Bill Gates’ Dark Dream of Blocking Sunlight from the Earth is About to be Realized

“And that You should reward Your servants the prophets and the saints, And those who fear Your name, small and great, And should destroy those who destroy the Earth.” -Rev. 11:18

Bill Gates, ever the demented snake oil salesman, has long argued in favor of a bizarre plan to fight global warming by using experimental geoengineering to partially block the sun’s rays from reaching Earth.

Well, he’s apparently about to get his wish.

Scientists plan to begin pumping chemicals into the sky over the next few weeks and months from several countries around the globe, including the U.S., Australia and Israel.

The idea, promoted by Gates and leftist billionaire George Soros, involves pumping manmade white clouds containing chalk dust and other chemicals into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from the Earth’s surface.

Blocking the sun’s light would allegedly lower the planet’s temperature enough to reverse global warming.

Never mind that fruit trees and vegetables require sunlight in order to grow and produce food for the masses. Not to mention, sunlight is the primary source of critical Vitamin D, an essential nutrient for human immunity. Gates, a known eugenicist who goes around giving talks about how we need to reduce the global population, likely sees these dark possibilities as exciting side effects of the nefarious sun-blocking plan.

Soros is similarly excited about the plan. He says the technology will help to prevent ice from melting in Greenland, which he claims could doom human civilization.

How ironic that the very globalists who are doing everything in their power to destroy human civilization claim to be worried that global warming might speed up the process.

Globalists like Bill Gates and George Soros are doing harm to the environment through their genocidal climate agenda on multiple levels. They advocate blanketing our fertile farmland with toxic solar panels, while filling more acres of farmland with wind turbines that kill birds and other wildlife. They also push electric cars which run on toxic lithium batteries that are going to create an environmental nightmare in the years ahead because, like with the solar panels, there’s no way to safely dispose of them.

Chloe Aiello of Inc. magazine reported on February 13, 2024, that a Bill Gates-Backed Startup Just Raised $145 Million to Source Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric VehiclesMuch of the lithium mined in the world today is done on the backs of child labor in poor countries of Africa and Asia. But don’t tell that to Bill Gates, George Soros, Larry Fink and their buddies at the World Economic Forum.

Despite their destructive plans, these globalists insist they are our saviors and we should look to them for answers on how to live a sustainable lifestyle. Please.

About the devious sun-blocking formula, Soros said: “Our civilization is in danger of collapsing because of the inexorable advance of climate change. The melting of the Greenland ice sheet would increase the level of the oceans by 7 meters. That poses a threat to the survival of our civilization.”

Of course this is all nonsense meant to stoke fear. A fearful population will beg for solutions to the imaginary problem, inviting their own enslavement. More than 20 years ago, Al Gore made the exact same dire predictions about ice melting, polar bears dying, hurricanes increasing, and whole cities being submerged in water. None of these apocalyptic predictions have materialized.

According to a report by Slay News, the tactics advocated by Bill Gates involve spraying aerosol concentrations into the stratosphere to reflect solar radiation away from the Earth.

Gates has been funding a major project at Harvard using balloons to deploy aerosols. The Harvard project was shut down following public backlash.

But now, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that another group of scientists has been advancing Gates’ idiotic and, frankly, dangerous plan.

Marine Cloud Brightening is a research project led by Southern Cross University as part of the $64.55 million, or 100 million Australian dollars, Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program.

The program involves modifying clouds to make them reflect sunlight away from the Earth to supposedly stop global warming.

Slay News reports:

“This week, researchers aboard a ship off the northeastern coast of Australia near the Whitsunday Islands started spraying a briny mixture through high-pressure nozzles into the air in an attempt to brighten low-altitude clouds that form over the ocean.

“Scientists hope bigger, brighter clouds will reflect sunlight away from the Earth, shade the ocean surface, and cool the waters around the Great Barrier Reef.”

In Israel, another startup called Stardust Solutions has begun testing a system to disperse a cloud of tiny reflective particles about 60,000 feet in altitude.

These geoengineered clouds reflect sunlight away from Earth to cool the atmosphere in a concept known as solar radiation management.

And, in Massachusetts, researchers at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution are preparing to pour 6,000 gallons of a liquid solution of sodium hydroxide, a component of lye, into the ocean 10 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard this summer.

Some would argue that “cloud seeding” has been going on for years. Take a look at this shot I took of the sky above my house a few weeks ago.

Does the sky in the photo above look normal?

With all these chemicals being sprayed above us, what could possibly go wrong?

Let’s pray this ill-advised experiment fizzles out before it can do too much damage.

Copyright 2024. All rights reserved. is 100 percent reader supported, not beholden to any, ads, sponsorships or other streams of income form government, corporate or nonprofit entities. If you appreciate my reporting and analyzing of the most important news and would like to support my efforts, you may send a donation of any size c/o Leo Hohmann, P.O. Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264, or via credit card.

Disney Board Wants To Hide Political Donations, Spending On Sex Changes From Shareholders, Docs Reveal

The Walt Disney Company board wants to hide key financial data from the public, particularly as it relates to their funding of the transgender movement and donations to political candidates, documents reviewed by the Daily Caller reveal.

The 2024 proxy vote ballot for Disney’s annual shareholder meeting, scheduled for April 2, reveals the board doesn’t want the public, or even their own shareholders, to know how much Disney spends on “gender transition compensation and benefits” for its staff. Despite the board’s suggested vote to shareholders, the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) and National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR) are urging the company to release the data.

In Disney’s 2024 “Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Proxy Statement,” Disney details how the NLPC and NCPPR notified the company that they intend to present proposals focused on these issues. Within the same document, Disney “affirms” that people who suffer from gender dysphoria can “transition to a different sex.” However, “an increasing body of scientific evidence shows no benefits result from such medical treatments,” the NLPC argues. They go on to cite the European and American medical community’s “increasing” caution about gender-transition “therapies.”

“Victims report transition treatments and surgeries are harmful. Examples include long-lasting or permanent outcomes like chronic pain, sexual dysfunction, unwanted hair loss or hair gain, menstrual irregularities, urinary problems, and other complications,” the statement continues. “Rather than resolve health problems ‘gender affirming’ therapies instead often exacerbate them. In such instances, those who desire to ‘detransition’ cannot find medical care or insurance coverage, and are permanently mutilated. Many of these sufferers litigate against those who misled or harmed them.”

But as transitioners are de-transitioners are protected under “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” aspects of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), they cannot be discriminated against in any way, resulting in Disney covering transition procedures.

Shareholders have asked the board to issue a report on Disney’s funding of gender care and related activities by Dec. 31, 2024, and whether there are any “benefit gaps” related to gender dysphoria, as well as “associated reputational, competitive, operational and litigative risks.”

Similarly, Disney doesn’t want shareholders to approve the publication of the company’s charitable and political donations. The board recommends a vote against “requesting a report on political expenditures” and “publication of recipients of charitable contributions.”

In their recommendation, NCPPR argued that there are “issues” with donating to certain groups who support sex-change surgeries, not just for the potential legal and medical issues listed above, but because is it “time Disney stop injecting itself into controversial and significant social policy issues,” the proposal stated.

Disney’s board ignores all the arguments and scientific evidence laid out by the NCPPR and NLPC in their explanation for why they’re recommending voting “against” the proposals. “We believe the proposal is an attempt to generate attention from a proponent with a narrow focus seeking to advance a limited agenda rather than an authentic attempt to call for action in the best interest of the Company and shareholders,” Disney wrote in response to the proposals.

The board also ignored any mention of “gender” in their request for shareholders to reject the proposal to publicize Disney’s charitable donation, and instead stated the company is already transparent enough about their spending.

“In its opposition statement Disney revealed why our proposal is so important, and how badly it has failed to fulfill its fiduciary duties. Disney clearly hasn’t spent a single moment considering how much Iger and his team have harmed the company by going full-in on politics instead of running the company for shareholder and even genuine stakeholder benefit. Iger has hired people like Kathleen Kennedy who hate Disney’s customers and want to shove their politics down audiences’ throats rather than entertaining them,” NCPPR director Scott Shepard said in a statement to the Daily Caller. “Iger seems to think that by adopting a partisan position he makes it non-partisan and just ‘the right thing to do.’ He is wrong in this, of course, as he’s wrong in just about every decision he’s made for many years.”

Disney has found itself increasingly mired in political squabbles in recent years, most notably with Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has gone after the megacorporation’s special tax status. Conservatives have accused Disney of shoehorning progressive messaging into its content and pursuing a political agenda over putting out quality family content.

Disney did not respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment.



News and commentary writer.


Disney CEO Pledges To Double Down On LGBT ‘Storytelling’ In Animated Kids’ Movies

‘I Was Being Hunted Down’: Gina Carano Announces Lawsuit Against Disney, Teams Up With Elon Musk

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

More Lack of Critical Thinking Evidence?

The jury’s Mann v. Steyn conclusion.

As readers know, I recently posted a detailed discussion of the Mann v Steyn lawsuit, and asserted that ALL of our rights were being debated. The jury’s verdict was rendered yesterday — and it was disturbing.

I’m not an attorney, but the two fundamental issues appeared to be: 1) Does a person have the right to publicly express their opinion (right or wrong) about a national matter? and 2) Does a person have the right to publicly express an opinion that is based on reasonable scientific evidence, but differs from what is currently politically correct? Apparently no to both!

Put another way, can a public figure be awarded damages when their work product is publicly criticized (based on scientific evidence), but they are unable to show material damages directly related to such criticism? Apparently yes!

Since I’m not a lawyer, please read a good synopsis of this jarring jury verdict by a very competent attorney who was closely following this case. And when I say competent, I’m referring to the fact that he is not only legally knowledgeable, but he is very informed about the climate matter as well.

That the jury came to such conclusions could well be interpreted as yet another sign that our education system has been effectively hijacked by the Left, as we are producing citizens who not only lack critical thinking skills, but give unquestioned deference to authority — irrespective of any contrary evidence presented.

The hope for some semblance of sanity is that the judge in this case will overturn the jury’s verdict, based on the fact that it was in stark contrast to the evidence presented.

Some other good commentaries as of this writing:

Copyright 2024. John Droz, Jr. All rights reserved.

