxpayer-funded gender surgery. If pandering were an Olympic sport, Joe Biden could have medaled. Instead, he settled — like they all did — for new records in extremism.

GLAAD CEO Sarah Ellis would have you believe that “LGBTQ issues have been… left out of the 2020 presidential primary conversation.” That’s interesting, since most Americans probably feel like it’s all the Democrats ever talk about. From Biden calling the Equality Act his “number one priority” to Julian Castro saying even transgender “women” need abortion, sexual politics have dominated this political cycle in a way most people can’t believe. Surely there are more pressing issues facing our nation than putting a Drag Queen Story Hour in every library — but you wouldn’t know it by the talking points of the Democratic field.

Most of Saturday’s event was spent fighting for the most radical social space in U.S. history — led by “moderate” Joe Biden, whose best argument for president is that he’ll turn our prisons into a gender-neutral free-for-all. “In prison,” he argued, “the determination should be that your sexual identity is defined by what you say it is [and] not what the prison says it is.” That, ironically, was tame compared to his other kooky suggestions. The former vice president’s platform for America also includes outlawing talk therapy, forcing religious hospitals to perform gender mutilations, and putting taxpayers on the hook for transgender plastic surgery.

The soundbites were almost impossible to believe. “We should outlaw, nationally, conversion therapy,” Biden argued. “There should be a law against it, period.” Followed by: “Obamacare… does cover [gender reassignment] surgery…Trump by executive order struck all of that out of the Affordable Care Act. I would reinstate it all. Every LGBT person… should be able to have full health care without limits.” Then, as if that weren’t enough, the former second-in-command went on to say that the government should punish hospitals who don’t want to perform transgender surgery. “It is simply against the law when I’m president.”

Of course, this grab bag of LGBT radicalism is all designed for one thing: winning the nomination. There’s just one problem — the same that one Hillary Clinton ran into three years ago: You can’t win the White House with the same extremism that charms the core of today’s Democratic party. For now, these promises may open up the Left’s wallet, but they never pay off come Election Day.

And it’s no wonder. Even sympathetic voters would agree that there are far bigger issues facing America than gender-neutral pronouns. With all of the tension on the world stage, with immigration reaching its boiling point, and people looking to Washington to keep the economic boom going, the front-runner of the Democratic party says putting men in girls’ bathrooms is the most important thing of all? And yet, the DNC is so tone deaf that its candidates aren’t participating in one — but two — LGBT forums this fall.

Interestingly, if you ask Americans what their biggest concerns are heading into next year’s election, the LGBT agenda doesn’t even make the list! In April, when Fox News ran the numbers, immigration (21 percent) and the economy (10 percent) were the only two that even had double-digit mentions. Gallup’s team got the same response in the lead-up to the midterms. When they asked voters, Biden’s number-one priority wasn’t even on the map. Even climate change, which is usually dead last on Americans’ minds, had more fans.

Brad Polumbo, one of the people who suffered through this three-hour spectacle, probably felt like a lot of viewers when he wrote, “I expected the debate would be full of left-wing virtue signaling and pandering. But I never quite expected this many Democratic candidates to say openly crazy things — and be proud of it.”

Welcome to 2020.


Tony Perkins’s Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC Action senior writers.


RELATED ARTICLES:

A Countries Club for Life

Eric Metaxas Joins Conservative Who’s Who at 14th VVS

RELATED VIDEO: Joe Biden Transgender Criminals In Prison Should Be Housed With Gender They Identify As. – Infinite Jest

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

Sting Sex Trafficking at the Source . . . Its Buyers

Authorities have arrested more than 100 people in a massive child sex trafficking sting in central Ohio. Yes, you heard correctly: 100 people, in the state of Ohio, for child sex trafficking. The Homeland Security special agent in charge of the investigation warned, “We are just scratching the surface… it’s that way across the country.”

Human trafficking, particularly for sex, is a global enterprise — and the United States is, unfortunately, the leader in driving demand. Because human trafficking is no small business, this Ohio sting operation involved more than 30 law enforcement agencies.

As reported by The Columbus Dispatch, “[a] report commissioned for the city of Columbus last year found that the National Human Trafficking Resource Center in 2015 received 1,066 trafficking calls from Ohio, the fourth-highest volume in the country. Central Ohio rescue groups have served more than 700 human-trafficking victims since 2008; girls between the ages of 12 and 18 are at the highest risk.”

The child sex-trafficking ring outed by this particular sting was not operated on the streets or in dark alleys as one might expect but on the internet. The perpetrators defied stereotypes as well. Among the arrested suspects were an emergency room doctor and a church youth director! Traffickers and predators can be anyone.

In his remarks relating to the sting, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost (R) acknowledged the “real dangers on the internet for children.” He continued, “[c]riminals involved in trafficking other human beings prey upon those individuals that are already at risk, subjecting them to prostitution and addiction. . .. Predators who seek to harm our children and grandchildren are not hiding in the bushes, they’re lurking on the internet.”

In this sting operation, law enforcement officers posed as the underage boys and girls with whom the predators initiated online chats. But the sting was not focused merely on “internet predators, but human traffickers and the men who feed the sex trade with their dollars.”

In a bipartisan effort to target the buyers of sex, Congresswoman Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) and Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) recently introduced the Sex Trafficking Demand Reduction Act, which would amend the minimum standards of combating sex trafficking (contained in the current Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000) to include language prohibiting the purchase of sex.

Without buyers, you lower the demand for sex trafficking. Buying human beings should be unacceptable behavior, and one way to make it unacceptable is by penalizing said behavior. Passing the Sex Trafficking Demand Reduction Act would paint a clear line between what is ethically right and what is wrong and would be a great step in the right direction for our culture. You can read more about the bill here.

Of the 104 arrested, there were 24 male suspects (ranging in age from 20 to 59) accused of attempting unlawful sexual conduct with a minor and importuning, 43 women accused of selling sex, 36 men accused of trying to buy sex, and one man accused of promoting prostitution.

Thanks to years of human trafficking advocacy, our society knows so much more about the realities of the business of sexual exploitation than we once did. Thankfully, the 43 women arrested for selling sex are now in what Ohio calls CATCH Court (Changing Actions To Change Habits), a two-year treatment-oriented program and specialty docket for women in the system who are victims of human trafficking. No matter what kind of spin liberal activists may use, “pimp” and “prostitute” are erroneous and outdated terminology for what we now know as the business of sex trafficking. Arresting the victims is not the perfect system, but at least for now, it has proved to be the most effective means of getting the trafficked away from their traffickers and into safety. (Oftentimes victims do not see themselves as victims due to the manipulative grooming of the trafficker).

One thing is certain: we need to arrest more of the buyers of sex. The law needs to continue driving a long, hard stake into the ground with a sign that reads: our women, boys, and girls are not for sale.

COLUMN BY

Patrina Mosley

Patrina Mosley serves as the Director of Life, Culture and Women’s Advocacy at the Family Research Council. Her writings and research examine the sanctity of life and women’s dignity issues in policy and culture.

Specifically, Patrina specializes in advocating for women in matters of abortion, sex trafficking, and pornography. From her policy analysis to cultural commentary, her goal is to motivate others to action from a biblical worldview.

Her commentary has been featured in the New York Times, Washington Examiner, The Hill, Townhall, The Federalist, The Daily Signal, The Christian Post and more. She has also testified in state legislatures on fetal pain in abortion, and the influence pornography has to normalize violence against women as well as its effect in increasing the demand for sex trafficking.

Before her current role, Patrina served as Family Research Council Action’s Assistant Director where she walked alongside state and federal campaigns for endorsement. Combining her passion for elections and educating voters, she oversaw numerous grassroots projects to lead endorsed candidates of faith, family, and freedom to victory.

Before joining FRC, Patrina directed Concerned Women for America’s collegiate initiative, Young Women for America. In training the next generation of women to be leaders in public policy, she grew YWA’s campus reach across the country while at the same time pioneering biblically based educational curriculum on policy issues such as abortion, family and marriage, support for Israel, and sexual exploitation.

Patrina is a graduate of Liberty University with a Bachelor of Science in Religion with a specialization in Biblical Studies and a Masters in Public Policy.

RELATED ARTICLES:

UNCompromising: Trump Steals the Show with Religious Freedom

The Remains of an Abortionist’s Day

Scalise Brings Born-Alive Push to VVS

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

Andrew Who?

It’s no secret that the legacy media in America is struggling to maintain a certain level of trust with the general public. Polls show that Americans often feel that there is a great deal of bias permeating the nation’s newsrooms, with one survey even showing there is less confidence in the press than there is in Congress or the Executive Branch.

Considering most people form their opinions about Congress and the White House based on reports from the media, and since government officials from across the political spectrum regularly question media reports, it’s no wonder that these three institutions reside in the basement of rankings based on public trust.

But politicians are expected to exhibit bias: that’s why we have different political parties, as they tend to embrace different ideological positions. To promote your platform, it is only natural to have bias.

The media, on the other hand, is supposed to be neutral; at least when it comes to simply reporting the news. Many don’t feel that is the case, with most (if not all) in the pro-Second Amendment community convinced that media outlets tend to present a distinct anti-gun bias.

