Todays blog comes from an article in LifeSiteNews.com. It seemed pretty important that you all realize the total disregard this administration has for our military. It disgusts me and I honor this U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who is an Oathkeeper. God bless him.
Here’s the Truth for Health Foundation video, about 1.5 hours long, with U.S. Army LTC/Dr. Peter Chambers’ story.
A U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and combat physician has described how fellow medics in the Army were told not to enter records of COVID jab adverse reactions into official databases.
“They either look the other way or they just say, ‘Well, I can’t do that. It doesn’t exist’,” said Dr. Peter Chambers, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, Special Forces Green Beret, and combat physician.
Chambers made the comments as part of the Truth For Health Foundation’s ninth online conference, which saw the announcement of the Foundation’s new global reporting system for COVID jab injuries.
Dr. Chambers’ jab reactions
Discussing the armed forces COVID jab rollout along with Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, the Foundation’s president and CEO, Chambers shed light on his recent experience as a taskforce surgeon for Operation Lone Star, a border security mission of the Texas military at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Chambers, a veteran of 39 years and a Purple Heart recipient, received Moderna’s COVID jab in January 2021, unaware of the potential side effects. He now counts himself as an advocate for the “vaccine wounded” due to the adverse reactions he experienced afterwards.
He swiftly developed “brain fog” of a kind which he had not experienced even while suffering aftershock from rockets while on active duty, and experienced loss of eyesight.
Following an eventual MRI scan, after bouts of vertigo, dizziness, and nausea which caused him to crash a truck while returning from night patrol, Chambers was diagnosed withdemyelination, a disease which affects the nerve tissue.
Army medics ‘told not to enter’ adverse events into database
He recounted how he had seen “multiple soldiers” also suffering similar side effects from the injections, along with “six soldiers that have been in the ICU,” and one soldier who was forced to take a second jab despite having suffered micro-clotting after her first.
Dr. Chambers took down the details from these service personnel and entered them into the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). However, he revealed to Dr. Vliet that “surgeons at the military hospitals were not letting them in. They were told not to enter people into VAERS.”
“Doctors told me personally in the active duty system that worked at Fort Sam Houston, that they were not to enter people into the VAERS system,” he added.
Due to the COVID jabs’ collective nature of being experimental vaccines, Chambers noted how “we can’t even enter it [COVID jab injuries] into our own defense, medical, epidemiological database.”
“We can’t even interpret that as a true diagnosis,” he said. “So when you try to speak to other positions, they won’t. They either look the other way or they just say, ‘Well, I can’t do that. It doesn’t exist’.”
Told to ‘pack bags’ over attempt to give informed consent
As taskforce surgeon for Operation Lone Star, Chambers had to fill out informed consent forms, as per Army regulations, for soldiers taking the COVID shots. Chambers noted how he had to “reinforce or confirm” whether soldiers needed the shot, while at the same time, his knowledge of the dangers of the COVID jab was growing.
Of the 3,000 soldiers he briefed, only six took the injection.
Challenged by a senior medical officer over this, Chambers said he was “told that I was to pack my bags and leave the border.”
As LifeSite has reported, Dr. Chambers later testified at a March 10 federal court hearing in Tampa in the Navy SEAL 1 v. Austin case. Chambers said he had been pressured into getting soldiers vaccinated and presented as an exhibit an instruction on religious exemptions that read: “Soldiers will try. Soldiers will fail.”
Praise for new vaccine reporting system
Having faced stern resistance against entering COVID jab reports into VAERS, Dr. Chambers warmly welcomed Truth for Health Foundation’s new vaccine reporting system – the Citizens Vaccine Injury Reporting System (CVIRS)™. “If the system that we have now in the government that they provide for us doesn’t work, then we the people have to provide something, because we still have to treat people,” he said.
Doctors “can’t just quit,” he added. “Not everything is COVID related.”
Chambers was the first person to use and register his vaccine injury on the Foundation’s new system, which is designed to be user-friendly and able to be completed in under 20 minutes. “This system was perfectly created for that, and I am honored to be the first person,” he added.
Help support our brave doctors and medical experts who are putting their livelihoods at risk simply by speaking the truth about COVID-19 here.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Save America Foundationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSave America Foundation2022-04-21 05:18:372022-04-21 05:25:43U.S. Army Doctor Reveals Medics Were Told Not to Report Adverse COVID Jab Reactions
The United States is facing a mental health crisis, experts say, noting we’re in dire need of more mental health professionals
Nearly 1 in 3 — 27.3% — of American adults now struggle with depression and/or anxiety
This is the price society is paying for ill-conceived, irrational pandemic measures and nonstop fearmongering
To treat everyone, each of the 33,000 practicing psychiatrists in the U.S. would have to see approximately 3,000 patients a year — a patient load that simply isn’t feasible
Those of us who have not succumbed to irrational fear (or worked our way out of it) can act as a lifeline to others by sharing information that empowers rather than enforces fear, and by being role models in the way we live our lives
The United States is facing a mental health crisis, experts say, noting we’re in dire need of more mental health professionals. Christin Drake, clinical associate professor of psychiatry at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, writes:1
“Every day, people call my office looking for help: A loved one has not left their bed in a week. A father is experiencing panic symptoms while preparing his children for school. A young woman is using substances in a way that feels dangerous to her. These are not the worried well. They are people in crisis.
Their conditions are complex and acute, and require the expertise of a psychiatrist who can talk with them, assess possible medical causes for their problems, manage withdrawal, prescribe medications when needed, and connect with other providers … Before the pandemic, I could almost always help. I would be able to find time to meet someone for a consultation, or make a few calls to secure the right referral.
But now, my every available hour — even those that jut into my ability to meet my obligations to my family — is full. My colleagues tell me the same. They are starting work earlier, working later, contending with long waitlists and their own limits. All the while, patients in crisis are going without psychiatric help.”
Depression and Anxiety Are at All-Time Highs
According to the most recent Household Pulse Survey,2 conducted by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics, 27.3% of American adults now struggle with depression and/or anxiety, and that’s in addition to the 40 million Americans who report substance use disorders3 and the 14 million who have more serious mental illnesses.4
“There are about 33,000 practicing psychiatrists in the U.S.5 By my back-of-the-napkin math, if all of us were treating only people with depression or anxiety, each of us would have to see more than 3,000 patients a year,” Drake notes.6
In short, there aren’t enough practicing psychiatrists to handle the burgeoning tsunami of mentally unwell Americans. There also aren’t enough residency positions available to significantly expand the profession any time soon.
