The Pillars of Transgender Medicine are Shaking

Recent studies have exposed the flimsiness of much of the evidence. 


Can you really be transgender at four years old? Matthew Stubbings, and wife Klara Jeynes, both 44, from the English city of Doncaster, believe so. Their “son” Stormy was born as a girl named Emerald. However, from 18 months Emerald identified as a boy like her twin brother Arlo, so they are raising him as a boy.

“His gender identity, what’s in his head, doesn’t match his physical sex,” Stormy’s dad wrote on LinkedIn. “I am so proud that he knows who he is and isn’t constrained by societal norms and prejudices.”

Fortunately for these children and their parents and unfortunately for the experts at gender clinics, the latest news on this front leaves a cloud of doubt hovering over transgender medicine. It is increasingly looking like a kind of 21st century voodoo.  In a series of publications doctors have expressed their dismay at the ready availability of gender transitioning and its rapid spread amongst young people.

The Karolinska slams on the brakes

At the moment, the accepted wisdom amongst transgender doctors is the so-called Dutch Protocol. This permits puberty blockers at 12 (and even at 8-9, in some cases). Cross-sex hormones (testosterone for girls and estrogen for boys) begin at 16.

However, this week the world-renowned Karolinska Hospital in Sweden put the brakes on — “a watershed moment”, according to the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine. It is the first time that a major hospital has officially deviated from the guidelines issued by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health.

The Karolinska declared in a press release that Swedish government investigations had:

showed a lack of evidence for both the long-term consequences of the treatments, and the reasons for the large influx of patients in recent years. These treatments are potentially fraught with extensive and irreversible adverse consequences such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, infertility, increased cancer risk, and thrombosis.

In its understated prose, the press release declares that it is “challenging” for doctors to assess the pros and cons of treatment and “even more challenging” for the patients and their parents to give truly informed consent.

Therefore, the Karolinska will no longer prescribe puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors under age 16. Hormonal treatment for adolescents between 16 and 18 will be allowed, but only as research to be approved by an ethics review board. Basically, the Swedish authorities have decided that conventional gender medication is a potentially dangerous experimental procedure.

The Westmead study

Last month, several doctors at the Westmead Children’s Hospital, a large public hospital in Sydney, published a powerful statement of their misgivings about the standard gender dysphoria treatment in the journal Human Systems. It must have taken courage, as the between-the-lines message is that the staff of the hospital’s gender is deeply divided on the issue. In fact, as clinicians, they identify “polarized sociopolitical discourses” as one of the biggest challenges they face.

Here are some of the issues that they raise.

First, that modern medicine still does not understand the phenomenon of gender dysphoria very well. “Despite the existence of guidelines,” they write “the evidence base for all aspects of treatment was and remains sparse.”

But neither the patients nor their families grasped this. “Families tended to medicalize the child’s distress, attributing it solely to gender dysphoria as an isolated phenomenon, with the consequence that the family identified the medical pathway as providing the only potential way forward.”

Second, many of the youths who requested treatment believed that “gender affirmation” means immediate medical intervention – drugs and possibly surgery. The authors tried to get their patients to accept a holistic approach to their dysphoria that took into account their family, psychological and biological issues but their words “fell on deaf ears”.

Why? Partly because the philosophy of “gender affirmation” means unquestioning acceptance of whatever the patient says. But also because of information they had gleaned from friends, the internet, social media, and health care workers.  “Many children did not have the cognitive, psychological, or emotional capacity to understand the decisions they were making.”

Third, their patients often had many other social and psychological problems, or “co-morbidities”, in the medical terminology. They felt bullied by their peers and were in conflict with their parents or carers. Many were autistic, suffered from depression or psychosis or had experienced sexual abuse.

Fourth, there was pressure on doctors to become rubber-stamps for their patients’ self-diagnosis. This was personally distressing and ethically challenging:

From the clinician perspective, we recognized the emergence of this “conveyor belt,” or “tick the box,” mentality—the medical model for treating gender dysphoria stripped bare of holistic (biopsychosocial) care—as being driven by the misguided belief that affirmation of gender dysphoria equates to a medical intervention pathway. Enacted in this way, we felt that this particular sociopolitical discourse put significant pressure on us as clinicians within the Gender Service to abandon ethical, reflective practice in mental health. 

The UK’s NICE review of the evidence

In March the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published two systematic evidence reviews of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones as part of a review of gender dysphoria healthcare. It found that many frequently cited studies are very low quality.

For instance, The Trevor Project, a well-known group which claims to be “the leading national organization providing crisis intervention and suicide prevention services to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer & questioning (LGBTQ) young people under 25”, cites several studies to support its claims gender-affirmative medicine. Nearly all of them were described as deficient by the NICE study. It used damning phrases like: “at high risk of bias”, “poor quality overall”, “No critical outcomes reported”, or “poorly reported”.

There are a many journals and squillions of studies which support medical treatment of teenagers’ gender dysphoria. There is never any lack of highly-paid PhDs with active Twitter accounts to sprinkle the fairy dust of statistical jargon over “evidence”. The question is whether their evidence is robust and trustworthy. From this point of view, the NICE study was devastating.

The Keira Bell judgement

In December last year a brave young British woman named Keira Bell won her lawsuit against a gender centre which had helped her to “transition” from a male to a female. Within a few years she regretted her decision. In a long and thoughtful judgement, the High Court found that people under 16 could not give informed consent to the life-changing decisions that gender medicine often involves. It also found that the evidence for clinical treatment was thin and unconvincing. It even described it as “experimental treatment”.