Which brings us to this article’s titular question, “Andrew Who?”

Andrew Pollack is a man who likely warrants media attention. But the stridently liberal arm of legacy media appears to not be aware of the man, or is going out of its way to keep the general public from hearing his story.

Now, those who read our alerts regularly are likely aware of Mr. Pollack. Sadly, his daughter Meadow was one of the victims of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. Even those who don’t read our material, and don’t support the Second Amendment, may have heard of him last year, when the media also seemed to know him. Numerous stories on the aftermath of that horrendous murder-spree[CB1] [KK2]  by a deranged former student of the school ran in the weeks and months following.

Andrew Pollack was one of the grieving parents, along with several students, invited to the White House for a listening session, where President Trump heard from some of those most directly impacted by the tragedy. Media coverage spoke of Mr. Pollack’s passionate demands that something be done.

“How many schools, how many children have to get shot? It stops here with this administration and me. I’m not going to sleep until it is fixed. And Mr. President, we’ll fix it. Because I’m going to fix it. I’m not going to rest,” Mr. Pollack stated.

Since that meeting at the White House, though, the legacy media seems to have forgotten who Andrew Pollack is.

Or is he being avoided?

Ever since Parkland, there has been a tremendous amount of coverage of some of the people impacted by the shooting. But those receiving the vast majority of the coverage have been promoting gun control as their response, which tends to coincide with what most in the media promote. Andrew Pollack, on the other hand, does not support that response.

In fact, Meadow’s dad decided to dig much deeper than simply looking at the type of firearm the gunman used, or how he obtained it, which has long been the standard reaction to these types of rare, but horrific events.

Banning guns, or increasing regulations on law-abiding gun owners, has always been the “easy” response to violent crime involving firearms. This approach doesn’t require looking into far more complicated matters, such as what drives someone to want to kill others, what are the warning signs of such intent, and what systems can be put into place to prevent someone from actually following through with their murderous intentions.

Andrew Pollack wasn’t looking for the “easy” response; he was looking for an effective response. This led to a partnership with Max Eden, a senior fellow in education policy at the Manhattan Institute. The two met when Mr. Eden visited Parkland to do his own investigation for an article. They became friends, and decided to collaborate on a book, “Why Meadow Died: The People and the Policies that Created the Parkland Shooter and Endanger America’s Students,” which was released this month.

While this isn’t intended as a review of the book, we will say that it is a well-researched, thorough treatise on Parkland. Most who have followed this tragedy are aware that there appeared to be not just warning signs about the shooter’s potential for committing the heinous act he committed, but missed opportunities to take action that would have prevented him from doing what he did.

That’s putting it mildly.

The investigation by Mr. Pollack and Mr. Eden revealed innumerable missed warning signs and opportunities. On second thought, it is likely more accurate to say the warning signs and opportunities were “ignored,” rather than “missed.” It is truly shocking how little was done to address such an obvious growing threat, and the book strongly supports Mr. Pollack’s assertion, “Parkland was the most avoidable mass shooting in American history.”

A book addressing a horrific tragedy that gripped the nation, written by a grieving father searching for answers, would seem to be newsworthy. But for some reason, most of the media are ignoring it. A cynic might posit that this is because the book doesn’t advocate banning guns and ratcheting up restriction on law-abiding gun owners, which is what the media likes to promote. But maybe they just aren’t aware of the book.

Lack of awareness, however, doesn’t seem to be the issue.

In fact, the authors told us that CNN had initially booked Mr. Pollack for an appearance, but cancelled the appearance, claiming “timing conflicts.” Again, a cynic might think someone wanted to do a segment on a book by a father who lost his daughter in Parkland, but once they realized the book was contrary to CNN’s usual anti-gun narrative, the powers-that-be instructed the segment be cancelled. Perhaps they will rebook him in the future, just to prove the cynics wrong.

Of course, CNN isn’t the only news outlet. On cable, MSNBC is also ignoring Mr. Pollack, as are print media giants, such as The New York Times and The Washington Post.

Fortunately, some are paying attention. Fox News has had Andrew Pollack on its programs a number of times, including a segment discussing the fact that others in the media seem to be ignoring him. Considering the fact that Fox News has long dominated the ratings when it comes to cable news, if only one outlet is going to cover your book, that’s the one you want.

We hope that the lack of coverage is only temporary, and other outlets start booking Mr. Pollack. He and his co-author have done compelling research that should not be ignored. This grieving father should be heard, even if his message might run contrary to a particular outlet’s political agenda. News, after all, is still news, and should be covered by news outlets. That’s how an open and free media should work.

At least, that’s how it’s supposed to work.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Wisconsin: Gov. Evers Calls for Firearm Confiscation & Criminalizing Private Transfers

U.S. Supreme Court Schedules NRA-Supported Second Amendment Case for Argument

Beto’s Confiscation Plan Shows Why Gun Owners Must Reject Appeasement

The Hopkins Hypocrite: Michael Bloomberg Touts Free Speech While Another Bloomberg Entity Degrades It

EDITORS NOTE: The NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

New Study Links Premarital Sex with Separation and Divorce

Study: ‘Generalized beliefs that uncommitted sex is okay … can contribute to the failure of a marriage’


by Paul Murano  •  ChurchMilitant.com

If you already knew divorce rates today are in part the byproduct of the sexual revolution, this will confirm your wisdom. A new study conducted by a group of Florida State University researchers, published in the journal Psychological Scienceconcludes that premarital sex can have deleterious effects on one’s future marriage.

The researchers investigated common factors influential in determining the success and failure of marriagesAmong the major factors contributing to marriage failure is an individual’s premarital beliefs and behaviors toward uncommitted sex.

What we’ve found,” Juliana French, the first author of the studysaid in a statement to the Association for Psychological Science, “is that when, prior to their marriage, one or both spouses hold generalized beliefs that uncommitted sex is okay, that can contribute to the failure of a marriage.”

Generalized beliefs that uncommitted sex is okay can contribute to the failure of a marriage.Tweet

French, along with assistant professor Andrea Meltzer and fellow graduate student Emma Altgelt, collected and analyzed data from 204 newly married couples, focusing primarily on information gathered about their behaviors and attitudes prior to marriage. 

While following up periodically with the couples over several years in order to discover what may lead to marital satisfaction, they collected information and cataloged data on which couples had eventually separated or filed for divorce.

The researchers found that people who expressed behaviors, desires and attitudes prior to marriage that would make them more likely to engage in uncommitted sexual relationshipswho generally believed that sex without love or commitment is OKwere more likely to separate and divorce.

The bad news goes even further. While those who were loose in attitude and behavior on sex without commitment were less satisfied at the start of their marriages, and experienced more rapid declines in satisfaction over the first several years of marriagepeople whose marital partners had been “unrestricted” or promiscuous in action and attitude prior to marriage also  experienced a rapid decline in marital satisfaction over the first few years of marriage, leading to greater likelihood of separation or divorce — even if they themselves were premaritally celibate.

“What we found most surprising about these results was the fact that both [spouses’ premarital attitudes and experience] play an important role in long-term marital outcomes,” said French.

This study is another example of science supporting the truth and goodness of natural law, codified in Christian moral teachingScripture infers that sexual union is not simply something one does, but something two become. 

Two becoming “one flesh” could happen within (Gen. 2:24), or outside of (1 Cor. 6:16) marriage. Aquinas speaks of the one-flesh union as creating a new relation that cannot be repudiated. We are learning more through science about the profundity of the biblical term of two becoming one flesh. 

Scripture infers that sexual union is not simply something one does, but something two become. Tweet

Genetic material, chemical compounds, hormones and prostaglandins, nucleotides and seminal proteins are exchanged and commingled in this greatest of natural human intimaciesTracey Chapman, a researcher at the University of East Anglia in Norwich in the United Kingdom, has conducted studies on fruit flies and has concluded that seminal protein is a “master regulator of genes and that females exposed to it through sexual union show a wide range of changes in gene expression.

Cells have proteins called receptors that bind to signaling molecules and initiate a physiological response. Chapman believes this kind of sexual signaling is widespread in the animal world, raising questions about what kind of behavioral responses may occur in female mammals.

A 2002 CUNY study conducted by psychologist Gordon Gallup and subsequent confirmations indicate that seminal fluid does indeed alter the mood of womenas it is absorbed into their bloodstream and acts as a mood stabilizer and safeguard against depression

It is now well-documented that “bonding hormones” such as oxytocin and vasopressin are released during sexual intimacy, causing emotional and psychological bonding between the two partners. Other scientific studies relating to male microchimerism in women and the possibility of telegony in humans have pointed to other interesting possibilities that may someday uncover more depth of truth about the one-flesh union.

The more science reveals insight into the physical, psychological and social dimensions of the family, the more the “Sexual Revolution” is nakedly exposed as the destructive foundation upholding our Culture of DeathAs this study points to in its correlation between premarital sex and divorce, it is a revolution not only against God, but against human nature as well.

