What is at stake in Roe vs. Wade goes far beyond a squabble between left and right

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

What about the personhood of the unborn child?

A few days ago, a draft opinion of the United States Supreme Court was leaked to Politico, suggesting that the majority was inclined to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision enshrining a connotational right to abortion. The court has confirmed that the draft is authentic.

Although the draft is not final, it does strongly suggest that the court has already voted on the case and that a majority of justices is in favour of overturning Roe v. Wade. If that happens, it will bring an end to the notion that there is a right to abortion protected by the American constitution, and effectively leave the definition of abortion policy back in the hands of the individual States.

The extraordinary leaking of such an important draft opinion predictably opened a firestorm of political controversy.

It was insinuated by a report in The New York Times, for example, that the court had become unduly politicised or had become an instrument of conservative ideology rather than law. Apart from the fact that the original 1973 ruling was hardly an orthodox piece of constitutional interpretation, this sort of charge fails to engage the questions before the Court on their legal merits. As such, it looks more like a rhetorical deflection than a serious argument.

Fundamental issues

Even someone who is an ardent supporter of abortion rights should be more than capable of recognising that Roe v. Wade touches upon ethical and constitutional matters of fundamental importance that go far beyond the question of one’s political affiliations, or of whether this or that ideology, be it conservative or liberal, holds sway on the court.

The original majority opinion of Roe v. Wade in 1973 assumed that the unborn human being inside the mother is not deserving of the same fundamental protection of the law as that afforded born infants. It essentially contended that the mother’s choice to abort was indeed protected by the Constitution, whereas the Court has never, to my knowledge, suggested that anyone had a constitutional right to end the life of an infant after birth. In other words, it was unwilling to authorise infanticide.

In Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court found that the Constitution contained an implicit right to privacy, and that this right prevented governments from unduly restricting a woman’s access to abortion services. Many of those alarmed by the leak suggesting Roe v. Wade was about to be overturned have focused on this aspect of the decision.

But it also set down another important principle. The majority opinion deemed that the unborn foetus was not to be considered a “person” protected by the law, in the context of the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteeing “equal protection of the laws” and the rights to “life, liberty, and property” to all persons.

Finally, the court attempted to sidestep the question of when human life begins, on the grounds that this question was medically and philosophically unsettled:

We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, in this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.

Yet even if some medics and philosophers dispute the exact moment when human life begins, the unborn foetus is biologically and genetically identical and continuous with the human being after birth. Under these circumstances, a strong case could also be made for treating the unborn as a person rather than a non-person under the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment. For surely we should err on the side of protecting rather than stripping away fundamental rights from beings who are indisputably human from a biological and genetic perspective.

Politicization

Many important ethical and constitutional questions have the potential to be politicised. And abortion is perhaps as clear an example of this as any. For example, currently, in the United States (according to this Pew Research Center poll conducted in April 2021), a majority of self-identifying “conservative Republicans” tend to oppose widely available legal abortion, while a majority of self-identifying “liberal Democrats” tend to favour the “right to choose” affirmed in Roe v. Wade.

The politically charged nature of the abortion debate tends to lead people to reduce all arguments for and against essentially as ornamentation for a predefined political posture. But just as the political explosiveness of the slavery question did not automatically invalidate argumentation about the moral and legal standing of slaves in the US before the Civil War, the political explosiveness of abortion does not automatically invalidate thoughtful argumentation about the moral and legal standing of the unborn or reduce it to a form of political cheer-leading.

The personhood of the unborn

The two questions touched on in Roe v. Wade — the constitutional standing of the choice to abort and the moral and legal standing of the unborn — are intimately connected.

If, for example, one takes the view that the unborn is a full member of the human family and as such, is deserving of full legal protection in virtue of his or her humanity, then it would be very strange indeed if one also took the view that the choice to abort were protected from interference by third parties by the federal constitution of the United States. For that would amount to saying that the choice to take an innocent human life was not only permitted by the federal constitution but protected by it from third-party interference.

If one concedes that unborn human life is in fact deserving of legal protection in virtue of the humanity of the unborn (or that humans should be considered as “persons” under the Fourteenth Amendment), one cannot coherently argue that the Constitution prohibits a State government from protecting unborn human life.

Indeed, if we assume that unborn human beings deserve full legal protection, it would seem strange if a Constitution that protects other fundamental human rights, such as the right to a fair trial, or the right to property, did not extend a similar protection to the bodily integrity of the unborn.

In order to endorse the mother’s right to abortion established by Roe v. Wade, one would have to take the view that unborn human life was not in fact deserving of full legal protection in virtue of its humanity, and that whatever potential interests the unborn may have in living and in thriving, may be overridden by the prerogatives of his or her mother, or her own interest in not being burdened with a child, or not carrying a child to term.

That  puts the supporter of Roe v. Wade in a difficult position. For having rejected humanity as a sufficient basis for full legal protection, it is difficult to see a principled reason for ruling out infanticide if that is what the parents want. Indeed, the plausibility of “after-birth abortion” has been defended by some bioethicists.