Kill Them All — O’Biden/Globalist Net Zero Agenda

Let’s start out with a little humor. Remember this: Humor

What a week this was I hardly know where to start. One thing we should have learned is that when we call our legislators and conduct oversight it works. Because of our efforts the non-border border bill was killed. But fear not the RINOS and the Communists/Globalists in the Senate will twist enough arms, threaten enough people so that they will offer another bill with aid for Ukraine again. Think about how important Ukraine is to these criminals. Are they getting paid off? Do they need to give their lobbyist contractor friends money? Need to continue their human sex trafficking? Need to continue their drug pipeline? One thing is true they will never stop. We have to make sure that we never stop either. We have to continue our calls or emails to our legislators.

We can see clearly now that thugs/grifters are running this government and they will do anything to maintain control. But the people are smarter. We now see when we act we take back our power. The shift of power makes them crazy. We must make sure this election is overwhelmingly crushing against the globalist. We’re off to a good start. Nikki Haley lost to none of the above in Nevada. Trump won with an overwhelming majority and the US Virgin Islands . We have to see that in every state.

If you have not seen the report from Special Council Richard Hur on dementia Joe he proves what we already knew. Hur said even tough Joe committed multiple felonies, his is a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” No, sorry if he is well enough to be President and destroy the county, he is well enough to be prosecuted.   In the meanwhile  Trump gets all the wrath because he is mean MAGA man who committed no crimes. seniors if you commit a crime or get in trouble remember you new defense “I am well-meaning, elderly man/woman with a poor memory.”

The government favors the globalists. Joe has dementia and is pathetic. So what do we do about it? We need to call the House and Senate oversight committees and tell them that  Obiden is a compromised leader and if he is not well enough to be prosecuted for a felonies which he committed by taking classified material as a vice president when he had no right to classify material, then how can he be in charge of negotiation for anything good for Americans. Part of dementia is illusion and that’s what he is living under while forcing it upon us. Sadly the alternative will be Affirmative Action Graduate Kamala who maybe worse. But I think not because Joe was never really running the country anyway.  The question is: Will the lying DNC take Joe out themselves or make him go through article 25? Or impeachment? Or leave him in office without ability to make any America killing policies.  But regardless it is a disgrace to see what the leadership thinks of America. Remember Trump can not do this alone. We must vet candidates to get him support in both houses.

Another lie this week was the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  BLS reported that we had the biggest job growth beating all expectations. Zero Hedge said it was the most ridiculous jobs report in recent history. Why would they say that? Was BLS lying? They weren’t really lying, they just manipulated the numbers. Does that count?  Basically they changed the amount of hours they reported so it looked like more people had jobs and got higher wages.

This is the way the new economy works. The Feds print money out of thin air. The Feds give the money to the government, who gives the money to the UN, who gives the money to the NGO’s, who gives the money to illegals to invade our country, who then buy things to support the donors of the Globalists, who gives the money back to the Globalists.  Then the lying media and globalist government reports that the economy is doing great as another trillion is added to the debt that the American people must pay.  And the rich 1% get richer.  That is modern day fascism aka slavery.  If you want to see the theft in action see: The Great Taking

Globalists tell us it is our fault for eating too much meat, using to much fossil fuel, turning on the air conditioning. They dream up programs to force us to live in 15 minute cities so they can monitor our every move. And once again they get richer. Read what is going on in South Florida since DeSantis sold the state to his developer friends. Then you will know what to look for in your state. This is the Great Reset or the destruction of the American Dream.

Let’s tackle the greatest lie which we have been told over and over again.  No it’s not China.  No it’s not illegals.  No it’s not Iran, or the Middle East. No it’s not Russia.  Can you guess?  It’s climate change. The farmers are rising up in Europe and the truckers are rising up in America as people all over the world reject world wide slavery and hunger. We must peacefully protest.  They want civil war so they can declare a national emergency and stop the election. Too many western countries are having elections in 2024. Too many nationalists are running for office. This is the big threat. It’s numbers that count,. We must vote. Remember every time they tell you net zero, to get rid of CO2, to get rid of nitrogen, to stop farming or that agriculture is bad they want us dead.  Globalists are putting in place a plan that will kill humanity. CO2 is one of the most necessary gases to sustain life. The biggest emitter of CO2 is water vapor. The Earth is 75% water.  Humans have no control over the weather.

Great video to share with your friends.


Everything is connected. Nothing is random, Everything has a plan. All plans are lies. All Globalists want is MONEY, POWER, CONTROL Don’t give them yours. Challenge them with the truth. Doing Nothing is affirmation.


Rep. Aaron Bean on the EPA: ‘Welcome to Crazy Town’ | TIPPING POINT

The Crime of Breathing

TIK History: The Cult many are in but don’t realize (explaining Hegelian dialectics)

Copyright 2024. Karen Schoen. All rights reserved.

The Decline of the Democrats

More than 20 years ago, the American political commentators John Judis and Ruy Teixeira wrote The Emerging Democratic Majority.

In this influential work, they argued that America’s changing demographics would result in the Democratic Party achieving lasting political dominance.

The growth of Democratic-leaning minority populations (particularly Hispanics and Asians) combined with the increased preference for Democratic candidates shown by college-educated professionals and single women all suggested that America’s future was blue, not red.

Admirably, Judis and Teixeira have spent recent years publicly recalibrating their initial assessment in the face of subsequent evidence.

Their new book, Where have all the Democrats gone? The Soul of the Party in the Age of Extremes, is the fruit of this process, and is immensely valuable for any observer of American politics.

In short, they describe how millions of working-class voters of all races have been abandoning the Democratic Party.

Observing their party’s failure to learn the lessons of 2016 and anticipating the closeness of the coming battles, they urge its leaders to refocus their priorities.

“They need to press economic reforms that benefit the working and middle classes, but they need to declare a truce and find a middle ground in today’s culture war between Democrats and Republicans so that they can once again become the party of the people,” Judis and Teixeira argue.

Losing ground

The statistical evidence of the declining support for the Democrats is striking.

Working-class white voters have gravitated to the Republican Party for many years.

What is more remarkable is the degree to which low-income minority groups are following the same path: the Democrats shed a whopping 25 percentage points off their advantage over the GOP among the non-white working class between 2012-2022.

It is not just about the 2016 shock. Previous reversals for the Democratic Party can also be explained by declining working-class support, as the authors demonstrate by focusing on electoral data from the disastrous 1994 and 2010 midterms.

While Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the 2020 election, warning signs were obvious here, too. Biden lost the white working-class by 27 points, and his support among non-white voters was 11 points lower than Hillary Clinton’s four years earlier.

In the 2022 midterms, Republican candidates made strong gains among Asian voters angered by the Democrats’ support for racial quotas. Elsewhere, historic gains by Trump in majority-Hispanic counties in Texas were cemented.

Judis and Teixeira’s description of how the socio-economic profile of the Democratic Party has changed makes for essential reading.

Although they initially make the common left-wing error of failing to place the decline of labour unions in the context of wider social atomisation, their description of how corporate interests gained power is accurate.

Advocacy groups focused on particular issues like abortion or the environment have strengthened their hold.

In one particularly interesting interview carried out with the Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, the Congressman explains how his hyper-prosperous voters in Silicon Valley are drawn to the Democrats mainly because they are “vehemently pro-choice, vehemently pro-gay marriage [and] vehemently for reasonable gun safety legislation.”

Policy matters

Judis and Teixeira identify four key policy components of the Democrats’ overall problem with working-class voters.

First, there is the issue of race. Key figures within the liberal intelligentsia have pushed for greater use of race-based quotas while increasingly suggesting that all American institutions are structurally racist.

Racial quotas are deeply unpopular with voters, even in liberal states like California. In spite of this, activists within the Democratic coalition remain rabidly supportive, and the Biden Administration has boasted of prioritising minorities when it comes to the allocation of business grants and other measures.

Second, there is mass immigration. More than 20 million immigrants entered America between 1965-1995, triple the number that came in the previous 30 years.

Large-scale illegal immigration across the southern border with Mexico has heightened public unease.

Concern from unions about the effect this was having on the wages of American workers led the Democratic Party to consider a more restrictive approach along with stronger border security in the 1990s.

However, no such compromises can be countenanced in today’s party, beholden as it is to a radical minority that often appears to believe that national borders can no longer be defended in theory, let alone in practice.

As a result, Trump and other border security advocates are gaining ground.

Third, there is the range of gender-based issues that the authors cleverly categorise as ‘Sexual Creationism.’

Just as a majority of Americans support the usual legal protections for transgender people, a clear majority also break with the Democratic elite by telling pollsters that gender is determined at birth and that trans athletes should be required to compete in sports categories corresponding to their biological sex.

Last of all, there is the issue of environmental policy, where a clear class divide exists.

While left-wing activists adopt apocalyptic rhetoric in discussing the problem, only 3 percent of respondents in a 2022 Gallup poll said that climate change was the ‘most important problem.’ Working-class voters were far less likely to do so, and they are of course far more likely to be adversely impacted by increased energy costs caused by the shift from fossil fuels to renewables.

For all the talk of green-collar jobs, the authors point out that so far, employment opportunities within the renewable energy sector appear far less attractive than the huge numbers of jobs that still exist in fossil fuel-related industries.

They are also admirably brave in acknowledging that the great majority of the world’s energy consumption is from fossil fuels and that humanity’s overall reliance has barely budged in the last two decades.

Utopian and unachievable policy proposals like the ‘Green New Deal’ plan for America to become carbon neutral by 2030 are not just bad policy; they are bad politics too, considering the number of American swing states where such a plan would cause devastating job losses.

The authors are critical of President Joe Biden for not doing more to check the radicalism of his party, but they do commend him for his pro-union stance and his overall economic agenda.

Biden’s measures to improve America’s infrastructure, accelerate the energy transition and increase the domestic production of all-important semiconductors are notable, they write, for the emphasis that this recent legislation has placed on the need to ‘buy American’, as well as the inclusion of measures designed to boost wages and counteract the effects of regional deindustrialisation.

Considering the scale of Biden’s legislative accomplishments in these areas, it is surprising that they are not discussed more frequently.