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

Beaten and Threatened for Defending Women’s Rights

Reda Eldanbouki is a lawyer and the head of the Women’s center for Guidance and Legal Awareness in Egypt. He leads the battle for human and women’s rights and fights FGM in Egypt. He’s also a dear and close friend of Clarion.

A few days ago, Eldanbouki was brutally attacked while trying to save a young woman from being abused by her family.

The incident happened in the city of Mansoura, located northeast of Cairo. Eldanbouki got a phone call from a 25-year-old student who said, “Please, I need help! My parents won’t let me to go to my university! They won’t even let me leave the house. I’m a student in the faculty of sciences. They say it’s because I’ll have relations with a guy and I’ll bring them shame.”

Right after Eldanbouki took down her name and address, he heard screaming. The phone suddenly went dead.

Eldanbouki later found out that besides the fact that this young woman was dating a man who she had chosen (not her family), the girl was enmeshed in a battle with her family from whom she was demanding her inheritance rights.

Egyptian law allows women rights of inheritance. But not only are these laws not implemented, most men block female family members from receiving any of their rightful inheritance.

Without hesitation, Eldanbouki jumped in his car and sped to the young woman’s house. He knew calling the police would be worthless as they wouldn’t help in a situation like this. The young woman’s family also must have figured this out, because when he arrived, four male family members were waiting for him.

They grabbed him and dragged him to the fourth floor of the house where they tied his hands behind his back and bound his legs.

“You’re Reda Eldanbouki!” they shouted while kicking him all over his body and delivering punches to his chest and head. “You want our daughters to be infidels, not get circumcised and date men!”

They broke his glasses and took turns beating him, threatening him that if he continued to defend women and advocate for women’s rights, they would kill him.

At some point, Eldanbouki lost consciousness. He woke up on the side of a road with no ID and his phone broken. A note in his pocket read, “This is just a warning, the next time it will cost you your life.”

Eldanbouki is now recovering. When we asked him if he will continue to fight for women’s rights, he answered, “Without any hesitation, as long as I’m alive,” proving, unfortunately, that the fight for women’s rights in the Middle East is no less dangerous than the rest of the battles in that part of the world.

RELATED STORIES

Clarion Organizes Groundbreaking Egyptian Women’s Protests

Egyptian Women Fight Incessant Sexual Harassment

Egypt: Women Supporters Celebrate Anti-FGM Successes

PODCAST: Iran sanctions, Cost of illegals, Bernie’s Free tuition, Medical Care cost…

GUESTS:

Lt Col (R) Saris Sangari is a retired US Army Colonel who saw extensive combat in the Middle East as a Special Operations Forces soldier and who, after retirement, continues to advise the fledgling Assyrian Christian Army in Iraq known as Dwekh Nawsha with his military expertise.

TopicIran: Hardliners vs Moderates on shooting down the drone!

Frank Vernuccio, editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy & Government, providing objective coverage of key issues facing the United States today. Frank is the co-host of the Vernuccio/Novak Report, nationally both on broadcast radio and the web at amfm247.com. FRANK also co-hosts of the “The American Political Zone,” Broadcast on cable in eastern Connecticut.

TopicIllegal Alien Impact on 2020 Election!

Michael Busler, Ph.D. public policy analyst and a Professor of Finance at Stockton University where he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in Finance and Economics. He has written Op-ed columns in major newspapers for more than 35 years.

TopicSanders, liberals, out to cancel student debt!

Stephen Moore writer and economic policy analyst. He founded and served as president of the Club for Growth and is a former member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board. In 2014 Steve joined The Heritage Foundation serving as its its chief economist. and Distinguished Visiting Fellow. Steve now serves as senior economic analyst with CNN, and author of “Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy” and former senior economic advisor to the Trump campaign. Moore’s work continues to appear regularly in the Wall Street Journal, Townhall, The Washington Times, and various publications including The Weekly Standard, Washington Times and National Review.

TopicBlurring the Expense of Medical Care!!

PODCAST: In NYC, a Change of Orientation

The last place anyone would expect liberals to rethink their extremism is New York City. But, thanks to a new lawsuit, even the Big Apple seems to understand when it’s vulnerable. “Pinch yourself,” FRC’s Cathy Ruse says. One of the most radical cities on earth is about to walk back its LGBT counseling ban. All because one courageous psychotherapist fought back.

Like most Americans, Dr. Dovid Schwartz doesn’t want the government telling him what he can and can’t say — especially not to patients in desperate need of a listening ear. As someone who’s practiced in New York City for 50 years, he’s seen countless people who want his help overcoming same-sex attractions. After the council passed its ban on talk therapy for patients like his, simply offering that help would have come at a price: $1,000, $5,000, or $10,000 for first, second, and third violations. In Schwartz’s opinion, people should have the right to seek whatever counseling they need. By passing the law, they weren’t just punishing therapists, they were punishing patients. It’s “inhumane,” he argued.

So, with the help of Alliance Defending Freedom, he filed a lawsuit. And, without even stepping foot in a courtroom, Schwartz won. The council, seeing the writing on the wall, buckled, announcing that it would be the first legislative body in America to reverse itself on the issue. “Obviously, I didn’t want to repeal this,” the council’s speaker, Corey Johnson, told reporters last week. “I don’t want to be someone who is giving in to these right-wing groups. But the Supreme Court has become conservative; the Second Circuit, which oversees New York, has become more conservative. [And] we think this is the most responsible, prudent course.”

Friday, on “Washington Watch,” lead ADF attorney Roger Brooks told listeners that this case was about a lot more than sexual orientation or gender identity. It goes to the heart of free speech as we know it. “What this lawsuit is about is defending the right of New Yorkers — and obviously, down the road, protect every American to pursue their [own] lives [and seek their own] counsel… [T]here were fundamental constitutional issues at stake… And the bottom line, I think, is that after they looked a little harder at the case, the city attorneys had to agree and agreed that this was simply found unconstitutional.”

ADF’s hope — and ours — is that more elected officials see what’s happening in New York and stop to think about the dangerous side effects to policies like this one. This law, he points out, “extended to conversations between a therapist and an adult,” but there are a great many other laws that take aim at minors and their free speech and personal rights. “Some of those laws are currently being challenged… [and] I think that this case is likely to slow down the emotion elsewhere in the country.” Maybe, he hints, it’s the start of something.

FRC’s Ruse agrees. In a column for the Stream, she talks about the significance of the LGBT movement — “a wrecking ball against any cultural or legal edifice in its way — repealing its own law out of fear. It fears that the new slate of federal judges — who see themselves as umpires and not social problem-solvers — might well strike its law. And in the process, create a precedent that threatens other new laws policing LGBT speech. This is, in a word, huge. It might even rise to the level of a paradigm shift.”

But, she warns, it’s not over until it’s over. “Even if the New York City gag rule is repealed, nearly 20 state gag rules still stand, including one passed by the New York General Assembly this January.” That’s where you come in. There are plenty of local councils and state leaders trying to keep Americans trapped in a lifestyle of pain and bondage. Ohio has a hearing on a similar ban this Wednesday. Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin aren’t far behind. Make sure you’re informed. Find out how Sexual Orientation Change Efforts (SOCE) are helping people — and what you can do to protect them in Peter Sprigg’s new issue analysis, here.


Tony Perkins’s Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC Action senior writers.


RELATED ARTICLES:

Over Their Dead Bodies

Kavanaugh Allegations Hit All Times Low

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

Michigan: See List of Doctors Illegally Pushing Opiods

There are some American-sounding names on the list, but gosh this looks like a list of names of UN delegates or something.

From the Detroit Free Press:

Michigan’s opioid pushers: Is your doctor on this list?

Michigan locks up more doctors and pharmacists for peddling pain pills than any other state except New York, the Department of Justice says.

A Free Press investigation focused on this trend and found that metro Detroit doctors in particular are among the leading culprits fueling the opioid crisis, with more than 100 area physicians facing criminal charges over the last decade for running painkiller schemes.

Dr. Obioma Agomuoh. Prison sentence: 5 years

Dr. Asm Akter Ahmed, 58, of Hamtramck. Prison sentence: Time served

Dr. Muhammad Ahmed, 65, of Ypsilanti. Prison sentence: 4 years

Dr. Abbey Akinwumi, 55, of Superior Township. Prison sentence: 7 years and 3 months.

Dr. Yasser Awaad, a Bloomfield Hills neurologist, is accused in civil suit of diagnosing hundreds of children with epilepsy who didn’t have. He fled the country in 2017.

Dr. Hussein “Sam” Awada, 46, of Royal Oak. Prison sentence: 7 years

Dr. Gavin Awerbuch of West Bloomfield. Prison sentence: 32 months

Dr. Mohamed Batayneh, 68, of Livonia. Prison sentence: 8 years and 1 month

The case of Lebanese born Doctor Farid Fata was front page news in Michigan for years.  He got 45 years, but his victims wanted even more!

Dr. Farid Fata, 50, of Oakland Township. Prison sentence: 45 years (See what Debbie Schlussel said about Dr. Farid Fata in 2013.)