The notion that transgender rights is the human rights issue of our time is an illusion. The idea that gender affirmative drugs and surgery are essential to cure dysphoria is an illusion. The fear that the transgender movement is an unstoppable juggernaut is an illusion. These are not partisan conclusions; they are the facts.

These recent developments show that the truth is going triumph eventually. What is uncertain is how many young persons’ lives will be destroyed before we come to our senses.

COLUMN BY

Michael Cook

Michael Cook is the editor of MercatorNet .

RELATED ARTICLE: The transgender debate has become a propaganda war

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

BRILLIANT: Florida will fine any business or school $5,000 each time it requires a ‘vaccine passport’ or proof of COVID-19 vaccination

Awesome governor. Imagine what America would be like if every state were governed like Florida. #DeSantis2024.

Senate OK needed to send Florida vaccine passport ban to DeSantis’ desk

By Washington Examiner, May 3, 2021

Florida will fine any business or school $5,000 each time it requires a “vaccine passport,” or proof of COVID-19 vaccination, for entry or participation under a bill bound for Gov. Ron DeSantis’ desk.

The House Wednesday passed Senate Bill 2006 in a 76-40 vote and sent it to the Senate to endorse a newly added amendment before the session ends Friday.

Sponsored by Sen. Danny Burgess, R-Zephyrhills, SB 2006 was passed by the Senate on April 22 in a 27-9 vote.

The 49-page SB 2006 amends the state’s Emergency Management Act to place limits on local emergency powers and installs fines for businesses or institutions that require vaccine documentation. The relatively technical amendment added Wednesday clarifies COVID-19 screening protocols.

Under SB 2006, violating the state’s vaccine passport ban would be punishable by fines up to $5,000 per violation.

Under another provision, local government emergency powers would be limited to 10 or 30 days. To extend the emergency order beyond 30 days, a vote needs to take place with a majority of voters approving the emergency order extension.

Opponents argued the bill infringes on business owners’ property rights and would impair the travel industry and the state’s cruise line operators, who say their customers want fellow travelers to be vaccinated.

“What about the cruise ship industry? What about the hospitality industry? They can’t make those decisions?” asked Rep. Michael Grieco, D-Miami Beach.

Rep. Omari Hardy, D-Lake Worth, said Republicans support for a vaccine passport ban undermines their pro-business claims, especially when it comes to the state’s $8 billion cruise industry and overall $90 billion tourist/hospitality economy.

“If you care about our business community as certain elected officials in this state say that they do, why would you prevent people from enacting policies that give their customers the assurance, the confidence, that they can walk into a business, and that they’ll be safe?” Hardy asked.

Rep. Tom Leek, R-Ormond Beach, who carried SB 2006’s House companion, said forcing people to be vaccinated to go to work or to patronize a business discounts legitimate concerns about the shots.

“We have vaccines, through some miracle of science, that work. We also must recognize that COVID-19 vaccines don’t have the same proven history as the same vaccines we require our schoolchildren to get,” Leek said. “We must recognize that vaccine hesitancy is real and understandable.”

Leek said the ban also prevents discrimination of minority communities with lower rates of vaccination.

“Let’s return to normal, but recognize that it is fair for certain segments of our community to be hesitant about getting the vaccine,” he said. “And it is absolutely true that the largest segment of our community that is vaccination hesitant is our minority population.”

Wednesday’s floor debate on SB 2006 occasionally evolved into a referendum on Gov. Ron DeSantis’ pandemic policies.

The governor – a leading 2024 GOP presidential candidate not named Donald Trump – has been promoting his open policies during the pandemic against “lockdown states” on national media circuits for months.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ron DeSantis To Sign Bill Banning Biological Males From Competing In Girls Sports

Ron DeSantis to Sign Bill Banning Social Media ‘Deplatforming,’ ‘Shadow Banning,’ ‘Censoring’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

VIDEO: Florida Governor Ron DeSantis STOPS Covid Restrictions

There are not enough superlatives to describe the performance of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. DeSantis has rejected (despite enormous pressure) the lockdown policies of the Left. Today, Florida is prosperous, safe, and free. This is why millions of Americans are flocking to the Sunshine State. If President Trump decides that he is not going to run for POTUS in 2024, then Governor Ron DeSantis is unquestionably our candidate.

Gov. DeSantis discontinues COVID restrictions

By Saracarter.com, May 3, 2021

After more than a year since the global pandemic began, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis held a press conference just before signing an executive order to discontinue COVID restrictions across the state Monday. State legislators also set precedent for future emergency management in a bill DeSantis also signed at the conference.

Both the order and the bill go into effect July 1st. In the meantime, the governor suspended all emergency orders.

“The legislation creates a default legal presumption that during any emergency our business should be free from government mandates to close and our schools remain open for in-person instruction for our children,” DeSantis explained. Later on, he called these mandates “abuses.”

DeSantis held the conference at The Big Catch, a waterfront restaurant in St. Petersburg. Previously, local ordinances fined this restaurant for not following COVID regulations. The governor remitted outstanding fines for individuals and businesses in March. So, the restaurant never had to pay up. DeSantis said he will continue to remit fines in the future.

