‘Batman’ cartoonist Frank Miller dropped from comic convention over accusation of ‘anti-Muslim hate’

Frank Miller himself is not defending “Holy Terror,” so I’m certainly not going to defend it on his behalf, and I don’t endorse torture or killing of innocent people, as his hero seems to in the illustration. But that is not what the controversy is about here. It’s over the claim that “Holy Terror” is “anti-Muslim.” I myself am frequently accused of being anti-Muslim, but the claim is false, baseless, and defamatory. It is no more anti-Muslim to oppose jihad violence than it was anti-German to oppose Nazism. It is worth nothing that “Holy Terror” is described below as “a graphic novel in which an original character known as The Fixer sets out to battle Al-Qaeda.” Meanwhile, “many believed the story depicted the religion of Islam, rather than the specific terrorist group of Al-Qaeda, as the book’s villain,” but no evidence is offered to substantiate that claim. Nor does Miller state this in his disavowal of his work. Maybe it’s true. I don’t know; I’ve never read “Holy Terror.” However, it is also true that it is routine for Islamic supremacist groups in the West to claim that opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women is opposition to Islam itself. They also routinely conflate criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims, and numerous people fall for this, although they have no trouble whatsoever seeing the distinction between criticism of Christianity and hatred of Christians. If Frank Miller had written a comic book about fighting against Christian “right-wing extremists,” and some people accused him of attacking Christianity itself, would this convention had dropped him? Of course not. It would be celebrating him as a hero.

Frank Miller Removed From Thought Bubble Comic Convention Guest List After Being Accused Of Propagating ‘Abhorrent Anti-Muslim Hate

by Spencer Baculi, The Mix, July 29, 2021 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

Legendary comic book industry veteran Frank Miller, whose bibliography includes Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Daredevil, and 300, has been removed from the guest list for the upcoming Though Bubble UK Comic Convention after a number of attendees threatened to boycott the event based on their belief that the creator “is responsible for propagation of abhorrent anti-Muslim hate”.

Miller was first announced as a guest for the North Yorkshire, England-based comic convention on June 2nd, with his name being emphasized to the same degree as fellow special guests Joëlle Jones (Wonder Girl) and Christian Ward (New Mutants) on a promotional poster for the event released that same day.

Though Miller’s initial invitation announcement seemed to come and go without any incident, on July 27th, award-winning cartoonist and small press publisher ShortBox founder Zainab Akhtar revealed that they would “no longer be attending Thought Bubble festival this November” in protest of Miller’s attendance.

In a statement announcing her protest of the convention, Akhtar asserted, “As a proud Muslim woman, I cannot in good conscience attend a festival that deems it appropriate to invite and platform Frank Miller, a person who is responsible for the propagation of abhorrent anti-Muslim hate, particularly via his work.”

“Anti-Muslim bigotry is repugnant and condemnable yet has become so deeply rooted, so widely accepted in society that it is not even given a cursory consideration, as evidenced once again in this situation,” Akhtar continued. “I cannot comprehend how time and time again, festivals and communities within comics espouse values regarding inclusivity, diversity, ‘comics being for everyone’, zero tolerance on hate, but all that lip-service evaporates when they are asked to enact those same values.”

In a follow-up tweet, Akhtar stated that though she had “first contacted Thought Bubble about this privately, 8 weeks ago” and had been “assured action would be taken”, Miller’s continued invitation made her feel as if “it’s been communicated to me that I am the acceptable loss: repercussions to my career/income over repercussions to theirs.”

Though Akhtar does not cite any specific instances of anti-Muslim bigotry from Miller, it is assumed that she is referring to his creation of Holy Terror, a graphic novel in which an original character known as The Fixer sets out to battle Al-Qaeda.

Originally developed for DC as a Batman story, Holy Terror would release to widespread criticism, as many believed the story depicted the religion of Islam, rather than the specific terrorist group of Al-Qaeda, as the book’s villain.

However, while Miller stood by his work upon its publication in 2006, he has since changed his opinion of the self-admitted “propaganda” story.

“When I look at Holy Terror, which I really don’t do all that often, I can really feel the anger ripple out of the pages. There are places where it is bloodthirsty beyond belief,” Miller told The Guardian’s Sam Thielman in 2018. “I don’t want to go back and start erasing books I did,” he replies. “I don’t want to wipe out chapters of my own biography. But I’m not capable of that book again.”

As Akhtar’s tweet soon sparked calls to boycott the entire convention amongst her supporters, Though Bubble ultimately announced on July 28th that “Frank Miller will not be attending Thought Bubble.”

“Over the last fourteen years Thought Bubble has grown into an amazing community of comic creators and fans who we love, trust and respect. We have let you down, and in our commitment to maintaining Thought Bubble as a safe space for all, we have fallen short,” read the convention organizer’s statement. “We exist to share the art form and its worlds with people. If any individual, group or community feels uncomfortable or excluded from our show then we’ve failed.”

“We know that many of you are disappointed in us, and have been expecting a comment on this before now,” they continued. “We are sorry for our silence while we’ve been trying to fix this. Frank Miller will not be attending Thought Bubble.”

Continuing their statement, the organizers further affirmed that they were “deeply sorry, particularly to those who we should be standing up for the most,” and hoped “that you can give us the opportunity to make this better and we thank you for holding us accountable.”

“We know there is still more to discuss and we will be replying to those who have been in touch, we hope you can bear with us while we do this,” the statement concluded. “We won’t let you down again.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Al-Qaeda calls for vehicular jihad attacks in U.S., calls truck ‘the ultimate mowing machine’

Qatar: Indian woman abused and tortured, ‘they told me I was a slave they had bought’

UK: Man converts to Islam, travels to the Islamic State, shares jihad beheading videos

Germany: Muslim migrant stabs man, then beheads him

Muslim migrant suspected of raping and murdering 13-year-old flees to London despite international arrest warrant

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

VIDEO: Hunter Biden, Crack, Lies and Videotape

A Glazov Gang interview with Jeff Crouere, author of ‘America’s Last Chance’ on Hunter Biden, crack addict and son of Joe Biden.

WATCH:

EDITORS NOTE: This Glazov Gang video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Marxist Democrat Assault: Don’t Get Mad, Get Even

Cuomo, Newsom, Biden et.al. are working in unison to attack our sacred constitutional rights to life, liberty and happiness. Freedom is under assault! Now is the time to focus like we did in 2009/2010. We need to re-ignite the flame of the Tea Party movement, only this time smarter and more strategic: 1776. Graham Ledger speaks with Clay Clark and the role his Reawaken America Tour is playing in this effort to organize and push back against this Marxist attack.

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

Biden Camp Considers Us Domestic Terrorists

I don’t know whether you read the Whitehouse.gov website regularly but it contains a lot of information on their leftist and extremist future actions against who you and I call patriots and they call domestic terrorists. I am copying and pasting a press release from June 23rd written and released by Homeland Security Advisor Liz Sherwood-Randall. She is a career liberal minded government worker, (from 1986 with then Senator Biden) who has staunch leftist views. She has notably worked with testosterone challenged Hussein Obama and our mentally challenged Joe Biden, both of whose radical agendas she supports. Her father, surprise, was a wealthy liberal lawyer and patron of the arts in LA.

I want you to take the time to carefully read what I have copied here and understand the steps they are taking to silence the right and our voices, to ruin our lives and careers and take note who they are doing this with. I hope you are as alarmed as I am. As regards that web site, try hit it at least weekly. You will be shocked at what they post. They are not even trying to hide their agenda now.