Have a look at the whole list that wraps with this one:

Dr. Mohammed Zahoor, 51, of Novi. Charged in pending health care fraud case involving opioids.

I guess these are some of the ‘new American’ entrepreneurs the Open Borders propagandists are always telling us about.

RELATED ARTICLES:

WH Calls for Investigation of Ind. Abortionist; Buttigieg Silent

Discovery of Fetal Remains at Abortionist’s House Shows the Cruelty of Abortion

RELATED VIDEO: Prescription Opioids: Even When Prescribed by a Doctor – CDC.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

California: America’s First Third World State by Black Pigeon Speaks [Video]

Posted by Eeyore video by Black Pigeon Speaks

The Cure for Confused Male/Female Relationships

At our annual Labor Day family reunion, I surprisingly found myself in conversations in which male/female relations was a reoccurring theme.

A happily married female relative told me about five of her middle-aged girlfriends who are looking for husbands. She said they probably will not be successful because they are domineering women who refuse to respect a man.

A gentleman said he asked his wife to prepare him a plate of food from the buffet which she did happily. A radical feminist scolded his wife, “Why did you do that? There is nothing wrong with his feet and hands!” The gentleman told the bitter woman to stay out of their relationship.

A young female relative cornered me at the dessert table. She ranted about how her dating pool is filled with boys rather than real men like her dad. “I am so tired of wearing the pants in every relationship. I would gladly take off the pants and hand them over to a real man. I’ll even cut the pants off, turning them into shorts if it will make him feel better. I just want a responsible adult male that I can respect and depend on”.

At poolside watching the kids have a ball in the pool, a frustrated young father told me his vindictive ex-wife selfishly uses their 12 year old son as a pawn. Over the years, he has spent thousands in attorney fees for visitation rights. I praised him for fighting to stay a part of his son’s life whom he brought to the reunion.

Male/female relations are a mess folks. America is suffering the dire consequences of allowing radical feminists and progressives’ anti-biblical ideology to dominate our culture.

Progressive schools, radical feminists and Hollywood have absurdly taught young women that gender equality means they must reject their femininity and physically compete with men. Several ridiculous movies feature 100 pound women beating the crap out of 300 pound men. The absurd message is men and women are the same.

Consequently, far too many young women are clueless regarding the tremendous power of their God given femininity. Remember that song in the musical, “Flower Drum Song” titled, “I Enjoy Being a Girl”? Celebrating femininity is deemed offensive and oppressive today.

As a child, our choir was on a bus trip. The bus was ready to leave and some of the kids had not returned to the bus. Our choir director, Miss Robena said, “Lloyd you can run fast. Run back and tell the kids to hurry.” I ran as fast as I could because I wanted to please Miss Robena. That’s the power of femininity.

Progressives claim to be our superiors regarding advocating for people of color. And yet, progressives promote anti-biblical and irresponsible behaviors which produce problems that plague urban blacks. For example: The Oxygen channel produced a reality TV show titled, “All My Babies’ Mammas”. The show irresponsibly celebrated a black rapper who has 11 kids by 10 black women.

Fatherless households negatively impact urban blacks, causing a cycle of generational poverty, addiction to government dependency, black on black crime, gang membership, high incarceration and epidemic school dropout rates. The dirty little secret is Democrats’ insidiously evil game-plan is to keep their constituents on the government dependency plantation.

This is why every 2020 Democrat presidential candidate is promising free everything, including a monthly check to able-bodied Americans who simply refuse to work. Trump’s economy has created more jobs than there are people to fill them. Trump has reduced black unemployment to a historic low.

Black Entertainment Television (BET) is extremely hypocritical. While claiming to be super advocates for blacks, BET has partnered with progressives promoting debauchery which contributes greatly to the moral and cultural decay of urban blacks.

Due to politically correct mixed messaging, men and women are confused about how to relate to each other; rejecting their biological instincts. Feminist women magazines say it is insulting for the man to automatically pick up the check at dinner. They say the woman should have an opportunity to pay for the meal. However, if he allows her to pay, the woman should run from him.

Dad taught my three younger brothers and me that when we took a girl on a date, as men, it was our responsibility to return her home safely. Even at our peril.

Adding to the confusion about how males and females should relate to each other is the implementation of the LGBTQ curriculum in schools which teach kids to reject nature’s definition of male and female. Thank God hundreds of parents in California pulled their kids out of school in protest of the LGBTQ curriculum.

In progressives’ relentless war against nature, we are bombarded 24/7 with the glorification of same sex attraction. The TV cooking show “Chopped” would have us believe a third of America’s chefs are involved in same sex relationships which is an absurd lie. Only 2-3% of the population is homosexual.

Progressives’ latest attack on normal male/female relationships is a NBC News report, “Heterosexuality is just not working.” The report claims that men are so horrible that women are opting out of heterosexuality and choosing to become lesbians. Wait a minute. Haven’t LGBTQ activists insisted that people are born homosexual and it is not a choice?

While claiming they only want tolerance, the real agenda of LGBTQ activists is to demonize heterosexuality and throw people in jail who publicly disapprove of the LGBTQ lifestyle.

Our Creator has provided the perfect instructional manual to achieve happy and fulfilling male/female relationships. The Bible. Progressives despise God’s instructions and seek to implement their hideously evil and destructive perversion.

© All right reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Teacher Stands Ground Against Transgender Student, Now Whole Staff Faces Training – Report

Autism –– Still looking for answers in all the wrong places

Updated from an April 2014 article on this issue.

According to 2018 statistics from the Center for Disease Control (CDC), about 1 in 59 children has been identified with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), up from the one in 68 in 2016.

PLUS ÇA CHANGE…

As always, the powers-that-be at the CDC trot out the age-old rationales to explain these disturbing statistics:

  • Greater awareness and therefore earlier and more accurate diagnoses
  • The role that being older parents play not only in the incidence of autism but also Down syndrome and other developmental disabilities
  • Genes
  • “Something” in the environment

Five years ago, a CDC study found that the incidence of autism in blacks “continues to lag behind whites and Hispanics,” which some experts attributed to racial bias––i.e., blacks lack equal access to medical care. But other experts say that blacks may simply be less vulnerable to autism for some unknown reason.

What is consistently omitted, however, is the role that ultrasound exams during pregnancy may and probably do play in the rapidly-escalating incidence of this lifelong condition.

WHAT WE KNOW TODAY

Autism is a neurological disorder that affects the normal development of the brain, causing self-defeating behaviors and an inability to form social relationships. It usually appears before the age of three. Most scientists believe that autism is strongly influenced by genetics but allow that environmental factors may also play a role.

To be diagnosed on the autistic spectrum, a child must have deficits in three areas:

  1. Communication (most children can’t make eye contact; others can’t speak).
  2. Social skills (typified by disinterest in both people and surroundings).
  3. Typically “normal” behavior (many autistic children have tics, repetitive behavior, inappropriate affects, et al).

Those diagnosed on the autistic spectrum range from high-functioning, self-sufficient people––even geniuses––to those who need lifelong supportive help.

A LARGELY-DEBUNKED THEORY

The increased incidence of autism has been attributed by legions of parents and a number of professionals to the mercury-containing preservative thimerosol, used to prevent bacterial or fungal contamination in the vaccines babies and children routinely receive.

This is not backed up by hard science.

Thimerosol, which has been used in vaccines since the 1930s, has not been used in the U.S. since 2001 and the vaccine dosages containing the preservative that were given before then had about the same amount of mercury found in an infant’s daily supply of breast milk.

Numerous studies––by The CDC, The Institute of Medicine, The American Academy of Pediatrics, The World Health Organization, and The National Academy of Sciences, among other prestigious organizations––have found no autism-vaccine link, while other studies have shown an increase in autism in countries that have removed thimerosal from vaccines.

In fact, between late 1999 and late 2002, mercury was removed from most childhood vaccines, including DPT (Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis), Hepatitis B, and Hib [Haemophilus influenza b]. The MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella), which is a live vaccine, is not compatible with thimerosal.

What appears significant, however, is the degree to which diagnoses of mental retardation and learning disabilities throughout the country have decreased at the same time as diagnoses of autism have risen, as reported in a May 2006 issue of Behavioral Pediatrics.

Some experts theorize that “diagnostic substitution” may explain this phenomenon. Diagnostic Substitution means that children who were diagnosed with other conditions––including ADHD and learning disabilities––are now diagnosed with autism.

MY THEORY

In the early ’70s, I worked as a delivery-room nurse at a university-affiliated hospital. It was a revolutionary time in obstetrics, when the Lamaze method of “prepared childbirth” and the use of sonograms to visualize fetuses in the womb were just gaining popularity.

Ultrasound technology was first developed in Scotland in the mid-1950s by obstetrician Ian Donald and engineer Tom Brown to detect industrial flaws in ships. But it was only in the early 1970s that it was used in American hospitals to check that the developing baby, placenta, and amniotic fluid were normal and to detect abnormal conditions such as birth defects and ectopic pregnancies, et al.

At the end of the ’70s, I became a certified Lamaze teacher and spent the next 22 years giving classes in my home. In a very real way, I had my own laboratory, as I learned directly from my clients about the increasing escalation of sonogram exams.