The Price of Fearmongering
While Drake doesn’t go into the causes behind the mental health crisis, it’s fairly obvious that this is the price society is paying for our government’s ill-conceived and irrational pandemic measures and the nonstop fearmongering. NPR contributor Kat Lonsdorf describes the constant fear of kidney transplant patient Jullie Hoggan:7
“While the surgery was successful and Hoggan is now vaccinated and boosted, she is still severely immunocompromised and has to take significant safety measures.
‘I’m so nervous. Like, my heart rate is through the roof when I’m out for anything,’ she said. ‘And I wonder if I’m ever able to be out safely again and be normal and go out to a store. Am I going to be feeling that forever?’
Hoggan works from home, rarely leaves the house, and when she does, it’s incredibly stressful. Her husband and college-age daughter both wear masks at home and have to be extremely careful about who they see and what they do.
Hoggan’s pandemic experience carries no violence and there have been no explosions or assault, which is why she has a hard time calling it trauma. But Arthur Evans, CEO of the American Psychological Association (APA), says viewing the world as unsafe can be a symptom of trauma.”
A Nebulous and Hard-to-Define Trauma
As noted by Lonsdorf, trauma typically involves some kind of life-threatening event or something that leaves you feeling fearful and/or helpless. Many who have religiously followed mainstream news over the past two years have clearly been traumatized, feeling as though death is imminent and there’s no escape. The death-dealing blow — in the form of an invisible virus — could come from anyone, including loved ones. No one was “safe” to be around.
What’s more, the pandemic wasn’t an isolated incident that could be processed and recovered from. Roxane Cohen Silver, a psychologist with expertise in collective trauma, likens the pandemic to a “slow-moving disaster” that “escalated in intensity over time” — and to this day doesn’t have a clear endpoint.8
Not everyone agrees that what we’re seeing is the result of collective trauma, though. Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, author of “The Body Keeps the Score” — one of the most-sold books on Amazon during the pandemic — is hesitant to categorize the pandemic as a collective trauma.
He tells Lonsdorf,9 “We need to be very precise … because if we don’t know what we are treating, we may give the wrong treatment.” He believes we need “a new term, a new language” to accurately define our circumstances. “That’s really what I’m encouraging us to do — to really identify what is making us all feel like we’re barely hanging on,” he says.
Officials Are Unwilling to Let Go of the Fearmongering
Whatever we end up calling it, it’s clear that our government’s and media’s response to the pandemic has been a key causative factor behind this mental health crisis. It’s also notable that even though COVID-19 has become endemic in most parts of the world, causing few deaths, the pandemic has not officially been declared “over.”
In early March 2022, the World Health Organization said discussions about when and how to declare an end to the pandemic were underway, but that “we are not there yet.”10
Denmark, the Netherlands and the U.K. have functionally declared an end to their national emergencies by lifting all or most restrictions, but other countries, such as New Zealand and Hong Kong, are moving in the opposite direction, renewing lockdown orders amid fresh surges in COVID cases (i.e., positive PCR tests, which doesn’t mean people are dying or even getting seriously ill).11
Meanwhile in the U.S., April 13, 2022, the CDC extended for another 90 days the public health emergency that’s been in effect since the pandemic began. In tandem, President Biden extended the mask mandates for airplanes and public transportation until May 3.12
In alternative media circles, fear of the virus has been tempered by more clearheaded analyses of statistics and data, showing that the real-world risk is actually quite limited, and that there are highly effective early treatments available even if you do get infected.
My guess is that those who now, two years in, are still struggling with overwhelming feelings of fear and anxiety about the virus are the ones who for whatever reason weren’t exposed to these comforting data, or chose to dismiss them (which is what mainstream media told them to do).
And, if they persist in following the legacy media, there’s really no relief in sight for them. While many now accept COVID-19 as another version of, or addition to, the seasonal flu, and are going about their lives more or less as usual, the mainstream media are trying to pump up the fear level yet again with — you guessed it — another variant.13
This one is called “Xe.” It’s said to be a combination of two previous subvariants of Omicron and the most contagious form yet. “COVID-19 Could be Surging in the U.S. Right Now and We Might Not Even Know It,” a headline for Time magazine announced April 11, 2022, adding:14
“… as the country tries to move on from the pandemic, demand for lab-based testing has declined and federal funding priorities have shifted. The change has forced some testing centers to shutter while others have hiked up prices in response to the end of government-subsidized testing programs.
People are increasingly relying on at-home rapid tests if they decide to test at all. But those results are rarely reported, giving public health officials little insight into how widespread the virus truly is.”
Truth Is a Big Part of the Remedy
This fearmongering is again based on the lie that the PCR test can identify an active infection (it can’t), and the false idea that asymptomatic spread is a driver of infection (it’s not). Time magazine also promotes the false idea that the COVID shot is “extremely effective at preventing severe disease” and that Omicron causes milder symptoms only in “healthy, vaccinated people,” even though real-world data suggest otherwise on both accounts.
There’s no mention of the fact that the COVID shots may be responsible for more than 1.2 million injuries15 and are, by any metric, the most dangerous drugs ever to be released. There’s also no mention of the fact that most people are likely immune to Xe at this point, as it arose right on the heels of a major Omicron surge.
Even questions about remasking have popped up again. “Is It Time to Start Masking Again?” The Atlantic asked April 8, 2022.16 According to The Atlantic, in the face of new variants, we ought to prepare “by having good masks on hand — and being mentally ready to put them on again.”
It’s that kind of mental preparation to face death every day and the useless ritual of donning a mask that is driving people to the brink of their mental endurance. Masking was futile from the start, but that doesn’t stop the mainstream media — which gets its talking points from those trying to figure out how to shove The Great Reset down our collective throats — from pushing this worn-out and wholly unscientific narrative.
Totalitarianism Is Built Through Fear
Let’s face it, they need us to be fearful because, otherwise, they know we won’t comply with what’s coming next — digital identities, biosensors and emotional monitors, vaccine passports, the green new deal (which will virtually eliminate your ability to travel any significant distance), programmable central bank digital currencies (which will give the issuers complete control over your spending) and much more.
For The Great Reset and Fourth Industrial Revolution to come to pass, the great masses must be willing to give up their freedoms and submit to more invasive surveillance and control, and for that, their fear of imminent death must eclipse all other concerns. For a description of how large swathes of society can be made mentally ill, on purpose, see the After Skool production above.
The good news is about half the population (in my estimation) have worked their way through the propaganda and no longer fret unnecessarily. Around the U.S., people are standing up to tyrannical and irrational COVID measures, be it mask and vaccine mandates or inhumane COVID rules in the hospitals.