This in itself points to the degree to which cultural issues have taken centre stage in American politics.

Spiritual malaise

Interestingly, though they are firmly of the Left, the authors identify a spiritual dimension to the crisis in American society.

“People’s sense of their own self-worth depends on the ways in which they can think of themselves not as isolated collections of cells destined to disintegrate but as people having multiple identities that transcend their own biological individuality. They need affirmation from others, and they need to feel they are part of not only families or neighbourhoods but also larger communities,” they write.

College-educated Americans in large cities, they go on to write, can feel part of the new economic and global order more easily than those living in those smaller and often economically depressed communities where factories, unions and churches are all less vibrant than they were several decades ago.

Donald Trump’s rallying cry to ‘Make America Great Again’ was not for such voters about rolling back the clock on racial equality or other forms of progress. Instead, it was about restoring the widespread prosperity and tranquillity which has been lost.

In several instances, Judis and Teixeira hint at the impact that the secularisation of America has had in propelling progressives in a socially and politically self-destructive direction.

Citing the work of Columbia Professor John McWhorter on racial radicalism, the authors speculate “that the absence of conventional religion and of expected economic opportunity had created among the college-educated young a search for identity, lifestyle, and salvation that had led some into a moralistic radical politics.”

Similarly, they correctly describe today’s environmental movement as having been “hijacked by a millenarian, quasi-religious commitment to rapidly zeroing out fossil fuels and creating a renewables-based economy.”

Though they are also slowly showing a greater willingness to consider Republican candidates, the African-American community offers a useful case-in-point of a stable component of the Democratic coalition.

Disproportionately religious, culturally moderate black voters act as a bulwark against even greater radicalism within a Democratic Party where the ancient quest for community continues to push the rootless towards utopian and even authoritarian causes.

This is not likely to change. As America continues its drift away from Christianity, the main left-wing party is not likely to make its way back towards the centre, no matter how cogently Judis and Teixeira express themselves.

Their book is nonetheless outstanding. As the United States veers towards what could be the most contentious election in the country’s history, these brilliant minds explain better than anyone else exactly why it is surely going to be incredibly close.


James Bradshaw writes on topics including history, culture, film and literature.


Biden Regime’s Legacy: Human Trafficking, Sex Slavery and Invasion

TIK History: The Cult many are in but don’t realize (explaining Hegelian dialectics)

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

Florida Grand Jury finds Finds Masks and Covid Lockdowns Were Harmful and Ineffective

Florida has issued it’s 22nd Statewide Grand Jury Report, which found that masks and Covid lockdowns were both harmful and ineffective.

Preliminary findings show inefficacy of masks, lockdowns, and other nonpharmaceutical interventions.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Today, the 22nd Statewide Grand Jury released their first interim report, which includes findings on the inefficacy of masks and the years of lockdowns. On December 13, 2022, Governor DeSantis petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for a statewide grand jury to investigate crimes and wrongdoing committed against Floridians related to the COVID-19 vaccine.

The report noted roadblocks in the Statewide Grand Jury’s investigative efforts due to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Army refusing to provide representatives to testify before the jury. These entities played a substantial hand in the contracting, approval, and distribution process for the COVID-19 vaccines.

Major highlights of the report include:

  1. On nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs): “To be clear, scientific research into NPIs and their consequences did not begin with the outbreak of COVID-19. A wealth of contemporaneous scientific information already existed in major publications that could have informed a much more robust and meaningful response with respect to NPIs, but much of it was ignored or even attacked by mainstream public health and media entities in the early months of the pandemic, for reasons that are not always clear. In short, this was not an ‘information’ problem, it was a ‘judgment’ problem.”
  2. On lockdowns: “Lockdowns were not a good trade. Comparative data showed that jurisdictions that held to them tended to end up with higher overall excess mortality. This is especially evident when compared to jurisdictions that targeted their protective efforts towards the highest-risk groups instead of mandating large-scale, extended periods of quarantine for everyone.”
  3. On safety and efficacy: “It should also be apparent that establishing the ‘safety’ of a biological product necessitates a comprehensive, meaningful and accurate evaluation of the risk presented by the disease that product is designed to address.”
  4. On masking: “We have never had sound evidence of their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 transmission” and “there have always been legitimate questions around the impracticality of individual adherence to mask recommendations, but once it became clear that the primary transmission vector of SARS-CoV-2 was via aerosol, their potential efficacy was further diminished. Public health agencies failed to adequately explain this important distinction to the American public in favor of a broad mask recommendation that did not make nearly enough distinction between the types of masks available and put at risk those it sought to help. Well-financed federal agencies chose to fill the discourse with flawed observational and laboratory studies, hiding behind their conclusion of ‘no equipoise’ to avoid the potential embarrassment of the public health advice they championed being invalidated by evidence.”
  5. On hospitalization risk: “We know for a fact that this happened because numerous federal and state health officials have publicly stated that they did not ask or require hospitals to distinguish cases where someone was admitted with incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection versus cases where someone was so sick with symptoms of COVID-19 disease that he or she required hospitalization. Thus, it is highly likely that the CDC’s number of total hospitalizations is inflated to some degree with asymptomatic or minor SARS-CoV-2 infections that were classified as ‘hospitalizations’ in order to financially benefit the hospital.”
  6. On collateral consequences: “Somehow, because of panic, hubris, ineptitude or some unfortunate combination of the three, this widely rejected idea not only made its way back into scientific discourse in 2020, it became the law of the land in most of the United States between 2020 and 2022. It is clear to this Grand Jury that whatever benefits inured from these mandates, they were not worth the price.”

Nonetheless, the apolitical Statewide Grand Jury concluded in its first interim report that “there are still many months and much more testimony and evidence to come before our work will be finished. The issue we have been asked to examine is different from prior statewide grand juries in that it obviously affects people all over the United States—and perhaps the world—in much the same way as it affects citizens of the State of Florida.”

Governor Ron DeSantis and State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo met with members of Florida’s Public Health Integrity Committee (PHIC) to discuss the First Interim Report released by the Florida Statewide 22nd Grand Jury on the harmful impacts of mask mandates and lockdowns, all pushed by the federal government.

Watch the roundtable discussion.

“Florida rejected the prevailing orthodoxy regarding non-pharmaceutical interventions, but in reality, just followed pre-COVID pandemic response guidance, which elite bureaucrats tossed aside as fear and hysteria took over,” said Governor Ron DeSantis. “Florida preserved freedom and blocked mandates. The grand jury has now confirmed what we knew all along – Florida got it right.”

In this initial report, the grand jury noted that their investigation was hampered due to the refusal to participate by various federal agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Even with this refusal from the federal government impeding a review to allow for transparency and accountability, the report’s determinations were clear:

Lockdowns and mask mandates caused more collateral damage than good. The jury identified anxiety, depression, suicidal behavior, and attention deficits were attributable to the “heavy-handed” policies of lockdowns.

Lockdowns resulted in higher excess mortality rates. The jury found that jurisdictions that implemented lockdowns tended to have higher overall excess mortality rates.

Evidence to support mask mandates were abysmal. “There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks,” the jury concluded. There has never been sound evidence of effectiveness against the virus from face masks that provided statistically significant benefits.

The CDC’s COVID-19 hospitalization data is likely inflated. The jury found that the CDC’s number of total COVID-19 hospitalizations is likely inflated due to asymptomatic or minor SARS-CoV-2 infections among patients that were classified as COVID-19 hospitalizations in order to financially benefit the hospital.

“Leading by common sense and sound science was a priority for Florida from day one of COVID-19,” said State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo. “The findings of the grand jury demonstrate how going against federal mandates was the right choice for the health and freedom of all Floridians. The lasting damage done to Americans by COVID-19 mandates is no secret, but the grand jury’s first interim report makes it even more evident.”

“During the pandemic, we threw away the basic principles of public health,” said Dr. Martin Kulldorff, PhD. “The verdict is in. Lockdowns were a huge mistake.”

“CDC and other bodies ignored basic science, used their power to silence scientists that didn’t agree with them, and subverted high-quality evidence to make decisions,” said Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD. “In 2021, [Governor DeSantis] ordered monoclonal antibody treatment for Floridians, and the Biden administration cut the funding at a time that would have saved countless lives. Now, I don’t know for sure, but it looked to me like one political party trying to hurt members of another political party.”

“There have been some accounting tricks used to make COVID-19 seem more dangerous than it really was. There is something odd that a fundamental principle of public health was thrown under the bus,” said Dr. Bret Weinstein, PhD. “It is great to see the state of Florida acting in a capacity of international leadership. The entire planet is suffering from the exhaustion from COVID.”

“Every American knows a large number of mistakes were made. We’re not seeing a nation come together on what we did wrong,” said Dr. Joseph Fraiman, MD. “I hope the grand jury can offer our country guidance on how to organize our government and how to handle events like this in the future.”

“Spotlight needs to be shown on the federal agencies and their actions during the pandemic. That needs to come from the highest level possible, and that’s not happening,” said Dr. Steven Templeton, PhD. “I don’t think [the federal government] has an appetite right now to address these problems, and I don’t think there is going to be an appetite anytime soon for it.”

Copyright 2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Spontaneous Recovery – The Body’s Power to Heal from Cancer and Chronic Disease

The following is a transcript of this video.

“Natural forces within us are the true healers of disease.”


Modern medicine has achieved remarkable results. Its ability to save people from ailments which a mere generation ago would have led to an untimely death, borders on the miraculous. But when it comes to chronic illness modern medicine has its limits. Sometimes the treatment is worse than the disease. Sometimes the treatment only provides temporary relief from symptoms. Sometimes there is no treatment. Fortunately, modern medicine does not possess a monopoly on our ability to heal as the body possesses innate powers that can heal many chronic health issues. In this video we explore the body’s natural capacity to heal and look the role self-transformation plays in promoting these healing abilities.

“. . .health and illness are not random states in a particular body or body part. They are, in fact, an expression of an entire life lived. . .”