In the early 1980s, it was common for only one or two out of the 10 women in my classes to have a sonogram. In just a few years, every woman in my classes had had a sonogram. And in the late ’80s and ’90s, almost every woman had not one but often two or three or four or five sonograms––starting as early as three-or-four weeks of gestation and extending, in some instances, right up to the ninth month!

It was in the ’90s, in fact, that it began to occur to me that the scary rise in the incidence of autism might be linked to the significant rise in ultrasound exams. Over the years, I’ve posited my theory to a number of people and written letters to the editors of newspapers––including the NY Times, for which I wrote for over 20 years, but they still refused to publish my letter.

I contacted autism researchers Dr. Marcel Just and Dr. Diane L. Williams, who told me via e-mail that Dr. Pasko Rakic at Yale was, indeed, exploring the autism-ultrasound link.

AN AHA! MOMENT

Then, in 2006, I found an article in Midwifery Today: “Questions about Prenatal Ultrasound and the Alarming Increase in Autism,” by writer-researcher Caroline Rodgers.

“The steep increase in autism,” Rodgers wrote, “goes beyond the U.S.: It is a “global phenomenon”… that “has emerged…across vastly different environments and cultures.”

“What do countries and regions with climates, diets and exposure to known toxins as disparate as the U.S., Japan, Scandinavia, Australia, India and the UK have in common?” Rodgers asked.

“No common factor in the water, air, local pesticides, diet or even building materials and clothing can explain the emergence and relentless increase in this serious, life-long neurodevelopmental disorder,” she stated.

“What all industrial countries do have in common,” she added, “is …the use of routine prenatal ultrasound on pregnant women. In countries with nationalized healthcare, where virtually all pregnant women are exposed to ultrasound, the autism rates are even higher than in the U.S., where due to disparities in income and health insurance, some 30 percent of pregnant women do not yet undergo ultrasound scanning.”

The cause of autism, Rodgers continues, “has been pinned on everything from ’emotionally remote’ mothers…to vaccines, genetics, immunological disorders, environmental toxins and maternal infections, [but] a far simpler possibility…is the pervasive use of prenatal ultrasound, which can cause potentially dangerous thermal effects.

ENTER HARD SCIENCE

In August 2006, Pasko Rakic, M.D., chair of Yale School of Medicine’s Department of Neurobiology, announced the results of a study with pregnant mice undergoing various durations of ultrasound. The brains of the offspring showed damage consistent with that found in the brains of people with autism.

The research, funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, also implicated ultrasound in neurodevelopmental problems in children, such as dyslexia, epilepsy, mental retardation and schizophrenia, and showed that damage to brain cells increased with longer exposures.

Dr. Rakic’s study, Rodgers said, “… is just one of many animal experiments and human studies conducted over the years indicating that prenatal ultrasound can be harmful to babies.”

Jennifer Margulis, author of Business of Baby: What Doctors Don’t Tell You, What Corporations Try to Sell You, and How to Put Your Baby Before Their Bottom Linewrites that Dr. Rakic “concluded that all nonmedical use of ultrasound on pregnant women should be avoided.”

In her research, Margulis discovered that “there is mounting evidence that overexposure to sound waves––or perhaps exposure to sound waves at a critical time during fetal development––is to blame for the astronomic rise in neurological disorders among America’s children.”

PROBLEMS WITH SOUND AND HEAT

A 2009 Scientific American  article by John Slocum explains that sonar––Sound Navigation And Ranging systems––first developed by the U.S. Navy to detect enemy submarines, “generate slow-rolling sound waves topping out at around 235 decibels, [while] the world’s loudest rock bands top out at only 130. These sound waves can travel for hundreds of miles under water, and can retain an intensity of 140 decibels as far as 300 miles from their source.”

This is relevant because many mass deaths and strandings of whales and dolphins have been attributed to the sonar waves emitted from Navy ships. As many as 3,000 dead dolphins were found in Peru during the summer of 2012, which researchers attributed to the deep-water sonar by ships in nearby waters. And in June of 2008, four days after a Navy helicopter was using sonar equipment in training exercises off the coast of Great Britain, 26 dolphins died in a mass stranding.

Quick question: If sonar beams can kill fully-developed dolphins, what effect do they have on the developing brains of in-utero embryos and fetuses in the first three months of development?

WHAT DOES ULTRASOUND ACTUALLY DO?

Rodgers explained that ultrasound used in fetal imaging emits high-frequency sound waves that are converted into images and waves that can heat both tissue and bone.”

She cited a warning the Food and Drug Administration issued in 2004: “…even at low levels, [ultrasound] laboratory studies have shown it can have…`jarring vibrations’ – one study compared the noise to a subway coming into a station – `and a rise in temperature.’”

Imagine how these assaults affect the fragile brain of a developing fetus!

Just as concerning, as far back 1982, a study by the World Health Organization (WHO)––”Effects of Ultrasound on Biological Systems”––concluded that “…neurological, behavioral, developmental, immunological, hematological changes and reduced fetal weight can result from exposure to ultrasound.”

 

Two years later, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) reported that when birth defects occurred, the acoustic output [of sonograms] was usually high enough to cause considerable heat.

And yet, in 1993, the FDA approved an eight-fold increase in the potential acoustical output of ultrasound equipment, ostensibly to enhance better visualization of the heart and small vessels during microsurgery. Clearly, the health and well-being of developing fetuses was not a consideration!

“Can the fact that this increase in potential thermal effects happened during the same period of time that the incidence of autism increased nearly 60-fold be merely coincidental?” Rodgers asks.

KEEPING THE HEAT ON (so to speak)

In 2010, Ms. Rodgers presented a lecture about autism and ultrasound entitled “The Elephant in the Room” at the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. These were but a few of her shocking conclusions:

  • A worldwide autism boom was identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that began in 1988-1989.
  • Ultrasound use and autism are more prevalent among higher socioeconomic groups.
  • An increased prevalence of autism occurs among better-educated, more affluent communities. Among other things, women in these communities have more ultrasound exams.

Women who are at higher risk of bearing children with autism include:

  • Mothers who receive first-trimester care
  • Mothers with higher educations
  • Mothers with private health insurance
  • Older mothers

Rodgers concludes: Only increased exposure to prenatal ultrasound can explain all of the above.

THOSE WHO DISAGREE

Numerous studies “prove” fetal ultrasound exams are safe, like the recent study reported in The Journal of the American Medical Association, which essentially said no problem!

In addition, WebMD touts the benefits of the technology, including that sonograms depict 4D imaging which vividly presents “the baby’s in utero facial expressions.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tells prospective parents that ultrasound provides “a valuable opportunity to view and hear the heartbeat of the fetus, bond with the unborn baby, and capture images to share with family and friends.”

And the CDC denies any association between ultrasound and adverse maternal, fetal or neonatal outcomes.

SKEPTICISM, ANYONE?

And yet, Jim West, author of Ultrasound: Human Studies Indicate Extreme Risk, contends that the “subtle and not-so-subtle” biological effects of ultrasound “have set the human species on a tragic path” from which it may take generations to recover….a single exposure to ultrasound produces cellular and DNA damage similar to 250 chest X-rays—and damage [is] permanent and heritable for 10 generations and beyond.”

Ultrasound also uses non-ionizing radiation (used in cell phones, cell towers, etc.), which can cause cellular and DNA damage.

We also know that when there is a vested financial, professional, ideological or political interest in a certain result, scientific “experts” are quite susceptible to “shaping” their findings to fit the views of the people who are funding the study.

We’ve seen this with the tobacco industry and the sugar industry, and another perfect example, as written extensively about by Henry Payne in National Review––Global Warming–Follow the Money––are the climate change so-called scientists who always “shape” their results to their benefactors’ satisfaction.

Another reason for skepticism are the numerous examples of rosy promises that turned into disasters.

  • Diethylstilbestrol (DES), given to women from 1940 to 1970 to prevent miscarriages until catastrophic health conditions happened to the daughters and sons of the women who took the drug.
  • The Copper 7 intrauterine device (IUD), introduced in the mid-1970s, ultimately was found to cause pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancies, septic miscarriages, infection, et al.
  • Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT), introduced in the 1940s to help women with symptoms of menopause, was highly effective until a front-page article in The Wall St. Journal (in about 2008) cited studies linking this therapy to a rise in metastatic breast cancer, effectively destroying the world’s best-selling drug, Premarin––a high-estrogen medication.
  • Vioxx, approved by the FDA in 1999 for pain relief and reducing inflammation of osteoarthritis, was pulled from the market in 2004 because of all the heart attacks and strokes it caused.

This is the very very very short list! But if you want more info on the drugs approved by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and then pulled off the market because of disastrous effects, Laima Jonusiene, M.D., spells it all out here.

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

There is a vast human tragedy––a true man-made disaster––taking place before our eyes.

For whatever reasons––follow the money?––the mountain of evidence that points to a causal relationship between prenatal ultrasound exams and an escalating pandemic of autism is being completely ignored.