In Tennessee, for example, a new state law will force hospitals to allow end-of-life visitations for COVID patients, so that they won’t have to face death alone.17 As noted by Dr. Jason Martin, an ICU doctor who’s been on the frontlines since the beginning of the pandemic, “End-of-life care in an ICU with COVID is terrible,” and watching patients die all alone, separated from their families “is a life-changing experience.”
Be a Role Model
There are no simple answers to the mental health crisis facing us, but putting an end to unnecessary fearmongering, I think, is a task that needs to be shouldered by those who still chose to work in mainstream media. On an individual level, it may mean shutting off MSM news altogether.
Those of us who have not succumbed to irrational fear (or who have worked our way out of it) can also act as a lifeline to untold numbers of people by sharing information that empowers rather than enforces fear, and by being role models in the way we go about our lives.
Don’t wear a mask to appease people’s fears. Let people see you smile. Be friendly and optimistic when in public. You never know how seeing you enjoy life might benefit someone who feels the world has become an unsafe and scary place.
In the long term, we need additional solutions — we need more qualified psychiatrists and therapists, for example — but in the meantime, we must do what we can, on an individual level, to ease the collective pressure, and we can begin by simply demonstrating that a different reality is possible.
The collective has been squeezed, mangled and brought to the precipice by a few in power. Many have been broken down in this process. It’s now time for the rest of us to take the reins and steward our fellow humans back to reality, back to sanity, by being firm yet kind, principled, ethical, truthful, rational and optimistic.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MERCOLA Take Control of Your Healthhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMERCOLA Take Control of Your Health2022-04-21 05:00:082022-04-21 05:03:18The COVID ‘Side Effect’: Almost 1 in 3 Now Suffer Mental Health Crisis Driven by Public Health Policy Trauma
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said the state could take action against Twitter Inc. for launching a poison pill defense to thwart an unsolicited bid by Elon Musk.
“Why would you reject the 20% premium?” DeSantis said Tuesday at a press conference, accusing the company of censorship. “I don’t think that was a rejection based on financial concerns or business judgment. They rejected it because they know they can’t control Elon Musk. They know that he will not accept the narrative.”
Watch Governor DeSantis explain how the Sunshine state will hold Titter’s Board of Directors accountable:
DeSantis announces that Florida is going to look at ways to hold Twitter's board of directors accountable for breaching its fiduciary duties to the state, which is a shareholder of Twitter stock. pic.twitter.com/DpKdMrHUkr
The Governor has a fiduciary responsibility to insure that Florida’s pension fund, and the companies the pension fun has invested in, increase the value of their stock to keep the fund solvent. Twitter’s stock has not performed well and dropped 10% on April 20th, 2022.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-04-20 20:19:582022-04-21 06:11:21Governor Ron DeSantis, ‘Florida is going to hold Twitter’s board of directors accountable for breaching its fiduciary duties’
The lesson of 1989 is that today’s culture and ideas are tomorrow’s politics and policies.
In August 1989, Poland’s parliament did the unthinkable. The Soviet satellite state elected an anti-communist as its new prime minister.
The world waited with bated breath to see what would happen next. And then it happened: nothing.
When no Soviet tanks deployed to Poland to crush the rebels, political movements in other nations—first Hungary, followed by East Germany, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and Romania—soon followed in what became known as the Revolutions of 1989.
The collapse of Communism had begun.
‘Marx’s Ideological Heirs’
On October 25, 1989, a mere two months after Poland’s pivotal election, the New York Times published an article, headlined “The Mainstreaming of Marxism in US Colleges,” describing a strange and seemingly paradoxical phenomenon. Even as the world’s great experiment in Marxism was collapsing for all to see, Marxist ideas were taking root and becoming mainstream in the halls of American universities.
“As Karl Marx’s ideological heirs in Communist nations struggle to transform his political legacy, his intellectual heirs on American campuses have virtually completed their own transformation from brash, beleaguered outsiders to assimilated academic insiders,” wrote Felicity Barringer.
There were notable differences, however. The stark, unmistakable contrast between the grinding poverty of the Communist nations and the prosperity of Western economies had obliterated socialism’s claim to economic superiority.
As a result, orthodox Marxism, with its emphasis on economics, was no longer in vogue. Traditional Marxism was “retreating” and had become “unfashionable,” the Times reported.
”There are a lot of people who don’t want to call themselves Marxist,” Eugene D. Genovese, an eminent Marxist academic, told the Times. (Genovese, who died in 2012, later abandoned socialism and embraced traditional conservatism after rediscovering Catholicism.)
Marxism wasn’t truly retreating, however. It was simply adapting to survive.
Watching the upheaval in Poland and other Eastern bloc nations had convinced even Marxists that capitalism would not “give way to socialism” anytime soon. But this would cause an evolution of Marxist ideas, not an abandonment of them.
”Marx has become relativized,” Loren Graham, a historian at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told the Times.
Graham was just one of a dozen of the scholars the Times spoke to, a mix of economists, legal scholars, historians, sociologists, and literary critics. Most of them seemed to reach the same conclusion as Graham.
Marxism was not dying, it was mutating.
”Marxism and feminism, Marxism and deconstruction, Marxism and race – this is where the exciting debates are,” Jonathan M. Wiener, a professor of history at the University of California at Irvine, told the paper.
Marxism was still thriving, Barringer concluded, but not in the social sciences, “where there is a possibility of practical application,” but in abstract fields such as literary criticism.
A Strategic Shift
Marxism was not defeated. The Marxists had just staked out new turf.
And it was a highly strategic move. “Practical application” of Marxism had proven disastrous. Communism had been tried as a governing philosophy and had failed catastrophically, leading to mass starvation, impoverishment, persecution, and murder. But, in the ivory tower of the American university system, professors could inculcate Marxist ideas in the minds of their students without risk of being refuted by reality.
Yet, it wasn’t happening in university economics departments, because Marxism’s credentials in that discipline were too tarnished by its “practical” track record. Instead, Marxism was thriving in English departments and other more abstract disciplines.
In these studies, economics was downplayed, and other key aspects of the Marxist worldview came to the fore. The Marxist class war doctrine was still emphasized. But instead of capital versus labor, it was the patriarchy versus women, the racially privileged versus the marginalized, etc. Students were taught to see every social relation through the lens of oppression and conflict.
After absorbing Marxist ideas (even when those ideas weren’t called “Marxist”), generations of university graduates carried those ideas into other important American institutions: the arts, media, government, public schools, even eventually into human resources departments and corporate boardrooms. (This is known as “the long march through the institutions,” a phrase coined by Communist student activist Rudi Dutschke, whose ideas were influenced by early twentieth-century Marxist theoretician Antonio Gramsci.)