Gabor Mate, The Myth of Normal

Our body is constantly at work healing itself. White blood cells clean out wounds and combat infections, fibroblast cells create new tissue to repair ruptures to our skin and flesh, new bone cells are created to fuse fractures, and the immune system can identify and neutralize all sorts of harmful pathogens. But the body can do more than just heal from wounds, infections, fractures, and viral and bacterial illnesses, it also has the ability to heal itself from virtually all forms of chronic disease as is evidenced by the phenomenon of spontaneous recovery.

A spontaneous recovery occurs when an individual is unexpectedly cured from a disease in a way that cannot be explained through the paradigm of modern medicine. Absent any intervention by doctors, without surgery or pharmaceutical drugs, some people heal from cancer, heart disease, multiple sclerosis, Chron’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, and other forms of chronic illness. For example, with regards to cancer, it is well-established that tumors can shrink in size, or even disappear absent surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation, or as was written in the medical journal Oncology Letters:

“. . .malignant tumors as well as metastases, of almost all histological types, can regress spontaneously although certain histological types regress more frequently than others.”

Sante Basso Ricci & Ugo Cerchiari, Spontaneous regression of malignant tumors: Importance of the immune system and other factors

A spontaneous recovery does not necessarily occur suddenly, or without cause, rather as Caryle Hirshberg and Marc Barasch explain in their book Remarkable Recovery:

“The original meaning of the word “spontaneous” (derived from the Latin sponte, “of free will”), has little to do with the suddenness, rapidity, or immediate change without cause which contemporary usage implies. The word, the dictionary reveals, originally had more to do with something occurring due to a “native internal proneness,” a tendency to “act by its own impulse, energy or natural law.” It implies a natural process that arises from within.”

Caryle Hirshberg & Marc Barasch, Remarkable Recovery

While only a small fraction of individuals with a chronic disease will spontaneously recover, and while most spontaneous recoveries go unreported, there are still many cases of this phenomenon documented in the medical literature. For example, in Mind Over Medicine the physician Lissa Rankin points to a case of a man suffering from pancreatic cancer, one of the most devastating forms of this disease. This man was scheduled for surgery, but had a heart attack due to a presurgical procedure which forced delay of the surgery and as Rankin writes:

“Within four weeks of his heart attack, while he was recovering from the cardiac event, the symptoms and laboratory findings of his pancreatic cancer began to resolve. Four months after the initial diagnosis, a CT scan revealed that his tumor had disappeared completely – without surgery, chemotherapy, or any other cancer treatment. Four other case studies in the medical literature report “spontaneous” remissions from inoperable pancreatic cancers.”

Lissa Rankin, Mind Over Medicine

An article titled Notes on Spontaneous Regression of Cancer examines twelve cases of spontaneous remissions and tries to understand what life changes may have led to these recoveries. One of the most remarkable cases involved a patient with a grade four brain tumour:

“Dr. Maurice Green, as an intern, observed the treatment of a physician with glioblastoma multiform [grade 4 brain tumour]. The operation was unsuccessful. The patient, however, had a regression rather than progression of symptoms… Eventually he left the hospital completely well, indicating only that he felt differently about life after facing death ….”

Charles Weinstock, Notes on spontaneous regression of cancer. Journal of the American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry & Medicine

Examples of spontaneous recoveries are not limited to cancer; they span the spectrum of chronic diseases, from cardiovascular and autoimmune diseases to neurological disorders, blood disorders, and skin conditions. There is even the mysterious Lazarus phenomenon which is the unassisted, or spontaneous recovery, from cardiac arrest after a patient has been declared dead and all attempts at resuscitation have ended.

If the body can bring itself back from the brink of death and cure itself from diseases believed to be terminal, then its capacity for healing is far greater than most of us realize. Our goal should be to harness this power to help us heal from chronic ailments or to prevent their onset. For even if we turn to conventional medicine to treat whatever ails us, when our body is optimized to heal the efficacy of such treatments will improve.

Research into spontaneous recovery has yet to unveil a universal formula or specific set of steps to unlock the body’s vast healing potentials, as many factors influence this capacity, and individual needs vary. Those who have studied numerous cases of spontaneous recovery, however, suggest that there are recurring patterns and shared contributing factors that offer potential insights into how we can prime our body to heal.

On the one hand there are the physical factors that contribute to healing, these include changes to diet, regular exercise, improving the quality of sleep, and the breaking of addictions to drugs or alcohol. Factors related to the health of the body are crucially important to our ability to heal. But there is a psychological factor that stands above these in rank of importance, and this is the willingness to undergo a self-transformation.

Self-transformation is critical to the process of physical healing for two main reasons. Firstly, it is often only when we transform our sense of self that we develop the courage, discipline, and desire to change the physical habits that are thwarting our ability to heal. Secondly, self-transformation helps correct for the unhealthy patterns of thought, belief, and emotion, that through the body-mind connection, keep us locked in a state of sickness. Many of these thought and emotional patterns operate below the threshold of conscious awareness and are the product of our conditioning, bit it an upbring in an unhealthy environment or years of conforming to the sickness of modern society. If we free ourselves from this conditioning through self-transformation, we free ourselves from the damaging physiological responses that are dictated by our maladaptive thoughts, behaviours, and emotions.

The literature on spontaneous recovery supports the assertion that self-transformation facilitates healing, for example in the book Cured Jeffrey Rediger who examined hundreds of cases of spontaneous recoveries, writes:

“People who experienced spontaneous healings disrupted the default mode, got out of that rut, saw and experienced themselves in an entirely new way. . .”

Jeffrey Rediger, Cured

Or as Caryle Hirshberg and Marc Barasch write in Remarkable Recovery:

“. . .it has been noted by a number of researchers that extraordinary healing is often preceded by profound personal change, sometimes even what seems like a startlingly different personality.

Several researchers have noted sudden psychological turning points [or what are called] “existential shifts” preceding remarkable recovery. Dr. Marco DeVries and his associates found that a group of spontaneous remission cases they studied all showed a relatively sudden change toward increased autonomous behavior, and significantly altered attitudes toward illness, treatment, relationships, and spiritual beliefs.”

Caryle Hirshberg and Marc Barasch, Remarkable Recovery

In a paper titled “Psychological Changes Preceding Spontaneous Remission of Cancer” several researchers discovered that common among those who spontaneously healed from cancer was:

“…an increased dystonic reaction to limited aspects of the personality and an increased syntonic reaction to a wider set of characteristics than normally accessed.”

Schilder, J. N., de Vries, M. J., Goodkin, K., & Antoni, M. (2004). Psychological Changes Preceding Spontaneous Remission of Cancer. Clinical Case Studies

In layman’s terms this amounts to a rejection of the limiting aspects of one’s personality and an opening up to, and acceptance of, a greater sense of self.

As self-transformation can lead in many directions, some good and some bad, which form of it primes the body for healing? The etymology of the word heal offers a clue, as at root this word means a return to wholeness. A movement in the direction of psychological wholeness, which Carl Jung identified as the epitome of psychological health, is the form of self-transformation that promotes healing. Psychological wholeness is an ideal state which can only ever be approached, never fully attained, and it entails increased awareness of all aspects of who we are and integration of these aspects into our conscious sense of self. In volume 16 of his Collected Works, Carl Jung wrote that:

“…no previous age has ever needed wholeness so much. It is abundantly clear that this is the prime problem confronting the art of psychic healing in our day.”

Carl Jung, Collected Works Volume 16

Wholeness is attained through self-acceptance, coupled with self-knowledge, and expressed through acts of courage. Without self-acceptance we tend to deny and repress aspects of who we are, thus blocking their healthy expression. Without self-knowledge we never discover our true potential and what we value in life. Without courage we never express our potentials in the service of valued ends. Or as Mate wrote:

“When we heal, we are engaged in recovering our lost parts of self, not trying to change or “better” them. As the depth psychologist and wilderness guide Bill Plotkin told me, the core question is “not so much looking at what’s wrong, but where is the person’s wholeness not fully realized or lived out?””

Gabor Mate, The Myth of Normal

While self-transformation can enhance the healing capacities of the body, the fact remains that we are never in complete control of an illness, nor of matters of life and death. We can take all the steps necessary to heal and yet remain sick. But this does not invalidate the benefits of self-transformation as a response to illness or disease. For the pursuit of wholeness is an enriching and meaningful experience that will help us endure life no matter the health of our body. In fact, many people only wake up to their more authentic self when faced with their mortality and so amidst the great suffering that accompanies disease, a silver lining can be found. An illness or disease may be the necessary spark that inspires us to discover who we truly are and which imbues us with the courage to live in a way more aligned with our authentic sense of self.

 “It is only in the face of death that man’s self is born.”

Saint Augustine

Or as Martin Heidegger wrote:

“If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life – and only then will I be free to become myself.”

Martin Heidegger, Being and Time

EDITORS NOTE: This Academy of Ideas video is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Forget the Laughingstock Female SWAT Team. How About One for 70-year-old Men?

Too old? That’s ageism, you bigot! Canceled you must be.

The idea of a septuagenarian SWAT team comes to mind after watching a viral video of a Chilean all-female team’s grand failure at the recent UAE SWAT Dubai Police Challenge (yes, there is such a thing).

’Twas a sight to behold.

Embarking upon an obstacle course, all but one of the women quickly got stuck dangling on a cable above a pool of water, with one immediately splashing in. It was a scene that lit up the Internet and invited mockery, such as the comedic version of the incident below, set to Benny Hill music.

Original video:

Okay, I know the competition featured a few other all-female SWAT teams, some or all of which did not so ignominiously fail. And, yes, it’s easy poking fun at the Chile gals’ fall into the chilly water — just as it’s easy pointing to ladies who fared better.

But anecdotes aren’t the issue. It is, rather, that many people will, reflexively and obediently, applaud an all-female SWAT team’s existence as “progress.” Instead, however, we should ask a simple question:

What’s the point?

In fact, though I’ll elaborate, I can sum up this endeavor’s folly with a simple analogy:

It’s like spending money training Chihuahuas to be guard dogs when German shepherds are readily available. You could do it, I’m sure.

But why would you?

With the female SWAT team, the answer is that this is where Equality Dogma, which thoroughly infects moderns’ minds, has brought us. Even the most important roles in our society (airline pilots and Harvard presidents come to mind) must become vehicles through which to effect social engineering. It’s a waste of resources, though, and, in the SWAT team’s case, of tax money. It also defies common sense.