Could it have anything to do with the huge investments doctors and scientists have made in ultrasound technology, which, according to Jennifer Margulis, “adds more than $1 billion to the cost of caring for pregnant women in America each year”?

Could it have anything to do with the revenue now pouring like an avalanche into the coffers of diagnostic and treatment centers and classrooms?

Could it have anything to do with modern journalism’s complete abandonment of hard-nosed reporting and life-saving exposés?

As Caroline Rodgers said, there is an elephant in the room when it comes to the subject of autism. And that elephant is the worldwide blitzkrieg of ultrasound exams on pregnant women–– exams that have bombarded the babies they’re carrying with the brain-warping sound waves and heat that will affect them every second of their autistic lives.

 

What’s wrong with this picture? America has 320-million people. If even half that number are parents or grandparents, when will all of them start to demand accountability from our health experts, as well as answers––and action!––from our feckless politicians?

Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on January 15, 2019, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C.


Seventy miles northwest of New York City is a hospital that looks like a prison, its drab brick buildings wrapped in layers of fencing and barbed wire. This grim facility is called the Mid-Hudson Forensic Psychiatric Institute. It’s one of three places the state of New York sends the criminally mentally ill—defendants judged not guilty by reason of insanity.

Until recently, my wife Jackie­—Dr. Jacqueline Berenson—was a senior psychiatrist there. Many of Mid-Hudson’s 300 patients are killers and arsonists. At least one is a cannibal. Most have been diagnosed with psychotic disorders like schizophrenia that provoked them to violence against family members or strangers.

A couple of years ago, Jackie was telling me about a patient. In passing, she said something like, Of course he’d been smoking pot his whole life.

Of course? I said.

Yes, they all smoke.

So marijuana causes schizophrenia?

I was surprised, to say the least. I tended to be a libertarian on drugs. Years before, I’d covered the pharmaceutical industry for The New York Times. I was aware of the claims about marijuana as medicine, and I’d watched the slow spread of legalized cannabis without much interest.

Jackie would have been within her rights to say, I know what I’m talking about, unlike you. Instead she offered something neutral like, I think that’s what the big studies say. You should read them.

So I did. The big studies, the little ones, and all the rest. I read everything I could find. I talked to every psychiatrist and brain scientist who would talk to me. And I soon realized that in all my years as a journalist I had never seen a story where the gap between insider and outsider knowledge was so great, or the stakes so high.

I began to wonder why—with the stocks of cannabis companies soaring and politicians promoting legalization as a low-risk way to raise tax revenue and reduce crime—I had never heard the truth about marijuana, mental illness, and violence.

Over the last 30 years, psychiatrists and epidemiologists have turned speculation about marijuana’s dangers into science. Yet over the same period, a shrewd and expensive lobbying campaign has pushed public attitudes about marijuana the other way. And the effects are now becoming apparent.

Almost everything you think you know about the health effects of cannabis, almost everything advocates and the media have told you for a generation, is wrong.

They’ve told you marijuana has many different medical uses. In reality marijuana and THC, its active ingredient, have been shown to work only in a few narrow conditions. They are most commonly prescribed for pain relief. But they are rarely tested against other pain relief drugs like ibuprofen—and in July, a large four-year study of patients with chronic pain in Australia showed cannabis use was associated with greater pain over time.

They’ve told you cannabis can stem opioid use—“Two new studies show how marijuana can help fight the opioid epidemic,” according to Wonkblog, a Washington Post website, in April 2018— and that marijuana’s effects as a painkiller make it a potential substitute for opiates. In reality, like alcohol, marijuana is too weak as a painkiller to work for most people who truly need opiates, such as terminal cancer patients. Even cannabis advocates, like Rob Kampia, the co-founder of the Marijuana Policy Project, acknowledge that they have always viewed medical marijuana laws primarily as a way to protect recreational users.

As for the marijuana-reduces-opiate-use theory, it is based largely on a single paper comparing overdose deaths by state before 2010 to the spread of medical marijuana laws— and the paper’s finding is probably a result of simple geographic coincidence. The opiate epidemic began in Appalachia, while the first states to legalize medical marijuana were in the West. Since 2010, as both the epidemic and medical marijuana laws have spread nationally, the finding has vanished. And the United States, the Western country with the most cannabis use, also has by far the worst problem with opioids.

Research on individual users—a better way to trace cause and effect than looking at aggregate state-level data—consistently shows that marijuana use leads to other drug use. For example, a January 2018 paper in the American Journal of Psychiatry showed that people who used cannabis in 2001 were almost three times as likely to use opiates three years later, even after adjusting for other potential risks.

Most of all, advocates have told you that marijuana is not just safe for people with psychiatric problems like depression, but that it is a potential treatment for those patients. On its website, the cannabis delivery service Eaze offers the “Best Marijuana Strains and Products for Treating Anxiety.” “How Does Cannabis Help Depression?” is the topic of an article on Leafly, the largest cannabis website. But a mountain of peer-reviewed research in top medical journals shows that marijuana can cause or worsen severe mental illness, especially psychosis, the medical term for a break from reality. Teenagers who smoke marijuana regularly are about three times as likely to develop schizophrenia, the most devastating psychotic disorder.

After an exhaustive review, the National Academy of Medicine found in 2017 that “cannabis use is likely to increase the risk of developing schizophrenia and other psychoses; the higher the use, the greater the risk.” Also that “regular cannabis use is likely to increase the risk for developing social anxiety disorder.”

Over the past decade, as legalization has spread, patterns of marijuana use—and the drug itself—have changed in dangerous ways.

Legalization has not led to a huge increase in people using the drug casually. About 15 percent of Americans used cannabis at least once in 2017, up from ten percent in 2006, according to a large federal study called the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. (By contrast, about 65 percent of Americans had a drink in the last year.) But the number of Americans who use cannabis heavily is soaring. In 2006, about three million Americans reported using cannabis at least 300 times a year, the standard for daily use. By 2017, that number had nearly tripled, to eight million, approaching the twelve million Americans who drank alcohol every day. Put another way, one in 15 drinkers consumed alcohol daily; about one in five marijuana users used cannabis that often.

Cannabis users today are also consuming a drug that is far more potent than ever before, as measured by the amount of THC—delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, the chemical in cannabis responsible for its psychoactive effects—it contains. In the 1970s, the last time this many Americans used cannabis, most marijuana contained less than two percent THC. Today, marijuana routinely contains 20 to 25 percent THC, thanks to sophisticated farming and cloning techniques—as well as to a demand by users for cannabis that produces a stronger high more quickly. In states where cannabis is legal, many users prefer extracts that are nearly pure THC. Think of the difference between near-beer and a martini, or even grain alcohol, to understand the difference.

These new patterns of use have caused problems with the drug to soar. In 2014, people who had diagnosable cannabis use disorder, the medical term for marijuana abuse or addiction, made up about 1.5 percent of Americans. But they accounted for eleven percent of all the psychosis cases in emergency rooms—90,000 cases, 250 a day, triple the number in 2006. In states like Colorado, emergency room physicians have become experts on dealing with cannabis-induced psychosis.

Cannabis advocates often argue that the drug can’t be as neurotoxic as studies suggest, because otherwise Western countries would have seen population-wide increases in psychosis alongside rising use. In reality, accurately tracking psychosis cases is impossible in the United States. The government carefully tracks diseases like cancer with central registries, but no such registry exists for schizophrenia or other severe mental illnesses.

On the other hand, research from Finland and Denmark, two countries that track mental illness more comprehensively, shows a significant increase in psychosis since 2000, following an increase in cannabis use. And in September of last year, a large federal survey found a rise in serious mental illness in the United States as well, especially among young adults, the heaviest users of cannabis.

According to this latter study, 7.5 percent of adults age 18-25 met the criteria for serious mental illness in 2017, double the rate in 2008. What’s especially striking is that adolescents age 12-17 don’t show these increases in cannabis use and severe mental illness.

A caveat: this federal survey doesn’t count individual cases, and it lumps psychosis with other severe mental illness. So it isn’t as accurate as the Finnish or Danish studies. Nor do any of these studies prove that rising cannabis use has caused population-wide increases in psychosis or other mental illness. The most that can be said is that they offer intriguing evidence of a link.

Advocates for people with mental illness do not like discussing the link between schizophrenia and crime. They fear it will stigmatize people with the disease. “Most people with mental illness are not violent,” the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) explains on its website. But wishing away the link can’t make it disappear. In truth, psychosis is a shockingly high risk factor for violence. The best analysis came in a 2009 paper in PLOS Medicine by Dr. Seena Fazel, an Oxford University psychiatrist and epidemiologist. Drawing on earlier studies, the paper found that people with schizophrenia are five times as likely to commit violent crimes as healthy people, and almost 20 times as likely to commit homicide.

NAMI’s statement that most people with mental illness are not violent is of course accurate, given that “most” simply means “more than half”; but it is deeply misleading. Schizophrenia is rare. But people with the disorder commit an appreciable fraction of all murders, in the range of six to nine percent.

“The best way to deal with the stigma is to reduce the violence,” says Dr. Sheilagh Hodgins, a professor at the University of Montreal who has studied mental illness and violence for more than 30 years.