Supporters of Roe v. Wade who would not go so far as advocating infanticide need to find a basis for legal protection of newborn infants that does not entail a similar level of protection for unborn infants. They need to point to characteristics of newborn infants that place them squarely within the rights-bearing community, which are not morally arbitrary and which are not shared by their unborn counterparts.

That seems like a rather tall order to me.

This is a slightly edited version of a post on the author’s Substack, The Freedom Blog.

AUTHOR

David Thunder

David Thunder is a researcher and lecturer at the University of Navarra’s Institute for Culture and Society. More by David Thunder

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jake Tapper Calls Potentially Disabled Children ‘Tragedy’ During Abortion Debate

SNL Claims SCOTUS Draft Opinion Argues ‘Abortion Is A Crime,’ Compares Court To Medieval Idiots

‘I told you so’ – the dissenters in Roe predicted its collapse

The problems of putting off children

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

Decoding the Latest Attack on Free Speech

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Biden Administration Creates ‘Ministry of Truth’.

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has quietly set up a Disinformation Governance Board to oversee what information is and isn’t “truthful”
  • Heading up this new “Ministry of Truth” is Nina Jankowicz, a “Russian disinformation expert” who in her spare time sings show tunes about disinformation and erotic Harry Potter songs on TikTok
  • Jankowicz is herself known for spreading disinformation. She called the Hunter Biden laptop story a “fairytale” and “Russian disinformation,” and she’s openly opposed to free speech and anti-censorship efforts
  • In her book, “How to Lose the Information War,” Jankowicz criticized Poland’s efforts to eliminate censorship of conservatives on social networks, and called for the U.S. government to regulate and conduct oversight of people who disagree with the Democratic party on Twitter
  • Every dictatorship and autocracy has had a ministry of truth, a department of propaganda, and Biden has now joined them. May 1, 2022, GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert introduced a bill to immediately defund and terminate the Disinformation Governance Board

By now, you’ve probably heard that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has created a Disinformation Governance Board to oversee what information is and isn’t “truthful.”1 This includes information relating to elections.2 It’s so incredibly Orwellian, you’d think it was pure fiction, yet here we are. It’s real.

This “Ministry of Truth” will reportedly operate under and receive funding from the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3), created by President Biden to “curb radicalization in the U.S.”3 It appears those in the Biden administration must have thought “1984” was an instruction manual rather than a warning.

Known Disinformation Spreader Made Head of Truth Ministry

Heading up this new “Ministry of Truth” is Nina Jankowicz,4 a “Russian disinformation expert” who in her spare time makes a fool of herself singing made-up show tunes about disinformation and erotic Harry Potter songs5 on TikTok.

As noted by both Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson and Jimmy Dore of “The Jimmy Dore Show” in the videos above, Jankowicz is qualified to do absolutely nothing. Independent journalist Glen Greenwald also highlighted Jankowicz’s obvious lack of real credentials in a May 4, 2022, Substack article:6

“The concept of ‘anti-disinformation expert’ is itself completely fraudulent. This is not a real expertise but rather a concocted title bestowed on propagandists to make them appear more scholarly and apolitical than they are …

There is no conceivable circumstance in which a domestic law enforcement agency like DHS should be claiming the power to decree truth and falsity … The purpose of Homeland Security agents is to propagandize and deceive, not enlighten and inform.

The level of historical ignorance and stupidity required to believe that U.S. Security State operatives are earnestly devoted to exposing and decreeing truth is off the charts … That nobody should want the U.S. Government let alone Homeland Security arrogating unto itself the power to declare truth and falsity seems self-evident.”

Surprisingly enough, even mainstream news outlets have pointed out Jankowicz’s role in the spreading of disinformation and outright lies. For example, as reported by the British Daily Mail:7

“The Russia disinformation expert previously called the laptop of President Joe Biden’s son Hunter a ‘Trump campaign product.’ This is causing questions over Jankowicz’s ability to accurately judge disinformation now that several sources have come out confirming the validity of Hunter’s laptop …

When stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop started emerging, several outlets, social media sites and left-leaning disinformation experts claimed that it was just misinformation coming from Trump and others on the right.

In an October 2020 report, Jankowicz shared her skepticism of the contents of the laptop and the claims it belonged to Hunter. ‘We should view it as a Trump campaign product,’ she told the New York Daily News at the time. Twitter repeatedly took down the Hunter Biden laptop story and prevented it from being spread on the platform.”

In one October 2020 tweet, she referred to the Hunter Biden laptop story as a “fairytale.”8 Jankowicz was also among those who insisted Trump had colluded with Russia to win the presidency in 2016, a claim we now know is patently false. In reality, it was Hillary Clinton and allies who colluded to fabricate this false narrative and derail Trump’s presidency.9

Over the past couple years, we’ve repeatedly seen how information censored on the grounds that it was “misinformation” turned out to be factual and true. In early 2020, YouTube betrayed its founding principles and started censoring and banning anything that contradicted the World Health Organization’s stance on COVID-19.