This comes after widespread vaccinations across the state. About 9 million Floridians have been vaccinated according to the governor. DeSantis admitted that lately, the old emergency orders were “unjustifiable.”

“My message is: the vaccines protect you, get vaccinated, and then live your life as if you’re protected,” DeSantis said. “You don’t have to chafe under restrictions ad infinitum.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ron DeSantis signs bill banning vaccine passports and suspends local virus emergency orders

DEMOCRAT CHILD ABUSE: White House Balks At Reopening Schools

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Ditch Abortion-Funding Disney Parks For Kentucky Kingdom Vacation

The Walt Disney Company (1.67) is known for their branded amusement parks and resorts (1.83), which typically draw millions of families each year. Unfortunately, they’re also known for being a top supporter of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the United States – literally, the largest killer of family members. OpenSecrets.org listed Disney as Planned Parenthood’s 17th largest donor in 2020, which means that despite getting hit hard with the pandemic, Disney still chose to financially support the murder of unborn babies.

Through donating to Planned Parenthood, Disney tries to show that they stand with women’s “reproductive health”, yet leave out the disturbing evidence about what goes on behind the scenes at Planned Parenthood facilities: promoting contraceptives with negative health effects, committing medical fraud, and even covering up underage rape. Disney is also shortsightedly supporting an organization that reduces its potential for new customers, staff, and leadership – slowing its growth, reducing its net profit, and possibly reducing the quality of its large team.

Disney will probably not stop their donations to Planned Parenthood anytime soon, so cut the summer trip to Disney World and spend your money at Kentucky Kingdom, which we rate a neutral 3.00 out of 5.00. They have lots of thrilling coasters, a waterpark, and a whole section designed specifically for kids. An added bonus: the tickets are much cheaper than Disney’s, and because Kentucky Kingdom doesn’t market itself nationally, the parks are likely not as crowded.

Make your 2ndVote heard. Ditch the Disney destination and tell them you won’t be back until they stop donating to companies that hurt women and children. Then, spend your vacation dollars at Kentucky Kingdom, where your family can enjoy a vacation that goes easy on both your conscience and your pocketbook.

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Humanizing the Victims of Abortion

One of the great blessings of the United States is that written into our national birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence, is the acknowledgement that we are endowed by our Creator with the right to life.

But the right to life is under assault today through the widespread practice of abortion—and has been for decades.

Amazingly, through the years, there have been a few that actually survived an abortion attempt. In a previous piece, I mentioned the existence of about 300 or so survivors of abortion in modern America, including Claire Culwell. She has now written her story in a powerful newly-released book, Survivor. Christian apologist Josh McDowell says of the book, “It’s a story of beauty, pain, regret, redemption, and encouragement.”

I have had the privilege to interview Claire Culwell for a television segment for D. James Kennedy Ministries and my radio program. What follows is her story, based on what she said in those interviews and what she writes in her book.

Claire was adopted and grew up in a godly home in Austin, Texas, surrounded by Christian love. As far as she was concerned, abortion had zero impact on her—until she was about 20 and learned the background of her birth. She notes, “I never imagined that I would meet my birth mother and find out that I survived something that was literally meant to take my life.”

Her birth mother (Tonya) says that her own family life had been very difficult, with little love in the household. So she sought attention outside the home. At age 13, Tonya eagerly welcomed the fickle affection of a boy whom she described as a “young, good-looking jock cowboy.”

Soon she was pregnant. Tonya shares, “The most frightening day of my life was to tell my mother, and so I got up the courage and I told her. It didn’t go well, you know. Here come the beatings, the telling me how worthless I was, how horrible I was, I was going to ruin the [family] name.” And so on.

Tonya’s mother forcibly took her to an abortion clinic to take care of the problem—against her will.

When it was over, says Tonya: “I remember going in that bathroom and just crying, just throwing up, you know. I’ll never forget turning my head and seeing my baby and just staring at that canister….So in my mind I thought, ‘With my mom’s help, I just murdered my baby.’”

But as a couple of weeks passed, Tonya realized she still was somehow pregnant.

Now Claire’s grandmother was really mad. They returned to the abortion clinic to find out how this could be. Claire says the clinic told her birth mother and grandmother that the “abortion had been successful on one baby, but they didn’t know there were two; and so I had survived my birth mother’s abortion.”

Claire’s grandmother didn’t take well this news that there were twins—and only one had been aborted. But at that point it was too late to abort Claire. The pregnancy was too far along.

“And so I was delivered at 30 weeks,” observes Claire, “and I weighed 3 lbs. 2 oz. I was ten weeks premature, and I had a dislocated hip, club feet. My visible signs are my every day reminder of being a twin. But miraculously the abortion instruments never touched my body.” Thankfully, she was placed in a wonderful home. Today Claire is married, has children, and enjoys a wonderful life.

When Claire first learned of the circumstances of her birth, she was shocked. But she chose to forgive her birth mom, Tonya.

Later, they even got to speak at some pro-life venues together. Both Claire and Tonya, writes Claire in her book Survivor, are indeed survivors of abortion, and “by Christ alone” has their story been redeemed: “Death had tried to drive us apart, but love brought us together.”

Claire adds, “God uses things that were meant for evil and turns them into things that are beautiful and fruitful, like he did with me. Bad things have been transformed into beautiful things in my life.”