As always I have included the link below for you all. Feel free to share this blog far and wide!!

Remarks by Homeland Security Advisor Liz Sherwood-Randall at the University of Virginia on National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.

Good afternoon. I’m delighted to have the opportunity to speak at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center and Karsh Center for Law and Democracy, even if only virtually, and to discuss the Biden Administration’s new National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.

I asked to speak in the historic setting of Charlottesville because the nation was riveted four years ago this summer on the chilling events that reflected disturbing trends in our culture raised the specter of domestic terrorism.

President Biden launched his campaign by pointing to the violence we saw in Charlottesville in August 2017—including domestic terrorist violence. He called it a battle for the soul of America.

In his inaugural address, President Biden specifically pointed to “a rise in political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism that we must confront and we will defeat.”

The use of violence to pursue political ends is a profound threat to our public safety and national security. And it is even more than that: it is a threat to our national identity, our values, our norms, our rule of law—our democracy.

We saw this vividly on January 6th when the Congress and the U.S. Capitol were attacked.

Democracy isn’t something we create once. Democracy is a process, not a static condition. It is, as President Biden said today, “a way of being.”

We have to renew it and reinvest in it in each generation, affirming a simple but profound premise: that we can and must resolve our differences peacefully, through civil civic discourse and at the ballot box, rather than through physical intimidation and violence.

At the same time, our efforts to counter domestic terrorism must take place within the context of upholding Americans’ civil rights and civil liberties—the very freedoms that make us the United States of America.

President Biden is briefed regularly on the domestic terrorism threat and has discussed what we need to be doing to counter it in a series of meetings in our first five months in office with his key Cabinet members, including Attorney General Garland, Secretary of Homeland Security Mayorkas, FBI Director Wray, and Secretary of Defense Austin.

And he has consistently guided us to undertake this vital work without undermining our values and freedoms or, inadvertently, exacerbating the very challenges we are seeking to address.

Notably, we are tackling these challenges 20 years after the events of September 11th, 2001, which led to the building of a strategy and indeed an entire architecture to counter global terrorist threats—which is work that Fran Townsend pioneered earlier in her career. We have learned a lot over the last two decades. That experience has taught us the importance of remaining true to who we want to be at home and in the world, and about finding the balance between countering very real threats while protecting basic freedoms that are the foundation of our democracy and our enduring advantage in the world.

I’d like to explain some of the core guiding principles that informed our approach to that vital task and then set forth the four key pillars of our strategy, which the Attorney General announced in a major speech at the Justice Department last week, on June 15th.

Our first guiding principle: Start with the facts, and analyze them rigorously.

This is foundational to everything we do on this front – as it is more broadly in the national security domain.

To establish an objective, fact-based view of the domestic terrorism challenge we faced as a new Administration in January 2021, President Biden tasked the intelligence and law enforcement communities during his first week in office to produce a comprehensive assessment of today’s domestic terrorist threat. The goal was to understand the risks that domestic terrorists pose and let the expert assessment guide us as we formulate a strategy and implement it.

The career professionals found that domestic violent extremists motivated by a range of ideologies pose an elevated threat to our country —with racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists and anti-government militia violent extremists posing the most lethal threats.

Further, violent extremists who promote the superiority of the white race have the most persistent transnational connections.

Overall, however, the report did not find a robust nexus between domestic terrorists and foreign actors. At this time, this is largely an inside-out problem, not an outside-in problem, though we know that our adversaries are seeking to sow divisions in our country.

This brings me to our second guiding principle: Make this a clear White House priority so that the entire U.S. Government gives immediate attention to an urgent threat and sustains that attention throughout our Administration.

That’s why we built a team at the National Security Council specifically dedicated to coordinating our government’s domestic terrorism strategy—the first team of its kind ever created within the White House. We have learned lessons from international terrorism where we could; and we treat domestic terrorism as distinctive where we should.

The third guiding principle underpinning this work is to ensure that we learn from the career professionals and experts who do this hard work every day.

Our team has worked with an extraordinary community of relevant experts across the Federal Government, including law enforcement and homeland security components and elements that haven’t traditionally been part of national security conversations, such as the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Veterans Affairs. They have helped us to grasp what important efforts are already underway to address issues related to domestic terrorism and shared lessons learned from previous efforts about where there are gaps and opportunities to innovate and improve, so that we evolve as quickly as the threat is evolving.

The fourth guiding principle is that we must be in ongoing conversations with the broader stakeholder community, from civil rights groups to faith-based organizations to technology companies to universities like the one hosting this dialogue today to law enforcement partners at the state and local level. We have also consulted with Members of Congress—both Democrats and Republicans—to learn how they regard this evolving threat and to ensure they understand our approach.

By following these core principles, we developed America’s first-ever National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism, with a focus on four key pillars.

The first pillar, which addresses understanding and sharing information about domestic terrorism, builds directly on the comprehensive threat assessment completed in March. We must understand this threat fully in order to address it fully. That’s why we’re ensuring that the Federal Government is gathering information on domestic terrorism comprehensively, within existing authorities and consistent with constitutional protections, to improve that understanding. For the first time, The Department of Justice is now tracking Federal law enforcement’s investigations nationwide in this area comprehensively. For the first time, the Department of State and other agencies are making this issue a priority for information exchanges with foreign partners. And, for the first time, we’re creating a structured mechanism to ensure that our government benefits, in a consistent and systematic way, from the worthwhile research and analysis done on this issue by non-governmental experts like the experts at the Karsh and Miller Centers.

That understanding informs the Strategy’s second pillar, which focuses on prevention.

Drawing on the expertise of a variety of Federal departments and agencies, we will work with communities to become more effective at preventing individuals from ever reaching the point of committing acts of terrorism.

To do this, we will strengthen domestic terrorism prevention resources and services and work to improve public awareness of Federal resources to address threatening behavior before violence occurs.

For example, the Department of Homeland Security is building on its counterterrorism mantra that if you see something, you should say something. Recognizing that family, friends, and co-workers may be the first to realize someone is radicalizing to violence, we need to create pathways for sharing information that feel comfortable and are easily accessible.

For the first time, DHS has designated “Domestic Violent Extremism” as a National Priority Area within the Department’s Homeland Security Grant Program, which means that over $77 million will be allocated to state, local, tribal, and territorial partners to prevent, protect against, and respond to domestic violent extremism.

To offer another example, the Department of Defense is ensuring service members leaving the military are aware that they could be targeted for recruitment by violent extremists.

We will also be augmenting efforts to address online terrorist recruitment and mobilization to violence by domestic terrorists. This is an enormous challenge and one that will require ongoing ingenuity and collaboration with the private sector. The strategy directs increased information sharing with the technology companies and the creation of innovative approaches to foster digital literacy and build resilience in the face of terrorist recruitment and mobilization.

Relatedly, in May, we announced our decision to join the Christchurch Call to Action to Eliminate Terrorist and Violent Extremist Content Online, an international partnership among 56 governments and 10 technology companies including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube that works to develop new solutions to eliminating terrorist content online while safeguarding free expression.

This framework was forged by some of our closest foreign partners following the 2017 attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, that left 51 dead and dozens wounded. What they’ve built has energized and guided an important global conversation about how to address terrorism threats online while protecting and indeed promoting freedom of expression that we as Americans cherish. And we are stronger when we stand together with countries that share our values, especially in urging technology companies to take vital actions to secure their platforms against exploitation.