Indeed, it was recently revealed that federal agencies have spent millions of taxpayer dollars on programs training employees to acknowledge their “white privilege.” These training programs are also found in countless schools and corporations, and people who have questioned the appropriateness of these programs have found themselves summarily fired.
A huge part of today’s culture is a consequence of this movement. Widespread “wokeness,” all-pervasive identity politics, victimism, cancel culture, rioters self-righteously destroying people’s livelihoods and menacing passersby: all largely stem from Marxist presumptions (especially Marxism’s distorted fixations on oppression and conflict) that have been incubating in the universities, especially since the late 80s.
As it turned out, what was happening in American universities in 1989 was just as pivotal as what was happening in European parliaments.
Especially in an election year, it can be easy to fixate on the political fray. But the lesson of 1989 is that today’s culture and ideas are tomorrow’s politics and policies.
That is why the fate of freedom rests on education.
To advance the cause of freedom for today and tomorrow, please support the Foundation for Economic Education.
Correction: This article originally stated that Gramsci coined the phrase “the long march through the institutions.”
Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-04-20 19:48:312022-04-20 19:48:31The New York Times Reported ‘the Mainstreaming of Marxism in US Colleges’ 30 Years Ago. Today, We See the Results
Ending the Department of Education may seem like a radical idea, but it’s not as crazy as it sounds.
The debate over the federal role in education has been going on for decades. Some say the feds should have a relatively large role while others say it should be relatively small. But while most people believe there should be at least some federal oversight, some believe there should be none at all.
Rep. Thomas Massie is one of those who believes there should be no federal involvement in education, and he is actively working to make that a reality. In February 2021, he introduced H.R. 899, a bill that perfectly encapsulates his views on this issue. It consists of one sentence:
“This bill terminates the Department of Education on December 31, 2022.”
This position may seem radical, but Massie is not alone. The bill had 8 cosponsors when it was introduced and has been gaining support ever since. On Monday, Massie announced that Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) decided to cosponsor the bill, bringing the total number of cosponsors to 18.
Though it may be tempting to think Massie and his supporters just don’t care about education, this is certainly not the case. If anything, they are pushing to end the federal Department of Education precisely because they care about educational outcomes. In their view, the Department is at best not helping and, at worst, may actually be part of the problem.
“Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development,” said Massie when he initially introduced the bill. “States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students.”
Massie is echoing sentiments expressed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981, who advocated dismantling the Department of Education even though it had just begun operating in 1980.
“By eliminating the Department of Education less than 2 years after it was created,” said Reagan, “we cannot only reduce the budget but ensure that local needs and preferences, rather than the wishes of Washington, determine the education of our children.”
Before we rush into a decision like this, however, it’s important to consider the consequences. As G. K. Chesterton famously said, “don’t ever take a fence down until you know the reason it was put up.”
So, why was the federal Department of Education set up in the first place? What do they do with their $68 billion budget? Well, when it was initially established it was given 4 main roles, and these are the same roles it fulfills to this day. They are:
Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds (which comprise roughly 8 percent of elementary and secondary education spending).
Collecting data on America’s schools and disseminating research.
Focusing national attention on key educational issues.
Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education.
Now, some of these functions arguably shouldn’t exist at all. For instance, if you are opposed to federal funding or federal interference in education on principle, then there is no need for the first and fourth roles. As for the middle two roles, it’s clear that we need people collecting data, disseminating research, and pointing out educational issues. But the question here is not whether these initiatives should exist. The question is whether the federal government should pursue them.
On that question, there’s a good case to be made that leaving these tasks to the state and local level is far more appropriate. Education needs vary from student to student, so educational decisions need to be made as close to the individual student as possible. Federal organizations simply can’t account for the diverse array of educational contexts, which means their one-size-fits-all findings and recommendations will be poorly suited for many classrooms.
Teachers don’t need national administrators telling them how to do their job. They need the freedom and flexibility to tailor their approach to meet the needs of students. It is the local teachers, schools, and districts that know their students’ needs best, which is why they are best positioned to gather data, assess their options, and make decisions about how to meet those needs. Imposing top-down national ideas only gets in the way of these adaptive, customized, local processes.
The federal Department of Education has lofty goals when it comes to student success, but it is simply not the right institution for achieving them. If we really want to improve education, it’s going to require a bottom-up, decentralized approach. So rather than continuing to fund yet another federal bureaucracy, perhaps it’s time to let taxpayers keep their money, and let educators and parents pursue a better avenue for change.
This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.
Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-04-20 19:33:492022-04-20 19:35:23Reagan’s Goal to End the Department of Education Is Finally Gaining Momentum
Monday afternoon, airline passengers whooped and hollered when flight crews informed them the federal mask mandate was finally over. Crews and passengers responded to the news by ripping off masks mid-flight. Most commercial airlines and Amtrak quickly followed suit to drop their masking policies, as did rideshare services Uber and Lyft. Airlines “were urging that the mandate be lifted sooner,” said Dr. Andrew Bostom, clinical trial epidemiologist at Brown University.
The president who promised to shut down the virus has a strange way of showing it. “Had he been smart, Joe Biden could have owned that glee,” notedNational Review‘s Charles Cooke. “Instead, it came in spite of him, courtesy of a Republican-appointed judge.” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki called the decision “disappointing” but when asked why airplane cabins should be subjected to harsher rules than the White House briefing room, she could only retort lamely, “I’m not a doctor. You’re not a doctor.” Who knew advanced medical degrees were required to form opinions on questions of law, justice, and public policy?
Meanwhile on “Washington Watch,” Bostom, who is a doctor, laid out the science. Since 2008, 14 studies (12 for influenza and two for COVID) have used randomized, controlled trials, which are “the gold standard [for] evidence,” to study whether “mass masking is an intervention which works” for airborne viruses. Bostom said the results of those studies are “uniformly negative.” Nevertheless, “public health authorities have managed to push through mandates,” he continued, essentially turning “the whole evidence-based paradigm on its head.”
Other science opposing the mask mandate concerns the airplanes themselves, which are armed with “highly efficient filtration systems” and “biocidal technology to kill a virus,” explained Bostom. For comparison, “in a restaurant, the air may recirculate through a filter about every 15 minutes. In an airplane, that’s every 30 seconds,” said Ken Klukowski, the attorney representing FRC Action in its own lawsuit against the mask mandate. According to a Defense Department study conducted last year, he said, “it would take 54 hours on an airplane to get infected” with COVID — three times longer than the world’s longest flight.