Yet, time and again, the WHO turned out to be wrong.10 No organization is infallible, and the WHO has a long history of corruption that makes its ability to discern what’s best for public health all the more suspect. Twitter followed suit, axing health experts, scientists and respected journalists like Tess Lawrie, Martin Kulldorf, Jay Bhattacharya, Dr. Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch, Alex Berenson and many more.11

Jankowicz’s Hostile Stand Against First Amendment Rights

Jankowicz has also publicly opposed the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, saying free speech is bad for “marginalized communities.” Shortly after Elon Musk announced his takeover of Twitter, she told NPR:12

“I shudder to think about if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms, what that would look like for the marginalized communities …

We need the platforms to do more, and we frankly need law enforcement and our legislatures to do more as well … the U.K. has an online safety bill that’s being considered right now where they’re trying to make illegal this currently, quote, ‘awful but lawful content’ that exists online where people are being harassed.”

Lack of censorship on social media will make abuse against marginalized groups worse, she claims. At the same time, she insists that “a HUGE focus” of the new disinformation board will be “protecting free speech, privacy, civil rights and civil liberties.”13

This is clearly Orwellian doublespeak, where what’s being said is the complete opposite of reality. How can you have a board dedicated to dictating “truth,” which means censoring “untruth,” while simultaneously protecting free speech? Either all viewpoints are allowed, or only one viewpoint is permitted, and if only one viewpoint is tolerated, then there’s clearly no free speech.

In her book, “How to Lose the Information War,” she also criticized Poland’s efforts to eliminate rampant online censorship of conservatives on social networks by forming a Ministry of Digital Affairs.

In other words, she wants conservative views to be censored, not just in the U.S., but everywhere. In that book, she also called on the U.S. government to regulate and conduct oversight of people who disagree with the Democratic party on Twitter. As noted by Carlson, that’s likely why she was selected in the first place.

Not surprisingly, then, Jankowicz has expressed “dismay” at Musk’s decision to no longer censor posts discussing potential fraud in the 2020 election.14 Interestingly, in a September 2020 tweet, she defined the term “color revolution” and “why the U.S. isn’t a candidate for one.”15

In it, she noted that “Believe it or not, sometimes people get fed up with having their voices silenced for decades,” but she then insisted that a color revolution isn’t possible in the U.S. because “we are not an autocracy,” and color revolutions only occur in oppressive autocracy regimes.

Given an Inch, They’ll Take a Mile

Others disagree with that assessment. As noted by former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (video above), every dictatorship and autocracy has had a ministry of truth, a department of propaganda. And Biden just joined them.

Gabbard also accurately points out that the government has been working with media and Big Tech to censor for some time already. We’ve become increasingly aware of this covert backdoor influence over the past two years. Now, however, they’re formalizing that influence, which is, by the way, completely unconstitutional.

Moreover, the scary truth here is that the terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” could cover absolutely anything. As noted by Carlson in the featured video, the DHS has not actually defined or given any clues as to what mis- or disinformation actually is.

“Would you declare war on a country you couldn’t name?” Carlson asks. “Would you sentence someone to death for a crime you couldn’t describe? Of course you wouldn’t, not if you were a sane and decent person. Because you can’t have justice without precise definitions …

But they’re not defining the core concept, the heart of what is effectively a new law enforcement agency. Maybe that is because [U.S. secretary of homeland security, Alejandro] Mayorkas doesn’t want justice, and neither does the president he serves. They want power. And to get power, they plan to control what you think.”

Carlson points out that the DHS has now publicly admitted they intend to punish people for merely thinking “the wrong way,” even if they’ve committed no actual crime worthy of judicial intervention. In short, anyone who disagrees with the Biden administration is now an enemy of the state. As noted by Carlson:

“You can’t make any of this up. It’s too grotesque. Would you believe a novel with this plot? No, you wouldn’t, but it’s happening, and that’s the bad news. The good news is, everyone involved in Joe Biden’s Ministry of Information is a buffoon. They may be evil, but they’re also ridiculous.”

He then airs one of Jankowicz’s undignified TikTok videos, where she’s singing about disinformation. “This is now one of our top law enforcement officials,” he dryly notes. Jankowicz has also, ironically, accused Republicans of dealing in “highly emotional rhetoric,” which proves nothing except the fact that she’s read George Orwell’s “1984” more than once.

In fact, Democrats accuse their opponents of doing exactly what they themselves are doing so regularly, you can be near-assured that any accusation is a veiled admission at this point. And, in his report, Carlson reviews how Jankowicz is guilty of this exact behavior. Carlson also points out that her falsehoods have by no means been inconsequential.

Her disinformation helped presidential candidate Biden to lie about an incredibly important story — Hunter’s laptop — that could have altered the outcome of the presidential election, had it been up for public discussion. Jankowicz has never apologized for dismissing what was in fact truthful, and neither has anyone else who insisted the laptop was “Russian disinformation.”