Prevention efforts are important, but we know they will not always succeed in stopping radicalization toward violence. That’s why the Strategy’s third pillar involves disrupting and deterring domestic terrorists.

Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement are critical to countering domestic terrorism. We are deliberately increasing support to law enforcement to enable them to more effectively address domestic terrorism nationwide.

As Attorney General Garland has emphasized, U.S. Attorney’s Offices and FBI Field Offices across the country are making domestic terrorism a top priority, with the Justice Department and FBI reallocating or requesting appropriate funding and resources to target the threat. In the President’s Fiscal Year 2022 Budget, we have included over $100 million in additional resources for DOJ, FBI, and DHS to ensure that the Federal Government has the analysts, investigators, prosecutors, and other personnel and resources it needs to thwart domestic terrorism and do justice when the law has been broken.

State, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement will have access to increased intelligence sharing and training on domestic terrorism and associated threats. That includes, for example, enhanced training on domestic terrorism iconography, symbology, and phraseology as well as augmented information on how to recognize potential indicators of mobilization to domestic terrorism.

In the Federal Government, we are also working to address the potential “insider threat” posed by deliberate domestic terrorist recruitment of individuals who hold or have held sensitive positions in the military and law enforcement. We are, in particular, improving employee screening to enhance methods for identifying domestic terrorists who might pose insider threats.

The Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Justice are pursuing efforts to ensure domestic terrorists are not employed within our military or law enforcement ranks and to improve screening and vetting processes. Moreover, resources are being developed for state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement partners to enable them to enhance their own employee screening programs.

Finally, we must also address long-term contributors to domestic terrorism. That is the fourth pillar of our Strategy.

This reflects the context within which our first three pillars are situated, and involves broader possibilities for reducing the drivers of domestic terrorism over the years and generations to come, such as by reducing persistent economic inequality and by helping those who feel left behind in a 21st century economy. Our long-term efforts also involve reducing and protecting Americans from racial, ethnic, and religious hatreds; building trust in our institutions; working toward an information environment that fosters healthy democratic discourse; and stemming the flow of firearms to individuals intending to commit acts of domestic terrorism, including through initiatives that will be discussed by the President later today as part of the Administration’s gun violence and violent crime prevention strategy. While this work is beyond the remit of traditional counterterrorism work, our strategy will be situated within our Administration’s comprehensive efforts to strengthen the long-term health of our nation.

I’ve learned across my opportunities to serve in government, with this being my fourth tour of duty, that strategies mean little unless they are translated into concrete and consequential actions. Having first worked for President Biden in the Senate when I was 26 years old, I can say with confidence that he puts a premium on effective implementation. The work of implementing this strategy so as to make Americans safer is already well underway. And in doing this work today and every day, we will remain vigilant against all threats to Americans, including those posed by terrorists internationally, because we will never take our eyes off threats to our safety and security, whether they come from at home and abroad.

It is a privilege to join each of you today to discuss this vital work. By tackling domestic terrorism together, each of us can make a contribution to safeguarding our precious democratic experiment. So, I thank each of you, wherever you are today, and whatever role you play—perhaps in the Federal Government; perhaps with a state, local, territorial, or tribal partner; or perhaps with a non-profit, such as a university, working on violence prevention or researching terrorist recruitment online.

We are committed to protecting this nation and staying focused on this work. And we believe this Strategy can guide us for years to come. As Justice Thurgood Marshall said upon receiving the Liberty Medal from the National Constitution Center, “Democracy just cannot flourish amid fear. Liberty cannot bloom amid hate. Justice cannot take root amid rage. America must get to work.” That’s exactly what we’re doing: we are getting to work.

Now I’ll turn things back to Fran, who knows very well the challenges of serving as Homeland Security Advisor and tackling existential threats. Fran, thank you again for making time for this, conversation.

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

Michigan: Citizens Organize to Oppose Home for Unaccompanied Alien Children in Their Community

EDITORS NOTE:  I am posting this story here and at RRW today because it supports my recent harangue that you must get to work locally!  There is no one coming to your rescue as the Open Borders agitators expand their reach into towns large and small across the country.

They are working day and night to change America by changing the people!

The only hope you have now is to fight against the Progressive Left where you live!  Local elected officials can still be moved through public pressure, there really is no hope at the state or federal level right now.


Here is a brief report of what is happening in Alma, Michigan where a federal resettlement subcontractor is planning to open a “home” for Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) who are not refugees, but have recently invaded the southern border.

See data: mostly teenaged males! And, don’t you dare use the word “alien” says the Biden Administration.

These local citizens speaking up against the plan are doing what you should be doing where you live because I will bet the ‘religious’ Leftwingers are a step ahead of you and have either begun moving ‘new Americans’ to your community or have you in their sites.

From the Epoch Times:

Resettlement of Unaccompanied Minors Divides Michigan Town

ALMA, Mich.—A proposal to open a 36-bed residential resettlement facility for illegal alien teenagers in a small central Michigan city has ignited a firestorm of opposition from its citizens.

An estimated 400 people attended the City of Alma Planning Commission’s July 12 public hearing to voice their opinions on the issue. The planning commission is expected to make a recommendation to the city commission on Aug. 4 on whether to approve a request for the conditional rezoning of a recently closed nursing home facility owned by Michigan Masonic Home—also known as Masonic Pathways—a fraternal philanthropic nonprofit organization.

Bethany Christian Services, a nonprofit corporation based in Grand Rapids, Michigan, that would operate the facility, has signed a letter of intent to lease the 6.1-acre property for an annual rent of $385,440, for the purpose of running what it calls “a small group shelter for the short-term care of low-risk youth from 12 to 17 years of age.” Bethany’s goal is to connect the youths with relatives or place them in foster homes.

The Alma shelter, and other such arrangements across Michigan and beyond, are part of the Biden administration’s effort to disseminate the thousands of migrants surging across the United States’ southern border and throughout the interior of the country, and place them in what it calls “influx sites.”

During the month of March, more than 19,000 unaccompanied minors were taken into custody at the southern border by Border Patrol, the largest monthly number in U.S. history.

Bethany Christian Services (subcontractor of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service*** located in Baltimore, MD) says it doesn’t cost Michigan anything because the feds are footing the bill.  Well, obviously the federal money is our money!

Moving them in secrecy!

Media organizations operating in Texas have reported for weeks that unaccompanied children taken into custody at the U.S.–Mexico border are being flown on U.S. military or other government-supplied airplanes to undisclosed destinations. The locations aren’t being divulged out of “concern for the safety of the children,” one federal official said.

At the public hearing in Alma, a spokesperson for Bethany Christian Services explained how the process is paid for, saying: “Everything is fully funded by the U.S. government.

“This program doesn’t cost the state of Michigan anything.

Bethany plays the Christian card….

“Bethany’s mission is to demonstrate the love and compassion of Jesus by protecting children. It is a moral issue.”

Audience member Dr. Jeff Smith, who strongly opposes the proposed resettlement center in Alma, appeared to take offense at the claim that the issue is a moral one.

“Don’t lecture me about what’s morally right,” he said. “I went to these countries on medical mission trips. I’m not going to be told I am morally bad by people who stand to make millions.”

There is more here.

Here is more information that shows that the citizens of Alma are doing their homework!

Just so you know, you may see less of me because I plan to spend more time taking my own advice!