She told the D. James Kennedy Ministries television audience, “I share my story because I want to put a face and a name and a story with the unborn child, and I saw how abortion hurt my birth mother, and it has hurt and wronged so many women that regret their abortion. And so I believe that abortion takes the life of a human being just like me and just like you.”

Life is a precious gift. Just as America’s founders recognized that the Lord has granted us the right to life, may America once again cherish the God-given right to life. I know of one happy survivor in America who cherishes that right.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

Climate Models Hotter Than Reality

Global warming policy is based on climate computer models.

These simulations of the temperature of the Earth are wrong and always have been.

They start out on the left side of the graph looking pretty good.  They have to.  Real-world recorded temperature observations had already been made.

It’s like projecting the results of races that have already been run.

As soon as the models start trying to project the future, however, they diverge wildly from reality, pretty much always running way too hot.

Projecting races that have not yet run is a trickier business.

Dr. Roy Spencer and Dr. John Christy manage temperature satellites for NASA.  They are climate scientists based at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.  They regularly publish temperature data as their instruments record it and offer expert commentary on climate science and the computer simulations it is based on.  Their work is invaluable.  On Earth Day Dr. Spencer posted the comparison of observed temperature to simulated temperature above.

All of the temperature datasets show that the Earth is warmer today when compared to various baselines.  No one “denies” this.  “Climate denial” is a straw man argument.  Those same datasets also show that climate computer simulations project a far warmer Earth than real-world observations show.

This indicates that the computer models may factor in a greater climate sensitivity to CO2 and other greenhouse gases than observations justify.

This is a massive problem.  Global warming campaigners take the most extreme models, the ones that are nowhere close to reality, and use them to generate frightening scenarios that are used in turn to argue for extreme “solutions.”  That these so-called “solutions” solve nothing meaningful, and are unable to pass cost-benefit analysis when factored into those same climate models, is an inconvenient truth Team Warming does not want discussed.

In science, theories and projections must follow the data.  Scientists must never alter the data to suit a desired outcome.  However, “adjusting” the data to fit the models is now a regular occurrence.  Somehow, these technical corrections are always weighted toward warming.  Inconveniently, the “adjustments” are still never enough to make these models match reality.

The inability of “climate communicators” to showcase temperature predictions that actually come true, leaves them constantly exaggerating natural weather events and fighting to silence critics to compensate.

The Biden Administration is pushing to remake the American energy economy, expend vast sums of public money, and place unprecedented restrictions on American freedom, based on climate computer models that run too hot.

Those with a vested interest in global warming are doing all they can to ensure that American voters never learn the facts.

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

Wuhan Virus: Joe Biden Is Missing In Action

PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS MISSED EVERY WEEKLY COVID-19 CALL WITH GOVERNORS SINCE TAKING OFFICE.

Anonymous staffers note that the time, 11AM, is difficult for the president as his medication takes time to become effective.

Every Tuesday, usually at 11 a.m. EST, all 50 governors dial in to the same conference call to coordinate federal and state responses to the coronavirus crisis.

But Biden is not here.

The Trump White House hosted a total of 40 COVID conference calls. Pence led 39 of them, according to that administration’s final COVID report first obtained by RCP (1). Trump participated in eight.

Things are different now, said Pete Ricketts.

“President Biden hasn’t been on any of them,” the Nebraska governor told RCP, “and Vice President Harris has only been on one, but that was for about five minutes and she didn’t take any questions.”

“It’s been a real frustration, I think it’s safe to say, for all 50 governors,” New Hampshire’s Chris Sununu told RealClearPolitics.

Ricketts complains that

“high-level access to the decision-makers who can move the bureaucracy” is now missing, adding that “It really is not the type of bipartisan partnership that the president promised when he came into office in his inaugural address. It really is much more of a top-down, we-are-going-to-do-what-we-are-going-to-do thought process.”

Some governors have concerns.

“Communication is not the administration’s strong point, but it’s still important. Transparency is the foundation of public trust, especially during a crisis,” New Hampshire’s Chris Sununu said.

To me, it looks like Biden is doing nothing, the governors are doing everything, but the media make sure Biden is receiving all the credit.

RELATED ARTICLE: MIT Study Finds That We are ‘No Safer at 60 Feet than at Six Feet’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

MIT Study Finds That We are ‘No Safer at 60 Feet than at Six Feet’

It was never about health, it was ALWAYS about Democrats seizing control, defeating Trump and imposing draconian totalitarian measures to humiliate and break the American People.

MIT Study Finds that We are ‘No Safer at 60 Feet than at Six Feet’

A major study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that all this mythic social distancing does absolutely nothing whatever.

By Warner Todd Huston on April 26, 2021:

A major study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that all this mythic social distancing does absolutely nothing whatever to keep us safe from the coronavirus.

Since the fools running the CDC first bean making their baseless proclamations about the virus, we have been told that standing six feet away from other people — what they have called “social distancing” — will save us all from getting the coronavirus.

This claim has always been absurd. But, for some unfathomable reason, millions of people fell for this line of nonsense. And now MIT has blown the claim out of the water.

MIT chemical engineering Prof. Martin Bazant and applied mathematics Prof. John Bush, found proof that “characterize[s] the evolution of the concentration of pathogen-laden droplets in a well-mixed room, and the associated risk of infection to its occupants.”