However, the basic question in the judge’s opinion was legal, not scientific. Klukowski explained, “the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)… sets forth the requirements that agencies need to meet when they’re putting legal obligations or restrictions on you and me.” “A broad body of Supreme Court precedent” holds administrative agencies to a standard of “reasoned decision making,” which the judge found was not met. Thus, “forcing people to wear masks on airplanes meets the definition of what the law calls arbitrary and capricious…. The judge did the right thing,” Klukowski concluded.
The mask mandate was soundly thumped by the gavel, but it’s not quite dead yet. The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced plans to appeal, “subject to CDC’s conclusion that the order remains necessary for public health.” Of course, given the CDC’s preference for political science, they may calculate that opposing the overwhelming weight of medical data is worth it to ingratiate the president with his base. The White House’s continued insistence on encouraging mask-wearing is “consistent with their zealotry, but it’s not consistent with the data,” noted Bostom, nor “with the desires, as you can see by the popular reaction, of the vast swath of the population.”
However, the DOJ has avoided requesting a temporary stay on the ruling, an unusual move which allows the judge’s decision to remain in effect for now. That could indicate the DOJ is tired of getting pummeled in court and wants to rest its sore ribs, that they expect to lose on appeal, and that they’re only appealing on their doubly-boosted boss’s orders. So too, the CDC could, as it has done before, stick its finger into the political winds and then “discover” that “the science has changed.”
In the meantime, honest citizens won’t get kicked off a plane because they can’t keep a two-year-old’s mask on, or struggle to read a book that’s half obscured by a cloth mask serving only to virtue-signal. Americans can board their flights with all the comfort their economy-class ticket allows. You are now free to breathe about the country.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2022-04-20 19:12:172022-04-20 19:12:48A 40,000-Foot View of Freedom
Below was reported as being part of a Letter to the Editor in a recent WSJ article in reference to their editorial on the consequences of the The Shrinking U. S. Navy. I think it applies to all our military services these days.
Here’s the attachment to the letter to the editor:
You can relax about our military preparedness. In terms of manpower, we have far more diversity coordinators and gender advisors than the Russians and Chinese. In materiel, our advantage in maternity flight suits is overwhelming. Faced with such potent weapons of war, who would dare engage us in armed conflict?
Harry O. McKinney
Southfield, Mich.
I feel much better about our military now – how ’bout you?
Thank you Fake POTUS Biden, SecDef Austin, Chair JCS Milley and all the other WOKE senior officers who have reduced the morale and fighting spirit of those soldiers in the trenches.
Yes and let’s not forget:
the female Navy Officers who graduated from Canoe U (USNA) with poor seamanship training and were in charge on the Bridges of 2 Navy Destroyers which collided with other ships at the cost of sailors lives;
the Navy Officer who surrendered two well armed gun boats to Iran without firing a shot;
the Army hierarchy which has reduced standards for PT tests;
Ranger School Graduations, installed field lactation stations for pregnant female soldiers;
the Air Force for installing a Lesbian Commandant of Cadets at the AFA and a black Commandant whose #1 priority was weeding out cadets he felt were racists or sexual harassers;
the Marines for reducing standards for their officer training program to commission more women;
SecDef Austin for ordering a 50 day stand-down to ferret out soldiers considered extremists (i.e. Trump supporters);
Chairman of JCS Milley for touting Critical Race Theory, etc. etc.
Our entire military is now WOKE and more concerned at the top with Climate Change, the environment and Diversity, Equality and Inclusion than combat readiness and warfighting.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Royal A. Brown IIIhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRoyal A. Brown III2022-04-20 14:55:272022-04-20 15:38:32Letter to the Editor of the WSJ RE: Military Preparedness
We came across an interesting tweet from Roland S. Martin, a journalist and former CNN contributor. Here’s the tweet:
I don’t give a damn what some grossly unqualified Donald Trump judge said, I’m double masked and wearing goggles on this Nashville to DC flight. I had COVID in December. Y’all can KISS MY ASS about me not wanting it again. And any fool saying they don’t matter is a damn liar. pic.twitter.com/cHJ9oUYWo4
We wanted to dissect Roland’s tweet to better understand who he really is.
Roland: “I don’t give a damn what some grossly unqualified Donald Trump judge said…”
Analysis: Roland hates Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle who was indeed appointed by President Donald J. Trump. Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle followed the U.S. Constitution and her ruling limited the powers of the federal government over we the people. Roland uses the word “unqualified” for U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle for the Middle District of Florida who ruled against the CDC.
NOTE: We are wondering what Roland would say about the qualifications of Ketanji Brown Jackson who couldn’t or wouldn’t define the word “woman” during her Senate confirmation hearing.
Roland: “I’m double masked and wearing goggles on this Nashville to DC flight.”
Analysis: Research reveals that prolonged use of Covid masks, homemade or N95, can cause anywhere from five percent on up to 20 percent loss of oxygen, leading to hypercapnia (excessive carbon dioxide in the bloodstream typically caused by inadequate respiration), panic attacks, vertigo, double vision, tinnitus, concentration issues, headaches, slowed reactions, seizures, alterations in blood chemistry and suffocation due to air displacement. According to Amesh A. Adalja, MD, and senior scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Maryland, “wearing a mask day in and day out can lead to alterations in blood chemistry,” and that leads to “changes in level of consciousness.” A German neurologist, Dr. Margarite Griesz-Brisson, MD, PhD (in pharmacology), who specializes in neurotoxicology and environmental medicine, warns that oxygen deprivation from prolonged Covid-mask wearing can cause permanent neurological damage. She states in her research, “The re-breathing of our exhaled air will without a doubt create oxygen deficiency and a flooding of carbon dioxide. We know that the human brain is very sensitive to oxygen deprivation. There are nerve cells for example in the hippocampus, that can’t be longer than 3 minutes without oxygen – they cannot survive. The acute warning symptoms are headaches, drowsiness, dizziness, issues in concentration, slowing down of the reaction time – reactions of the cognitive system.” An article titled “Do masks actually work? The best studies suggest they don’t“, appeared in The Washington Examiner on August 12, 2021 stated: “Of the 14 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) that have tested the effectiveness of masks in preventing the transmission of respiratory viruses, three suggest, but do not provide any statistically significant evidence in intention-to-treat analysis, that masks might be useful. The other eleven suggest that masks are either useless — whether compared with no masks or because they appear not to add to good hand hygiene alone — or actually counterproductive. Of the three studies that provided statistically significant evidence in intention-to-treat analysis that was not contradicted within the same study, one found that the combination of surgical masks and hand hygiene was less effective than hand hygiene alone, one found that the combination of surgical masks and hand hygiene was less effective than nothing, and one found that cloth masks were less effective than surgical masks.”