After all, if your life depended on assembling the best possible track team — without knowing anyone’s best running times — whom would you choose?

Basic profiling informs that the elderly wouldn’t even be considered. Nor would small children, the obese nor those with prosthetic legs (that is, at least not until technology delivers a real-life Six Million Dollar Man; 60 million with inflation). And given facts such as how 14-year-old boys’ records in the 400- and 800-meter runs are better than the corresponding women’s world records, females wouldn’t be candidates, either.

Rather, you’d choose athletic, lean, well-built young men with narrow hips, who are not at all bow-legged and who, if anything, exhibit a pigeon-toe foot bias (if you know anatomy). Doing otherwise would undermine your goal’s attainment and be a waste of resources.

Likewise, why is any government spending money training female SWAT members? Has a Y-chromosome-specific condition killed off virtually all the Chilean men? There surely are young, athletic, dynamic fellows ready, willing and able to perform that role — that’s where the resources should be focused.

Again, though, this is heresy to moderns’ ears. Everyone deserves a chance to participate in everything — and everybody gets a participation trophy! Diversity is a strength, dontcha’ know, bigot? And if women aren’t incorporated into every sphere (except compulsory draft registration, oddly), it’s a miscarriage of justice, somehow, and disagreeing makes you a sexist.

Alright, but then let’s have that SWAT team for 70-year-old men. Oh, just as with the women, it’s irrelevant if even the best of them aren’t as capable as the most robust young bucks. Why, I once knew a septuagenarian who could break you in half! (That’s for the “I knew a girl once who…” crew).

Be assured, too, that just as with the odd overgrown tomboy who wants to roll with Butch, it wouldn’t be impossible to find a youthful 70-year-old man who’d like to finally fulfill his SWAT-team dreams. Only backwards, ageist bigots would object.

Equality, right?

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe or Gettr or log on to

Copyright 2024. Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

WEF’er Klaus Schwab Pronounces ‘New Dawn” of Human Civilization Based on Technology and Transhumanism

Speaking Monday at the World Governments Summit in Dubai, the founder and executive director of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, said humankind is “transitioning” into “The Intelligent Age” powered by technologies springing forth from a Fourth Industrial Revolution.

This was the same summit addressed earlier in the day by Tucker Carlson, who calling out the transhumanists who “think they are God” and are using technology in a vain effort to “improve the human condition.”

On the same day, one of the world’s most prominent transhumanists, Klaus Schwab, commanded center stage and gave a very different view of the world from that envisioned by Carlson.

Schwab described a chilling vision of the near future in which he said human beings must prepare to have their physical, biological and digital identities integrated into one “fusion.”

Schwab said this revolution in technology will power a global transition of humankind into a new era that he called The Intelligent Age, in which “humankind will enjoy many more opportunities and possibilities” to become god-like.

This includes features like linking your brain to the internet and wearing virtual-reality goggles on your face that will ultimately rewire your brain and be unable to tell the difference between reality and fantasy (not to mention make you look like an idiot).

Schwab says a new type of human will exist in this new era. It’s a “transition of humankind,” he said, a choice of words that was not coincidental. He used the word “transition” five times in a span of less than a minute.

What he’s talking about here is the use of machine learning and AI to create a population of hybrid beings. These hybrids who exploit the “opportunities and possibilities” offered by technology to evolve into a whole new species. They will “transition” from humans into transhumans, bearing some of the hallmarks of the previous species but incorporating new characteristics powered by artificial intelligence.

Those who refuse to take advantage of these new “opportunities” will be left behind, unable to qualify for the best jobs and educational opportunities. You can already see that coming. AI will replace 60 percent of the jobs over the next 10 to 20 years, and those who refuse to become transhuman will be the first ones eliminated from the work force.

Eventually, you will also see purges from the upper ranks of the social strata, the so-called elites.

We already are experiencing an increasingly bifurcated society, with a wider distance between the haves and the have nots. The takeover by AI will exacerbate this process. The generation now on the Earth may be the last one to grow up remembering what it was like to actually be human. Young children currently under the age of 8 or 9 will not remember the human experience unless they are raised by parents who guard them from this pernicious drive to automate humanity and make people into soulless cyborgs — having access to more information than ever but unable to separate truth from fiction, love from hate, feelings from facts.

Schwab demonstrated how this works as he has already gone down this path, submitting to what he considers a higher power. He sacrifices his own free will to the will of his god, which is AI.

Schwab said he arrived at this conclusions about the Fourth Industrial Revolution not by researching and studying and then using his own ability to reason. No, he consulted ChatGPT.

“I had about 20 pages of text, and I asked ChatGPT, ‘Summarize the text, and tell me now, based on our discussion, how will the new era – the intelligent era – will look like,” he said.

So, instead of going to God the Father and consulting Him about our “deepest needs and aspirations” as human beings, we should go to AI for such answers. And by doing this, Schwab promises the creation of a “new dawn of human civilization” without God. Isn’t this the Tower of Babel all over again?

Copyright 2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved. is 100 percent reader supported, offering independent analysis critical to living a life of freedom in the 21st century. If you appreciate my work and would like to support it, please share these articles. You may also send a donation of any size c/o Leo Hohmann, P.O. Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264. Or, you can donate via credit card at the Christian crowdfunding site GiveSendGo.

Biden State Department Funds Training of 2,500 LGBT ‘Allies’

The Biden administration is using the State Department to fund LGBT activism abroad — again. According to federal spending database, the U.S. State Department awarded a $15,000 grant to Washington State University (WSU) for a “public diplomacy program.” The government website explains that the program is designed to train 30 “master trainers” to become “LGBTQI+ allies, followed by these master trainers training another 2500 individuals on this theme.” WSU hosted its three-day “train-the-trainer workshop” in India at the end of September.

According to WSU’s official new site, the program’s “priority” was “promoting a better understanding of diversity and inclusion and LGBTQIA+ rights…” The three-day program included sessions on “LGBTQ+ ally training,” “What it means to be an ally,” “Evolution of language/Defining LGBTQ+ language,” “LGBTQ+ history: Worldwide, in the United States, and in India,” “LGBTQ+ individuals and faith,” and others. The workshop concluded with the U.S. Consul General of Hyderabad awarding participants with certificates of completion. The program’s stated goal was to “[i]ncrease the comfort levels of all participants regarding issues faced by members of the LGBTQI+ community and work toward a more equitable company, university, and society for all.”

Meg Kilgannon, a senior fellow at Family Research Council, commented to The Washington Stand, “Hardly a day goes by without a revelation about talent or treasure being spent on perversion by the U.S. State Department. It’s the worst kind of colonialism — sexual colonialism.” She continued, “And don’t think that promotion abroad means the home front is safe from these manipulations. American school children and college students are offered the same content. Unrest at home and abroad is exacerbated by the Biden administration’s maniacal push to normalize the dangerous and abnormal.”

This is not the first time that the Biden State Department has used American taxpayers’ money to fund LGBT activism abroad. Last year, Family Research Council published a report detailing the Biden State Department’s commitment to LGBT ideology in foreign nations, including hundreds of thousands of dollars in grant money to LGBT organizations and programs. The U.S. Mission in Botswana, for example, offered $300,000 in grant money to “carry out a program to promote greater social acceptance of LGBTQI+ persons, including among influential religious groups and traditional groups…”

Another grant was awarded to an Ecuadorian group to finance drag shows and produce LGBT films and documentaries. A similar State Department grant in Portugal was used to fund a film festival called “Queer Lisboa,” which featured drag queens and media centered on incest and pedophilia. Other instances of State Department funds going to LGBT causes include supporting “queer Muslim writers in India, paying for classes for “transgender women makeup entrepreneurs” in Nepal, and promoting puberty blockers for children in Poland.

In some cases, the State Department’s LGBT activism has strained or jeopardized diplomatic relations with other nations. Promotion of Pride month and same-sex marriage has landed U.S. diplomats in trouble with the Foreign Ministers of nations like Kuwait and Hungary, where same-sex marriage is illegal. When U.S. Ambassador David Pressman, who openly identifies as homosexual, criticized Hungary’s laws, Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó fired back, “[I]f he wishes to use his stay in Hungary to criticize the actions of a government elected by a clear majority of the Hungarian people and legitimized by the Hungarian people, he will have a very difficult job in working effectively to improve cooperation between the two countries.”

The Biden administration has also funneled funding into LGBT causes abroad via the U.S. Agency for International Aid (USAID). Through USAID, the White House has often partnered with other governments and private firms to sink further millions into LGBT activism in foreign nations. According to the Washington Free Beacon, the Biden administration has spent nearly $5 million promoting LGBT ideology in foreign nations as of June, 2023.


S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Queers for Palestine: An Unholy Alliance

Queers for Palestine. What an unlikely slogan. It makes my brain stop working. It’s a thought-terminating cliché along the lines of “Trans rights are human rights” or “Black Lives Matter.” At the heart of Christian mysticism lies a pathway to knowing God, and it is contained in contradictory or paradoxical speech. The “dazzling darkness” of Pseudo-Dionysius, who also talks about “knowing all by knowing nothing” (how is that possible?). Right there, in that spot, we can meet God, but let’s not confuse this with whatever it is the rainbow mob is doing linguistically. While they might feel as though they are part of a religious organisation, with their grievances and gripes and demands being their liturgy, and their rainbow flag their symbol of adoration, it is the opposite in content and character. It is more in line with a cult, and its members display all the signs of having been brainwashed.

Queers for Palestine turned up to support the Free Palestine brigade in London recently, and one blue-haired person was asked why she was there. Her answer: “We’re not free until we’re all free.” It’s catchy-sounding, but devoid of all meaning. She should have said, “We’re not free until those whom we selectively choose to use for our own cause are also free.” That, at least, would have been honest. She sagely continued: “We’re here because there are queers in Palestine.” The logic is that queers in Palestine need also to be freed from the atrocities that Israel is allegedly perpetrating on the citizens. The assumption is that if Israel simply stops what it’s doing, queers will go back to having a fantastic life under Hamas, Islam, and sharia. If I were she, I’d be demanding the release of all queer people in Palestine. I’d be viewing them along the lines of being in a hostage situation at the hands of Hamas. But even then, queers couldn’t simply raise their hands in the rubble and say “I’m queer, I’m here, see me, free me.” They’d be instantly killed or tortured. So the queers attach their grievances to those of the terrorists for whatever reasons they might have, but both parties’ hatred needs an outlet, and they’re not above or below using their own as human shields when they need to score a political point over someone.