An International Coordination Effort to Censor Free Speech

Now, some have pointed out that this Disinformation Governance Board didn’t come into existence until Musk bought Twitter, promising to turn it into a free speech platform.16,17 However, other evidence strongly indicates there’s international coordination taking place.

In mid-April 2022, the European Union approved new rules aimed at policing Big Tech platforms. As reported by the Financial Times:18

“The EU will force Big Tech companies to police content online more aggressively after approving a major piece of legislation that sets the rules for the first time on how companies should keep users safe on the internet …

Leading tech groups will be forced to disclose to EU regulators how they are tackling disinformation and war propaganda in order to curb the spread of fake information — an effort that has gained fresh momentum since the Russian invasion of Ukraine … Countries such as the U.S., Canada and Singapore are expected to follow with similar rules in the coming months.”

Some of the language used to describe this EU legislation sounds good — for example, it will ban the targeting of internet users based on personal information such as gender, religion and sexual preferences, and terms and conditions must be clearly understandable even to children.

However, there are also many reasons to suspect that these regulations will end up serving as a springboard for government-directed censorship. Among them is the fact that the EU is supporting the proposal to make the WHO into a global health authority, and the WHO, in turn, is setting up its own censorship network.

A key player in that network is NewsGuard,19 which entered into a partnership with the WHO in August 2020.20 As reported by Carlson, NewsGuard has also received funding from the U.S. Pentagon to blacklist any site that publishes “misinformation” about the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Time to Draw a Line in the Sand

Clearly, the shocking censorship we experienced during the COVID pandemic was only the beginning. It’s going to include all kinds of information. The creation of a DHS Disinformation Governance Board is truly a watershed moment in history, and we cannot allow it to stand. As noted by Carlson in the featured video at the top of this article:

“Just to be clear, this is a nightmare unfolding in slow motion. But this is the point where we’re just going to have to draw the line. No, Joe Biden, you cannot have a federally funded ministry of truth. And no, Nina Jankowicz can’t run it. Period. It’s not your country … and you don’t get to do this to a free people. Period. This can’t happen.”

May 1, 2022, GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert introduced a bill to immediately defund and terminate the Disinformation Governance Board. In an interview with Fox News, Boebert said:21

“This kind of stuff is terrifying. We in Congress have the power of the purse. It is our duty to shut down this department immediately. I’m calling on leadership in the Republican Party — Leader McCarthy, Whip Scalise, and others — to join me in calling for this department to be shut down and defunded.

No tax dollars should go to where Biden can use the power of the federal government to silence truthful stories like Big Tech did with the Hunter Biden story. Democrats took [Orwell’s book ‘1984’] not as a warning, but as a guide.

This is really a department of propaganda. To say that the federal department has a say in what’s right and what’s wrong, what’s truth and what’s not — this is a very dangerous place that we’ve come to.”

Sources and References

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

The Long Arm of the Lawless Communist Chinese Party

/in , , , , /by

China is sending its police to the Solomon Islands but, not to worry, it won’t turn into Hong Kong, or so they say.

China has been sending goons to target Shen Yun dancers and musicians in upstate New York for years, intimidating them with propaganda, lies, and life-threatening sabotage.

China hunting down Uighurs around the world; more than 1,500 detained or forced to return to China.

Human rights report: China stepping up pressure on Sinicized state-sanctioned religious groups with new restrictions on clergy, schools, and Internet postings.

Xinjiang survivor to testify to Congress and International Criminal Court about torture in CCP camps and repeatedly restrained in ‘tiger chair’ for a day at a stretch.

Spotlight turns back to widespread forced labor in China’s solar energy industry.

First-person account: ‘Our souls are dead’: how I survived a Chinese ‘re-education’ camp for Uyghurs.

“Canaries in a Cold War” film documents CCP’s rape, torture, forced organ harvesting, and other human rights violations.

Election of CCP-tied official to U.N. Torture Committee expected to cripple independent review of China’s record on brutality.

Another consequence of Chinese dominance of the U.N. – Judge Dismissed Before Ruling That UN Helped Beijing Persecute Dissidents.

Xi Jinping backs off ‘Common Prosperity’ policy – aimed at reducing inequality – to regain economic growth.  #SocialistsNeverLearn #NEP.

China tried to strong-arm Sony into taking the Statue of Liberty out of the latest ‘Spider-Man’ movie, but Sony refused.

Animated film ‘Eternal Spring’ tells “The Story of 18 Brave Chinese Who Tapped Into State TV to Air Uncensored News in China” in 2002.

Chinese law professor silenced after commenting on chained woman scandal; colleagues told not to discuss the scandal in the classroom.

The number of people quitting the CCP nears 400 million. If you want to quit, go to the Tuidang website Sen Nieh. 

United States

American Library Association’s new president is Marxist; wants to harness the power of the collective for hope and change.

Democratic Socialists of America amass largest contingency in New York State Assembly.

Biden White House honors activist who was a champion of Mao’s disastrous Great Leap Forward that killed Chinese by the tens of millions.

