THE QUEERING OF AMERICA’S CHILDREN: Hey Mom & Dad Now You Can ‘Drag Your Kids’ To ‘Pride’

A reader sent us a June 6th, 2022 article titled “‘Preferred Pronouns’ Madness MUST Stop” by Devvy. Devvy wrote:

I will always remember more than two decades ago, Sean Hannity, saying on his radio show he didn’t care what queers did at home behind closed doors.  I thought to myself, you’re Catholic and instead of lovingly condemning what God Almighty called an abomination, you just want to shush it up behind closed doors. Give an inch and they’ll take a mile.  An old saying but so true.

Even way back then so many of us knew what was going to happen to normalize the immoral and dangerous PREFERRED lifestyles of sexual deviants. While the “queer community” uses those exact words, you had better not or be smeared into the next century.

The prime target became schools with corporate America jumping on board throwing tens of millions of dollars to promote sexual deviancy.  These 50+ Brands Are Celebrating Pride by Giving Back to the LGBT Community – Nike, American Eagle and Disney are among the companies celebrating inclusion, equality and love for LGBT Pride month.  (None of them get a penny from me. I’m sorry but I will not spit in God’s face.)

Read more.

We then received links to a series of articles highlighted by activist, blogger, speaker, and best-selling author who educates and inspires the public on the burning social and moral issues of the day Elizabeth Johnson:

The Queering of America’s Children

After reading each article we came to the inextricable conclusion that there has been a continual effort to queer America’s children.

QUESTION: Why?

ANSWER: To groom them for sodomy, gay sex and prepare them for the pedophiles and pederasts!

Don’t believe us? Then read this BlazeMedia article titled “‘Drag the Kids to Pride’ event at Texas gay bar show children handing money to drag queen dancers“:

A Texas gay bar hosted a “Drag the Kids to Pride” event where drag queen dancers provocatively gyrated in front of children as young as toddlers. Tensions flared when protesters demonstrated outside the venue hosting the drag queen show for children.

The Mr. Misster gay bar in downtown Dallas hosted the drag queen event aimed at children.

A poster for the “Drag the Kids to Pride” event claims it is the “ultimate family friendly pride experience.”

“Our under 21 guests can enjoy a special Mr. Misster Mocktails while the moms and dads can sip on one of our classic Mr. Misster Mimosa Towers,” the poster reads. “Do you want to hit the stage with the queens? We have FIVE limited spots for young performers to take the stage solo, or with a queen of their choosing! Come hangout with the Queens and enjoy this unique pride experience, fit for guests of all ages!”

The Texas gay bar said the “Drag the Kids to Pride” event was a spinoff of Mr. Misster’s Champagne Drag Brunch – which tickets start at $25 and go all the way up to $600.

Read more.

So now parents are dragging their children to gay bars for what exactly? Are these parents selling their children’s innocence or paying others to take their innocence away?

We report, you decide.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Drag Queen Dances for Children in Dallas, Texas

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats categorize gender mis-prouncing as sexual harassment in Wisconson

Poll: 63% of Americans Oppose Including ‘Gender Identity’ in Education Department Definition of Sex

Burger King Debuts ‘Pride Whopper’ With Two Top Or Two Bottom Buns

Pizza Hut’s book club promotes drag queen books to pre-K children

New York library hosts ‘drag camp’ for kids age 11 and up to adopt a drag persona and perform at pride show

Oreo Cookies Tout ‘Pride Pack’ for June Pride Month

Abortion Activists: How Far Will They Go?

We’re starting to see just how far abortion activists are willing to go to get their way.

Starting with violence.  A radical pro-abortion group claimed credit for the Molotov cocktail attack on a pro-life office in Wisconsin and promised “increasingly extreme tactics” ahead.  Pro-life workers received death threats after the attack.  Two hundred students surrounded two pro-life students at a high school in New Jersey, pushing and shoving them, and tearing down their signs.  Pro-abortion protesters in Los Angeles threw rocks and bottles at police, and beat one officer with his own baton.  So there you have it – abortion activists are even willing to attack the police to get their way.  Then you have politicians like Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot egging them on.  She issued a “call to arms” and urged citizens to rise up and “fight to victory” for abortion rights – no surrender.

Then there’s the vandalism.  Vandals spray-painted a Catholic church in Boulder with pro-abortion graffiti – “F- the Church”, “My Body, My Choice” and such and the like.  That’s just one report.  Other churches have been vandalized, too.  A pregnancy help center in Florida was vandalized over the Memorial Day weekend, with “If abortions aren’t SAFE then neither are you” spray-painted on the building.  This is just one report; many more many more pro-life organizations have been hit, recently.

So it’s not just spray paint; it’s intimidation, and it’s being attempted at the Supreme Court, too.  Illegal protests continue outside Supreme Court Justice’s homes, and the local Progressive DA won’t do anything to stop them.  Abortion activists are laying plans to shut down the Supreme Court building next Monday, to prevent the Justices from reaching their offices and issuing opinions.

Politicians in Progressive cities are signaling they won’t enforce state laws banning abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned.  The cities include Austin, New Orleans, parts of Atlanta, Durham County in North Carolina, a Philadelphia suburb, Nashville’s county, and Fairfax, Virginia.  Sixty state and local officials pledged in 2020 not to prosecute abortion if Roe goes away.  None dare call it insurrection, but I will.

One thing to notice in all this is how organized it is.  These are not random acts of violence.  We see professionally printed signs, standard talking points, online coordination, crowdfunding, and other hallmarks of an organized effort.

So now we’re seeing how far abortion activists are willing to go to get what they want – violence, vandalism, illegal protests, attacking the police, ignoring the law, intimidation, and death threats.  If you can’t persuade people, smash’em in the face and firebomb their office.  It’s no longer about persuasion or winning the issue fair and square.  It’s about using any means necessary to get what they want and the hell with everybody else, starting with the unborn.  And it’s all supported by politicians who should be thrown out of office for their lawlessness.  The law means nothing to abortion activists and their willing accomplices in government.  Which is not surprising, because these people don’t even respect life itself.  My mother was the best political scientist I’ve ever known.  She said a society that does not respect life is in trouble.  Amen to that, and I will add a society that no longer respects law will soon find it no longer has the Rule of Law, leaving it to the worst and most ruthless among us to determine what goes on here.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: EXCLUSIVE: Kyle & Todd McMurtry Join Tucker Carlson for First Joint Interview

RELATED TWEETS:

RELATED ARTICES:

Joe Biden Invites Abortion Activists to the White House to Celebrate Killing Babies in Abortions

Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre Calls Killing Babies in Abortions a “Constitutional Right”

Supreme Court Issues No Decision on Dobbs, Wait to Overturn Roe Continues Another Week

Abortion Activist Chains Himself to Fence to Protest Upcoming Supreme Court Decision

New Harvard/Harris Shows More Americans Want Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v. Wade

Oklahoma Abortion Centers are Not Killing Any Babies Thanks to State’s New Abortion Ban

MSNBC Host Andrea Mitchell Celebrates Abortionists Who Kill Babies as “Heroes”

NORTH CARILINA: Preschool Shows Kids LGBT Flashcards Featuring A Pregnant Man

As the insanity of American society today gallops forward, it came to light Sunday that Ballentine Elementary School in Wake County Park, North Carolina has been using LGBTQ-themed flashcards featuring a pregnant man to teach young children colors.

In the first place, it is important to note that a “pregnant man” is actually a woman. She may have pumped her body full of male hormones and have undergone surgery such that she sports a beard and resembles a man in other ways, but she is still functionally a woman, as her pregnancy itself attests. The idea of a “pregnant man” is a fiction and fantasy of our present age, which wants to pretend that men can become women and women men, and that when they do so, this is something to celebrate.

And yes, forcing this nonsense on preschoolers is child abuse, and worse. Republican State Rep. Erin Paré called for a return to sanity, sayingSchools should only be using age-appropriate materials, and these flashcards clearly do not meet that standard for a pre-school classroom.” The cards seem to have been brought in by one teacher alone, as school administrators acted quickly to remove them when Paré alerted them to their use. Paré said: “I hope schools across Wake County and the State of North Carolina will follow the example of Ballentine and respond swiftly when a parent expresses concern and ensure that materials like this are not being used to teach young students.”

So do I, but there are larger issues at play here. What was the agenda of the teacher who brought these cards to the school in the first place? Clearly he or she wanted to teach the youngest children that changing one’s sex is both possible and normal, and that those who do so are as ordinary and wholesome as apple pie. The child will then grow up free from what is of course being dubbed “transphobia,” and the world will become that much more tolerant, diverse, and peaceful.