Queering the Map is an online digital platform which allows queer users “to make anonymous geotagged posts.” Some of the posts read, “Pls know despite what the media says there are gay Palestinians. We are here, we are queer. Free Palestine.” Free it into what, you might ask. While another post reads, “I knew I was different from a young age… But society demands it remains hidden. I live elsewhere now… I cannot live a lie.” Two things apparently can be true at once — that gay Palestinians support living under sharia, but they also have to flee from a probable public honour killing.

Leftists try to blame the UK for criminalizing same-sex relations in Gaza due to the British Mandate Criminal Code Ordinance 1936, while ignoring Islamic laws and attitudes towards the act. Owen Jones was spouting this nonsense recently, until he was reminded that the mandate ended in 1948. Owen Jones is a mouthpiece for the LGBT+ mob. He’s nothing more than an agitator, and he will gleefully twist facts and deliberately leave out information in order to create an imaginary crisis, and in order to sensationalize a thing to fit his agenda. His argument is standing on quicksand if he’s reaching back almost 100 years to try and score a modern-day point. It was illegal to be publicly gay in Scotland as recently as 1980, but so what? Life progresses and laws change. Scotland now has the most progressive laws in all of the UK, albeit over-the-top, misogynistic, and bang out of order. If Islam is stuck in a rut, it’s not the West’s problem. If five million Scots can change their ways, so can 1.8 billion Muslims.

Why are gay groups being drawn to Islam? The truth is that LGBT+ movements are predatory and parasitic in nature, just as Islam is. Today, they are like sharks circling bloody waters whenever they see a perceived victim group that they can devour. They like to vampirically suck the life out of groups of people. It’s what sustains them: victims. Vampires make other vampires, and we see this with all the new additions to the rainbow flag as it changes every couple of years now to include each newly-made monster. Recent inclusions being brown stripes for POC (who were never actually excluded), the trans triangle, and a circle for intersex. Of course, further additions will be made ad nauseum. Even though they’re running out of room on the thing, we are told that “The placement of the new colours in an arrow shape is meant to convey the progress still needed… work is still needed in terms of POC and trans rights. This arrow design is meant to highlight that.” I’d bet they’d love nothing more than a Muslim/Islamic/Palestinian stripe or circle or arrow on that flag. How to go about getting it, though? Simple, turn up at the rallies and pretend to be an ally. It’s the gay equivalent of a dawah stall.

The pro-Palestine mob isn’t buying what the gays are selling, no matter how mightily they flirt and flutter their eyelashes at them. Gays are just going to have to learn that no means no. A skirmish broke out upon the sighting of a Pride flag at a recent protest. The flag was ripped down and trampled on. The only thing both groups have in common is that they both want special treatment under the law. Neither one of them are happy with equality. It’s a hate crime to criticise both groups these days. A man was recently arrested for criticising the number of Palestinian flags that had been put up in his street in East London. Meanwhile, in South London, a man was arrested for pushing over planters in a school’s gardening display. He was arrested and held in custody for causing alarm and distress: “Officers are treating this incident as a motivated hate crime attack on our LGBTQ+ communities.”

The truth of the matter is that the LGBT+ movement in the UK, and certainly the West, is a privileged class. There is nothing left to fight for, because they have rights that the majority of people don’t have. In Scotland, they can change their gender on a daily basis and enjoy the protections under the law afforded to whatever gender they are that day. To quote Captain James T. Kirk from Star Trek, they can boldly go to places where “no man has gone before”: into the women’s bathrooms and locker rooms. It is a criminal act to deliberately misgender someone. The war has been won for these groups and these people, but I put the blame on the organisations. They need to remain funded, and in order to receive money they need to create gripes on a regular basis. It has all culminated with men dominating women in sports. That’s what gay progress looks like in the West. It is the very worst of a religious cult.

White liberals are incredibly racist, we already know this. They have a tendency to view all non-white people as being invalids or basket cases who simply have no control over their lives or behaviour. Islam comes with a colour attached to it in their minds – brown – therefore, it is a group for marginalised people who need help. I find it all patronizing and very condescending. And they are doing their utmost to align themselves with it. I wonder what colour or stripe or shape they’ll find to represent Islam on their flag. It could simply be a ragged hole in the middle of it, to symbolize a bomb explosion? Can someone please tell them that Islam doesn’t want them, in spite of their best attempts at seduction?



The Goal of the Globalists — Satan’s Partners in His Quest to Destroy America

The Queen of Queer Hill

Fired Democrat staffer will not be charged for shooting gay porn in Senate hearing room


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

Oral Arguments begin February 7th, 2024 before the Florida Supreme Court on Proposed Amendment that Codifies Unrestricted Abortion

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver will be presenting oral arguments before the Florida Supreme Court on Wednesday, February 7, 2024, beginning at 9:00 a.m. EST, regarding a proposed amendment that would codify unrestricted abortion as a right in the state constitution.

Liberty Counsel represents Florida Voters Against Extremism which is urging the Florida Supreme Court not to approve the wording of a proposed amendment that is misleading and deceptive and violates the single subject rule.

The proposed amendment, “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion,” would create a new section in the Florida Constitution “limiting government interference with abortion.” The full text of the accompanying ballot summary states: “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

The proposed amendment is sponsored by Floridians Protecting Freedom, Inc., a political committee supported by the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, the American Civil Liberties Union, and other groups that support unrestricted abortion on demand up to birth.

The effect of the proposed amendment would prevent the State of Florida from regulating all abortions that a vague and undefined “healthcare provider” may deem “necessary” to protect the woman’s “health.” The amendment leaves the terms “necessary” and “health” purposefully undefined and vague. The proposed amendment would permit Partial-Birth Abortion, which is banned by the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. This conflict alone with the federal law disqualifies the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment also violates the Florida Constitution’s single-subject requirement by addressing multiple subjects, including pre-viability abortions and health in the same proposal. Those are distinct issues that cannot permissibly be put into a single ballot initiative.

According to the Florida Department of Health, a “healthcare practitioner” includes nearly 60 categories — everything from a massage therapist, audiologist, 911 public safety telecommunicator, and a tattoo artist. According to this proposed amendment, any of those professions could refer a woman for an abortion.

Please text or call Jack Kinnett, Vice President of Constituency Affairs for the Liberty Counsel @ 407.702.7478 or email for information if you are interested in attending or want additional info.

Hear Live Argument Here:

Oral Argument Broadcasts & Ceremonial Sessions

Liberty Counsel’s Briefs:

FL Voters Against Extremism PC (PDF)

Brief FL Voters Against Extremism – Filed (PDF)

Press Releases:

FL Supreme Court Will Hear Abortion Initiative Argument

Deceptive Abortion Initiative in Florida Must Be Rejected

FL Supreme Court Asked To Reject Deceptive and Misleading Abortion Amendment


(AUDIO) The Florida Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Arguments Regarding This Deceptive Amendment

(AUDIO) Florida Supreme Court Will Hear Abortion Initiative Argument

(AUDIO) Florida Supreme Court Must Reject Misleading Abortion Amendment

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Moms For Liberty: Exposé on Slander by NYC Democrat Politicians and Leftwing Media

From Moms For Liberty after the Town Hall on Jan. 18, 2024: “We had an open conversation on the state of education in New York with NYC elected leaders and parents in the community. Plus a keynote speech from Billboard Chris.


Inside Bohemian Hall, “questions were answered, and voices from all viewpoints who wanted to engage in collaborative conversation were welcomed. We loved being in NYC.”

Unable to attend but that will not stop me from reporting on the event and the  anti-Moms propaganda parroted by the leftists, politicians and media.

Moms for Liberty is a hate group, plain and simple. And hate has no place in New York City.” Tony Simone: Assembly member, 75th District

They used the hate grouSPLC (the infamous Southern Poverty Law Center) as their authority on mislabeled hate groups.

The SPLC Is Massively Over counting ‘Hate’ Groups—and It’s Not Just Moms for Liberty” (

Map Southern Poverty Law Center, 2022

”At this rate, the Southern Poverty Law Center‘s HATE MAP might eventually describe everyone as an extremist.”

Southern Poverty Law Center’s Despicable Attack on Parental Rights Is a Sign of Leftist Panic”

The Southern Poverty Law Center does one of the Left’s filthiest jobs: It smears political enemies as “hate groups,” putting these organizations’ staff at risk. It thus spreads hatred while mawkishly pretending to fight it. It foolishly believes its wall of sanctimony will obscure its ruthless tactics.” [The Heritage Foundation]

NOTHING that was said inside by a very diverse panel was going to change the stories they had already written. What follows is a look at some of the slanted reporting as well as videos from left and right, leading off with the NY Daily News one-sided headline.

In this video of Manhattan Borough President, Mark Levine , outside Bohemian Hall, he rants the predictable slander  (Freedom News TV)

Other videos and articles, like this from the Daily Beast‘s Kate Briquelet Senior Reporter is an example of leftist journalism, all slant. No matter what she heard inside, the Moms for Liberty were racist BIGOTS.” (mobbed?). Noisy, but easily contained by the police.

Protesters flocked to Manhattan on Thursday to oppose the right-wing extremist group, which hosted a “town hall” for “an honest conversation on the state of education” that featured anti-trans and school choice activists. (Among them were state and city lawmakers and Moms for Liberty opposition group Defense of Democracy.)

Jo Macellaroa public school teacher in the Bronx, stood near the entrance with a sign reading, “I’m the trans teacher you’re so scared of.”(pronouns they/them)

…”they’ve” worked with trans students in elementary school and said, “It’s hard for me to imagine how hard it is for them,” especially when “most of the information from people like Moms for Liberty is false. Trans kids I know just want to be kids.” (also) …   protect kids …. students (need) access to books, therapy, medical care, and the ability to ask questions.”