‘Sunlight is the best disinfectant’ – University of Florida changes name of the “Karl Marx Group Study Room” after a published report.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: China: Licking its Chops?

Spiritual Warfare – The Gloves Are Off!

/in , , , , , /by

Spiritual Warfare – The Gloves Are Off!

By Jason A Brown

The gloves are off, and the demonic forces that have long resided in Washington, D.C. have taken off the mask.  Protestors outside the Supreme Court, throwing a fit because the so-called abortion rights, (aka right to murder children) may be left to state legislators to decide.  Yes, that’s right, this Supreme Court decision does not ban abortions nationwide.  It just gives blue states that are ruled by demons the ability to legalize murder.  However, in responding to the evil that consumes our national and some state governments right now, we must be consistent in our faith and know where we stand.  Furthermore, we have to be able to cite scripture to back up our claims in this fight, and that is not always easy.

Those of us that are pro-life, have said for a long time, that the slippery slope here a ticking time bomb.  Not that the act itself is not reprehensible, but most people that have their eyes open recognized that this kind of disregard for the sanctity of human life will only lead to more devilish acts down the road that will be given legal status by the government.  And we were at a point where even partial birth abortion was given legitimacy by the deviants that pedal this evil to the masses.  Now we have the California Assembly committee, that has passed Assembly Bill 2223, that prevents criminal liability for parents that that have a newborn that dies within 28 days of birth.  This would effectively legalize the killing of a newborn baby.  The vote was 11-3.  Can you imagine a committee consisting of 14 people, where 11 of those 14 voted to allow the murder of a child?

This continues to expand the definition what constitutes life, by deciding that the killing isn’t a killing but merely a termination of a clump of cells.  So, a newborn baby is now just a clump of cells?  Really?  So, this SCOTUS decision would only cite the 10th amendment and the lack of authority that the federal government has to preside over these matters.  That is the constitutional argument, and the correct one from a legal standpoint.  But then there is the moral argument that murder in any form is wrong and not righteous in any way.  Why should states have the right to legalize murder, that is dismissed, due to the false narratives that are put forth by a disingenuous media?

Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.”   

Some would ask about death penalty and the morality of putting someone to death for crimes that they have committed.  My views have changed on this issue over the years. I used to support the death penalty 100% but now I feel like that original view was wrong. It is still government sanctioned murder.  Incarceration gives people a moment or sometimes a lifetime to reflect.  We all have up until we take our dying breath to submit to God and repent, accepting Jesus as our Savior, the perfect human lamb (100% God and 100% human) that was sacrificed to pay for the sins of humanity.  The punishment for sin is death, but not death at the hands of another man, government or not.  We do not have the moral authority to make such decisions, only God Himself.  Every day that someone lives is another chance for them to repent and come to God before they shed their physical vessel that houses their eternal soul.

Every day that someone spends on death row, is another day that they have the opportunity to exercise their free will and submit to the Glory of the Lord and His sacrifice so that we may live forever with Him in His Father’s Kingdom.  So, to end that life prematurely and not according to God’s will, we are potentially depriving a person of an opportunity to be saved and still live for eternity.  Putting someone to death could literally make the difference between eternal suffering, and being part of God’s Kingdom.  We unfortunately allow our emotions to cloud our thinking and even distort our belief in God, and forgiveness.  Forgiveness is not convenient, nor is it always the popular stance to take.  But, if Jesus forgave those that were beating Him, and driving nails through His wrists, we need to find that forgiveness in ourselves, even at the most inconvenient of times.

I had to go into the death penalty even though it is off topic from Roe v Wade, because so many people call conservatives hypocrites because we condemn abortion while cheering the death penalty.  While it does not justify killing a child of God, they do make a valid argument regarding consistency.  We don’t get to cherry pick scripture and assign our own morals to the Word of God.

I was intent on writing this today, and making it about politics, the constitution, and other things that are part of our physical world, and that appeal to the flesh. But as I started to write, I felt compelled to take this in a different direction, and while it may be seen as preachy, it had to be done this way. I am not afraid to speck truth, even when that truth may be condemned by the masses. I am not ashamed.

©Jason A Brown. All rights reserved.

I Agree with Nina Jankowicz that Gender Disinformation is a Threat to National Security. Let me explain.

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Below is a tweet of a video done by Nina Jankowicz when she was a professor at Penn State University School of Law. Jankowicz states, “Gender disinformation is a threat to national security.” We agree with her. Please continue reading to understand why.

In this short video Jankowicz defends Kamala Harris, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She also defends herself for being childless. So she is defending politicians and they all happen to be Democrats. She seems to be upset that some point out that Ilhan Omar married her brother in order to obtain U.S. citizenship. Then she states that its racist to point out that Kamal Harris is not black even though her father is Jamaican and mother is from India. It appears that what Jankowicz is against is any criticism of women who are Democrats.

Where I disagree is with her use of “gender disinformation.”

It’s not about defending political figures. It’s not about defending women who are political leaders. It is not about defending one political party against those who report on its members and the party’s policies.