What could possibly be wrong with that? Plenty. One may change how one looks cosmetically, but one’s sex is embedded within every cell of one’s body. To try to change that is to set oneself at war with oneself forever. A person who changes sex, or thinks he or she has done so, becomes dependent upon pharmaceuticals for the rest of his or her life, which is great for Big Pharma and no doubt one reason why the medical and pharmaceutical establishment has suddenly decided that this obvious mental derangement is something entirely normal and to be encouraged and celebrated.

The transgender movement is also repeatedly targeting the youngest of children, as in this case, and working for statutes that enable children to change their sex, or think they have done so, even without their parents’ knowledge or consent. This is part of a larger effort to loosen the bond between parents and children and to make children more attached to and dependent upon the state and its officials than upon their parents. When you want to set up an authoritarian regime, say, one with a Disinformation Governance Board and a Justice Department that targets parents who dissent from the Leftist agenda at school board meetings, the weakening of the parental bond dovetails nicely with your plans.

There is another effect of all this as well. Once a generation of children is entirely indoctrinated into the LGBTQ transgender perspective, this generation will have learned to abhor and despise traditional masculinity and femininity. These self-absorbed and deeply confused young people will also have been taught that the founders of this nation were all white male slave owners, racists, colonialists, and imperialists, full of “toxic masculinity.” When the nation faces genuine existential threats, these young people will be called upon to defend it, and they will sneeringly refuse. They won’t want to be part of the aggressive gun culture. They will know that wars never solve anything, and that fighting in them is wrong in all circumstances. They will know that gun-wielding right-wingers are actually terrorists, whom under no circumstances are they willing to emulate. They will know that they should be welcoming to the other, not hostile, and that they should eschew all “bigotry” and “racism.”

Now imagine that the same elites who would like to see a generation hooked on pharmaceuticals and hating masculinity are also socialist internationalists who abhor the very idea of the nation-state. How wonderful it will be for them once a generation has accepted the trans nonsense and all the rest of what children are being taught. The way to the realization of their plans will be ably and smoothly paved.

AUTHOR

 

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

Dear LGBTQMxyz Community ‘Pride’ is a Mortal Sin—Have a great ‘Pride’ Month

Well its once again it’s June.

It was first President Bill Clinton who declared June “Gay & Lesbian Pride Month” in 1999 and 2000. Then from 2009 to 2016, each year he was in office, President Barack Obama declared June “LGBT Pride Month.”

So, let’s first look at what Mohammed had to say about pride month.

A hadith depicts Muhammad specifying the punishment for homosexual activity:

“The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, ‘Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.’” (Sunan Abu Dawud 4462)

So, let’s look at what the Holy Bible says about pride:

Proverbs 11:2 – When pride cometh, then cometh shame: but with the lowly is wisdom.

Proverbs 16:5 – Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished.

Proverbs 29:23 – A man’s pride shall bring him low: but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit.

Proverbs 16:18 – Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Galatians 6:3 – For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

James 4:6 – But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.

Proverbs 27:2 – Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips.

Proverbs 26:12 – Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.

Philippians 2:3 – Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.

Proverbs 8:13 – The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.

Jeremiah 9:23 – Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches:

1 John 2:16 – For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Romans 12:16 – Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.

Maybe pride isn’t all its cracked up to be? No pun intended.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Men are Women and California Judges Rule Bees are Fish

We live in a wondrous new age in which men can be women. So why can’t bees also be fish? What if they identify, or their lawyers rather, identify them as fish?

They say that the law is an ass, but in this case it may also be a fish. Or a bee. Or whatever the Big Green lobby and the Dems who control the state say it is.

In the latest installment of a years long legal debate over whether bees are fish, a California appeals court has ruled that, for the purposes of the state’s Endangered Species Act, they are.

Environmentalists petitioned the California Fish and Game Commission to add four bumblebee species to the list of at-risk plants and animals governed by the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Roughly 250 plant and animal species are protected by the CESA, which prohibits the import, export, possession, purchase, or sale of listed species. The Commission provided notice in 2019 that the four bumblebee species were candidates for CESA protection, prompting lawsuits from agricultural groups that were concerned about the costs of adherence to the new requirements.

They also questioned the Commission’s legal authority to designate bumblebees for protection. Insects aren’t a protected category under the CESA. Candidate species may include “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant,” according to the state’s fish and game code. And while California does protect some species of insect, these are listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. That left state officials without an intuitive avenue.

Rather than let pesky biological standards get in the way, they had concluded that designating bumblebees as fish was the most fitting way to get them protected under the CESA. Legally, a fish refers to “a wild fish, mollusk, crustacean, invertebrate, amphibian, or part, spawn, or ovum of any of those animals.” Because bumblebees are invertebrates—a protected subset of fish—the Fish and Game Commission argued that they could reasonably be designated as fish per the CESA’s terms.

What do words mean anyway? Isn’t the entire concept of fish something invented by dead white men who were probably racists?

The arguments heard by an appeals court last week primarily focused on one question: What does it mean to be a “fish”?

Apparently, we need to consult a biologist.

“​​We acknowledge the scope of the definition is ambiguous but also recognize that we are not interpreting the definition on a blank slate. The legislative history supports the liberal interpretation of the Act (the lens through which we are required to construe the Act) that the commission may list any invertebrate as an endangered or threatened species,” the 35-page ruling states.

Including California leftists. While they are invertebrates, sadly they are not threatened. Instead, as this case shows us, they do most of the threatening.

But you don’t have to know anything when you’re fighting for social justice.

Bumblebees and honeybees are in the same family (Apidae) but they are in different genera (Bombus and Apis, respectively).  The honeybee species name, mellifera, is Latin for “honey bearer”.   Perhaps the legislature is just confused about bees.  In Section 29414 of the California Food & Agriculture Code incorrectly defines “honeybees” as insects of the genus Apis Mellifica (rather than mellifera).  In fact, Apis Mellifica is a homeopathic remedy that is variously bee venom or an entire bee crushed and diluted in alcohol.  Because there is no species named “apis mellifica”, it seems that in California there are no honeybees and bumblebees are fish.

While all of this is easy to mock, the practical implication of this means that almonds (and almond-based products) and citrus products will once again become more expensive, more family farms will go under, and more environmental consultants in Marin County will get richer.

And so the verdict is unanimous, that the law doesn’t apply to environmentalists and that California farmers have no rights. And that words mean nothing.

When looking at the CESA, Justice Ronald Robie and two other members of the Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District ruled the CESA’s language does, in fact, cover bumblebees and that the California state legislature had taken action to ensure this result.

“We generally give words their usual and ordinary meaning,” the analysis begins. “Where, however, the Legislature has provided a technical definition of a word, we construe the term of art in accordance with the technical meaning. In performing this function, we are tasked with liberally construing the Act to effectuate its remedial purpose.”

In other words, anything goes.

Robie is an environmentalist and Jerry Brown’s former director of the California Department of Water Resources. Which means that maybe he shouldn’t have been hearing this case.

I would love if this case could somehow move to the federal level with California’s Democrat machine and the entire media focused to defend “bees are fish”.

But if they can do it with men are women, bees and fish are easy. Just don’t ask them about the birds and the bees.

AUTHOR

RELATED VIDEO: Biden and his wealthy allies ‘killing’ America via green agenda

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

Silence of the power engineers? NERC does nothing!

The North American Electric Reliability Corporation, or NERC for short (rhymes with jerk), recently released a report warning of likely blackouts across much of America this summer.

The report got lots of publicity, including this piece flagged by our own Climate Depot, titled “Report: Deadly Summer Blackouts Inevitable As Renewables Struggle To Replace Reliable Energy”, see here.

My question is, instead of reporting this pending calamity, why is NERC not preventing it? What is not reported, and seems to be little known, is that NERC is a quasi-regulatory federal agency whose mission is to maintain reliability.

NERC issues standards which the electric power industry is supposed to follow. These federal standards are supposed to be enforced by NERC’s regional subsidiaries. Clearly this process has not worked or we would not be facing widespread blackouts. Why not?

By way of background, NERC was originally a Council, not a Corporation. It was formed in 1968 as a voluntary industry body after the massive 1960’s Eastern blackout. It became a corporation when it was “federalized” in 2006. It appears to answer to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in the US, but also includes Canada. NERC creates and files Reliability Standards with both countries.

Here is NERC’s mission statement: “The vision for the Electric Reliability Organization Enterprise, which is comprised of NERC and the six Regional Entities, is a highly reliable and secure North American bulk power system. Our mission is to assure the effective and efficient reduction of risks to the reliability and security of the grid.​

This vision is clearly inconsistent with NERC’s warning that widespread blackouts loom large for America.

Here is what NERC says about its Reliability Standards: “NERC’s Standards program ensures the reliability of the bulk power system by developing quality reliability standards in a timely manner that are effective, clear, consistent and technically sound.”

If the NERC standard program supposedly “ensures the reliability” of the grid then either the standards are wrong or they are not being followed. The NERC report simply does not address this massive issue.