***I wrote about the role of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, one of two major refugee contractors (US Conference of Catholic Bishops is the second major government contractor) who are paid to ‘take care of’ the mostly teenaged border jumpers here in April.

See that the largest portion of LIRS federal boodle is for UAC ‘care.’

I have many posts both here and at RRW about ‘Unaccompanied Alien Children’ so use my search function on my home page to find more.

Endnote:  As you know there is a contact form on my homepage and I usually write back to those of you with questions.  However, I have noticed that I rarely get a response to those e-mails.  So please check your spam folders from time to time.

Additionally, a couple of readers reported recently that my posts were going to their spam folders.

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

PODCAST: How Western Democracies Are Losing to Political Islam

An Interview by Vibhuti Jha on Jaipur Dialogs.

Topics include:

  • The power of using the right language and precisely defined terms.
  • How democracies are submitting to Islam in all areas.
  • Is there still freedom of speech in the West?
  • The fear factor in democracies about Islam.
  • Why I admire the Muslim Brotherhood.
  • Why we must fight an ideological war.
  • Why we must form groups to work with, so we are not fighting as individuals.
  • How Muslims are willing to donate money to the effort to defeat us and how Kafirs do not really support Kafir fighters.
  • When Muslims become candidates for public office, we must use the public forum as a time to ask tough questions about Sharia and political Islam. To do this, we must have the ability to create groups of Kafirs who work in communication with others doing the same thing in other areas.

EDITORS NOTE: This Political Islam podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Listen to hundreds more of my tracks on SoundCloud. You can now also follow me on SpotifyBreaker or Radio Public.

CFACT Exposes Climate Quislings at Freedom Fest

The gloves were off at Freedom Fest in Rapid City, SD last week when CFACT and the Heartland Institute squared off against representatives of the American Conservation Coalition (ACC) and the C3 Solutions organization in a climate change debate. At issue was how libertarians and conservatives should approach the climate change issue.

CFACT and Heartland have long opposed compromising with the Left on climate change. The two organizations oppose the ideas that the “science is settled” and “America needs to move forward” to aggressively tackle the climate “crisis.” ACC and C3, in contrast, believe that climate change is indeed a serious matter (and thus concede that the UN and Greens are correct on the science), but hope to promote solutions that are less extreme than a Green New Deal.

Throughout the discussion, neither side gave an inch. You can watch an excerpt of the debate here.

The debate began with James Taylor of the Heartland Institute delivering a litany of stats and data that debunked a host of climate claims dealing with temperature records, severe weather events such as hurricanes, drought, and other things. He was followed by Benji Backer of ACC who didn’t challenge his data, but instead focused on polls showing that young people, even conservatives and libertarians, believed the climate claims of those on the Left to be true. He then urged conservatives not to challenge the science, but rather to try and move young people into embracing “market-based” solutions instead of those proposed in the Green New Deal.

This lit a fuse under CFACT’s Morano. Morano took aim at the claim that there was a legitimate scientific consensus underpinning extreme climate claims, noting that “to cite these kind of climate authorities is kind of like saying ‘well if Fauci said it, or the World Health Organization said it, so therefore you can’t disagree’…this is the exact position of Google, Facebook and all that.”

Things got even more testy when Morano took aim at Backer’s premise that libertarians and conservatives should accept the fact that young people are not misinformed on the science.

“We have to go to the heart of this, and the heart of this is what Benji said, ‘there’s no debate of this among young people.’ Well gee, what should we do then? I guess we’ll just agree and come up with our own ‘conservative’ solutions? No! There’s a reason young people are so indoctrinated into climate fear. It’s because the old people for 30 years have never shown a concern for climate. All of a sudden, the climate activists got real and said ‘let’s go after the young people, they’re more gullible.’ And that’s how they were able to convince a whole generation of young people that climate is a problem.”

He even chided Backer for his praise of Greta Thunberg during a Congressional hearing.

“My biggest concern is Benji sat beside Greta Thunberg at a Congressional hearing in 2019. He turned to Greta and thanked her for raising awareness to the climate issue for young people across the world. To me that was horrific. Greta Thunberg has done more to instill alarm in young people with scientific nonsense than any person in the world.”

The audience erupted into hearty applause.

Backer shot back, defending his praise of Thunberg by saying: “I sat next to Greta Thunberg, instead of you, because you cherry-pick the science in a way that is very harmful to the people in this audience, and the people in America, who have been misled by you and James’ cherry-picking data through sources that are not real.”

Both James Taylor and Morano frequently cite NASA, UN IPCC and NOAA data to defend their positions.

After the debate, the discussion moved to a side event hosted by the Heartland Institute where James Taylor and John Hart were joined by CFACT president Craig Rucker to delve deeper into the issues that divide the two sides. In a much more conciliatory manner, the presenters each offered brief synopses of their positions and entertained numerous questions from an engaged audience.

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

VIDEO: The Push is On to Extend One of the Federal Government’s Worst Pandemic Power-Grabs

Nobel-Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman famously quipped that “nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” If only he’d known how apt this would prove during a pandemic.

Of course, Friedman didn’t mean to suggest that expansions of government power and control over the economy are never rolled back or repealed. Just that we ought to be wary of promised “temporary” programs or interventions, because there will inevitably be a strong push for their perpetuation. We’re witnessing this phenomenon play out in real time as politicians in Washington push to—yet again—extend the federal government’s halt on evictions nationwide.

The so-called “eviction moratorium” in question was initially implemented by Congress in March 2020 and then drastically, unilaterally expanded by the Centers for Disease Control in September 2020. (Yes, under the Trump administration.) It made tenants below a certain income threshold immune from eviction even if they did not pay their rent, so long as they provided written notice and cited certain excuses. Landlords who violate the moratorium were threatened with fines of up to $100,000 and jail time. They were, however, still allowed to evict tenants under a narrow set of circumstances, such as tenants who engaged in criminal activity or endangered public safety.

After the Biden administration took control in January 2021, it once again extended the supposedly “temporary” nationwide dictate. The moratorium is supposed to lapse on Saturday, July 31. Yet Washington politicians are again mobilizing to renew the order.

President Biden has called on Congress to pass legislation expanding it, after the Supreme Court suggested that it cannot be renewed unilaterally. Meanwhile, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has said that “extending the eviction moratorium is a moral imperative.” As I write this newsletter, Congress is considering legislation to extend it.

But despite politicians’ lofty rhetoric, renewing this drastic measure would be an enormous mistake.

For one, the so-called moratorium was always a constitutionally suspect power-grab. Just think about this: The director of the CDC, an unelected bureaucrat, cited one vague law to unilaterally issue a mandate essentially seizing millions of landlords’ properties and subjecting those properties to unpaid occupation.

It’s as if the CDC ruled that anyone could go to a grocery store, fill up their cart, and walk out without paying. It effectively canceled peoples’ contracts and seized their property. It did so without even providing them the “just compensation” required by the Takings Clause of the Constitution.

“CDC inserting itself into private rental contracts, effectively transferring control of private property from the lawful owner to the renter, is possibly the most socialist action our government has taken in decades… and without an act of Congress!” Congressman Thomas Massie lamented on Twitter. “Rental contracts are governed by state law. There is no federal authority to overturn them. The CDC order is an affront to the rule of law.”

“CDC does not have the authority to do this,” Senator Rand Paul similarly wrote at the time. “It’s dangerous precedent and bad policy.”