It’s all about science. Females have an XX pair of sex chromosomes, and males, an XY pair. A baby’s gender is determined by the sperm cell that fertilizes a woman’s egg. Sperm carries one sex chromosome, either a Y (male) or X (female).

For me gender disinformation is denying that gender is binary, i.e. male is XX and female is XY.

Anything else is pure propaganda.

I agree with Jankowicz that the gender narrative has now become a threat to our culture, society and national security. It has become a threat because of the simple but powerful point that gender is binary.

Science is very clear on this biological fact and has been since times immemorial. All other positions are personal choice myths, not science.

Jankowicz confuses gender, female (XX), with telling true stories about politicians, their families and their policies. Something that is allowed under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

We are now at a point in our cultural history where children are being taught in public schools that gender is fluid. Here are a few examples of how gender disinformation has become the weapon of choice and threatens our cultural, social and ultimately national security.

The Bottom Line

Today parents are challenging books in school libraries and classrooms in record numbers.  They’re objecting to sexually explicit content, profanity, anti-police messaging, and other left-wing indoctrination found in schoolbooks. The most-challenged books are “Gender Queer” and “Lawn Boy”, the latter a gay story normalizing sex acts between 4th-graders which has been criticized for encouraging pedophilia.

Mis, dis and mal-information about gender is propaganda writ large. Propaganda is the great threat to our national security.

Those teaching, promoting or ignoring this gender disinformation political pogrom do so at the risk of harming children. It is child abuse!

It is also a direct assault on the traditional family, all religions that declare sodomy to be a sin (Muslim, Jew and Christian) and those who are labeled by people like Jankowicz as racists.

Under this administration gender disinformation has come to the White House and her name is Karine Jean-Pierre.

Karine Jean-Pierre is a perfect fit to push gender dis, mis and mal-information (propaganda).

Jean-Pierre is Jew hating lesbian married to a female CNN correspondent. This latest appointment appeases the Islamic militants, the LGBTQ+ community and Marxists all with just one key appointment.

Brilliant! It’s by design.

The Democrats and Biden don’t care if everyone knows how radical they are because they hold the strings of power.  This appointment shows that the Biden administration’s gender disinformation is in fact a clear and present danger to the United States of America.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Pro-abortion group encourages supporters to storm churches nationwide on Mother’s Day

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The Left’s war against civility and the peacefulness of the nation in general looks as if it’s about to escalate.

Abortion Groups Imply They’re Planning To Storm Catholic Churches On Sunday Over Roe V. Wade

by Christine Sellers, Daily Caller, May 6, 2022:

The pro-choice group, Ruth Sent Us implied that they’re planning to storm Catholic and Evangelical churches on Sunday in protest of the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade, according to a social media post Tuesday.

The group, whose name honors the late Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, shared a video to their Twitter feed showing women wearing red cloaks protesting about abortion rights inside a Catholic church. The group also called for a “Mother’s Day Strike” on Sunday alongside fellow pro-choice group, Strike For Choice.

“This is what Mother’s Day should look like,” the group wrote in their tweet, encouraging supporters to protest at Catholic and Evangelical churches “nationwide.”…

The group, Ruth Sent Us previously posted a video of pro-choice activists storming a Catholic church in the Archdiocese of San Francisco via their Instagram.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED VIDEO: Democrat Rep. Jason Crow Wants the Defense Department to Perform Abortions on Military Bases

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats Warn Of Right-Wing Violence After Supreme Court Leak

With Roe v. Wade on the Ropes, the Left Has Women Exactly Where It Wants Them

Conflict of interest: Biden’s new press secretary in relationship with CNN reporter

Harvard president refuses to condemn string of anti-Semitic incidents on campus

Pakistan: Muslim murders his sister for choosing dancing and modeling as a career

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

VIDEO: Dr. Naomi Wolf on Pfizer Documents from April 5th, ‘They hid, they concealed, they redacted.’ Its bad

/in , , , , , , /by

Still waiting for an authoritative analysis of the most recent massive data dump from Pfizer. But lets have a look at what the last batch of 55,000 pages had. Naomi breaks some of it down.

And yes, we have posted this before. But to get a sense of scale of how much and easily these agencies tell massive lies, its good to be reminded. Especially when you hear people say, “They never said the vaccines would stop the spread or stop you from getting sick! They always said it would reduce the number of hospitalizations!”

UPDATE: There IS some analysis on the newest data dump. Please check this link. A small fraction is below.

Happy Cinco de Mayo kids! You might wanna grab a margarita or a Corona with a lime before you read this one.

This drop had 80,000 pages of data.  So I had to prioritize what needed to be read first.  Interesting findings.