Unreliability is reported to already be getting pretty bad. Sustained outages in the US went from less than 12 in 2000 to over 180 in 2020. The average utility customer went from 8 hours of power failure per year in 2013 to 16 in 2020.

Looking ahead it gets much worse. The Biden Administrations’ stated goal is for the electric power system to produce zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2035, a mere 13 years away. That means shutting down all fossil fueled generation, which presently provides more than half of America’s electricity.

Meeting the incredible Biden target is clearly a great threat to reliability. Given that this goal was announced over a year ago, NERC should already have developed standards to protect reliability during this called for transition. Either that or NERC should say that eliminating fossil fuels in 13 years simply cannot be done reliably.

I find no indication that NERC or any of its Regional Entities is even looking at this staggering scenario. The studies I have seen are limited to around 50% renewables and even these are not leading to standards. They do a huge amount of modeling but apparently nothing on the specific Federal Plan.

Moreover, many utilities are posting generation plans that are clearly unreliable, swapping fossil fueled and nuclear plants for wind and solar with very little of the required storage. For an example see my report: “Dominion’s VCEA Compliance Plan is Disastrously Unreliable.”

NERC should be blowing the whistle on these massively unreliable plans.

Biden himself tasked every Federal Agency with focusing on the Federal Climate Plan. NERC’s role in this is to issue those Reliability Standards needed to protect reliability. NERC is simply ducking this vital responsibility.

NERC is clearly failing to meet its mission. It should be investigated.

Author

David Wojick

David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. For origins see http://www.stemed.info/engineer_tackles_confusion.html For over 100 prior articles for CFACT see http://www.cfact.org/author/david-wojick-ph-d/ Available for confidential research and consulting.

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

‘Significant’ Cases of Neurological Disorder Associated with Covid Vaccine

University College London has confirmed “small but significant” cases of the serious Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), a rare neurological disorder associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine for COVID-19.

‘Significant’ Cases of Neurological Disorder Associated with the AstraZeneca Vaccine

By Marina Zhang, The Epoch Tines, May 31, 2022:

A UK study by University College London has confirmed “small but significant” cases of the serious Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), a rare neurological disorder associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine for COVID-19.

The researchers speculate that “the majority or all” of the 121 UK cases of GBS (pdf) in March to April 2021 were associated with first doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine administered in January.

“A similar pattern is not seen with the other vaccines or following a second dose of any vaccine,” said lead author Prof. Michael Lunn on May 30.

The team observed that from January to October 2021, 996 GBS cases were recorded in the national database but with an unusual spike from March to April with about 140 cases per month rather than 100.

To identify whether any or all of these cases were linked to vaccination, the team linked dates of GBS onset to vaccination receipt for every individual and found that 198 GBS cases (20 percent of 966) occurred within six weeks of their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination in England; of these, 176 people had an AstraZeneca vaccination, 21 for Pfizer, and 1 for Moderna.

The researchers found no excess GBS cases associated with mRNA vaccines, but observed 5.8 excess cases of GBS per million doses of vaccine for AstraZeneca, equating to a total excess between January to July 2021 of around 98–140 cases, confirming the association between the vaccine and GBS.

GBS is a rare and serious neurological disorder that occurs when the immune system mistakenly attacks its own nerves, typically resulting in numbness, weakness, pain in the limbs, and sometimes even paralysis of breathing.

The disease is commonly associated with Campylobacter infections that prompt the body to attack its own nerves.

However, GBS cases were also observed in the 1976 following administration of the swine flu vaccine as well as modern influenza and yellow fever vaccines, though none of them had rates as high as AstraZeneca.

Whilst the majority of the vaccination-associated GBS patients had recovered from symptoms of weak limbs, weak deep tendon reflexes, and monophasic sleep, one patient in the study had recurring neuropathic symptoms well after the second dose.

The patient initially developed facial paralysis on both sides and a tingling sensation in their limbs after the first dose and improved with treatment. However, two weeks after receiving their second dose, they developed increasing weakness with pain, changes in their nerves, and only partial response to the treatment.

Researchers are currently still speculating the reasons behind rises in GBS cases following the vaccine.

“It may be that a non-specific immune activation in susceptible individuals occurs, but if that were the case similar risks might apply to all vaccine types,” said Lunn.

“It is therefore logical to suggest that the simian adenovirus vector, often used to develop vaccines, including AstraZeneca’s, may account for the increased risk.”

Studies in the United States have also confirmed increased cases of GBS after receiving adenovirus vector COVID-19 vaccines, with significant cases of the disease associated with the vaccine.

Read the rest…..

RELATED ARTICLES:

New UK government data shows the COVID vaccines kill more people than they save

MIT: COVID Vaccines ‘Significantly Associated’ with Spike in Heart Attacks in Young People

CDC Data Shows More Than 1.2 Million Covid Vaccine Injuries

I’m Never Getting A Covid Vaccine, And I’m Not Alone

New big data study of 145 countries show COVID vaccines makes things worse (cases and deaths)

3-year-old girl dies of heart attack one day after taking COVID vaccine

More People DIED in The Key Clinical Trial for Pfizer’s Covid Vaccine Than The Company Publicly Reported

FOURTH Country Stops COVID Vaccines

FDA PANEL DISCUSSION: “COVID Vaccines Are Killing More People Than They’re Saving”

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

‘Gender Queer’ Woke School Counselor Arrested For Grooming And Assaulting A Child

Who is hiring these monsters?

Woke’ School Counselor Arrested For Grooming And Assaulting A Child

By: Patriot Chronicles, June 2022:

Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) high school counselors that promoted and organized ‘drag shows’ at the high school has been arrested for having sex with a student. Zobella Brazil Vinik, a 29-year-old woman who identifies as trans reportedly groomed and molested a 15-year-old female student.

TUSC spokesperson Karla Escamilla declined to comment on the arrest, but provided this statment [sic] from TUSD Superintendent Gabriel Trujillo:

Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) high school counselors that promoted and organized ‘drag shows’ at the high school has been arrested for having sex with a student. Zobella Brazil Vinik, a 29-year-old woman who identifies as trans reportedly groomed and molested a 15-year-old female student.

TUSC spokesperson Karla Escamilla declined to comment on the arrest, but provided this statment from TUSD Superintendent Gabriel Trujillo:

“On May 4th, 2022, detectives from the Tucson Police Department Sexual Assault Unit informed the administration of Tucson High Magnet School of an ongoing investigation into one of its counselors, Zobella Brazil Vinik. The administration was informed of an alleged inappropriate relationship between the counselor and a 15-year-old student from Tucson High.

Working with the Tucson High administration, the District administration acted swiftly to remove the counselor from campus and place her on administrative leave. Our School Safety Department immediately initiated a comprehensive investigation into this alleged incident, which is currently ongoing.

On Thursday May 5th, 2022, Ms. Vinik resigned her position from the Tucson Unified School District and is no longer an employee of the district. The Tucson Unified School District administration will continue to cooperate with the Tucson Police Department in its ongoing investigation. Our administration will continue to emphasize the health and safety of our students as our highest priority.”

Vinik, who promoted and planned school drag shows, identifies as ‘non-binary or ‘gender queer’. No word yet if the school will be held accountable for not providing students with a safe environment to learn.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: Taco Bell launches ‘Drag Brunch’ tour across the U.S.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Norwegian feminist who said men can’t be lesbians investigated for hate speech

Investigation Launched Against School Counselor For Opposing Transgenderism

U.S. recorded 17 cases of monkeypox in May, mostly in gay and bisexual men: CDC

U.S. State Dept. Accused of Hypocrisy for Flying LGBT Flag at Vatican to Mark ‘Pride Month’

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

Vaccinated Women – Fertility Signals Are Coming Through

Vaccinated Women

Fertility signals are coming through.

The topic of pregnant and nursing moms getting vaccinated under encouragement and coercion is painful. It’s painful to research, painful to write about, and painful to learn how carelessly the most precious among us are being treated. The very essence of life and nature live within pregnant and nursing mothers. Reflecting on how little regard was paid to that life is upsetting, and everything I have to report in this post is done so with a heavy heart and a hope that we’ll get through this with a renewed sense of personal autonomy when it comes to medical decisions.

Notes to Keep in Mind:

  1. The FDA + Pfizer actively worked to keep this data hidden from sight for our lifetimes.
  2. Academic institutions, Medical institutions, and public health agencies are all still recommending that pregnant women take the Covid-19 vaccines as a precaution against Covid.

Dr. Naomi Wolf, Project Manager Amy Kelly, and the WarRoom/ DailyClout Pfizer Documents Volunteer Research Team have uncovered so many new important pieces of information that it’s getting difficult to keep up. I highly recommend pinning DailyClout to your homepage and checking their updates often. Their team of thousands of volunteers including hundreds of lawyers is working quickly, thoroughly, and efficiently.