The study notes that the respiratory droplets posited to be the primary transmitters of COVID-19 come in numerous sizes from large to small. “In the presence of a quiescent ambient, [smaller droplets] settle to the floor; however, in the well-mixed ambient more typical of a ventilated space, sufficiently small drops may be suspended by the ambient airflow and mixed throughout the room until being removed by the ventilation outflow or inhaled.”

According to models of “closed, well-mixed” spaces, the authors claim, pathogens are “distributed uniformly throughout” the local environment. “In such well-mixed spaces, one is no safer from airborne pathogens at 60 ft than 6 ft,” the study states.

Reached for comment, Bush told Just the News that their study indicates “that one cannot make sweeping statements about reopening.”

“Each space must be assessed on a case by case basis,” he said. “Our study provides a rational means of making such an assessment. Most importantly, it indicates that one must limit the time spent in a given indoor space, to an extent determined by the relevant physical parameters.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Top Epidemiologist — Masks in school are ‘useless’…

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Biden WEARS MASK for Zoom call with world leaders on ‘climate change’

America is a global laughingstock with this husk, this enfeebled puppet, supposedly at the helm. Apparently those who manage the “president” told him that covid can be transmitted through Zoom now, so he has to mask up even when he is babbling about “climate change” alone in a room talking to a screen. How Xi must be laughing.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Biden’ State Dept. Keeps Israel on ‘Do Not Travel’ List, Despite Record Low Corona Infection Rate

Islamic State Executes Copt in Egypt ‘As A Warning to Christians’

Senator Inhofe: U.S. Defense Budget Must Match Threats Posed by China’s Military Build-Up

Iran, Oppressor Of Women’s Rights, Elected To UN Commission on Status of Women

Death toll during the holy month of Ramadan 2021

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

‘Dark Diversity’ in America’s Public Schools


Our schools choose their teaching staff by the color of their skin, not the content of their character or the extent of their knowledge, and the advantages that may be gained for the socialist-democrat party.


In a small, but vibrant, Middle-America community, there exists a public high school with a wall that proudly displays the achievements of past graduates, so that I welcomed reading the community’s magazine that boasted the school’s latest successes, cited as “diversity.”   But it soon became clear that the diversity refers to the staff’s complexions and sexual dispositions.  We search in vain for references to interests served, classes offered, careers sought, talents developed, and ingenuity encouraged, and we realize that another order of business is afoot.

America’s first schools, established in the 17th century in the thirteen original colonies, were designed to educate for literacy and arithmetic, but students under 17 were soon studying Greek, Latin, geometry, ancient history, logic, ethics and rhetoric.  Law and medicine were introduced in the 18th century, followed by mathematics and philosophy. The academies provided a rigorous curriculum that stressed writing, penmanship, arithmetic and languages, and the children were successful; they and their progeny contributed to the makings of a magnificent republic.  Horace Mann established that education should be free, universal, and non-sectarian, to aim for social efficiency, civic virtue, and character.  Graduates were to be disciplined, judicious citizens, continuing the American desire for liberty, inalienable individual rights, and sovereignty.  We were successful like no other but, sadly, we appear to have lost our way.

Diversity in America once meant that one could follow one’s dream by studying and working in any field of endeavor, unhindered by local or federal government.  Beyond the basics defined by parents and state, the student was encouraged to forge ahead in any field, even in apprenticeship, with diligence and determination.  Individuality was fortified as the only way one could strive and succeed.

Today’s diversity is designed to destroy that free will, as it identifies the students by race and assigns a victimhood that conditions toward societal conformity, known as Critical Race Theory.  It is part of the Cultural Marxism that is already destroying our Judeo-Christian values and ethics so that the youth are immersed in racial differences, sexual immorality, dissension, and rebellion against authority.   These include the delinquent youths, sociopaths who rage with Black Lives Matter, destroying property, our historic monuments, our morale and morals, and law and order – and conform to the new culture of revolution.

Consider the new tactics that have resulted in mass obedience – the coronavirus that has people paranoid about masking and social distancing; the politically correct speech that replaces rebellion with uneasy compliance; a belief system that forces impossible genders; the slur of “white privilege” that pardons one group for not succeeding while blaming the other for succeeding, shamed into curbing their efforts.  The motive is to demolish western civilization by destroying all that defines America – religion, morality, respect for the other, work ethic, ingenuity, and success – and replacing it with a totalitarian ideology.

By indoctrinating the “of color” students that they cannot succeed because of whites and are consequently entitled to special privileges, the underclass is created.  Undermining two-parent households, enacting affirmative action and other accommodations feed into the victim mentality.  When they are encouraged to unite, they make more demands, such as  acceptance into colleges and universities that would otherwise be closed to them.  Once there, of course, these students are confronted with their deficiencies, but not with the causes.  Crying foul encourages them to blame the privileged whites (read western civilization), but it also results in the schools’ downgrading the schoolwork.  This is equity, reducing standards to mediocrity for all, a planned mediocrity that results in undereducated graduates unqualified for the job market.  However, being of one mind, they are now ripe to be dedicated members of the socialist party.

The magazine article details the school’s diversity based on the inconsequential differences among the teaching staff and the children, contrary to Martin Luther King, Jr’s dream, that they would “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”  The interviewees actually compared the 72% white population of ten years ago with today’s 49%, the 15% black students with today’s 20%; the rise in Asians from 8% to 21%, and other groups. Never addressed is how the skin color and variable sexual preferences will help the children function in their adulthood, to form new families, to hold jobs and become responsible, creative, and innovative citizens to contribute to America’s growth.