OK first.  Remember how we discussed the vaccine likes to congregate in the liver?  Like, within HOURS of getting vaccinated?  I thought those poor Wistar Rats probably met their fate at the 48 hour mark.  But here we find a crumb of data that says nope, they now produced 300 hour post vaccine data comparing the lipid nano particles from the vaccine in the blood plasma versus in the liver.  THIS IS HORRID. Plasma levels peaked and dropped.  The liver?  Not so much.  It is still SEVERELY ELEVATED with mass nano particles at the 300 hour mark hanging out in the liver.  What does the liver do?  Metabolizes and excretes body waste.  Metabolizes medications.  Wonder if THIS is why we are seeing autoimmune hepatitis happening in kids right now?  You don’t suppose breastfeeding babies with moms full of lipid nano particles and spike proteins could possibly cause baby to have issues with THIER liver now, do you?

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

REPORT: Pro-Life Christians Purged from U.S. Military and DoD

/in , , , , , , /by

EDITORS NOTE: Personhood Alliance issued the following shocking report on what is happening in our military to pro-life Christian soldiers. Please read and share their report.

COVID VACCINES: PURGING PRO-LIFE CHRISTIANS FROM THE U.S. MILITARY

Across America, thousands of pro-life Christian service members are being persecuted and purged from the military for refusing to accept an abortion-derived COVID vaccine. Even though we ask these men and women to put their lives on the line to protect our fundamental rights, including our religious freedom, our government is denying theirs. What does this mean for our military? For our nation?

A battle is underway.

The deadline has passed for military service members to receive a mandatory COVID vaccine or face disciplinary action and discharge. While exact numbers have not been released, data from the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the Department of Defense (DoD), indicate an estimated 150,000 military personnel and DoD civilian employees have refused the vaccine.

Officially, 24,000 religious exemption requests have been filed primarily by Christian service members. 99% of these claims have been denied. Meanwhile, thousands of medical and administrative exemptions have been approved. According to DoD numbers, more than 3,200 soldiers have already been discharged for refusing the vaccine, with several thousand more expected in the coming months.

So many brave men and women, who have dedicated their lives to serving our country, are giving up their livelihoods and careers instead of submitting to the COVID vaccine. What would drive a person to make such a decision? What are the ramifications of current policies to force service members out, and what are the consequences for our country?

The problem with fetal cells

Currently in the US, every COVID vaccine approved by the FDA has used aborted fetal cells in either its production, testing, or both. The term fetal cell line conjures up sterile images of lab coats and test tubes, but most people don’t look deeper to understand what this term actually means. From where exactly would one obtain fetal cells? In the case of the available COVID vaccines, two cell lines were used: HEK293, which was originally harvested from the kidney of an aborted baby girl in 1973, and PER.C6, which was obtained from the eye of a baby aborted in 1985.

Many Christians believe that to inject a substance derived from aborted fetal cells lines, regardless of how much time that has passed or whether there is any potential benefit, is to be complicit in the murder of children. Soldiers frequently state in their exemption requests that to accept an abortion-derived vaccine would violate their deeply held religious convictions. To force them to participate in a mandated COVID vaccine program is not only immoral, but also unconstitutional.

Soldiers have unalienable rights, too

What message does it send when we ask a soldier to put their life on the line to protect our fundamental rights, including our religious freedom, but then we deny them their own religious freedom?

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

– The Declaration of Independence

Our Constitution is clear on this matter. It is not our government, but our Creator that grants our rights. The carefully crafted language in our founding documents expressly prohibits the government from infringing upon or violating these pre-existing, natural, God-given rights.

Soldiers do not give up the right to freely exercise their religion when they put on the uniform. In fact, religious liberty is afforded an extra layer of protection through the bi-partisan Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which “prohibits any agency, department, or official of the United States or any State (the government) from substantially burdening a person’s exercise of religion.”

Proof of religious conviction

In spite of these protections, our men and women in uniform undergo an exhaustive vetting process to test the validity of their religious exemption requests—only to have the requests denied anyway.

“It is a travesty when the very men and women who are on the frontline, defending our constitutional rights against foreign aggressors, are themselves seeing their constitutional rights trampled.”

– Kris Kobach, General Counsel, Alliance for Free Citizens

Paul,* a decorated combat veteran and Air Force pilot, and his wife Elizabeth* are among the many families in this fight. In September of 2021, Paul submitted a Request for Religious Accommodation for the COVID vaccine. He articulately stated his case, citing his objection to the use of aborted fetal cell lines, and included a copy of his denomination’s official resolution opposing the use of abortion-derived vaccines. He also included documentation of antibodies he acquired from a COVID infection, as well as a recommendation from his military chaplain that he be granted the exemption. A portion of his claim is included below.

2. To assess whether the request is based on a sincerely held belief, I conducted the interview in accordance with the Chaplain Interview Checklist in Attachment 5 of DAFI 52-201. The member is a committed Christian and is a member of the [ …………………. ] denomination. The member believes that abortion is immoral and that the COVID vaccines that have used fetal cell lines in their development or testing are not morally justifiable. The member attended a Christian college and has completed an advanced theology degree during his Air Force career. The member is an active Christian and his pattern of conduct is consistent with the request. I found the member to be sincere. His request is supported by letters of endorsement from his denomination as well as his local pastor. It is my assessment that receiving the COVID-19 vaccination places a substantial burden which infringes upon his religious freedom and that this request is grounded in a sincerely held religious belief.