NOTE: Roland is double masked and wearing goggles. This mean Roland is risking double hypercapnia (excessive carbon dioxide in the bloodstream typically caused by inadequate respiration), panic attacks, vertigo, double vision, tinnitus, concentration issues, headaches, slowed reactions, seizures, alterations in blood chemistry and suffocation due to air displacement.
Roland: “I had COVID in December.”
Analysis: On Instagram Roland on August 14th, 2021 posted this comment, “This ain’t hard, y’all. Get the damn vaccine!!!!” Our guess is that Roland was vaccinated before December and he still got Covid in December.
Roland: “Y’all can KISS MY ASS about me not wanting it again. And any fool saying they don’t matter is a damn liar.”
Analysis: It’s interesting to see a journalist tell his Facebook followers to “KISS MY ASS” and calling them fools and damn liars. Roland seems over the top and too emotional.
We thank Roland for setting the standard of being double masked and wearing a goggles. We’re guessing that the next time we fly we’ll be able to immediately recognize the Democrats because they will be, interestingly, exercising their freedom of choice by ignoring the judges ruling to not wear a face masks on aircraft.
That, as they say, is their choice.
BTW. Here’s Roland on April 3rd, 2022 without a mask in a very large auditorium:
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-04-20 14:25:172022-04-20 17:48:21How to recognize a Democrat on your next airline flight? Their the ones wearing a mask.
Maybe to some people, Joe Biden’s fixation with gender identity feels out of character. But to others, who’ve watched the president undergo his own radical transformation in recent years, it makes more sense. The man who stood in front of America and defended the rights of little children to change their identities has, in many ways, done the same thing himself — splitting from decades-old policy positions to assume a completely different political persona. When a reporter asked about Biden’s transition — was he officially identifying as a progressive? — White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki replied that the president “is not eager to be labeled.” Well, Joe Biden may not know what he is, but at least we know what he’s not: a moderate.
It only took 24 hours for Americans to realize what an unconvincing lie Biden’s promise to “govern from the middle” was. The same Democrat who, two years earlier, believed in common sense limits on abortion, immigration, Senate rules, and the Supreme Court got right to work alienating core constituencies with attacks on life, energy, biology, border law, and taxpayers. The myth of the moderate was blown. “The bait was he was going to govern as bipartisan, but the switch is he’s governed as a socialist,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has complained.
And nowhere has the “evolved” Biden made more enemies than in his crusade for LGBT indoctrination. While the former vice president was always light years ahead of his boss, Barack Obama, on radical changes like same-sex marriage, no one could have dreamed that the father of four would one day call parents’ involvement in education “hateful.” As the Federalist’s Rachel Bovard points out, Joe Biden of 1994 was completely on board with a much stricter law than Florida’s Parental Rights bill 30 years ago. Then-Senator Biden didn’t blink when it came to voting for a policy that didn’t just stop conversations about gender identity — it outright banned LGBT materials from schools.
Then, much like now, Republicans held up graphic books and curriculum, arguing that they couldn’t even quote from them “because to put them on the airwaves in any way, shape, or form,” New Hampshire Senator Bob Smith said, “would be considered obscene.” Fast forward 30 years, and leaders in states all across the country are still having the same debate. There’s just one difference: Democrats are siding with obscenity!
When Psaki was pressed about Biden’s support for those reasonable limits in 1994, she refused to entertain the idea that this president might understand where parents are coming from. “In terms of his views and comments from 25 years ago, I think the most important question now is: why are Florida leaders deciding they need to discriminate against kids who are members of the LGBTQ community?”
To most grassroots Democrats, that was an eye-opener. Sure, Bovard said on “Washington Watch,” the two parties don’t agree on a lot of things, but most moms and dads “want a say in their child’s education.” For some reason, that’s only a controversial view here in Washington, “where it seems like this very, very loud minority within the Democratic Party… not that big of a faction — but a very loud and aggressive [one] has taken over the Democratic Party in Washington and is forcing these transformative social views on a party where I would wager not a lot of their base actually support.” (She’s right, Democrats are hugely opposed to Biden’s position on the Florida law.)
It’s going to be an interesting test for the midterm elections, Bovard went on. “I suspect that a lot of parents in the Democratic Party are scratching their heads saying, ‘You know, we can debate some of these hot topics. But the fact that you want to bar me from knowing what’s going on in my child’s school, that’s probably a bridge too far’… So I do think it is this like nexus of a minority within the party that is just incredibly loud. And they have cowed a lot of the Democratic politicians into submission.”
In the real world, where D.C. Democrats refuse to live, there’s a lot more agreement on social issues than the mainstream media will admit. On things like girls’ sports, sex education, privacy, and parents’ rights, the overall pushback to Biden’s agenda is something that “even moderate Democrats” embrace. They’ve watched the Left — formerly the party of “live and let live” — abandon that motto in favor of “imposing progressive values on everyone,” Bovard warned. “It’s [either] you agree with them, or you’re a racist and a sexist and a bigot — and whatever else they want to throw at you. So the battles lines have been drawn.”
It’s been a remarkable shift, she would agree, not just for Biden — but for the whole Democratic Party. “Even in my lifetime, if you think back to the Clinton administration… saying, ‘Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.’ ‘Rare’ was a big component of that. That’s gone now. That moderation is gone. They have gone completely radical…” If you care about cultural issues — values like life, human dignity, biology, or natural marriage and sex — “it’s a binary choice for you at this point… You’re either voting Republican or voting Democrat. There’s no in-between… And Joe Biden has been a proxy for that question. His career, I think, really reflects how the Democratic Party has evolved on this.”
For a party that claims to like “choice,” they’ve certainly given voters a clear one.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2022-04-20 06:36:132022-04-20 06:36:13VIDEO: Under Biden, the Party’s over for Moderates
Project 21 co-chair Horace Cooper and former Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek join ‘Fox News @ Night’ to discuss the rise in violent crime across the U.S.
Support of Black Lives Matter and calls to defund the police reverberated across America in 2020 following the death of George Floyd, igniting social justice protests and riots at a time when the coronavirus and lockdowns upended society in unprecedented ways. What was left in 2020’s wake was a massive increase in the number of murders, dealing a disproportionate blow to Black Americans.
“Certainly, the protests and riots mid-2020 after the death of George Floyd followed a pattern of spiking violence that we’ve seen following past viral police incidents, such as the deaths of Michael Brown and Freddie Gray. This pattern has been termed the ‘Ferguson Effect’: police pull back while violent crime spikes precipitously,” Hannah Meyers, director of the policing and public safety initiative at the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News Digital.