As the staff were introduced, none spoke of what they hoped to bring to the classroom academically, or how their particular expertise would help the children flourish.  No longer based on merit, they were hired on the basis of race, thereby emphasizing cultural sensitivities and preferential treatment.  No one addressed the students’ learning skills, their personal growth, their exposure to better literature and music, their future pursuits, and the basics of civic responsibility.  Our entire country has been made to focus on race, the main political strategy and indoctrination of the next generation.  Lest we forget, racism was the official state ideology of Nazism – the superiority of the Aryan race uber alles. – and the cause of death for many millions of people worldwide.

The staff’s repeated focus on their own irrelevant attributes will affect the students’ judgments.  Academia’s leftism sows discontent and creates their social warriors, but cheats them of a bona fide education.  Students across America are deficient in reading, math, the arts and sciences, world and American history, our founding documents and, most importantly, critical thinking skills to analyze their world and succeed throughout life.  Only 24% of high school seniors have proficient writing skills.  Meritocracy and unity are forfeited for resentment, disunity, and obedience to the socialist party.

The director of Equity and Community Engagement duplicitously speaks of equity, which passes as equality to the underinformed.  It ignores individual skills and acumen in the name of conventionality and equal outcome.  Racism is the key to accomplishing this chicanery, as the children of color are infused with ideas that they’ve been victimized by the entire Caucasian race.  Their individualism and freedoms thus stifled, their discomfort level heightened, the stressed children blame their parents for their genetic makeup, the whites for their history, and the school because they are aware of their own illiteracy and undereducation.

When Bill Gates recently declared that math is racist, and that correct sums are unnecessary, he is intentionally forcing the damaging obsession with racism.  Although research shows that Asian students generally outperform other students in math, the leftist agenda is to accuse white students of excelling at the expense of children of color, further debilitating the latter.  An obliging academia vindicates them, justifies their defeatism, and confirms that they will never succeed, which, in turn, becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that also fuels their fury.  When they are accepted into universities based on their victim credentials (race, heritage, sexuality), but fare poorly because they were unqualified, these groups turn against the better students. Their emotional, intellectual, and social development is reduced to the common denominator – their basic instincts to blame others based on race.  These are the triggers used by all totalitarian regimes to inflame the children into violent warriors – Islam, Nazism, Marxism.

The head of Human Resources speaks of hiring teachers by their skin tone and comfort level, and his need to hire one more LGBTQ teacher to negate the first teacher’s “lonely feeling.”  Is this a school environment or a squirrel’s larder?

Another teacher believes she is qualified to teach social studies by virtue of her skin color.  How is that valid?  As this teacher is African-American, should her class also be 100% color coded?  And how long before the schools completely exclude the whites from the classroom, as the Nazis did the Jews, as this becomes an all-too-possible threat in universities across America?

The Middle School guidance counselor alleges a goal of teaching children to be proud of who they are, but not that we are all humans with the same needs and citizens of the same school, state, and country.  This is but more reinforcement to their differences as they are further marginalized and intolerant of others.  Colleges are already breeding grounds for radicalism, and the high schools are beginning the indoctrination sooner. In fact, racism, sexuality, pornography – even depravity – have already been introduced to Kindergartens and libraries.

Identity politics should never be underestimated, as it is how the Nazis conducted their hate campaigns and the communists their class struggle.  The schools are engaging in social engineering, psychologically manipulating the students so that racism becomes the chief consideration.  The victims, a coalition of all the minorities, are to become the dominant culture, always morally right, never challenged, and entitled to sympathy and concessions.  The previously dominant culture becomes the new victims, but never to rise again.  The insidious bigotry has been sown.  Under the careful tutelage of complicit personnel, the students have been frightened, demeaned and demoralized, the ideology ingrained.  Marxism survives, waiting in the wings for the throes of our decline.

In the words of George Orwell, “You will be hollow.  We shall squeeze you empty, and then we shall fill you with ourselves.”

Parents still have time to fight the schools’ hold over their children or remove them from the schools entirely. Start yesterday, because these ideologies never end well.

©Tabitha Korol. All rights reserved.

Democrats Furious Over Stanford Study that Found Masks are Useless Against COVID

Covid-19 Vaccine – Branding Humans Like Cows.

So much for leftists caring about “science.”

The Democrats have destroyed every respected institution in America.

Liberals Furious Over Stanford Study that Found Masks are Useless Against COVID

Stanford University quietly published a study that found that paper masks don’t help at all to prevent transmission of the coronavirus.

By: Warner Todd Huston, Flag and Cross, April 19, 2021:

Stanford University quietly published a study that found that paper masks don’t help at all to prevent transmission of the coronavirus. And leftist outlets such as Twitter are working hard to hide the study from the American people.

The study was posted on the the National Center for Biological Information government website.

One key part of the study notes: “The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective of viral and infectious disease such as SARS-CoV-2 and COVID -19.”

This is the same conclusion that nearly every mask study has ever come to — at least before “science” was corrupted by COVIDiots who wish to use the virus as a weapon to control the people.

The study added:

According to the current knowledge, the virus SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 60 nm to 140 nm [nanometers (billionth of a meter)] [16], [17], while medical and non-medical facemasks’ thread diameter ranges from 55 µm to 440 µm [micrometers (one millionth of a meter), which is more than 1000 times larger [25]. Due to the difference in sizes between SARS-CoV-2 diameter and facemasks thread diameter (the virus is 1000 times smaller), SARS-CoV-2 can easily pass through any facemask

In other words, the virus can just seep right through these absurd masks we are all wearing, and the masks can’t stop it.