A lot of information and serious concerns have emerged surrounding pregnant and nursing mothers and the possible effect that the Covid vaccines are having on their babies. Dr. Naomi Wolf has been appearing on Warroom regularly to provide us with updates on the findings of her and her team. On one appearance last week Dr. Wolf broke down some of the main red flags that have emerged, with the help of a female physician who studied the data:

  • Pregnant women were excluded from clinical trials when they were declared safe and effective for pregnant women. Pfizer, the FDA, the CDC, the entire “medical community” and your local employer who declared that you couldn’t come to work if you’re not vaccinated have concluded that this was safe and effective for pregnant women based on trials that were done on rats in France. There have not been any human clinical trials that have been concluded by Pfizer or other pharmaceutical companies to find out if these vaccines are safe for use during pregnancy or breastfeeding. There is currently one that’s still active, has no posted results and won’t conclude until July, 2022.
    • The animal studies that were conducted for the trial that the NIH based their conclusions on included 44 rats and were done over a period of 42 days. There are 2 main issues with this study:
      1. This doesn’t fulfill the requirement to ensure that the drug will do no harm to the next generation
      2. The doctors conducting the trials have all either been employed by or owned shares of Pfizer or BioNTech. There was an attempt to hide this fact by using their initials instead of full names on the study.
  • All Emergency Use Authorization excludes pregnant women.
  • Pregnant and nursing mothers were NOT ALLOWED to participate in phases 1,2, and 3 of human clinical trials. They were included on a list of 21 conditions that were not allowed to be recruited for trials. Page 33
  • The Department of Defense data is showing that female soldiers are having an astronomical rate of abnormalities and fetal problems. (NOTE- Mathew Crawford of RoundingtheEarth Substack has stated that he does not believe ANY of the DOD data is reliable, as it’s been demonstrably tampered with. Having said that, there are whistleblowers on the ground who corroborate that the rates of a variety of serious medical issues have indeed skyrocketed in 2021).

Adverse Events

In the Pfizer documents that were released thanks to legal force, there is data on reported adverse events since the rollout of the vaccine. On pages 12-13 of the document labeled “postmarketing-experience” Dr. Wolf’s Team 5 found:

  • 28% of the 270 pregnancies + 4 fetus/baby cases of adverse events were categorized as serious, including:
    • Miscarriages
    • Fetal deaths
    • Uterine contractions
    • Pre-term deliveries
    • Premature rupture of membranes
    • Fetal growth restrictions
  • Breastfed babies were reported to have effects such as:
    • Infantile vomiting
    • Fever
    • Rash
    • Agitation
    • Allergy to the vaccine
  • 4 nursing women reported adverse events such as:
    • Partial paralysis
    • Suppressed lactation
    • Breastmilk discoloration
    • Breast pain
    • Migraines

The document concludes that no serious adverse events have been detected. Dr. Wolf again questions whether we, as citizens of the United States of America, must begin to consider if all of these signs put together point to a serious national security breach. She has never seen anything as bad as what we’re seeing today in her 30 years in journalism.

There is a strong case that the potential risks for pregnant women from taking the Covid vaccine far outweigh the potential benefits.

On May 17, Dr. Wolf re-appeared on Warroom shortly after the FDA and the CDC authorized the Pfizer Covid-19 booster for 5-11-year-olds. In this segment, Dr. Wolf revealed some new information about data on the vaccine for pregnant and nursing mothers:

  • In Scotland there is an investigation happening right now that was triggered by a threshold that was crossed regarding the number of neonatal deaths. Its double the baseline amount, and this is the 2nd time in 7 months that the rate triggered an investigation.
  • Contrary to BBC claims (partially funded by Pfizer) that the rise in neonatal deaths cannot be connected to the vaccine, Dr. Wolf’s team, specifically Project Manager Amy Kelly, has found conclusive evidence to the contrary in Pfizer’s own documents.
  • Pfizer defined exposure to the vaccine as breastfeeding. This was not disclosed to pregnant women. A research team in Germany has confirmed to Dr. Wolf that breastmilk can deliver elements of the vaccine
  • A baby born to a vaccinated mother died after being born bleeding from the nose and mouth.
  • A mother received her 2nd vaccine dose on March 17, and within 24 hours her breastfed infant developed a rash and became inconsolable. The baby died 2 days later, with evidence of liver damage and a rare blood disorder.

The history of the claims of safety and efficacy regarding the Covid-19 vaccines for pregnant and nursing mothers will hopefully result in individuals who will be held criminally liable.

Missing Data

DailyClout’s expert Team 5 research team has reported some alarming numbers from Pfizer’s documents regarding missing information. In one group of 270 pregnancies, there were “no known outcomes” for 238 of the cases.

That leaves us with 36 known outcomes. Of those 36 known outcomes, 28 babies died before or at birth. It would be really helpful to know the outcome of the remaining 238 cases.

Pieces of the Puzzle – A Timeline

March 2021 – 50 participants in a clinical trial reported becoming pregnant, with some of them subsequently being dismissed from the trials. Cindy L. Weis of the DailyClout found that those 50 women have still not had their profiles updated to include pregnancy outcomes.

In the same March 2021 document, we can see that Pfizer themselves admits the following:

  1. Available data are insufficient to inform vaccine-related risks in pregnancy.
  2. Adverse effects from the vaccine on a breastfed child are a possibility.

July 2021- In Waterloo, Ontario between the months of January – July 2021, there were 86 babies who were born dead, otherwise known as stillbirths. The baseline rate is usually 5-6 per YEAR. One brave MP named Rick Nicholls raised the issue in a parliamentary session with great concern and passion. In response, the Minister of Health gave the answer we’re all used to. The vaccine is Safe and Effective. Just to note, there was no noticeable rise in stillbirths in 2020, the year of Covid.

September 2021 – Scotland launched it’s first investigation into an abnormal spike in newborn baby deaths that was triggered by surpassing a threshold in infant deaths that hadn’t been seen since the 1980’s. (Note- this spike did not occur in 2020, the Year of Covid)

Ashmedai over at Resisting the Intellectual Literati wrote an extensive report on fertility issues and the vaccine back in September 2021.

Is There a Plausible Basis For Fertility Concerns?
In my own community, the most prominent concern on the minds of many of the vaccine hesitant, especially young women of childbearing age, is the fear of an adverse effect on fertility. Possibly because of this, fertility concerns have also been derisively dismissed by the doctors with more passion and vengeance than for any other type of adverse effect…
Read more

August 2021- NPR reported on a survey out of the University of Chicago to investigate reports of changes in menstrual cycles after the vaccine. They received 140,000 responses.,

October 2021- VAERS looked like this:

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VEARS COVID VACCINE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH REALATED REPORTS GRAPH

I ran my own VAERS report using only a few pregnancy-related keywords. The list is 769 events long, and here’s a screenshot of just a few from the first page:

December 2021 – IVF clinics reported unusual issues after the mass vaccination campaign began. Steve Kirsch covered it thoroughly.

IVF clinics started having serious problems right after the vaccines started rolling out
I just got off the phone with a woman who works at a large IVF clinic. She has to remain nameless to avoid being fired for speaking out. Nobody is supposed to know about the serious problems happening in the IVF clinics. Let me tell you what is really going on and the scientific study that explains it…

Read more

January 2022- NIH funded a study that was released that reported a slight causal relationship between the Covid-19 vaccines and a lengthier menstrual cycle.

February 2022- An EU health agency announced an investigation between Covid-19 and disruptions in menstrual cycles based on reports coming in.

Josh Guetzkow reported on data from Rambam Hospital in Haifa, Israel. Vaccinated mothers were experiencing spontaneous abortions/miscarriages/stillbirths at a rate that’s 34% higher than their unvaccinated counterparts.

Stillbirths, Miscarriages and Abortions in Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Women
Data from Rambam hospital in Haifa reveal a stillbirth, miscarriage and abortion (SBMA) rate of 6% among women who never received a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to 8% among women who were vaccinated with at least one dose (and never had a SARS-Cov-2 infection…

Read more

March 2022- A 2nd investigation was launched in Scotland due to the high rate of infant deaths, totaling 18 for the month of March.

Pfizer, what say you?

After spending days reading reports about the horrible negative effects of fertility that are coming out in droves, I had to at least try and get some sort of response from Pfizer. After sitting on hold for a while, a gentleman named Ron got on the line. When I asked if the Covid-19 vaccine is safe for a pregnant woman to take, he read me the entire safety warning from Pfizer’s website. I then told him that I know many women who have had serious disruptions to their menstrual cycle, as well as numerous women who experienced miscarriages late term, shortly after getting one of the Pfizer vaccines. I asked him what he knows about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, given all the new information that’s come out from the FOIA requests.