The marijuana-psychosis-violence connection is even stronger than those figures suggest. People with schizophrenia are only moderately more likely to become violent than healthy people when they are taking antipsychotic medicine and avoiding recreational drugs. But when they use drugs, their risk of violence skyrockets. “You don’t just have an increased risk of one thing—these things occur in clusters,” Dr. Fazel told me.

Along with alcohol, the drug that psychotic patients use more than any other is cannabis: a 2010 review of earlier studies in Schizophrenia Bulletin found that 27 percent of people with schizophrenia had been diagnosed with cannabis use disorder in their lives. And unfortunately—despite its reputation for making users relaxed and calm—cannabis appears to provoke many of them to violence.

A Swiss study of 265 psychotic patients published in Frontiers of Forensic Psychiatry last June found that over a three-year period, young men with psychosis who used cannabis had a 50 percent chance of becoming violent. That risk was four times higher than for those with psychosis who didn’t use, even after adjusting for factors such as alcohol use. Other researchers have produced similar findings. A 2013 paper in an Italian psychiatric journal examined almost 1,600 psychiatric patients in southern Italy and found that cannabis use was associated with a ten-fold increase in violence.

The most obvious way that cannabis fuels violence in psychotic people is through its tendency to cause paranoia—something even cannabis advocates acknowledge the drug can cause. The risk is so obvious that users joke about it and dispensaries advertise certain strains as less likely to induce paranoia. And for people with psychotic disorders, paranoia can fuel extreme violence. A 2007 paper in the Medical Journal of Australia on 88 defendants who had committed homicide during psychotic episodes found that most believed they were in danger from the victim, and almost two-thirds reported misusing cannabis—more than alcohol and amphetamines combined.

Yet the link between marijuana and violence doesn’t appear limited to people with preexisting psychosis. Researchers have studied alcohol and violence for generations, proving that alcohol is a risk factor for domestic abuse, assault, and even murder. Far less work has been done on marijuana, in part because advocates have stigmatized anyone who raises the issue. But studies showing that marijuana use is a significant risk factor for violence have quietly piled up. Many of them weren’t even designed to catch the link, but they did. Dozens of such studies exist, covering everything from bullying by high school students to fighting among vacationers in Spain.

In most cases, studies find that the risk is at least as significant as with alcohol. A 2012 paper in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence examined a federal survey of more than 9,000 adolescents and found that marijuana use was associated with a doubling of domestic violence; a 2017 paper in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology examined drivers of violence among 6,000 British and Chinese men and found that drug use—the drug nearly always being cannabis—translated into a five-fold increase in violence.

Today that risk is translating into real-world impacts. Before states legalized recreational cannabis, advocates said that legalization would let police focus on hardened criminals rather than marijuana smokers and thus reduce violent crime. Some advocates go so far as to claim that legalization has reduced violent crime. In a 2017 speech calling for federal legalization, U.S. Senator Cory Booker said that “states [that have legalized marijuana] are seeing decreases in violent crime.” He was wrong.

The first four states to legalize marijuana for recreational use were Colorado and Washington in 2014 and Alaska and Oregon in 2015. Combined, those four states had about 450 murders and 30,300 aggravated assaults in 2013. Last year, they had almost 620 murders and 38,000 aggravated assaults—an increase of 37 percent for murders and 25 percent for aggravated assaults, far greater than the national increase, even after accounting for differences in population growth.

Knowing exactly how much of the increase is related to cannabis is impossible without researching every crime. But police reports, news stories, and arrest warrants suggest a close link in many cases. For example, last September, police in Longmont, Colorado, arrested Daniel Lopez for stabbing his brother Thomas to death as a neighbor watched. Daniel Lopez had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and was “self-medicating” with marijuana, according to an arrest affidavit.

In every state, not just those where marijuana is legal, cases like Lopez’s are far more common than either cannabis or mental illness advocates acknowledge. Cannabis is also associated with a disturbing number of child deaths from abuse and neglect—many more than alcohol, and more than cocaine, methamphetamines, and opioids combined—according to reports from Texas, one of the few states to provide detailed information on drug use by perpetrators.

These crimes rarely receive more than local attention. Psychosis-induced violence takes particularly ugly forms and is frequently directed at helpless family members. The elite national media prefers to ignore the crimes as tabloid fodder. Even police departments, which see this violence up close, have been slow to recognize the trend, in part because the epidemic of opioid overdose deaths has overwhelmed them.

So the black tide of psychosis and the red tide of violence are rising steadily, almost unnoticed, on a slow green wave.

For centuries, people worldwide have understood that cannabis causes mental illness and violence—just as they’ve known that opiates cause addiction and overdose. Hard data on the relationship between marijuana and madness dates back 150 years, to British asylum registers in India. Yet 20 years ago, the United States moved to encourage wider use of cannabis and opiates.

In both cases, we decided we could outsmart these drugs—that we could have their benefits without their costs. And in both cases we were wrong. Opiates are riskier, and the overdose deaths they cause a more imminent crisis, so we have focused on those. But soon enough the mental illness and violence that follow cannabis use will also be too widespread to ignore.

Whether to use cannabis, or any drug, is a personal decision. Whether cannabis should be legal is a political issue. But its precise legal status is far less important than making sure that anyone who uses it is aware of its risks. Most cigarette smokers don’t die of lung cancer. But we have made it widely known that cigarettes cause cancer, full stop. Most people who drink and drive don’t have fatal accidents. But we have highlighted the cases of those who do.

We need equally unambiguous and well-funded advertising campaigns on the risks of cannabis. Instead, we are now in the worst of all worlds. Marijuana is legal in some states, illegal in others, dangerously potent, and sold without warnings everywhere.

But before we can do anything, we—especially cannabis advocates and those in the elite media who have for too long credulously accepted their claims—need to come to terms with the truth about the science on marijuana. That adjustment may be painful. But the alternative is far worse, as the patients at Mid-Hudson Forensic Psychiatric Institute—and their victims—know.

COLUMN BY

Alex Berenson

Alex Berenson is a graduate of Yale University with degrees in history and economics. He began his career in journalism in 1994 as a business reporter for the Denver Post, joined the financial news website TheStreet.com in 1996, and worked as an investigative reporter for The New York Times from 1999 to 2010, during which time he also served two stints as an Iraq War correspondent. In 2006 he published The Faithful Spy, which won the 2007 Edgar Award for best first novel from the Mystery Writers of America. He has published ten additional novels and two nonfiction books, The Number: How the Drive for Quarterly Earnings Corrupted Wall Street and Corportate America and Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence.

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

Republican Famela Ramos Announces Candidacy for California’s 53rd Congressional District

SAN DIEGO, Ca. /PRNewswire/ — The Famela Ramos Campaign announced today Candidacy of Republican Famela Ramos in the 53rd Congressional District as a result of requests from supporters encouraging her participation in her home District.

Famela announced her candidacy versus Nancy Casady and Scott Peters in July with endorsements from business leaders such as Peter Farrell, Chairman of ResMed a $20 Billion market cap medical device company, and Wes Chandler, an NFL Hall of Fame Football Player. The recent announcement of Susan Davis’ retirement has resulted in an extensive outpouring of requests asking Famela Ramos to run in her home district.

“It has always been my dream to represent the community that I grew up in, and that my children are now part of.  When my colleagues, neighbors and family asked me to run in my home District, I was humbled but highly enthusiastic,” said Famela Ramos.

Famela resides in the 53rd District and previously attained a strong voter base in her School Board run in 2018.  Famela is a nurse, researcher, mother of 4 children, and Founder of a healthcare non-profit.

As President of the Right to Try Foundation, Famela collaborated with Dr. James Veltmeyer and local biotech companies in providing access to experimental medication to dying cancer patients.  Famela has published 7 peer reviewed scientific papers with major universities and companies.

Testimony to Famela’s corporate and scientific leadership is the fact that she has co-authored 7 peer reviewed scientific publications.

The first paper was a collaboration with the Moores Cancer Center and several biotechnology companies, describing the state of the art in cancer immunotherapy, and proposing future directions.

The second paper discussed the possibility of stimulating regeneration of injured lung stem cells using specific types of laser and light based interventions, this was a collaboration between the University of Utah and the University of California, San Diego.

The third paper, a collaboration between a nutraceutical company and Indiana University, demonstrated the beneficial effects of a nutritional supplement on circulating stem cells in healthy volunteers.

The fourth publication was the first successful use of two different types of stem cells in a patient with heart failure, which resulted in a profound improvement.

The fifth publication is a report of 114 patients that were treated with umbilical cord blood stem cells and demonstrated safety and signals of efficacy in collaboration with a Chinese Biotech company.

The sixth publication was successful treatment of a spinal cord injury patient with stem cells.

The seventh publication was the basis for an investigational new drug (IND) application to the FDA, describing use of fat stem cells to treat aplastic anemia.

“I am very pleased that my daughter is following my advice to change Districts in which she is running.  Areas such as Paradise Hills, where we raised our family, will significantly benefit from having one of our own representing us in Washington,” said Pepito Ramos, Father of Famela and a US Navy Veteran.