What did Twitter do? This anti-science social media platform tried to suppress the study.

Former Trump adviser Steve Cortez tied to share the study, and Twitter suspended him for it.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

‘MASKS ARE DIRTY, DANGEROUS, DEHUMANIZING’

TYRANNY: Michigan Set To Make China Virus Restrictions on Businesses PERMANENT – Geller Report News

Israel Will Offer Oxygen Machines to Lebanon – Geller Report News

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

VIDEO: Mick Jagger released ANTI-LOCKDOWN song!

That means both Mick Jagger and Van Morrison remember when music was about promoting freedom and against a state narrative. Good on ya Mick. So happy to be a Stones fan today.

WATCH Mick Jagger:

BORN TO BE FREE by Van Morrison

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Scientists Predict Death Spike in Vaccinated: Modelers are ‘following the science’ down a rabbit hole

WESTMINSTER, England (ChurchMilitant.com) – The most deaths in a third coronavirus wave will consist of people who have received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, British scientists are warning in a new doomsday report.

“The resurgence in both hospitalizations and deaths is dominated by those that have received two doses of the vaccine, comprising around 60% and 70% of the wave respectively,” the study predicts.

To combat the spike in mortality, the scientists are calling for new vaccines in the medium-term as measures to extend the period of lockdown before new vaccines are deployed.

The pessimistic scenario modeled by scientists at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) foresees deaths and hospital admissions on a scale similar to January 2021 — despite a high uptake of the experimental jab.

The mortality surge is expected to occur in the later stages of the U.K. government’s roadmap out of the lockdown, beginning around mid-May and peaking in late July or early August, according to the study reported in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) last Wednesday.

The predictions studied by the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), warn that the gloom-and-doom scenario is conservative as it does not take into account the “growth of an immune escape variant or a more rapidly spreading variant.”

A large proportion of Britain’s population would be susceptible to B.1.351 — the South African variant of the SARS-CoV-2 — whether they have been vaccinated or not, the modelers warn.

Speaking to Church Militant, academic and mental-health ethicist Niall McCrae noted that “the report’s prediction that 70% of COVID-19 deaths will be of dual-vaccinated people is quite startling.”

“Clearly these pseudo-scientific modelers would like us to be locked down ad infinitum, but do they know something that governments and public-health authorities aren’t telling us?” Dr. McCrae asked.

The academic slammed the study’s “Alice-in-Wonderland logic, ‘following the science’ down a rabbit hole” since “the report states, ‘this is because vaccine uptake has been so high in the oldest age groups,’ and that ‘this is not the result of vaccines being ineffective, merely uptake being so high.'”

McCrae elaborated:

We already know that for two to three weeks after the injection, elderly and vulnerable people are at increased risk of serious respiratory infection, due to lowering of immunity. That’s why there was a surge in deaths after vaccination rollout, with the evidence most stark in countries with the highest vaccination numbers; such as Hungary, Israel, Serbia, Gibraltar and the United Arab Emirates.

The report, however, suggests a longer-term risk to the vaccinated. Will they be more prone to COVID-19 variants or to other viruses? In the old joke when someone asks an Irishman for directions, and he says, “I wouldn’t start from here,” I fear for those who took the jab and thought that the road ahead would be safe and straightforward.

A SAGE source told Britain’s The Telegraph that the vaccines were not efficacious enough to allow a return to normal social mixing “without a big epidemic,” despite the jabs significantly reducing illness and deaths.

Addressing the question of low vaccine uptake among ethnic minorities in Britain, the report notes that “even if vaccination successfully drives down mortality and morbidity overall, it is highly likely that outbreaks will still happen in some communities.”

SAGE also reviewed models from scientists at Imperial College London and Warwick University that assumed lower virus transmission after all restrictions are lifted and used higher vaccine efficacy to make predictions.

Meanwhile, a new Israeli study involving 28 scientists has confirmed that those vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine were more likely to become infected with B.1.1.7 (Kent variant) or B.1.351 compared with unvaccinated individuals.

In fact, vaccine recipients infected at least a week after the second dose were disproportionally infected with B.1.351, while those infected between two weeks after the first dose and one week after the second dose were disproportionally infected by B.1.1.7, the study revealed.

Despite the Pfizer vaccine showing high protection levels, apprehension exists that several variants of concern can surmount the immune defenses generated by the vaccines, the Tel Aviv University researchers concluded.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Pause’ on Johnson & Johnson Vaccine Reveals One Systemic Flaw Plaguing the FDA

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

VIDEO: New Movement #ForgetYourMask Launched

Jennifer Cabrera (Leader, #ForgetYourMask) discusses her new movement, #ForgetYourMask, and reveals how it is a fight for humanity – and for basic human rights.

WATCH:


EDITORS NOTE: This Glazov Gang video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Please support The Glazov Gang because we are a fan-generated show and need your help to keep going. Make a contribution or set up a monthly pledge. Thank you! PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/Glazovgang

Why the Push Is On To Make Pandemic Life ‘Permanent’

One year after Americans were ordered to close down society for “two weeks to flatten the curve,” Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth warned, “We Must Start Planning for a Permanent Pandemic.”