He responded that he can pass me along to his managers, but first he has to read another statement, this time from the CDC. He proceeded to verbally read it for 10 minutes while I waited patiently. When he finished, surprised that I was still on the line, he asked if I had any more questions. I said yes, and asked if he wanted to be a whistleblower. He said he noted my response and passed me along to Olivia, which was pretty much a repeat of the first conversation.

I left contact information with both of them just in case, but somehow I highly doubt we’ll get a response. I did note to both of them that should they want to get on the right side of this scandal and begin to help those who are suffering, they should do so before the entire thing crumbles down.

Now What?

We’re now in May 2022. The claims of safety and efficacy don’t match their own internal documents that they tried to hide for 75 years. Yet academic institutions and public health agencies continue to insist it’s recommended for pregnant women to receive Covid-19 vaccines and boosters. Until when? Until the wave of misery gets so large that it’s no longer deniable? No one is coming to save us. Groups like DailyCloutVSRFAmerica’s Frontline DoctorsChildren’s Health Defense, and ICAN are sources of inspiration that there are still good men out there, as well as a source of hope that through their strength and efforts, we’ll come out of the other side of this with some integrity still left in some medical professionals.

AUTHOR

American Israeli, homemaker, wife, mom to 3. Buy Crypto. You’re still early. Freedom > Safety.

©. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FDA data shows 97% if pregnant women injected with Pfizer jab lost their babies

Israel study links Covid vaccine to increase in cardiac arrest events for young men and women

4 Catastrophic Climate Predictions That Never Came True

Current climate predictions can be terrifying if you don’t know about the previous dire climate claims that amounted to nothing.


If you’re under 50, there’s a good chance you’re expecting to see climate change create chaos and death in your lifetime. Scientists and pundits seem so certain we’re headed for global collapse and their predictions can be terrifying—especially if you’re young enough not to remember the last dozen times they predicted imminent collapse and were wrong. In each case, claims of impending environmental disaster were backed by allegedly irrefutable data and policymakers were encouraged to act before it was too late.

Global Cooling

The Prediction: Top climate specialists and environmental activists predicted that “global cooling trends” observed between WWII and 1970 would result in a world “eleven degrees colder in the year 2000 … about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Bitter winters and floods from “delayed typhoons” would trigger massive drops in food production, followed by widespread famine.

The Prophecies:

  • Newsweek Magazine’s “The Cooling World” Peter Gwynne April 28, 1975 
  • Time Magazine’s “A New Ice Age?” April 28, 1974
  • BBC’s Nigel Calder International Wildlife magazine, 1975
  • Betty Friedan in Harper’s magazine, 1958
  • University of California at Davis professor Kenneth Watt, Earth Day 1974

What Actually Happened: Global cooling trends didn’t continue unabated, and temperatures stabilized. Within a few years, the same alarmists were predicting a life-threatening rise in temperatures, presaging many of the same dire effects on plant and animal life. Those new predictions were continually revised as their “near certainty” collided with the truth year after year, but prophets seem unchastened by their abysmal historical accuracy. Newsweek issued a correction to the 1975 article in 2006.

The Great Die-Off

The Prediction: More women having babies in the developing world was expected to exceed the “carrying capacity” of the earth, experts were certain. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supply we make,” Ehrlich said. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years [1970-1980].” Ehrlich predicted that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.” This would lead to “an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity.”

The Prophecies:

What Actually Happened: Motivated by the urgent call for population control and fears of famine, India and China performed millions of forced abortions and sterilizations. But the number of people at risk of starvation dropped from 25 percent to 10 percent globally as genetically modified seeds and advances in irrigation improved crop yields. Far from the Great Die-Off, the global population nearly doubled while agricultural capacity soared and rates of starvation plummeted. Ehrlich’s star has continued to rise, though his signature predictions were nonsense, and now holds an endowed chair in Population Studies at Stanford. The millions scapegoated by his fear-mongering have not fared as well.

The Prediction: Ecologists and environmentalists claimed that the buildup of nitrogen, dust, fumes, and other forms of pollution would make the air unbreathable by the mid-1980s. They predicted all urban dwellers would have to don gas masks to survive, that particle clouds would block the majority of sunlight from reaching earth, and that farm yields would drop as dust blotted out the sun.

The Prophecies:

What Actually Happened: When these doomsayers were pronouncing the imminent death of our atmosphere, the rate of air pollution had already been falling for most of the world, usually in the absence of dedicated policy changes. Developments like air filtration, as well as an overall decline in household pollutants (like the smoke from cooking with coal or wood) greatly reduced the health risks of the particles that remained. Increased adoption of fossil fuels and electricity grids, rather than traditional stoves, accelerated the improvements.

75 Percent of Species Will Go Extinct

The Prediction: Alleged experts in biology and zoology predicted that of all species of animals alive in 1970, at least 75 percent would be extinct by 1995. They blamed human activities like hunting and farming for shrinking wild habitats and cited pollution and climate change as key drivers of the new extinctions. Paul Ehrlich claimed “[By 1985] all important animal life in the sea will be extinct.”

The Prophecies:

What Actually Happened: You may have noticed that earth has not lost three-quarters of its 8.7 million species, and indeed total biomass continues to grow. 99 percent of all species that have ever existed are already extinct, and natural rates of extinction predict we might lose anywhere from 200 to 2,000 species per year without any human intervention. Since 2000, we’ve identified fewer than 20.

The language surrounding these various environmental disasters sounds much like Wednesday night’s town hall, and yet each thesis has faded from public consciousness, and the fear-mongers faced no accountability for their misplaced alarmism. Before we make unprecedented sacrifices to fight a climate phantom, let’s review the credibility of claims that the end is near—but really, this time.

AUTHOR

Laura Williams

Dr. Laura Williams  teaches communication strategy to undergraduates and executives. She is a passionate advocate for critical thinking, individual liberties, and the Oxford Comma.

RELATED ARTICLES:

VIDEO: Can Climate Models Predict Climate Change?

How The Climate Media Subverts The Climate Debate

CLIMATE STUDY: ‘We have practically no anthropogenic [man made] climate change.’

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

The New York Times Explains Why Mask Mandates Don’t Work

The New York Times concedes that mask mandates are ineffective—as President Biden fights to reinstate them.


Throughout the pandemic, few things incited more discord than the mandated use of facemasks as a preventative measure to reduce the spread of Covid-19.

At various times, merely questioning the effectiveness of masks or mask mandates could result in a social media suspension, as when Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) received the boot from YouTube for citing research that suggested cloth masks were ineffective at containing Covid (something CNN admitted months later).

While mask mandates have largely receded across the US, arguments over their effectiveness have not.

On Tuesday, President Biden’s Justice Department asked a federal appeals court to overturn a District Court judge’s order that declared the government mask mandate on airplanes, buses, and other transit unlawful, stating that the CDC had not sought public comment prior to the order and failed to adequately explain its reasoning.

The Justice Department’s timing could be inauspicious.

The same day the DOJ’s appeal was filed, The New York Times published an article that explores the ineffectiveness of mask mandates. David Leonhardt, a Pulitzer Prize-winning writer, begins by exploring an apparent paradox involving masks observed by epidemiologist Dr. Shira Doron of Tufts Medical Center: “It is simultaneously true that masks work and mask mandates do not work.”

The idea that mask-wearing is effective but mask mandates are not does indeed seem like a paradox. But Leonhardt accepts the evidence that masks can mitigate the spread of Covid even as he provides copious evidence suggesting that mask mandates are ineffective.

In U.S. cities where mask use has been more common, Covid has spread at a similar rate as in mask-resistant cities. Mask mandates in schools also seem to have done little to reduce the spread. Hong Kong, despite almost universal mask-wearing, recently endured one of the world’s worst Covid outbreaks.

Advocates of mandates sometimes argue that they do have a big effect even if it is not evident in populationwide data, because of how many other factors are at play. But this argument seems unpersuasive.

After all, the effect of vaccines on severe illness is blazingly obvious in the geographic data: Places with higher vaccination rates have suffered many fewer Covid deaths.

While the idea that masks work while mask mandates do not might seem like a paradox, there’s actually a very simple explanation for the phenomenon (though it’s not the only explanation).

As Leonhardt notes, it’s quite possible that people who choose to wear masks wear them differently than people who are required to wear them.

“Airplane passengers remove their masks to have a drink. Restaurant patrons go maskless as soon as they walk in the door. Schoolchildren let their masks slide down their faces. So do adults: Research by the University of Minnesota suggests that between 25 percent and 30 percent of Americans consistently wear their masks below their nose.

“Even though masks work, getting millions of people to wear them, and wear them consistently and properly, is a far greater challenge,” Steven Salzberg, a biostatistician at Johns Hopkins University, has written.