To learn more about Famela Ramos go to here campaign website by clicking here.

The Destruction of the American Medical Industry

“If the government controls your health care, the government controls you. Obamacare was never about health care. It was about government power, dependency, and control.”  – Monica Crowley, Asst. Sec. for Public Affairs for U.S. Treasury Dept.

“Obamacare, without a single Republican vote, cut $700 billion out of Medicare.” – Congressman Louie Gohmert

“Unfortunately, the health care bill commonly referred to as Obamacare is making it more difficult for employers to provide insurance to their employees. It limits individuals’ ability to pick their own doctors and, over time, decreases the quality of care we provide in this country.” –  Congressman Jeff Duncan


Thirty years ago, employer-supplied healthcare deductibles were $250.00 per person before going to an 80/20 payout and then shortly to 100% coverage by insurance.  This was pretty standard across the country.

Today, because of Obamacare, my family, like so many others are hit with thousands in deductibles before insurance covers 80 percent.  This is what Obamacare has done to middle-class Americans who receive their insurance from their employers.  Kaiser Family Foundation claims that over 156 million Americans are insured via employers.  It is breaking middle-class families which is exactly what it was designed to do.

When Obamacare came on the scene in 2010, things radically changed for patients as well as physicians.  The government required paperwork for each patient is astronomical and must be done only by the physician.  Many physicians have taken early retirement.  The changes in our healthcare have been destructive and often deadly.  One of the meat cutters at our local upscale market could no longer afford his blood pressure medication on their new employee healthcare.  Three months later he died of a stroke.

That’s not all, the yearly physicals which used to give women both pap smears and breast checks, along with EKGs and full physicals have disappeared and now the latest is the elimination of labs in the physicians’ offices.  Outside labs are hired for blood and urinalysis and there is no opportunity to sit down with the doctor 20 minutes later to review the results.  Results come via snail mail.

Worse yet, hospitals can no longer carry all the drugs patients use when in hospital.  I would urge everyone to carry their regular drugs with them.  Twice in the last five years the nursing staff has failed to give me the proper medications and told me I could not take my own.  Bring your own anyway and keep them close to your bedside as many of the “substitutes” are not equal to what you normally take.

Getting rid of folks who know what this country was built on, who know the Constitution, who received excellent educations, and who are patriotic Americans is exactly what Obamacare is designed to do.  Basically, the transnationalists (globalists on steroids) want us eliminated.  Remember when Obama said, “Just take a pill.”

The Opioid “Crisis”

The government tells us that 1.7 million Americans are addicted to opioids, but what they don’t tell you is that marijuana, heroin, cocaine and meth amphetamines are included in the overall list and those drugs are illegal in most states.  That is .0485 percent of the American public.  So, what is the real number of opioid addictions from prescribed drugs?  We don’t know, but what we do know is people who have gone through surgeries like knee, hip, or shoulder replacements need these drugs and because of the “crisis,” people who will never become addicted are being deprived of temporary use of drugs that will help them through the first few days or weeks of pain. Here is the U.S. Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration’s 2018 national drug threat assessment.

Mexican Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) remain the greatest criminal drug threat to the United States; no other group is currently positioned to challenge them. The Sinaloa Cartel maintains the most expansive footprint in the United States, while Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generacion’s (CJNG) domestic presence has significantly expanded in the past few years via illegal aliens. Although 2017 drug-related murders in Mexico surpassed previous levels of violence, U.S.-based Mexican TCO members generally refrain from extending inter-cartel conflicts domestically.

The real cause of drug use?  Our elites were incentivized to deindustrialize the upper Midwest.  It’s the reason Donald Trump is President.  J.D. Vance, author of Hillbilly Elegy says the opioid crisis is directly correlated to the Midwest and upper Midwest loss of factories and jobs that went to China.  Human dignity and self-worth were lost when the ability to support your family was removed.  Wall Street and the Corporations benefited from it via lower costs, but America’s people suffered.  Prior to China joining the World Trade Organization and receiving “most favored nation,” our growth every year was 3.5 percent.  Once China came on the scene our growth dropped to 1.9 percent.  Trump is changing this…and we must stand with him

Chicago Communist Quentin Young

I’d bet few have heard of Dr. Quentin Young… a longtime friend and neighbor of Obama in Chicago and the primary figure who delivered Obama to the single-payer camp.  Young joined the Young Communist League as a teenager in the late 1930s.

From the mid-1940s through the mid-1970s, he was closely associated with the Communist Party. In October 1968 he was called to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee, which was probing the extent of his knowledge about the riots that had erupted at the Democratic National Convention.

Fires raged throughout the city during the Democratic National Convention which spawned an historic collision of politicians, protestors and police in the streets of Chicago.

The Committee accused Young of belonging to the Bethune Club, an organization for communist doctors; the group was named after Norman Bethune, a communist physician who devoted his services to the totalitarian regime of Mao Zedong.

Young founded the Medical Committee for Human Rights (MCHR), which initially aimed to secure medical care for civil-rights workers in the South, and later promoted “single-payer,” government-run healthcare. Through MCHR, Young in the ’60s helped establish neighborhood health clinics for the Black Panther Party and the Young Lords, a socialist organization of Puerto Rican nationalists. His MCHR provided emergency medical care to injured protesters and rioters at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago (including the infamous Chicago Seven, who were charged by the government with inciting to riot).

Dr. Young also was Martin Luther King Jr.’s personal physician.  King was assassinated in April of 1968.

In 1982 Young helped establish the Democratic Socialists of America, (DSA) now the largest socialist group in America, which, as the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International, asserts that “many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed.”  The DSA scored a huge number of wins in the 2018 mid-term election, including The Squad.

From 1970 until at least 1992, Young was affiliated with the Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights (CCDBR), which was founded in 1960 as a Communist Party USA (CPUSA) front group that sought to outlaw government surveillance of radical organizations. CCDBR later became heavily influenced by the Democratic Socialists of America and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism.

In the early 1980s Young was a leading ally of Chicago Democratic Mayor Harold Washington, who appointed him as president of the Chicago Board of Health. Also during this period, Young served on the board of directors of the ACLU‘s Illinois branch.  In 1983 he sat on the national advisory board of the All-People’s Congress, a group heavily influenced by the Marxist-Leninist Workers World Party.

In 1995 Young attended the now-famous meeting at the Chicago home of former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn where Barack Obama was first introduced to influential locals as the preferred successor to Illinois state senator Alice Palmer, a pro-Soviet radical who was planning to vacate her state senate seat. Young quickly became a friend and political ally of Obama, teaching the latter about the merits of single-payer healthcare. He also served as Obama’s personal physician for more than two decades.

Shortly after what he called Barack Obama’s “remarkable and historic victory” in the presidential election of 2008, Young wrote in the CPUSA magazine Political Affairs: “The only effective cure for our health-care woes is to establish a single, publicly financed system, one that removes the inefficient, wasteful, for-profit private health insurance industry from the picture.”

In 1970, Chicago radical activist Mike Soto gave testimony before the “Subcommittee to investigate the administration of the internal security Act…” in the aftermath of Students for a Democratic Society/Weathermen inspired student rioting in Chicago.  When questioned about fellow activist Bernardine Dohrn, Soto said “I have talked to her and she is a violent maniac, because when I talked to her, she said ‘let’s pick up arms, let’s blow up this country apart until we take over.’”

Conclusion

In 1938, Dr. Quentin Young was elected to the national executive committee of the American Student Union (ASU), an organization established by a merger between the Communist Party-sponsored National Student League and its Socialist Party counterpart, the Student League for Industrial Democracy.  After attending Northwestern University Medical School from 1944-47, Young fulfilled his internship and residency requirements at Cook County Hospital in Chicago.

Young was Obama’s longtime friend/doctor/mentor and political supporter. As stated above, he was present at the launching of Obama’s political career in the Hyde Park Chicago home of former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, also patients of Young’s.

Quentin Young has explicitly stated that he influenced Obama towards “single payer,” socialized healthcare.  Obama did not conceive of socialized medicine on his own. His acceptance of such a system was cultivated and nurtured by the same types of Marxist revolutionaries with whom he has surrounded himself throughout his entire adult life – and who shaped the major policy agendas of his administration.

Those who wish to permanently change America into a third world socialist country are now working to destroy the very President who stands against it.  We must support him, even when we disagree with something he does.  Our lives literally depend upon doing just that.

P.S. Although not part of this article, I must ask every reader to help us stay alive and well on NewsWithViews.  We are a website who has been blackballed and censored time and again.  Even during the campaign in 2016, our readers would see virus warnings when they opened our articles…warnings that were false, non-existent, but were put there to keep people from reading the truth.  This is a constant fight for truth, for freedom to express that truth.  We need your help, we need funding, constantly because the costs continue to rise for us to fight against the censorship.  Please remember us in your monthly contributions, and tell others to sign up to receive daily articles.  You can donate here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Medicare for Bernie

I Was a Physician at a Federally Qualified Health Center. Here’s Why I No Longer Believe Government Health Care Can Work

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