So, from the get-go, the eviction moratorium was a bad idea and a dangerous power-grab. But it also created an economic catastrophe and unfairly burdened an entire class of Americans.

Contrary to popular misconception, landlords are not all rich people or mega-corporations. Many are middle-or-working-class Americans who own one or two small properties, or perhaps even just own a multi-family home and rent out the part they don’t occupy. Oftentimes, rental properties are these peoples’ retirement investments and crucial to their long-term financial security.

The federal government basically commandeered their investment, forced them to give it away for free, and left them to deal with the catastrophic results.

This has had perverse unintended consequences. For example, a few months ago I interviewed one landlord, libertarian policy analyst Jen Sidorova, who has left several of her rental units empty given the moratorium.

“I had to basically bail out my own property because [my renters] knew they could just stay and not pay,” she said. “I have one tenant [out of four units] that is still paying. For the two units I have vacant, I actually am not renting them out. I think that’s another problem with the moratorium: Landlords are going to hold their units because there’s no way in [expletive] I can afford supporting other people.”

So, too, the moratorium has left an enormous $21 billion tab in unpaid rent built up. Whenever the order finally expires, crushing bills will come due. They will either bankrupt delinquent renters, leave landlords in the lurch, or, unfortunately, be passed on to taxpayers via a bailout.

The longer the eviction moratorium continues, the more this dysfunction magnifies. Of course, that only gives politicians more incentive to expand it into perpetuity to avoid having to face the fallout from their poor policy decisions. The ultimate loser from such cowardice, though, is American taxpayers. Remember that next time you hear the word “temporary” attached to a proposal for a new government program.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: The CDC’s ‘Eviction Moratorium’ Is Hurting Landlords Like Me

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

Gender Ideology Run Amok

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on April 27, 2021, in Franklin, Tennessee, at a Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar.


In 2007, America had one pediatric gender clinic; today there are hundreds. Testosterone is readily available to adolescents from places like Planned Parenthood and Kaiser, often on a first visit—without even a therapist’s note.

How did we get to this point? How is it that we are all supposed to pretend that the only way you can know I’m a woman is if I tell you my pronouns? How did we get to an America in which a 13-year-old in the State of Washington can begin “gender affirming” therapy without her parents’ consent? How did we get to an America in which a 15-year-old in Oregon can undergo “top surgery”—elective double mastectomy—without her parents’ permission? And what can we do about it?

To understand how we got to this point, it is useful to begin by considering gender dysphoria—the feeling of severe discomfort in a person’s biological sex. Gender dysphoria is certainly real. It is also exceedingly rare. It afflicts about 0.01 percent of the population, most of whom are male.

For nearly 100 years of diagnostic history, gender dysphoria typically began in early childhood, between the ages of two and four, and usually involved a boy who insisted that he was not a boy but a girl. Children afflicted are insistent, consistent, and persistent in the feeling that they are in the wrong body. It is by all accounts excruciating—I’ve talked to many transgender adults, most of them biological males, who describe the relentless chafe of a body that feels all wrong.

Historically, this has been the classic presentation of gender dysphoria. When these children were left alone—when no one intervened medically or encouraged what we today call “social transition”—over 70 percent of them naturally outgrew their gender dysphoria. Most of those who outgrew it became gay men. Those who did not outgrow it became what used to be known as transsexuals. They did not believe they were women, but they felt most comfortable presenting themselves as females.

Today, however, we don’t leave these children alone. Instead, the moment children seem not to be perfectly feminine or perfectly masculine, we label them as “trans kids.” Teachers encourage them to reintroduce themselves to their classes with new names and new pronouns. We take them to therapists or doctors, nearly all of whom practice so-called affirmative care—meaning they think it is their job to affirm the diagnosis of gender dysphoria and help the children medically transition.

The typical first step in treatment administered to these kids is puberty blockers, which shut down the part of the pituitary gland that directs the release of hormones catalyzing puberty. The most common of these drugs is Lupron, whose original purpose was the chemical castration of sex offenders. To this day, the FDA has never approved this drug for halting healthy puberty.

One has to wonder why a parent or a doctor would take measures to stop a child’s puberty, given that even a child with genuine gender dysphoria would most likely outgrow that condition if left alone. Some argue that it is traumatizing to let children go through the puberty of the sex to which they do not wish to belong. But in many cases, puberty seems to have helped children overcome gender dysphoria. The truth is that there is no satisfying answer, given that scientists have no way of predicting which children will outgrow the dysphoria on their own and which won’t.

Proponents of “affirmative care” also argue that allowing puberty to occur is dangerous, because suicide rates for trans-identified youth and trans adults are very high. Therefore, they say, we need to start treating children with gender dysphoria as soon and as dramatically as possible.

Yet there are no good long-term studies indicating that puberty blockers cure suicidality or even improve mental health. Nor are there studies that show puberty blockers are safe or reversible when used in this manner.

What we do know is that puberty blockers prevent the development of secondary sex characteristics, sexual maturation, and bone density. Indeed, because of the inhibition of bone density and other risks, doctors don’t like to keep children on puberty blockers for more than two years.

We also know that in almost every case when a child’s healthy puberty is medically arrested, placing the child out of step with his or her peers, that child proceeds to cross-sex hormones. And when puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are administered to a girl, she becomes infertile. She may also have permanent sexual dysfunction given that her sex organs never reach adult maturity.

Given this, the claims made by so many doctors and gender activists today that these medical transition measures for children are safe and reversible—that they are a “pause button,” without serious downsides—are not only dishonest, but destructive. We would not accept this sort of glib salesmanship in any other area of medicine.

Trans Identification among Teenage Girls

As I mentioned, for the nearly 100-year history of scientific study of gender dysphoria, it has been diagnosed almost exclusively in young children, and mostly in boys. But over the last decade, large numbers of teenage girls have begun to claim they have gender dysphoria.

Prior to 2012, in fact, there was no scientific literature on gender dysphoria arising in teenage girls. Dr. Lisa Littman, then a Brown University public health researcher, used the phrase “rapid onset gender dysphoria” to refer to the subsequent sudden spike in transgender identification among teenage girls with no childhood history of gender dysphoria.

This spike is not unique to America—we see it across the Western world. To offer just one statistic, there has been a decade-to-decade increase of over 4,400 percent in the number of teenage girls seeking treatment at the United Kingdom’s national gender clinic. Across the West, teen girls are now the leading demographic claiming to have gender dysphoria.

What is behind this is social contagion—the spread of ideas, emotions, and behaviors through peer influence, one more instance of teenage girls sharing and spreading their pain. There is a long history of social contagion with this demographic—anorexia and bulimia are also spread this way. And we know that teen girls today are in the midst of the worst mental health crisis on record, with the highest rates of anxiety, self-harm, and clinical depression.

The teen girls susceptible to this social contagion are the same high-anxiety, depressive girls who struggle socially in adolescence and tend to hate their bodies. Add to that a school environment where you can achieve status and popularity by declaring a trans identity. Add to that the teenage temptation to stick it to mom. Also add the intoxicating influence of social media, where trans activists push the idea that identifying as trans and starting a course of testosterone will cure a girl’s problems. Put those together, and you have a fast-spreading social phenomenon.

I’ve spoken to families at top girls’ schools who attest that 15, 20, or in one case 30 percent of the girls in their daughter’s seventh grade class identify as trans. When you see figures like that, you’re witnessing a social contagion in action. There is no other reasonable explanation.