Murders across the board spiked by nearly 30% in 2020 compared to the year prior, according to FBI data, marking the largest single-year increase in killings since the agency began tracking the crimes. Among Black Americans, the number of deaths spiked by more than 32% compared to 2019.
In 2019, at least 7,484 Black Americans were murdered. That number shot up to at least 9,941 murders in 2020, meaning there was an increase of 2,457 Black Americans murdered over the previous year.
The number of Black murders was also far higher than White murders in 2020. The FBI data shows there 7,043 White people murdered that year, meaning 2,898 more Black people were killed compared to Whites.
Between 2010 and 2019, there was an average of 5,954 White murders, which is roughly 16% lower than the 10-year average of Black murders. During that same time period, an average of 6,927 Black Americans were murdered each year, meaning Black murders shot up by 43% in 2020 compared to the previous 10-year average.
The figures are more staggering considering White Americans make up 76% of the population compared to Black Americans representing only 13%, according to Census data.
Murders in the 2010s first broke the 7,000 murder benchmark in 2015 after the high-profile deaths of Freddie Gray that same year and Michael Brown in 2014, jumping by nearly a thousand in one year. Brown was fatally shot by a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer and Gray died after he sustained injuries in the back of a Baltimore police van. Their deaths sparked protests and riots similar to the ones following Floyd’s death.
Prior to Brown’s death, Black murders had fallen the previous four years.
Fox News Digital reviewed murder data from 2014 and 2015 and found a spike of 15% in year over year data. At least 7,000 Black Americans were killed each year thereafter without ever exceeding the 8,000 mark……
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.
Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-04-20 06:24:212022-04-20 06:24:21BLM’s Defund Police Movement Cause of Massive Increase in Black Americans Murdered
“Many people are not living their dreams because they are living their fears.” – Les Brown
“Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.” – Theodore Roosevelt
One of the many great things done by President Trump was putting in place a conscience rule whereby Health Care workers could refuse to perform certain medical procedures or work if it conflicted with their sincerely held religious or moral beliefs.
The bill was never actually put in place as democrats and leftists in dozens of blue states and other liberal advocacy groups tied it up from 2019 onwards in Federal Courts.
Had it been implemented as planned, it would have allowed any and all health workers to legally refuse to provide services like abortions, contraception, gender affirming care, or any other procedure they objected to on religious and/or moral grounds.
The Democrats, as they get closer to losing power, and understanding that as many red states are introducing legislation to reduce or eradicate abortions and transgender care, they are telling this illegal regime occupying the White House to ensure that the Trump conscience bill never becomes law.
After all, these lefties love abortions! Especially those up to birth!! Destroying lives for political gain is their game. Just suck those babies out!! Murder them and call it a “woman’s choice” while refusing certain Americans the choice of if to take the poison – whoops – I mean China Virus Shot!
The plans to permanently remove Trumps conscious clause is underway at the Office of Management and Budget. Weird place to me to do this but what ever works I guess for these tyrants.
Progressive advocates see the removal of the clause as a major step in dismantling the Trump administration’s policy on reproductive rights, something every libtard in the nation hated. After all, they know better so don’t argue! If you do they will call you names covering everything they think will harm you, like racist, homophobe, anti LGBTQUI etc. What was that old expression? Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never harm me! We need to go back to that and stop fearing everything the left throws at us.
Planned Parenthood, one of the most reprehensible and disgusting companies out there that deal in blood, murder and mayhem, are delirious that the Biden Administration may get this done! Certainly no wailing and gnashing of teeth there!! Especially as they keep sucking up tax payers money!!
Jacqueline Ayers, the senior vice president of policy, organizing and campaigns for Planned Parenthood stated joyously “as state politicians continue to strip people of their sexual and reproductive rights and freedoms, it’s imperative that the Biden-Harris administration revoke this discriminatory policy and help ensure people can access the healthcare and information they need when they need it.” Healthcare? Since when did callous pre thought out murder of a living human being become healthcare? Just asking…..
Originally U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, a Hussein Ovomit – I mean Obama appointed federal judge with a very leftist past and career, was the Judge who initially killed the Trump conscious clause. He got his law degree at Harvard… a liberal bastion of lefties, commies and America haters. He and his wife are both very progressive and woke Jews. Enough said and his bias is obvious.
We will continue seeing this administration under Dumbo in Chief, attacking and destroying as fast as they can, Trumps legacy and finest work.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Save America Foundationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSave America Foundation2022-04-20 05:51:022022-04-21 09:33:08Biden to Revoke ‘Conscience’ Rule for Health Workers!
Residents screaming from windows? Children taken from parents? What is going on?
According to official reports, over 25 million Shanghai residents were placed under strict lockdown from March 27, due to rising cases of the Omicron variant of Covid-19. And when they say “lockdown,” they don’t just mean, “essential travel only.” They mean, do not leave your apartment even to purchase food. Shanghai residents must wait inside their apartments for food supplies to be delivered to them. According to a BBC report, Shanghai authorities have admitted that there have been problems with the food supply chain, corroborating complaints of food shortages made by residents.
Day 17 of my Shanghai Covid lockdown and food remains the priority
As usual, I woke up at 6am to try ordering deliveries
I have 10 apps that I cycle through repeatedly from various stores/platforms for several hours trying to find anything
The city has set up testing sites to implement mandatory mass testing, shuttling off Covid-positive residents to hospitals and makeshift quarantine facilities. Loudspeakers blare out, “Get tested now.” Isolating at home is not an option.
One particularly disturbing aspect of the Shanghai lockdown is the separation of parents from children who test positive and are sent off to quarantine facilities. It must be pretty heart-wrenching to see one’s child carted away to a quarantine facility, completely deprived of the support of family and loved ones.
One of the scenes that seems to encapsulate the hopeless plight of Shanghai residents, trapped in their apartments by their own government, is the sound of residents screaming in protest from their windows. This scene was captured on social media, and picked up by many mainstream media, such as The Guardian, as well:
What the?? This video taken yesterday in Shanghai, China, by the father of a close friend of mine. She verified its authenticity: People screaming out of their windows after a week of total lockdown, no leaving your apartment for any reason. pic.twitter.com/iHGOO8D8Cz
Shanghai authorities announced on Monday, April 11, that they would implement a “limited easing” of restrictions. But this comes two full weeks into one of the strictest and most far-reaching lockdowns since the pandemic began. Who knows how many people will by now have been deprived of access to essential medical services, or have gone hungry due to broken supply chains, or have been sunk in depression due to prolonged isolation from friends and loved ones?