Kate Briquelet continued with her negative report:

“But most of the airtime was spent listening to panelists stoke fears about the usual conservative bugbears: transgender care for minors and critical race theory. For about 15 minutes at the end, a handful of people in the crowd were able to ask questions, which resulted in anger and several fraught interactions. This, despite an event flyer claiming that “all viewpoints are welcome.”

My reaction: The full length video shows the only “fraught interactions” were caused by lefties who asked questions that were out right lies: ALL viewpoints were permitted doesn’t mean everyone has to like it.

Panelists included “Billboard Chris,” a frequent Moms for Liberty collaborator who travels the continent railing against gender-affirming care for minors, and Nicholas Giordano, a community college professor and occasional Fox News contributor.

Other “parents rights” adherents included NYC community education council member Maud Maron, who called trans-identifying children “a social contagion” and Paul Rossi, a former private school teacher fired for challenging anti-racism lessons. He is now a consultant for affluent parents concerned about “woke” ideology, the New York Post reported.

Another participant, Wai Wah Chin of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance Greater New York, was reportedly instrumental in ending affirmative action.”

Briquelet ended with this bit of “drama” while omitting his name:

“After the town hall ended amid bickering and shouts and one man being escorted out .

(“The One Man” ejected was Leftist troublemaker WALTER MATHESON – a Sascha Baron Cohen wanna-be) [screen grab photos – AOK News ] 

A few days later he harassed people leaving Henry Kissinger’s memorial with a ‘F**k Kissinger” sign. [picture of sign-Freedom News TV]

Sonni Mun (MD), a Manhattan parent told The Daily Beast, “It wasn’t a town hall. It was a disinformation campaign.”

[I’m familiar with Sonni–  a dedicated hard-core leftistMY pictures of her include Sonni and her pro-abortion friend’s UnF**k the world t-shirt in 2023 and her cute “It’s the f-ing guns” PINK t-shirt at an anti-gun rally in 2022.

Sonni’s quote is an incorrect assessment of the Town Hall: “This is New York City and I didn’t expect it to be as insane as it was,” she added. “I was sort of shocked at the amount of hate and misinformation and that they basically talked about everything except curriculum and education.” (The full video at the end of this article verifies that curriculum and education was very prevalent in the discussions.)

To be expected, Kate Briquelet, made these non-question plants VICTIMS of the Moms. [both photos Pamela Hall 2022/23]

“Moms for Liberty advertised their NYC event as a “town hall” but so far no audience members have been able to ask questions & it’s supposed to end in 10 minutes. Ahead of audience Qs, they showed us a clip from a COVID documentary.” – [The 15 minute documentary teaser was 01:09]

“How they’re responding to people’s concerns. People are telling this woman to shut up but they wouldn’t let her finish her Q.” [This woman would not let the panelist respond. SHE was yelling over him—so the audience did tell her to be quiet, to let him talk.]

This man repeated the leftist lies that claim curriculum and education were not discussed, despite the FACT that they were discussed.

Moms 4 Liberty posted a complete video of the Town Hall (2 hours)

.The leftists were planted around the room, knowing full well there would be vocal reactions to their snarky comments, so the left-media can accuse the so-called chaos of impeding an open town hall.

They ask who gave M4L the right to dictate how to educate their children without explaining “why it is okay for THEM to tell parents how to educate their children”. It’s one-sided. The left-media skips that part ’cause they know it’s one-sided.

Government schools fill hours of so-called education with “how to protest white people and conservatives and Christians and now : Jews and Israel.” Left-media does not admit they are the hypocrites.

Yes, the Three R’s are important but they are seriously neglected by the LEFT, not the Mom’s For Liberty crowd.  Children fail maths, can’t write in cursive (or at all) and only know the rewritten history foisted on them by leftist teachers who idolize Marxists like Howard Zinn and promote the fake history of the 1619 Project. Without apology, they ban Thomas Sowell, the Bible, Conservatives, Republicans, the real history of Israel as well as historians like Paul Johnson.

Bastardized history that teaches  hatred, to reshape our country while creating a dystopian world ; this is our future,  the New World Order, the Great Reset if they are not stopped by groups like Moms For Liberty.

This clip is rife with falsehoods as Joy Reid of MSNBC rudely talks over Tiffany Justice. She begins with Tiffany Justice (at 1:05) (16 min clip- MSNBC)

Joy  could not let go of the misinformation re banning,  ignoring the books LEFTIST have banned (books with racist or what they label offensive language.)

“All Boys are Blue”/rape of minor child/strap-on dildo/incest- pedophilia- predators- Joy claims moms take it OUT OF CONTEXT.
Joy lobs the “expertise” question with a snarky quip that Tiffany is  NOT AN EXPERT and WHO gave Tiffany the right to ‘ban’ books’

Joy mentions library OPT OUT FORMS for students. For books like  Ruby Bridges. Tiffany says graphic sexual contact is at issue, but Joy won’t let Tiffany talk; to explain.

Tiffany points out that Moms 4 Liberty have not BANNED books.

Found a conservative reading list that a leftist school removed from approved reading. 

Open picture in new tab to enlarge.

Outside the Town Hall was a table set by the People for the American Way with BOOKS supposedly ‘banned’ by the Mom’s and their ilk. [photo by hate speech]

Check out this outrageous alternative to Moms 4 Liberty, a stomach turning website: Defense Of Democracy.

“In the spring of 2022, two moms in a small upstate New York town came together to fight back against three school board candidates endorsed by the hate group Moms for Liberty. “

We support educators who present historically and scientifically accurate information…”

Since book ‘banning’ is such a hot topic for the left-media and the leftist orgs, these excerpts from a few articles (with links at end) reveal more about the hypocritical Left’s actual banning of BOOKS.

Liberals cannot open the door to censorship for reasons they consider good without also opening the door for reasons they consider not-so-good.

There were at least 2,532 book challenges from July 2021 to June 2022, affecting 1,648 book titles, according to a report by the “free expression protection group” PEN America. According to the American Library Association,… any book that is challenged is considered to be a “banned book.”

.… liberal efforts criticized or restricted books in the name of anti-racism or progressive ideals.

Books like “Of Mice and Men;” “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” and several Dr. Seuss titles have been challenged in some schools and libraries due to racist language or imagery throughout the years, including the use of the n-word or insensitive imagery of racial stereotypes, according to the ALA.

Just as conservatives have gained traction on gender identity by asking leftists to define the word “woman,” they could also reframe the book debate by asking them to define the word “ban.” They shouldn’t let the Left avoid acknowledging the explicit or graphic content of many of these books, and they should ask defenders of these titles whether they want their own children reading them. When movies and television programs are rated PG–13, R, or X—and consequently restricted for younger viewers—that doesn’t mean that they’re banned. The same principle goes for books.

… “progressive” education is designed to teach a single position as the only position. There can’t be debate over abortion, evolution, climate change, homosexuality, transgenderism, and any number of other leftist positions.

Students must be shielded from well-reasoned contrary positions. Just seeing a list of 31 books might give students the wrong impression of what they’ve been taught for 12 years. “You mean there is another position?”

1984, perfect example of how teaching its intended allegory has been lost

It’s hard for many Americans to believe, but their schools have been taken over by an alien worldview designed to shape their children into non-thinking wards of the State as THE LEFT CONTINUES to PERVERT the EDUCATION of our CHILDREN.

Bill Maher doubled down. “Everything I read, whatever source, it’s only half the truth. They print the narrative. They don’t print truth.” 

The left claims
 that progressive books are being censored in public schools. But my research proves the opposite is true…. students complained that their school libraries had become one-sided, offering only books in line with progressive orthodoxy.

FACT: the Public Library System is controlled by the LEFT.

The ALA has long been notoriously liberal. While many other library associations around the world condemned the Cuban regime’s closure of libraries and jailing of dissident librarians, the ALA never did.

America’s one-sided school libraries are failing students. No wonder only 16% of Gen Z says they are proud to live in America, according to a January 2023 Morning Consult poll. They don’t have access to books that present our country in an honest light.”

It’s no secret that many school libraries have become reflections of politicized librarians. Take Emily Drabinski, president of the American Library Association and a self-proclaimed Marxist, who said during a socialism conference last September in Chicago that public education “needs to be a site of socialist organizing. I think libraries really do, too. We need to be on the agenda of socialist organizing.”


Click here to view infographic: My Power and Privilege.

Click here to view infographic: Wheel of Power/Privilege


[All pictures articles and videos are attributed]

LINKS For articles that focused on Left Book Bans:

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

Prosecution of Pro-Lifers Continues under Biden’s DOJ, with 6 More Convictions

On Tuesday, a guilty verdict was announced for six pro-life activists for violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act at an abortion facility near Nashville, Tenn. The Biden administration’s Justice Department brought the charges, which stemmed from a peaceful protest on March 5, 2021, in which a group of pro-lifers prayed and sang hymns at the entrance to the Carafem Health Center Clinic.

Video of the protest shows a group of approximately 20-30 pro-life activists peacefully praying and singing hymns while standing and sitting along the walls of a hallway leading to the door of the abortion facility, with a small segment of the group sitting directly in front of the facility’s entrance. Roughly two hours into the vigil, a number of protestors were arrested for blocking the entrance without incident.

In October 2022, the Biden administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it was charging 11 individuals involved in the protest with violating the federal FACE Act, which bars individuals from physically blocking the entrance to an abortion facility. Six of the defendants were eventually convicted on Tuesday, with each facing “up to a maximum of 10 and a half years in prison, three years of supervised release and fines of up to $260,000,” with sentencing set for July 2. Four other defendants are scheduled to stand trial for misdemeanor violations of the FACE Act.

The Thomas More Society, which is representing the defendants, is expected to appeal the convictions.

The DOJ’s FACE Act prosecutions are the latest in a series of legal actions directed at pro-life activists under the Biden administration, in which at least 24 cases have been prosecuted since January 2021. At the same time, there have only been four FACE Act indictments of pro-abortion individuals related to a single attack on a pregnancy resource center in Florida, despite the fact that there have been hundreds of attacks that have occurred against churches and pregnancy resource centers during Biden’s tenure.