Because new variants of SARS-COV-2 are impervious to existing vaccines, says Kluth, and pharmaceutical companies will never be able to develop new vaccines fast enough to keep up, we will never be able to get “back to normal.”

“Get back to normal” means recovering the relative liberty we had in our already overregulated, pre-Covid lives. This is just the latest in a long series of crises that always seem to lead our wise rulers to the same conclusion: we just cannot afford freedom anymore.

Covid-19 certainly wasn’t the beginning. Americans were told “the world changed” after 9/11. Basic pillars of the American system, like the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, were too antiquated to deal with the “new threat of terrorism.” Warrantless surveillance of our phone, e-mail, and financial records and physical searches of our persons without probable cause of a crime became the norm. A few principled civil libertarians dissented, but the public largely complied without protest.

“Keep us safe,” they told the government, no matter the cost in dollars or liberty.

Perhaps seeing how willingly the public rolled over for the political right during the “War on Terror,” authoritarians on the left turbocharged their own war on “climate change.” Previously interested in merely significantly raising taxes and heavily regulating industry, they now wish to ban all sorts of things, including air travelgasoline-powered cars, and even eating meat.

Since Covid-19, however, even the freedom to assemble and see each other’s faces may be permanently banned to help the government “keep us safe.”

Assaulting our liberty isn’t the only characteristic these crisis narratives have in common. They share at least two others: dire predictions that turn out to be false and proposed solutions that turn out to be ineffective.

George W. Bush warned Saddam Hussein had “weapons of mass destruction” capable of hitting New York City within 45 minutes. He created the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA to prevent, among other things, a “mushroom cloud” over a major American city.

Twenty years later, we know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the terrorist threat was grossly exaggerated, and the TSA has still never caught a terrorist, not even the two people who tried to set off explosives concealed in their shoes and underwear, respectively.

The only effective deterrent of terrorism so far has been the relatively calmer foreign policy during the four years of the Trump administration, during which regime change operations ceased and major terrorist attacks in the United States virtually disappeared.

Predictions of environmental catastrophe have similarly proven false. Younger people may not remember that in the early 1970s, long before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was born, environmentalists were predicting worldwide disasters that subsequently failed to materialize. In 1989, the Associated Press reported, “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” The same official predicted the Earth’s temperature would rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years.

Ocasio-Cortez is famous for predicting in 2019, “The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” But Al Gore had warned in 2006 that “unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return.” So, isn’t it too late anyway?

As with the war on terrorism, the war on climate change asks us to give up our freedom for solutions that don’t work. Assuming climate change proponents have diagnosed the problem correctly and haven’t exaggerated the threat—huge assumptions by themselves— implementing their proposed solution won’t solve the problem, even by their own standards.

Its proponents know this. The U.S. has already led the world in reducing carbon emissions without the draconian provisions of the Green New Deal. If you listen to them carefully, the Green New Deal’s proponents propose the U.S. give up what freedom and prosperity remain to them merely as an example to developing nations, whom they assume will forego the benefits of industrialization already enjoyed by developed countries because of the shining example of an America in chains and brought to its economic knees to “save the earth.”

Fat chance, that.

The latest remake of this horror movie is Covid-19. While undeniably a serious pathogen that has likely killed more people than even the worst flu epidemics of the past several decades (although this is hard to confirm since public health officials changed the methodology for determining a virus-caused death), the government and its minions have still managed to grossly exaggerate this threat.

Gone is any sense of proportion when discussing Covid-19. Yes, it is certainly possible to spread the virus after one has been vaccinated or acquired natural immunity. But how likely is it? Is it any more likely than spreading other pathogens after immunity?

If not, then why are we treating people with immunity differently than we have during more dangerous pandemics in the past? Similarly, it is likely possible for asymptomatic people to spread the virus—a key pillar of the lockdown argument—but again, how likely is it?

The theory Covid-19 could be spread by asymptomatic people was originally based on the case of a single woman who supposedly infected four other people while experiencing no symptoms. Anthony Fauci said this case “lays the question to rest.”

The only problem was no one had asked the woman in question if she had symptoms at the time. When it turned out she did, the study on her was retracted. A subsequent study “did not link any COVID-19 cases to asymptomatic carriers,” and yet another after that concluded transmission of the disease by asymptomatic carriers “is not a major driver of spread.” Yet, policies based on this falsehood, like lockdowns and forcing asymptomatic people to wear masks, remain in place.

Most importantly, none of the government-mandated Covid-19 mitigation policies work. No retrospective review conducted with any semblance of the scientific method has found a relationship between lockdowns, mask mandates, or social distancing and the spread of Covid-19. In fact, the most recent study suggests lockdowns may have increased Covid-19 infections, in addition to all the non-Covid excess deaths they caused.

Over and over, authoritarians overhype crises to scare the living daylights out of the public and propose solutions that have two things in common: they demand more of our freedom and they don’t work. It’s always all pain and no gain. One wonders how many repetitions of this crisis drill it will take before the citizens of the so-called “land of the free” finally think to ask:

Why is freedom always the problem?

This article was republished with permission.

COLUMN BY

Tom Mullen

Tom Mullen is the author of Where Do Conservatives and Liberals Come From? And What Ever Happened to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? and A Return to Common  Sense: Reawakening Liberty in the Inhabitants of America. For more information and more of Tom’s writing, visit www.tommullen.net.

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