These teen girls are in a great deal of pain. Almost all of them have at some point dealt with an eating disorder, engaged in cutting, or been diagnosed with other mental health comorbidities. And now they’re being allowed to self-diagnose gender dysphoria by a medical establishment that has decided that its job is to affirm and agree with trans-identified adolescents.

Turning a Blind Eye

You may not know the name Keira Bell. She is a young woman in the U.K., very troubled in adolescence, who was rushed to transition in her teen years and came to regret it. She underwent double mastectomy and spent years on testosterone, only to realize that her problem had never been gender dysphoria. She sued the U.K.’s national gender clinic, and last December, after the High Court of Justice examined her case and the claims of similarly situated plaintiffs, she won.

The Court examined the medical protocols applied to Keira Bell—protocols identical to the ones we have in the United States—and was horrified that a young girl had been allowed to consent to begin a process of eliminating her future fertility and sexual function at an age, 15, when she could not possibly have gauged that loss.

Hailed as a “landmark case” by The Times of London, The Economist, and even The Guardian, Bell’s victory was widely viewed as a serious condemnation of the effort to fast-track teen girls to gender transition. One of the appalling things the Court noted was that the national gender clinic had been unable to show any psychological improvement in the adolescents it had treated with transitioning hormones.

If, as I suspect, you haven’t read or heard about the Keira Bell case, that’s because America’s legacy media decided to pretend the case didn’t happen. Similarly, they continue to ignore or dismiss the stories of the thousands of “detransitioners”—young women who underwent medical transition, later regretted it, and attempt to reverse course. A lot of the treatments these girls have undergone are permanent, but they do what they can to try to reverse some of the effects.

Thus it is that in the United States, this crisis among teenage girls gets treated as a political issue—a conservative issue—rather than a medical one. And so perhaps the greatest medical scandal of our time is dismissed as a conservative preoccupation.

The Assault on Women’s Sports and Safe Spaces

No discussion of gender ideology can ignore the ongoing movement to eradicate girls’ and women’s sports and protective spaces. Many or most of the people pushing this are not transgender themselves. But they are activists, they are energized, and they seem to be winning.

This movement promotes dangerous bills like the Equality Act, which would make it illegal ever to distinguish between biological men and women—and thus to exclude a biological male from a girls’ sports team or a women’s protective space, whether it be a restroom, locker room, or prison. We have these laws now in California and in the State of Washington—and as you might imagine, one result is that hundreds of biological male prisoners, many of them violent felons, have applied to transfer to women’s units.

For activists pushing this, it is not enough to create unisex bathrooms, a separate category for trans-identified athletes, or separate safe zones in prisons for trans-identified biological men. No, they are working to abolish all women’s-only spaces and they want to abolish them now.

The common thread running through these topics is that the truth is being obscured by gender ideology. Lies are told about the risks of the transition treatments administered to young children, both to play down the dangers of those treatments and to exaggerate the degree to which those treatments are known to be helpful. Lies are told about the researchers and journalists who attempt to report on the crisis of social contagion among teenage girls undergoing transition treatments. And lies are told about the movement to eradicate women’s protective spaces.

The gender ideology behind these lies is a sibling of critical race theory. While critical race activists are teaching kids that they are largely defined by their skin color, gender activists are teaching kids that there are a great many genders, and that only they know their true gender. And just as families who object to racial indoctrination in schools are told that their denials of racism are proof of racism, young women who object to biological males participating in girls’ sports are told that their objections are proof of transphobic bigotry.

These mendacious dogmas have corrupted our K-12 schools, our universities, and our legacy media, as well as our scientific journals and our medical accrediting organizations—the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, etc. To give you a sense of how far things have gone, I was informed late last year by a member of the National Association of Science Writers—an association of journalists with scientific backgrounds—that a member of the association’s online forum had been expelled for mentioning my book on the transgender social contagion among teenage girls. He hadn’t even read my book. He just mentioned that it sounded interesting, and for that he was banned as transphobic.

Similarly, endocrinologists, psychiatrists, pediatricians, and researchers who are concerned about the risks of gender interventions report that they struggle today to get their research published. And public and private funding of research is almost entirely restricted to researchers who promote gender transition and downplay the risks.

There are phalanxes of young doctors now, many of them in pediatrics or child psychiatry, who are open about their belief that their primary job is “social justice.” They unreservedly celebrate the increase in transitioning treatment of young people and are inexcusably complacent about the risks of those treatments. The Washington Post recently quoted some of these doctors to the effect that puberty blockers are fully reversible—which is not something that any honest doctor can claim to know. We simply don’t have the data to know whether puberty blockers are fully physically reversible when applied to halt healthy puberty—and they are certainly not psychologically reversible. We’re seeing a startling politicization of medicine and science, which is symptomatic of a larger woke corruption of American society.

Now, there’s something I make a point of saying whenever I speak, and I say it for the simple reason that it is true: transgender adults are some of the soberest and kindest people I have met in my work as a journalist. Many of them seem to have been helped by transition, and they are leading admirable and productive lives. They have no desire to harm women or to push transition on children. The gender ideology activists do not represent them.

My understanding of freedom includes a belief that society should allow adults to make consequential decisions about their lives, which includes choosing to undergo sex reassignment surgery. And whenever I am asked by a transgender adult, I use his or her chosen name and pronouns. This seems to me the courteous and the right thing to do. But—and this is a big but—I never lie. This means I never say, and I will never say, that trans women are women. I think reciting this lie leads, as we are seeing, to unjust and dangerous consequences for women and girls. It is not courteous or right to parrot these lies. It is the cowardly surrender of women’s welfare to the woke gods. And it is wrong.

I’m also often asked why it is that the gender ideology activists are doing what they are doing. What possible justification could there be, for instance, for telling small boys that they might be girls and small girls that they might be boys? My best guess at an answer occurred to me while talking to detransitioners. I heard repeatedly from these young women that while they were transitioning, they were angry and politically radical. They often cut off relations with their families, having been coached to do so online by gender activists. Related to this, if you look, you’ll notice a disproportionate number of gender-confused people among the ranks of Antifa in cities like Portland.

In other words, chaos is the point, and these troubled girls become prey for those who seek to recruit revolutionaries. Just as the destructive objective of critical race theory is to divide Americans racially, that of gender ideology is to disrupt the formation of stable families, the building blocks of American life.

So what do we do about it? How do we push back? First and foremost, we must oppose the indoctrination of children in gender ideology. There is no good reason for it, and it does real harm. We can absolutely insist that all children treat each other kindly without indoctrinating an entire generation in gender confusion.

Second, we must overcome our squeamishness and speak the truth in public. Wherever we find ourselves, we must refuse to recite lies. And we must always clearly distinguish between transgender Americans, generally wonderful people, and the ideological transgender movement, which seeks to warp children and weaken families.

This is a movement that would turn our children against themselves because its advocates know there is no greater harm—no quicker way to bring America to its knees—than by driving our children to do themselves irreversible damage. The people pushing this ideology have gotten a head start on us by perhaps a decade. But now I think they have awakened a sleeping giant. The success of my book is one indication. The many state legislatures that are now debating these issues is another.

These are our kids and grandkids. Our future depends on our winning this fight.