As noted by Family Research Council’s Arielle Del Turco during a House Judiciary Committee hearing last year, the FACE Act was originally designed to protect abortion facilities, pregnancy resource centers, and places of worship. The types of attacks committed against churches have included “vandalism, arson, bomb threats, gun-related incidents, and interruption of worship services — all of which are punishable under the FACE Act,” she emphasized.

The disparity in prosecutions has led to Congress taking notice. In October, Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) introduced a bill to repeal the FACE Act, citing the biased enforcement that is being carried out by the Biden administration. “We need to repeal it and then stop giving authority to the Department of Justice to be able to go after [pro-life] people,” he told Tony Perkins in September.

In comments to The Washington Stand, Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, questioned the priorities of the Biden administration’s DOJ in targeting pro-lifers amid a spiraling border crisis and the spreading conflict in the Middle East.

“As countless little boys and girls are being trafficked across the border and wars wage across the world, the Biden administration thinks the most important thing to focus on is prosecuting peaceful protestors attempting to save unborn babies from a brutal death,” she pointed out. “Yes, these protestors violated the FACE Act, but the Biden administration should consider spending taxpayer dollars to protect America’s border — not to stop non-violent men and women who are simply singing hymns while defending the unborn.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Report Catalogues Dozens of New Incidents of Persecution against Christians in the West


EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Opponents Call SAFE Acts ‘Extremist,’ but 5 Veto Overrides Suggest Otherwise

The Ohio state legislature on Wednesday became the fifth to override a governor’s veto to enact a law protecting minors from gender transition procedures. With every successful veto override, claims of “extremism” lodged against the bill appear more and more far-fetched.

Accusations of extremism began with the very first Save Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act, passed by the Arkansas legislature in 2021 (HB 1570). The bill sailed through the House (70-22) on March 10 and the Senate (28-7) on March 29. Despite these wide margins, Human Rights Campaign (HRC) President Alphonso David complained on March 13 of that year, “The furious pace of these bills shows that hateful anti-equality groups across the country and extremist legislators alike realize that equality is gaining momentum.” After then-Governor Asa Hutchinson vetoed the bill, the Arkansas legislature responded by overriding the veto (72-25 in the House, 25-8 in the Senate) on April 6.

The campaign to protect children accelerated in 2023, when 20 state legislatures joined those of Arkansas (2021), Alabama (2022), and Arizona (2022) in passing laws to protect children from gender transition procedures (although the Ohio veto override occurred this month). As the movement grew, so did the opposition. When Tennessee enacted a bill in March, a coalition of left-wing groups including the ACLU and Lambda Legal claimed that they had “chosen fearmongering, misrepresentations, intimidation, and extremist politics over the rights of families and the lives of transgender youth.”

“Extremist, anti-LGBTQ+ politicians and their allies are waging a dangerous and cruel misinformation campaign that seeks to stigmatize not only gender-affirming care but transgender and non-binary people as well,” claimed HRC’s new president Kelley Robinson. “Through fear-mongering and propaganda, extremist leaders are working overtime to manufacture panic, rile up their base, and coax them into opposing healthcare for transgender people.”

Left-wing groups were not above indulging in a little fear-mongering of their own. “Across the country, anti-transgender extremists and politicians are putting the lives and well-being of transgender people at risk,” said Movement Advancement Project Senior Policy Researcher Logan Casey, “by attempting to outlaw access to best practice medical care not only for youth but for all transgender people.” No states have passed laws to ban gender transition procedures for adults because, although these procedures harm adults too, society recognizes that adults are competent and therefore free to make their own decisions.

Nevertheless, “extremism” remained the buzzword across the left-wing activist-sphere, especially when a governor’s veto raised the bar for passage and gave activist groups time to pile on additional pressure. “For the extremist groups that are pushing these laws, the guard rails are off,” insisted Campaign for Southern Equality executive director Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara of Louisiana’s SAFE Act-style bill. GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis claimed that “Ohio’s extremist lawmakers inexplicably refused facts, expert testimony, and deeply personal pleas” by overriding the governor’s veto.

Despite the pressure and accusations of extremism, four state legislatures have overridden their governor’s vetoes in the past 12 months. On March 29, 2023, the Kentucky Senate (29-8) and House (76-23) voted to override Governor Andy Beshear’s (D) veto of a bill to protect minors from gender transition procedures, which also included protections for women’s sports and parental rights. On July 18, the Louisiana House (76-23) and Senate (28-11) voted to override then- Governor John Bel Edwards’s veto of the Stop Harming Our Kids Act, which told doctors to do just what the title said. On August 16, the North Carolina House (74-45) and Senate (27-18) voted to override Governor Roy Cooper’s (D) veto of that state’s bill to protect minors from gender transition procedures.

Then, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (R) vetoed that state’s SAFE Act at the end of the year (December 29), the first Republican governor to oppose such a measure since Hutchinson in 2021. Almost immediately, nearly every other statewide official criticized the veto, and legislators in both chambers announced plans to override. The House overrode the veto 65-27 on January 10, and the Senate overrode the veto 24-8 on January 24, 2024.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins extracted a lesson for governors from the veto override trend. “Given that five legislatures have overridden gubernatorial vetoes of legislation protecting minors from the transgender activists pushing experimental drugs and surgeries,” he remarked, “any governor who vetoes these SAFE Act-type laws is either politically tone-deaf or being influenced by those who profit from this morally devastating, but financially lucrative, industry.”

Another implication of the trend is that protecting minors from harmful, experimental gender transition procedures is not an “extremist” position, as its opponents keep on insisting. This is because of the role that executive vetoes play in America’s system of checks and balances.

In Federalist Paper 73, Alexander Hamilton explained that an executive veto “furnishes an additional security against the enaction of improper laws. It establishes a salutary check upon the legislative body, calculated to guard the community against the effects of faction, precipitancy, or of any impulse unfriendly to the public good, which may happen to influence a majority of that body.”

Hamilton was defending the veto power given to the U.S. president under the not-yet-ratified U.S. Constitution, but his reasoning is general enough to apply to gubernatorial vetoes against state legislation, too.

The “propriety” of a veto, Hamilton added, turns “upon the supposition that the legislature will not be infallible.” He articulated three general scenarios in which a veto could serve as a useful check. First, “the love of power may sometimes betray it into a disposition to encroach upon the rights of other members of the government.” Second, “a spirit of faction may sometimes pervert its deliberations.” Third, “impressions of the moment may sometimes hurry it into measures which itself, on maturer reflexion, would condemn.”

While the first scenario is not relevant to the SAFE Act debate, claims of “extremism” certainly suggest a “spirit of faction,” and they may also suggest the legislature itself would change its mind upon “maturer reflection.” The multiple vetoes issued against SAFE Acts provide case studies to see whether these applications prove true.

If the SAFE Acts were imprudent bills that legislatures passed too hastily, we would expect to find many legislators switching their votes during the veto override attempts, perhaps even enough that the bill would fail to reach whatever supermajority threshold was required. That is emphatically not what we find. The Arkansas bill lost one vote between its first passage and the veto override. The Kentucky bill lost one vote in the Senate but gained one in the House. The Louisiana bill lost one vote in the Senate, while four House members switched their votes two-and-two, canceling each other out. The North Carolina bill actually gained two votes. In Ohio, no legislators switched their votes.

Thus, after hundreds of legislators voted on these bills, and then voted on them again after they had been vetoed, the net effect was a change of zero votes (excluding different vote totals caused by absent legislators). These five bills lost a total of five votes and gained a total of five votes between first passage and the veto override.

The other claim raised against the SAFE Act is that it is the product of an extremist faction — in this case, its detractors allege, having swept through nearly the entire Republican Party. This claim would be more plausible if all the legislators who voted for the SAFE Act were of the same party, but that is not what we find. In Louisiana, multiple Democrats in the Senate voted for the bill both on initial passage and in overriding the governor’s veto — a governor of their own party. In North Carolina, two House Democrats actually switched their votes during the veto override, to approve the bill against the wishes of their own party’s governor.

For that matter, the North Carolina legislature would not have even taken up a SAFE Act-style bill if not for the extremism of Democrats in the chamber. Earlier in the year, Representative Tricia Cotham had switched from the Democratic to the Republican Party because her fellow Democrats were bullying her over introducing a school choice bill. Her party switch gave the Republicans the supermajority they needed to advance legislation the governor would likely veto.

There is a tendency today to view things like veto power and legislative supermajorities as simply a matter of who has power to do what. Succumbing to that tendency would be a mistake, because it capitulates to a Marxist view of politics that sees everything through the lens of power dynamics. Sometimes, the usual political divisions break down, and government officials make decisions based upon what they believe is best for society, a certain group in society, or at least for their reelection chances. As noted above, some Democratic legislators voted for SAFE Act-style bills, while some Republican governors vetoed them. The veto even exerts a restraining influence in the far-Left, one-party state of California, where in September Governor Gavin Newsom (D) vetoed an anti-parent bill. The more statesmanlike use of the veto propounded by Hamilton may not always exert itself, but it still plays a role too large to dismiss.

An executive veto serves to “increase the chances in favor of the community against the passing of bad laws, through haste, inadvertence, or design,” said Hamilton. “The oftener the measure is brought under examination, the greater the diversity in the situations of those who are to examine it, the less must be the danger of those errors which flow from want of due deliberation, or of those missteps which proceed from the contagion of some common passion or interest.”

SAFE Act-style bills have now been considered a great many times across a great many states. In just a three-year span, nearly half of all U.S. state legislatures (23, to be exact) have seen fit to implement protections for minors suffering gender dysphoria, who lack the long-term vision and decision-making prudence to clearly see the harms of irreversible gender transition procedures. Each of those states conducted extensive hearings, featuring testimony from both sides of the debate, and were exposed to public input (including rather rude protests from the Left) on the bills’ potential merits and effects. There has been no lack of examination or due deliberation.

In almost every state, a supermajority of the legislature (often two-thirds, or even three-fourths) voted in favor of the measures. In five states, a supermajority enacted the bills of a governor’s veto. Such overwhelming support, almost by definition, implies that these bills enjoy support from more than just an “extremist” faction, notwithstanding the slanders of their detractors.


Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.