Most of the world has by now come to accept that we must live with Covid-19 for the foreseeable future, and that all hopes of a “zero Covid” future were a naïve pipe-dream that will never come to pass. Yet China seems to cling to the fantasy of a zero-Covid world, refusing to accept that such a fantasy has lost every shred of credibility in this endemic phase of the virus.
The severe two-week lockdown in Shanghai has not been successful at containing the virus. Even if it were successful, this success would not be sustainable, since you cannot just keep locking down a large population every time a highly transmissible virus pops its head above the parapet.
To indulge a fantasy privately is one thing; to allow public officials to inflict that fantasy, come hell or high water, on a population of 25 million citizens is quite another.
But as we survey Shanghai from Western nations that have, at least for a while, recovered most of the liberties we were stripped of in the name of public health, we cannot afford to be complacent. For the Orwellian nightmare that we see unfolding before our eyes in Shanghai is just the logical consequence of the very same sort of Covid containment absolutism that ruled the roost across much of the West during a large part of the pandemic.
And this cruel, inhumane, and absolutist approach to disease control, though it has been significantly tempered in most Western nations in the latter months of the pandemic, has only been explicitly disavowed by a fraction of Western governments. So the new public health absolutism unleashed in 2020 has certainly not been laid to rest in the West.
Furthermore, the notion of a WHO-led pandemic “treaty,” now being publicly mooted by the WHO, raises the spectre of an even more tightly coordinated international pandemic response, in a world in which many political and scientific elites, with a limited appreciation for the principles of liberal constitutionalism and individualised medicine, have yet to publicly distance themselves in a principled way from the recklessness and inhumanity of lockdowns and medical coercion.
The Covid containment absolutist fancies himself as a humanitarian, who just wants to save lives, but in reality, embraces a bizarrely selective form of humanitarianism, fixing his attention almost exclusively on lives endangered by Covid infections. Indeed, he is so single-mindedly preoccupied with reducing infections that virtually every other dimension of public health and societal well-being seems to disappear from view.
The Covid containment absolutist is like a grand Chess Master, who has crafted a Master Plan for his army of chess pieces to faithfully follow. If a chess piece protests or resists, it must be put back in its place. At least, in theory.
The trouble is, human beings are much more than chess pieces. They are living, breathing persons with hopes, fears, desires, aspirations, loves, and aversions. They are equipped by nature to be masters of their own destinies, not just pawns on a chessboard.
To shove people around, ship them off to quarantine camps, mandate them to test repeatedly even when they are in perfect health, punish them for not vaccinating, order them to stay at home, confine them within a two-kilometre radius of their homes, or restrict the number of visitors they may receive in the privacy of their own home, is essentially to treat them as cattle, or as pawns on a chessboard, not as autonomous individuals with valid life plans and choices of their own.
To treat people as mere disease vectors, or utility functions in a Covid Containment Plan, is to trample on their dignity and to make their liberties contingent on the questionable musings of an “expert class,” a class that has, for the most part, exhibited a blinkered and impoverished social imagination, and proved itself hopelessly inept at managing a complex public health problem. The disproportionate faith this expert class has placed in containment measures like universal masking, vaccine passports, and lockdowns, has proved delusional.
Shanghai may appear to us now as a distant Orwellian nightmare. But in reality, it is just a slightly accentuated version of the Orwellian nightmare Western governments needlessly inflicted on their own citizens in 2020 and 2021, in the face of a virus that poses no serious threat to young and healthy people and has an estimated Infection Fatality Rate in the range of 0.2-0.3%.
Shanghai’s current lockdown shares with its Western counterparts an inhumane and reckless approach to disease control characterised by dehumanising attitudes toward citizens, a mono-dimensional vision of public health and well-being, and a manifest contempt for human rights. Sadly, this infelicitous approach took root among many leaders of the international public health establishment soon after it was first put on display in Wuhan back in January 2020.
If we are shocked by the way Chinese authorities imprison their citizens in their homes and ship infected citizens off to makeshift isolation camps, then we should probably take a long, hard look in the mirror.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-04-20 05:17:332022-04-20 05:23:41Shanghai’s Orwellian Nightmare is a Reminder of the Inhumanity of Absolutist Approaches to Disease Control
For a group who “isn’t grooming kids,” the left is grooming lots of kids.
Before we get started, I just want to remind you that a transgender boy in a skirt anally raped a girl in a school’s ladies’ restroom, and his school district tried to cover it up. No one was sent to jail. The rapist was transferred to another school, where he sexually assaulted another girl.
Even though we have been assured that there is no grooming going on in schools, the video below shows a lot of attention-starved, science-denying leftists brainwashing kids in schools….
There’s a new game for kids age 4-9 called “Playing with Pronouns.” From the seller’s website:
Read more about our Playing with Pronouns Card Deck. Simple card games to breakdown stereotypes, practice inclusive pronouns & expand everyday understanding beyond the binary for ages 4-9.
Playing with Pronounsis an educational card deck for young children designed to expand gender while learning and playing games. It rose directly from our experience as parents. We needed ways to foster inclusion and respect that were fun and could easily expand into our everyday life.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-04-19 08:17:352022-04-19 10:35:17Starting the Brainwashing Early: New game Called ‘Playing with Pronouns’ is Pitched to Kids Ages 4-9
Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism.
TOPIC: Biden Raises Cost Of Domestic Oil Production With New Order On Federal Leases!
DR. PETER VINCENT PRY
Dr. Peter Vincent Pry is Executive Director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, served as Chief of Staff of the Congressional EMP Commission, Director of the U.S. Nuclear Strategy Forum, and on the staffs of the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA. He is author of the books Will America Be Protected? (2022), Blackout Warfare (2021), and The Power And The Light (2020).
TOPIC: Biden Bans Nuclear Weapons Critical To U.S. National Security!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Conservative Commandos Radio Showhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show2022-04-19 08:03:112022-04-19 15:41:03PODCAST: Biden Bans Nuclear Weapons Critical To U.S. National Security!
Though China’s military is a great danger to the United States, yet, Russia presents an existential threat covertly destroying our republic from within.
Do you know Putin’s policy toward America and the world?
Have you heard about the ideology of Soviet Fascism?
If not, this book is a rich arsenal of information based on both first-hand personal experiences as a Soviet defense attorney and factual data.
It exposes the core of modern terrorism, its ideology and its operations.
By reading this seminal book written by a citizen of the former Soviet Union, you will learn about America’s problems in 2022 derived from decades of collusion between Russia and the Democratic Party.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-04-19 07:16:292022-04-21 14:43:40Book by citizen of the former Soviet Union reveals the truth about what’s happening to America