COLUMN BY

Abigail Shrier

Abigail Shrier is a journalist and author. She received her A.B. from Columbia College, where she was a Euretta J. Kellett Fellow; her B.Phil. from the University of Oxford; and her J.D. from Yale Law School, where she was a Coker Fellow. A member of the Board of Advisors of the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism, she has written for numerous publications, including City JournalNewsweek, RealClearPolitics, The Federalist, the New York Post, and The Wall Street Journal. She is the author of Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Critical Race Theory

5 Known Connections

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

To learn more about Critical Race Theory, click here.

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

Guilty until Proven Innocent

If you think China and North Korea are the only countries with “political prisoners,” think again. According to some conservatives in Congress, some of the January 6th rioters have been held in jail for months under what they consider abusive conditions. At a press conference earlier this week, Republicans warned about the possible mistreatment of some defendants and demanded that they be treated fairly.

“If they’re guilty, they need to be charged accordingly,” Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) told the Washington Times, “but they need to be treated just like any other criminal.” Stories continue to circulate that even the “nonviolent trespassers” have been put in solitary confinement for several hours a day. “Sadly, two systems of justice exist in America today,” Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) (a former state judge) argued, “one for former President Trump along with those who support or don’t hate him, and the other for everyone else.” His colleague, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) agreed. “To my knowledge, none have been charged for insurrection, so I don’t consider them insurrectionists.”

And yet, their cases are being closely guarded by the DOJ, whose attorney general, Merrick Garland, refuses to answer basic questions from these congressmen about their status. Gohmert, who joined Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch” this week, argues that Biden’s top law enforcer “is only about seeking to please the Democrats. He has no interest in being fair and judicious as the attorney general. It’s really unfortunate. We’ve been begging for answers… We’re not looking into specific cases. We’re just wanting to know, is it true about the abuse that’s been going on?”

Nothing but crickets in return, Gohmert shook his head. He and three other members went to the D.C. jail where some of the defendants are being held and explained that they were congressmen and wanted to ask a few questions. “A lady in uniform came out and said that we were trespassing, and that we had to get out. And I said, we’ve shown our ID for members of Congress. We’re allowed to be here. We have to do oversight to know whether we ought to cut off funding for this facility or keep funding it. We need to know and we haven’t gotten an answer.”

Incredibly, a supervisor came over to the group — a sergeant — and she walked past them to make a phone call outside. So, the four members of Congress followed her outside to ask their questions, and “she double back[ed] around, went into the facility and locked the doors. I’ve never seen anything like [it]. It’s unreal,” Gohmert said.

Regardless of the Biden administration cover-up, Gohmert vows, “We’re going to keep pushing… And of course there’s the media sycophants, but there’s [also] other media and even [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer (D-N.Y.) and [Senator Dick] Durbin (D-Ill.) have asked in recent weeks, are these people being treated fairly? So we’re making headway by bringing attention to this, and we’re just going to keep making noise until the demands get more people involved and finally they can’t ignore the requests we have. So we’ll see what happens. But we’re not giving up.”

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Washington Post: New China Virus [COVID] Strain Not Increasing Deaths

Which prove the mask paranoia is just that. Mass non-compliance. All together now.

The central question, looking ahead: Will the pandemic be less deadly?

Washington Post

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that some 5,600 fully vaccinated people have been hospitalized while coronavirus-positive — though a quarter of them were there for other reasons and learned they had asymptomatic infections once tested in the hospital. When compared with the more than 2 million new hospitalizations this year, that’s a tiny fraction — just as the number of deaths among the vaccinated is a tiny percentage of all covid-related deaths.

This is the goal: Individuals will get vaccinated so that everyone is less likely to get infected, and in the unlikely event that a vaccinated person is infected, the prognosis is significantly better. So, with 69.4 percent of American adults having received at least one dose of a vaccine, we might expect a greater percentage of new infections to avoid hospitalization or death.

Since the current surge in cases began at the beginning of this month, the number of hospitalizations and the number of patients sent to the intensive care unit has tracked with that surge. The number of deaths, though, hasn’t.

When overlaid, we see that the pattern for deaths is, so far, not tracking with cases and hospitalizations.

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

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

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

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

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

Secret Iran Plans to Hack Infrastructure in Western Countries Revealed

Ever since Joe Biden began dropping Trump’s sanctions against Iran, disturbing news has been emerging about Iran’s emboldening in numerous areas. Now comes news that “five secret documents allegedly showing Iranian plans to hack infrastructure in Western countries, including in Europe.” Leaked documents that were obtained by Sky News were “actual internal planning documents for Unit 13, the cyber unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.” Iran has been developing a cyber army  of highly trained specialists and hackers since 2010.

If successful, Iran’s ability to hack into Western infrastructure is worrying, especially given the billions now freed up for the Iranian regime’s expansion.

Secret Iran hacking plans against West revealed

by Yonah Jeremy Bob, Jerusalem Post, July 27, 2021:

Five secret documents allegedly showing Iranian plans to hack infrastructure in Western countries, including in Europe, were publicized by Sky News late Monday night.

Although there have been reports of such hacks by Iran and others in the past, it is unusual for a media organization to obtain actual internal planning documents for Unit 13, the cyber unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Some of the potential hacks the IRGC cyber group might be planning would target a cargo ship’s ballast water system, which could cause irreparable damage, according to the report.

The ballast water system helps balance a ship in certain circumstances by pumping water into special tanks. Tampering with the system could harm this crucial process.

Another Iranian plot might be to hack the automatic tank gage of certain gas stations, which could stop the flow of gas or, in a worst-case scenario, cause an explosion, the report said.

The 57 pages of documents also described attempts to hack maritime communications devices.

Sky News interviewed UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace, who talked more generally about the kind of threats described in the documents. He said the allegations were serious and did not deny them.

The documents described early stages of planning for a cyberattack, but they did not clarify how far along the plans were, an anonymous source said in the report.

It was unclear who leaked the documents, but the leak appeared to be designed to embarrass Tehran before European countries to potentially influence their views on a range of issues regarding Iran…..

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Protests Against Iran Regime Growing Rapidly: ‘Death to the Dictator!’

Islamic Republic of Iran Attempted To Abduct at Least 3 American Journalists in 2019 and 2020

Video: Tony Costa and Robert Spencer on the existence or non-existence of Muhammad

France: Muslim migrants sexually assault woman, stab man who defended her

Malaysia: Three charged with expounding religious doctrines contrary to Islamic law and spreading them on Facebook

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

VIDEO: CDC/Facebook Collusion on Censorship?

Is it any wonder that Americans don’t trust the CDC or Facebook to deliver accurate information? And is it any surprise that your Judicial Watch caught these two organizations colluding to control the flow of news and opinion about Covid-19?

We learned a lot about the behind the scenes, inappropriate friendship of this government agency and this private company after we sued.

We received 2,469 pages of documents from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which reveal that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the Covid narrative and “misinformation.”

In addition, social media companies gave more than $3.5 million in free advertising to the CDC.

We received these documents in response to our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health of Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-00625)) lawsuit for:

Any and all records of communication between CDC officials and/or employees and employees, agents, and/or representatives of Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, and YouTube concerning, regarding, or relating to COVID-19 related content on company platforms. Such records include, but are not limited to, any advice or instructions issued on disinformation re COVID-19.

The documents show little daylight between the CDC and Big Tech on Covid-19 messaging and misinformation:

  • In an email exchange beginning on January 26, 2020 with the subject, “Data for Good | CDC intros,” a Facebook representative sends the “FB coronavirus narrative” to the CDC.