Means and Ends

There’s an adage popular among libertarians: good ideas don’t require force. It’s a good line, but it’s also important to remember that force also yields dismal results.

Humans tend to forget this, but it’s an idea that Leonard Read took seriously. In his 1969 essay “The Bloom Pre-Exists in the Seed,” Read argued that one could reasonably predict the ends of a given action based on the means employed.

Examine the actions—means—that are implicit in achieving the goals.

Implicit in the collectivistic approach…is the masterminding of the people…The control of the individual’s life is from without. [But for] an individualist…what is valued above all else [is] each distinctive individual human being.

Any conscientious collectivist, if he could…properly evaluate the authoritarian means his system of thought demands, would likely defect.

However lofty the goals, if the means be depraved, the result must reflect that depravity.

This is why Read believed it was important to focus on means first, and ends second. Unfortunately, as a society we increasingly take the opposite approach—and we saw ample evidence of this during the pandemic, including with mask mandates.

To be sure, this is not the only explanation for the apparent paradox involving the alleged effectiveness of masks and the alleged ineffectiveness of mask mandates.

Any thinker worth his salt will tell you if you have a paradox, the first thing you should do is check your premises. It’s more than possible that one of Leonhardt’s premises—masks work, mask mandates don’t—is wrong. (Considering that prior to and during the pandemic the World Health Organizationthe US Surgeon General, and the CDC all expressed doubt about the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of respiratory viruses, I’m betting on the former being wrong over the latter.)

Whatever the case may be, it’s safe to say Leonard Read would have been one of the few voices in the wilderness during the pandemic warning that non-pharmaceutical interventions (lockdowns, mask mandates, etc.) would achieve little and would likely cause serious harms—and he would have been right.

Read knew the bloom pre-exists in the seed, and that means the use of force, sooner or later, is likely going to yield rotten fruit.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

Bill Gates’ Latest Attack, Now Targeting Moms

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Bill Gates appears to be behind the push to stop breastfeeding and encourage uptake of BIOMILQ, a cell-cultured “human milk” made in a lab, along with other varieties of fake food
  • Nearly every large meat and dairy processor/manufacturer has also acquired or developed plant-based meat and dairy substitutes
  • This “protein” industry convergence is jeopardizing the resilience of the food system and reducing genetic diversity of livestock and crops
  • When you factor in soy production as well as the use of conventional energy sources, lab-grown meat may be worse for the environment than conventionally produced chicken and pork
  • There are signs that the fake meat industry may be failing before it ever gets off the ground; shares of Beyond Meat lost $6 billion since March 2020 due to weak sales growth
  • To save the planet and support your health, skip all the fake meat alternatives and opt for real food that’s being raised using regenerative, grass fed methods

Fake food is being poised as a panacea to end world hunger and food shortages, but there’s nothing miraculous about synthetic, lab-made food. It can’t compare to food that comes from nature in terms of nutrition or environmental protection, and as we’re seeing with the mysterious infant formula shortages, when you’re dependent on fake food, your very survival is also dependent on the handful of companies that manufacture them.

With parents getting desperate in the search for infant formula, it’s eye-opening that campaigns haven’t been started to encourage new mothers to breastfeed — the best food for infants and one that also happens to be free and readily available in most cases. If you haven’t read my article on the best workaround for infant formula for those that are unable to breast feed, it is on Substack.

In the video above, you can watch a concerning timeline about why this may be, as Bill Gates appears to be behind the push to stop breastfeeding and encourage uptake of BIOMILQ, a cell-cultured “human milk” made in a lab,1 along with other varieties of fake food.

Bill Gates’ Formula for Disaster

In June 2020, Bill Gates announced startup company BIOMILQ, which is using biotechnology to create lab-made human milk for babies. Using mammary epithelial cells placed in flasks with cell culture media, the cells grow and are placed in a bioreactor that the company says “recreates conditions similar to in the breast.”2

This synthetic lab-made breast milk replacement raised $3.5 million in funding from Gates’ investment firm Breakthrough Energy Ventures.3 Gates has also contributed at least $319 million to the media,4 including The Guardian, allowing him to control and dictate what they print. The day after the Gates Foundation paid The Guardian its annual funding in May 2022, it released a hit piece on breastfeeding titled, “Turns out breastfeeding really does hurt — why does no one tell you?”5

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) offers also seized 588 cases of infant formula from Europe in April 2021 because it lacked appropriate nutritional labeling. In February 2021, CBP officers said they inspected 17 separate shipments of infant formula from Germany and The Netherlands, leading to a warning against buying infant formula online from overseas.

At the time, Keith Fleming, CBP’s acting director of field operations in Baltimore, Maryland, said in a news release:6

“Consumers should be very careful when contemplating the purchase of items over the internet from an international source, because they may not get what they expect. People expect that the products they purchase comply with existing U.S. health and safety laws and regulations and they’ll be safe for them or their family. That’s not always the case.”

While warning Americans against purchasing infant formula from overseas, in February 2022 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced bacterial contamination at the Abbott Nutrition’s Sturgis, Michigan facility,7 which is behind the current infant formula shortages. While Gates is clearly behind the push to stop breastfeeding and encourage BIOMILQ in lieu of breastmilk or formula, the formula shortages highlight the risks of consolidated food production.

Abbott Enriched Shareholders While Formula Sickened Babies

Corporate consolidation is rampant in the U.S. baby formula market, of which 90% is controlled by four companies. Abbot is among them, responsible for 43% of baby formula production in the U.S.8 Yet, according to a whistleblower filing from October 2021, equipment at the company’s Sturgis facility was “failing and in need of repair.”

Pitting and pinholes reportedly existed in a number of pipes, allowing bacterial contamination. Leadership was aware of the failing equipment for up to seven years before the February 2022 outbreak, according to the whistleblower’s report.9

With equipment in need of repair, and a bacteria outbreak in their formula sickening babies, Abbott used its massive profits from 2019 to 2021 to announce a lucrative stock buyback program.10 According to The Guardian:11

“Abbott detected bacteria eight times as its net profits soared by 94% between 2019 and 2021. And just as its tainted formula allegedly began sickening a number of babies, with two deaths reported, the company increased dividends to shareholders by over 25% while announcing a stock buyback program worth $5bn.”

Speaking with The Guardian, Rakeen Mabud, chief economist for the Groundwork Collaborative, added, “Abbott chose to prioritize shareholders by issuing billions of dollars in stock buybacks instead of making productive investments.”12

Big Meat and Dairy Companies Dominate Fake Meat Industry

The increasing number of plant-based fake foods and lab-grown meat companies give the illusion that consumers are getting more choices and the food industry is becoming less consolidated. However, there are still relatively few firms that are controlling the global grab for “protein” markets.

In a research article published in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, Philip Howard, a faculty member in the department of community sustainability at Michigan State University, and colleagues explain how this “protein” industry convergence is further jeopardizing the resilience of the food system and reducing genetic diversity of livestock and crops:13

“Recent years have seen the convergence of industries that focus on higher protein foods, such as meat processing firms expanding into plant-based substitutes and/or cellular meat production, and fisheries firms expanding into aquaculture. A driving force behind these changes is dominant firms seeking to increase their power relative to close competitors, including by extending beyond boundaries that pose constraints to growth.

The broad banner of “protein” offers a promising space to achieve this goal, despite its nutritionally reductionist focus on a single macronutrient. Protein firm strategies to increase their dominance are likely to further diminish equity in food systems by exacerbating power asymmetries.”

Tyson and Cargill, two of the largest meat processors in the world, for instance, have invested in fake meat company Memphis Meats, which also has backing from Bill Gates and Richard Branson. Other billionaires invested in fake foods include Sergey Brin (Mosa Meat), Peter Thiel (Modern Meadow) and Marc Benioff (Eat Just).

“These companies wouldn’t be making these investments if they didn’t expect that the intellectual properties held by these start-ups will lead to monopoly profits,” Howard notes.14 In “The Politics of Protein,” a report from the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES-Food), Howard explains:15

“Nearly every large meat and dairy processor/manufacturer has also acquired or developed plant-based meat and dairy substitutes, establishing footholds in a market that is growing approximately 20% per year.

More than a dozen of these firms have also invested in start-ups that are attempting to commercialize lab-grown meat and fish. Meanwhile, Vanguard and BlackRock — two of the world’s biggest asset management firms — have investments in almost all the largest meat, dairy, and animal feed companies.”

It is important to understand why all of these fake meat products are an absolute metabolic disaster relates to the fact that they are using vegetable fats to replace animal fats. Not only are they devoid of important vitamins like vitamin A and vitamin K2, but they are loaded with the dangerous omega-6 fat linoleic acid LA.

In some cases they contain up to 10 to 20 times the amount found in meats, which will radically contribute to diseases like diabetes, obesity, cancer and heart disease.