It states the following:

Facebook is taking a three pronged approached to the global response for the coronavirus:

Limit misinformation and other harmful content on our platforms.  Our third-party fact-checkers have been rating information on this topic as false, including the APPolitifactAFP Hong KongRapple IQ in the Philippines. As a result, we show people who come across that false content accurate information from our fact-checking partners and strong warning labels. We also send notifications to people who already shared this content alerting them that it’s been fact checked.

Provide accurate and helpful information on our platforms to our partners. Partners are already using our platforms to share accurate information about the situation, including on Pages. We have also provided ad credits to the World Health Organization and the Philippines’ Department of Health to enable them to run coronavirus education campaigns on Facebook in-region, which we will continue to do. We’re continuing to explore additional steps we can take, including dedicated information modules on relevant search queries and improved search ranking.

Empower partners with data tools. We’re sharing aggregated mobility data and high resolution density maps with various partners (e.g., National Tsinghua University (Taiwan); Harvard School of Public Health) to help inform forecasting models for the spread of the virus as part of our broader Data for Good program. We’re exploring doing this with a broader set of partners (e.g., WHO, US CDC) and also helping partners understand how people are talking about the issue online through tools like Crowdtangle to inform their efforts.

This email exchange continues on showing more coordination on messaging between the CDC and Facebook.

  • The CDC was given over $3.5 million of free advertising on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
    • In a March 8, 2020 email, a Facebook representative sends four ad credits totaling $2 million to the CDC for the purpose of supporting “messaging related to coronavirus.”

On March 14, 2020, then-CDC Chief Operating Officer and Chief Strategy Officer Sherri Berger emails Facebook to thank them for the $2 million.

“On behalf of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and by the authority delegated to me through Section 231 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. Section 238), as amended, thank you for Facebook’s non-monetary gift of advertising credited with an estimated value of $2,000,000.  The gift will be used by CDC’s COVID-19 response to support dissemination of critical public health messaging.  Thank you!”

  • In an email exchange between August 10-11, 2020, the CDC’s Sherri Berger emails Facebook again to thank them for another $1 million in ad credits with a similar message to that on March 14, except she adds: “This gift will be used by the CDC’s COVID-19 response to distribute scientifically accurate data, guidance and risk communication information on COVID-19 to a broader audience.” In an email exchange on August 25, 2020, Facebook makes CDC officials aware that of their recent gift of $1 million in ad credits, $529,207.42 remain.
  • In a heavily redacted email exchange on March 17, 2020, a Twitter official offers the CDC advertising in the form of Twitter’s Promoted Trend and Promoted Spotlight Trend, which have approximate values given as $75,000 and $150,000.
  • In an email exchange beginning March 16, 2020, a Google representative offers the CDC free video advertising on YouTube.  In the exchange, they claim to not be able to assign a dollar value to this advertising. The CDC’s official acceptance document for this advertising, which they value at $0, Sherri Berger states: I understand that Google LLC may be a vendor and/or lobbyist employed and that Google LLC’s employees may be registered lobbyists.  Providing the gift will not prevent Google LLC or its affiliates from supplying products of services to CDC in the future; CDC, however, is under no obligation to accept future services from Google LLC or its affiliates.
  • In a February 27, 2020 email, a Facebook representative offers to put CDC officials in contact with WhatsApp in order to establish auto-responses to FAQs about coronavirus in that communications platform.

These documents show that Facebook and the CDC are joined at the hip on managing the ever-changing Covid-19 “narrative” – which includes censorship of alleged “misinformation.”

I suspect there is more to be found on this topic and Judicial Watch’s investigators and litigators will continue to expose the behind-the-scenes censorious machinations between Big Government and Big Tech that are  a threat to both the truth and your First Amendment rights.

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

We have joined Parler and Rumble! Follow us @JudicialWatch to stay updated on the latest news from Judicial Watch. Rumble and Parler.  Donate today!

U.S. COVID Deaths at Lowest Level Since March 2020

Far more people were dying from COVID-19 months ago as we were winding down restrictions than are dying today as some call to reinstate them.


If you judged the US’s current COVID-19 situation only by the headlines, you’d come away thinking that we’re spiraling back into pandemic disaster. Localities like Los Angeles County and St. Louis have reimposed mask mandates on their citizens, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention just revised its “guidance” to say that, actually, fully vaccinated individuals should still wear masks in certain situations. Meanwhile, mainstream media coverage of the rise of the “Delta variant” is soaked in alarmism.

Yet at the same time that all this alarm is mounting, the actual number of COVID-19 deaths is at a nadir. Harvard Medical School Professor Martin Kulldorff pointed this out on Twitter, writing that “In [the] USA, COVID mortality is now the lowest since the start of the pandemic in March 2020.”

He shared this graph from OurWorldInData which clearly shows how COVID deaths per million are at, relatively speaking, extreme lows. Far more people were dying from COVID-19 months ago as we were winding down restrictions than are dying today as some call to reinstate them.

Now, some would cite rising COVID-19 case counts or hospitalizations in certain parts of the country as evidence that the pandemic is indeed once again spiraling out of control. But many COVID-19 cases recorded as positive are either asymptomatic or come with very mild symptoms—especially the cases confirmed among vaccinated individuals—so high case counts are not necessarily proof of a serious problem. Hospitalizations are concerning, yes, but primarily insofar as they lead to high numbers of deaths, which, thankfully, is not the case so far with the Delta variant.

Others would say that deaths are a “lagging indicator” that come in several weeks after the increased spread of the disease. But the Delta variant has been spreading in the US for months now, and deaths have remained relatively flat, in part due to widespread vaccination.

“It is striking that COVID mortality is at such low levels despite the fact that we are seeing an increase in cases of late,” Stanford Professor of Medicine Dr. Jay Bhattacharya tells FEE. “By immunizing the elderly and many other vulnerable people, we have provided them with excellent protection against severe disease in case they get infected. Also contributing is widespread natural immunity from recovered COVID patients. Though cases may rise, deaths will no longer follow in proportion.  We have effectively defanged the disease with our successful vaccination rollout.”

So, there’s simply no reason to expect the long downward trend in deaths shown in the above graph to suddenly spike upwards. And we can’t make public policy based on worst-case scenarios.

That’s right: despite all the alarmism and clamor for renewed restrictions on our liberty, there’s not really been a resurgence in the state of the COVID-19 crisis itself.

“We should be declaring a great and resounding success,” Bhattacharya told FEE in conclusion. “The COVID emergency is over. We still need to take COVID seriously, and there are still vulnerable people here and abroad left to vaccinate. But we can start to treat it as one disease among many that afflict people rather than an all-consuming threat.”

Of course, proponents of big government and government officials themselves will be the last ones to acknowledge the reality that the most dangerous phase of this pandemic has long since come to an end in the US. Why? Because the rhetoric of “emergency” and “crisis” is the government’s favorite tool to use in expanding and maintaining its power over our lives.

“‘Emergencies’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have eroded,” as Nobel-Prize-winning economist Freidrich Hayek put it. “And once they are suspended it is not difficult for anyone who has assumed emergency powers to see to it that the emergency will persist.”

Examples of this timeless truth abound throughout history up until present day: from the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II to the now-permanent infringements on our civil liberties after 9/11 to the sweeping expansion of government control during the COVID-19 pandemic.

But, whether politicians like it or not, the COVID-19 crisis is largely over. So don’t fall for cynical arguments from power-hungry individuals who want their “emergency” powers to become permanent.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.