Lab-Grown Food Is an Environmental Catastrophe

The push for fake food is being made on the platform that it will somehow save the environment from the ravages of factory farming, which has devastated the environment with its concentrated animal feeding operations and monocultures. But this, too, is misleading.

In February 2021, the Good Food Institute (GFI), a nonprofit group behind the alternative protein industry, released a techno-economic analysis of cultivated meat, which was prepared by consulting firm CE Delft.16 In it, they developed a model to reduce the current costs of cultured meat production down to a point that would make it economically feasible in full-scale plants by 2030, a model they said is “feasible.”

In attempting to create cultured meat on the scale that would be necessary to feed the world, logistical problems are numerous and, possibly, insurmountable. There are waste products — catabolites — to deal with, as even cultured cells excrete waste that is toxic.

And, the oxygen and nutrients available must be adequately distributed to all the cells — something that’s difficult in a large reactor. Stirring the cells faster or adding more oxygen may help, but this can cause fatal stress to the cells.17

The environmental “benefits” are also on shaky ground when you factor in soy production as well as the use of conventional energy sources. When this is factored in, GFI’s life-cycle analysis found that cultured meat may be worse for the environment than conventionally produced chicken and pork.18,19

Farmer and historian John Lewis-Stempel also points out that the world’s farmers already produce enough food for the global population: “[A]ny discussion of global food policy needs to begin with one plain fact: there is … no actual food shortage. Already, the planet’s farmers produce enough food to cater for the projected 10 billion humans of 2050. The problem is waste and distribution.”20

Yet, the push for the creation of fake protein sources continues. In the foreword to Navdanya International’s report “False Solutions That Endanger Our Health and Damage the Planet,” Vandana Shiva also details how lab-grown foods are catastrophic for human health and the environment, as they are repeating the mistakes already made with industrial agriculture:21

“In response to the crises in our food system, we are witnessing the rise of technological solutions that aim to replace animal products and other food staples with lab-grown alternatives. Artificial food advocates are reiterating the old and failed rhetoric that industrial agriculture is essential to feed the world.

Real, nutrient-rich food is gradually disappearing, while the dominant industrial agricultural model is causing an increase in chronic diseases and exacerbating climate change. The notion that high-tech, “farm free” lab food is a viable solution to the food crisis is simply a continuation of the same mechanistic mindset which has brought us to where we are today — the idea that we are separate from and outside of nature.

Industrial food systems have reduced food to a commodity, to “stuff” that can then be constituted in the lab. In the process, both the planet’s health and our health have been nearly destroyed.”

Signs the Fake Meat Industry Is Stalling

For all of its fanfare, there are signs that the fake meat industry may be failing before it ever gets off the ground. Shares of Beyond Meat, for one example, lost $6 billion since March 2020 due to weak sales growth and has resorted to partnering with PepsiCo to release a plant-based jerky product.

“My analysis is the launch will do very little to increase the company’s fortunes,” writes business development consultant Victor Martino in Just Food.22 He argues that the “plant-based meat revolution” is just a PR stunt, a narrative that’s set to implode:23

“The fact is, despite increased product availability in terms of brand choices and added retail outlets, plant-based meat sales stalled in 2021, recording zero growth, according to recent research from SPINS, data commissioned and released by The Plant-Based Foods Association and The Good Food Institute.

According to the research, the total annual sales of plant-based meat in the US remained stable at $1.4 billion. That’s a continuation of the 1.4% share of total meat category sales.”

Shares of Beyond Meat and Oatly, a plant-based milk substitute, have lost more than half their value in 2022,24 but this isn’t to say that their executives are suffering. Beyond Meat’s former chief growth officer Chuck Muth sold shares valued at more than $62 million from 2019 to 2021, while Biz Stone, a current board member and Twitter co-founder, has made millions on Beyond Meat stock.25

The fact remains that when private companies control the food supply, they will also ultimately control countries and entire populations. Biotech will eventually push farmers and ranchers out of the equation and will threaten food security and human health. In other words, the work being done in the name of sustainability and saving the planet will give greater control to private corporations while weakening the population.

To save the planet and support your health, skip all the fake meat alternatives and opt for real food that’s being raised the right way instead. When you shop for food, know your farmer and look for regenerative, biodynamic and/or grass fed farming methods, which are bringing you truly sustainable food for a healthy population and planet.

Sources and References

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

These 10 States Had The Most Expensive Gas Over Memorial Day Weekend

As the national average for gasoline rose to a new record high of $4.62 a gallon on Memorial Day, prices varied throughout the country affecting drivers on one of the busiest travel days of the year.

According to AAA, gas prices went up one penny since Sunday and gasoline is now 44 cents more expensive than it was just last month, CNN reported. On Memorial Day of 2021, gas prices averaged $3.05 a gallon, according to AAA. The Biden administration has continued to face criticism over the record-breaking gas prices and has been blaming the increase in price on the war in Ukraine.

AAA also said around 34.9 million people are traveling by car for Memorial Day weekend, which is 4.6% higher than in 2020, CNN noted. (RELATED: Gas Prices Hit Another Record High)

The 10 states that had the most expensive average gas prices over Memorial Day weekend, according to AAA: 

Alaska: $5.20 a gallon

Arizona: $4.95 a gallon

California: $6.15 a gallon

Hawaii: $5.44 a gallon

Illinois: $5.00 a gallon

Maine: $4.77 a gallon

Nevada: $5.30 a gallon

New York: $4.93 a gallon

Oregon: $5.20 a gallon

Washington: $5.23 a gallon

The Hill first reported about the highest prices in the 10 states.

On Thursday, the average price of gas in the U.S. hit its last record, with the average price costing Americans $4.60 a gallon, up more than 92% since President Joe Biden took office.

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Senior Congressional correspondent.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Energy Sec Claims Biden Is ‘Obsessed’ With Lowering Gas Prices. So Why Do Prices Keep Going Up?

Gas Prices Hit Another Record High

The US Hasn’t Built A Major Oil Refinery In Nearly 50 Years. Here’s Why

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

The Monkeypox pix reveal Western media’s double standards

Africans are outraged by coverage of an outbreak of an exotic disease


There’s an outbreak of monkeypox, a simian relative of smallpox, in western Europe, North America, and Australia. There’s no monkeypox outbreak in Africa. Yet, if all you had to go by were the images initially used to illustrate news articles about the outbreak in the mainstream corporate press, you’d be excused to think that Africa was the blazing epicentre of the outbreak.

From the BBC to the New York Times, the Guardian to Reuters, coverage of the outbreak came with pictures of people of African descent, their exposed skin pocked with festering blisters. Crucially, the pictures were all old file photos, with some being from as far back as the 1990s. The only major news sites that didn’t use these photos were those not based in the West, like Qatari Al Jazeera.

Naturally, many Africans online have been blasting Western media houses for this usage and sharing recent photos of white people suffering from the disease. When the Twitter handle of a Kenyan broadcaster illustrated a post about the disease with one such picture, the comments section erupted in cheers. Even the association of foreign journalists working in Africa weighed in with a formal condemnation.

Following the backlash, many of the offending pictures have been taken down and replaced with electron micrographs of the virus that causes the disease or, in a few cases, pictures of white victims.

Unfortunately, a few articles, like this one from the BBC and this other one by the New York Times, still inexcusably sport photos of Africans suffering from monkeypox.

Why, you may ask, do Africans care so much about this? Isn’t the disease endemic to the continent, after all? Until recently, weren’t most photos depicting the disease taken in African countries, so that they were the only ones available at the outset of the outbreak? And, even if this hadn’t been the case, what’s wrong with using the images? Aren’t there black people in the West?

Well, part of the answer comes from the offending news organisations themselves. Just two years ago, when the COVID-19 pandemic broke out in Wuhan, these same institutions worked up a whole kerfuffle about keeping their coverage of the disease respectful to the Chinese people. Convinced that it was their duty to spare them the stigma associated with the disease, they contorted themselves into all kinds of shapes and forwent some of the thrills of photojournalism.

Instead of dramatic photos of intubated patients struggling for air, they elected to use images and artistic impressions of the virus in their stories. When the WHO conjured up a clumsy name for the disease that had nothing to do with its place of origin, they fell in line and carried it to all corners of the earth. And when a certain bad orange man insisted on calling it the China virus, they added it to the ledger in support of their allegation that he was a white supremacist.

Why then have they, who acted so sanctimoniously in a case where they would have been excused for using photos of victims (Covid-19 did break out in Wuhan, after all) not only not been as careful, but turned into the perpetrators of an arguably worse offense? Were they even sincere the first time? Or have two years been too long for them to keep up the act?

Many commentators have attributed malice and neo-colonialist attitudes to the journalists and editors clearing the use of the images featuring Africans. It fits into a macabre pattern of thought about Africa that Western media organisations just can’t seem to wean themselves off of. Western media, the charge goes, considers Africa to be a backward place filled with sub-human people, whose suffering can be safely ogled at by sympathetic Westerners, who have no dignity to be defended.

Though broad, this accusation isn’t spurious. It’s hard to find other reasons for the tendency of Western media to gravitate to the lens of disaster porn in their treatment of Africa. Not even in their Covid-19 coverage, when they were ostentatious about being respectful everywhere else, could they shake it off.

Instead, they were overly enthusiastic every time it seemed as though Africa was about to take a turn for the worse, and palpably disappointed with every implosion of that expectation.

To give the devil his due, though, maybe we should look for other reasons. After all, no one in the West talks louder about decolonisation, and no one wants to be thought of as an ally of marginalised groups more, than these organisations. Is it possible that Africa is just such a small part of their constituency that they don’t think about it as much, or as carefully, as they do about the rest of their readers, and so are in the dark about Africans’ perception of their attitudes?

Or maybe they do, but this is the only angle for effective storytelling about the continent. Maybe it even comes from a good place, a sympathetic posture towards a continent that’s still bottom of the global healthcare system ranks. Maybe, by using photos of Africans to illustrate a disease outbreak in the West, they are trying to get ahead of the curve, so that when the disease resurges on the continent, the spigots of assistance can flow unimpeded.

If these excuses sound unconvincing, it’s because they are. Try as I might, I cannot find any compelling alternative reasons. In a world where information is so easy to come by, it isn’t reasonable to excuse well-resourced media organisations for being too lazy to use accurate photos for their stories. They are taking photos from a literal warzone in Europe right now, for crying out loud!

And so we are left with the initial accusation. Mainstream Western news organisations have been falling into this pattern in their African coverage for far too long for it to be merely circumstantial. It is inexcusable, even by their own standards, and it’s high time they tried dealing with it.

AUTHOR

Mathew Otieno

Mathew Otieno writes from Kisumu, Kenya. More by Mathew Otieno

RELATED VIDEO: Monkeypox: So a couple of pathogens walk into a Chinese lab…

RELATED ARTICLES:

US recorded 17 cases of monkeypox in May, mostly in gay and bisexual men: CDC

Thousands of European Celebrities Caught Buying Fake COVID Vaccine Certificates

The Same WHO Wanting To Have Authority Over Pandemics Says It’s OK For Sodomites To Parade Despite Their Alleged Mon(K)Eypox Threat

‘Drag The Kids To Pride’: Libs Of TikTok Shares Roundup Of Drag Events Targeting Children

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

How to handle Covid-19 bullying

Could a teenager’s suicide have been prevented with a simple question?


An unbearable yet too-common tragedy resulting from bullying is the suicide of its victims. It is a parent’s worst nightmare. A rash of suicides in the 1970s set Dan Olweus on the path to establishing the field of bullying psychology. Suicides have been a major trigger for anti-bullying campaigns and laws.

Despite the proliferation of anti-bullying programs and laws in the past two decades, bullying continues to be considered an epidemic, with the youth suicide rate skyrocketing during this same period.

The latest high-profile suicide tragedy to hit the national news is that of Nate Bronstein, a 15-year-old student at the exclusive Chicago Catholic prep school, the Latin School. As reported in the Chicago Tribune, the parents are suing the school for no less than $100,000,000–yes, one hundred million dollars–for failing to prevent his death. And the taxpayer–you and I–will end up footing the bill if the parents prevail.

While we tend to think of bullying as serious physical attacks or threats against victims, the great majority of bullying, including the impetus for most suicides, is not physical but verbal. Any characteristic can become the subject of bullying: intelligence, appearance, race or religion, sexual orientation, and even clothing.

An unusual casualty of the war against Covid-19

Nate may be the first case of a suicide stemming from Covid-19 insults. Students falsely accused him of being unvaccinated. Vaccination against Covid-19 has been a top priority for the administration and the appointed leaders of our public health organizations, who intentionally blamed the unvaccinated for the epidemic and encouraged the rest of us to do the same, with many celebrities and pundits answering this “call to duty”.

It is no wonder that in such a climate, a child would get extremely upset by being called unvaccinated. This is the trap that leads individuals to become the victims of non-stop bullying: they get upset because they want the insults to stop. They don’t realize that getting upset is actually what keeps the insults coming their way.

Why aren’t anti-bullying efforts working?

Why, after decades of anti-bullying efforts, laws, and research, do kids continue to be bullied in school? It’s because the prevalent approach to bullying, developed by Olweus and universally enshrined in school anti-bullying policies and laws, is predicated on the school protecting children from each other. Students and their parents are instructed to inform the school when bullying occurs. It then becomes the school’s responsibility to investigate, determine who the guilty parties are, and punish or rehabilitate them.

However, research and plain experience show that this approach does little to stop bullying, and often makes it worse. Informing the school can only work if the schools have a reliable approach to handling bullying. Usually, they don’t. Instead, they follow mandated policies of investigating, judging, and punishing, which tends to cause hostilities to escalate, for no party wants to be accused of wrongdoing. The accused typically insist on their innocence and blame the informer.

Indeed, the Tribune reports, “In November and October alone, [mom] contacted Latin more than 30 times.” While the school allegedly didn’t punish anyone, we can be sure that the kids being investigated were furious with Nate for constantly trying to get them in trouble, spurring them to call him “a terrible person” and telling him to kill himself.

The school’s denial of guilt

As virtually all schools do in response to a bullying lawsuit, the Latin School denied the accusations. The Tribune reports:

In a statement, the school called the claims unfounded. It said it “deeply grieves” the death of one of its students, but it plans to “vigorously defend itself… The allegations of wrongdoing by the school officials are inaccurate and misplaced… The school’s faculty and staff are compassionate people who put students’ interests first, as they did in this instance.”

And the school is probably right. It did attempt to solve the problem. It’s just that the idea spread by the anti-bullying establishment that bullying occurs because the schools do nothing to stop it has no basis in reality.

If you are not sure about this, try this at home, if you have children of your own. Treat the aggression between them the way anti-bullying laws require schools to do it. Investigate every complaint they bring you, conduct interrogations, and punish the wrongdoer. The likely result is that your kids will be fighting more often than ever. They will come to hate each other, and at least one of them (the one you find guilty) will end up hating you, too. Strangely, the very interventions that cause intense sibling rivalry at home are somehow expected to reduce hostilities among students in school.

There is a better way

The prevalent approach to bullying requires large investments of time and effort–which costs money–and still can result in the school being sued for astronomical sums of money for failing to stop the bullying.

All the money in the world will not put an end to bullying. What’s needed is good psychology. The policies required are not those of protecting and policing children, but teaching them how to handle insults and accusations on their own, so that attacks are nipped in the bud and don’t evolve into ongoing bullying relationships. This knowledge can be obtained essentially for free. Any counsellor or staff member can do the following with a student complaining of being bullied for being unvaccinated or any other false accusation. It involves role-playing, conducted in two stages.

Stage One

(It may go as follows):

Counsellor: Accuse me of being unvaccinated, and don’t let me stop you.

Student: You’re unvaccinated!

Counsellor: No, I’m not!

Student: Yes, you are! You are going to get us all sick and make us die!

Counsellor: That’s not true!

Student: Yes, it is!

Counsellor: No, it’s not! Why are you saying that?

Student: Because your parents are anti-vaxxers!

Counsellor: No, they’re not!

Student: Yes, they are!

Counsellor: No, they’re not!

Student: Yes, they are!

After futilely going back and forth for a while…

Counsellor: I give up. I’m not making you stop, am I?

Student: No.

Counsellor: Who’s winning?

Student: I am.

Counsellor: And aren’t you having fun seeing me get upset?

Student: Yes.

Stage Two

Counsellor: Let’s do it again. Accuse me of being unvaccinated, and don’t let me stop you.

Student: You’re unvaccinated!

Counsellor: Is that what you believe?

Student: Yes!

Counsellor: If you want to believe it, I can’t stop you.

Student: No, you can’t.

Counsellor: That’s right. You can believe anything you want.

At this point, the student probably has nothing more to say. Counsellor continues…

Counsellor: Who’s winning this time?

Student: You are.

Counsellor: You see, the kids aren’t calling you “unvaccinated” because they believe that’s what you are. They do it because when you get upset and defend yourself, you automatically lose, they have a good time, and they continue doing it to you. So, instead of defending yourself, turn the tables on them. Make them defend themselves by asking, “Do you believe it?” If they say, “Yes,” you say, “You can believe it if you wish,” and you win. And if they say, “No,” you win even bigger.

One simple question. No bullying. No suicide. No lawsuit.

AUTHOR

Izzy Kalman is the author and creator of the website Bullies2Buddies.com and a critic of the anti-bully movement. More by Izzy Kalman

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