3. It is my recommendation that this religious accommodation for COVID-19 vaccination exemption be granted.

Despite his chaplain’s recommendation, Paul received a denial letter asserting that: “We did not believe based on our criteria that the member had a sincerely held belief regarding the vaccine and that as a result it did not substantially burden them.”

An excerpt from the denial letter follows.

6. After reviewing all relevant documents, and deliberating with the RRT, I recommend you deny the member’s accommodation request. We did not believe based on our criteria that the member had a sincerely held belief regarding the vaccine an that as a result it did not substantially burden them. Additionanlly, even if the member did meet the threshold for a religious accomadation it would too deeply affect military requirements, military readiness and the health and safety of the force. All RRT members concur in this recommendation.

Paul was given five days to appeal the decision.

In his appeal, he addressed each point of the denial in detail. He also included 21 testimonials from pastors, doctors, and others, attesting to his moral character and his unwavering stance on the sanctity of human life. His appeal was denied.

If Paul—an exemplary Christian man who has lived out his faith consistently over a period of many years—was denied his religious exemption, then it is difficult to say whose request would actually be approved.

*Names have been changed to protect identity.

Punishment for “refusers”

For the men and women bravely taking this stand, every day has been a battle. Their moral abhorrence of abortion is questioned, mocked, and denigrated. They are labeled “unclean” and “refusers.” They are threatened with court martial and jail. They are told they are “worthless,” that they are “not team players,” and that “we don’t need your kind around here.”

They are stripped of rank and duties, removed from positions of command, isolated, and punished. The pressure to succumb is overwhelming. And yet, they stand strong.

Their perseverance in the face of such overwhelming adversity deserves our respect—and our support.

A military without moral leaders is a potential force of tyranny

The U.S. military is rapidly purging itself of some of the most courageous men and women in its ranks. These American patriots are taking enormous personal risk to do what they believe is right. They are the principled leaders we need in the military.

Purposefully removing people of integrity from our forces will not be without consequence. The constitutional protections for life and liberty are eroded for all of us when service members (and those who stand up for them) are forcibly and quietly stripped of these rights.

Who will be left? Who will defend our rights when these brave men and women are gone?

Perhaps the testimony of Lt. Col. Edward Joseph Stapanon III, who logged 174 hours of combat time in Operation Iraqi Freedom and earned two air medals, sums it up best:

Q: Now, you understand the serious of things, of the decision that you’re making today; correct?

A: Yes, Ma’am, I do.

Q: And if pushed, will you in fact go to prison to stand behind your religious beliefs?

A: Yes, Ma’am. I don’t see that I have any other alternative. When I meet my maker, I’m going to be held responsible for the decisions I’ve made, and I’d much rather go to prison. There’s been a lot of saints that have gone to prison, so I’m willing to do that.

(Transcript of Excerpt of Preliminary Injunction Hearing, Testimony of Edward Joseph Stapanon, III, Doc. 45, Pg. ID 3076-77

You are not alone

There are currently eight lawsuits across the country focused on fighting military vaccine mandates on religious grounds, with more being added every day:

  • In Florida, a preliminary injunction against the mandate has been granted, pending class certification
  • In Texas, preliminary injunction and class status have been granted; all U.S. Navy service members are currently protected from the vaccine mandate
  • In Georgia, a preliminary injunction has been granted
  • In Washington, DC, a case had been filed
  • In Louisiana, a case has been filed
  • In Nebraska, a preliminary Injunction has been granted and class certification requested
  • In Ohio, a preliminary injunction has been granted in two cases, one of which may be granted Air Force class status in the near future

If you would like more information on the status of these cases, or if you are a military service member looking for resources and support, reach out to the following organizations:

If you are a civilian, contact your state and federal legislators and ask them to protect the religious freedom of our men and women in uniform. If you have the means, prayerfully consider donating to Liberty Counsel help cover the cost of legal fees.

To learn more about the work of the Personhood Alliance and our 100% pro-life, no exceptions stance, subscribe to our email list.

AUTHOR

Deborah Stilt

Deborah Stilt is the vice president of Personhood Alliance Education and the social media coordinator for the Personhood Alliance. She has been active in pro-life media and foster care advocacy for several years. But most importantly, she’s a California mom who is fighting against the lies of the culture and for the protection of every human being without exception.

©Personhood Alliance. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Dr. Trozzi | The right to survive

Made in America Series: North Arrow Coffee Company – Veteran Owned

/in , , , /by

Here at 2ndVote we always advocate for the three pillars of shopping your values; shop local whenever possible, shop the highest 2ndVote score whenever possible, and shop American whenever possible. American production has been outsourced overseas for the sake of labor costs, sometimes even using slave labor, for far too long. It is high time that we as Americans demand that the goods and services we purchase are made by Americans, for Americans, in AMERICA!

That’s why we at 2ndVote endorse a product Made-in-America every week. This weekly message features various products that have been verified to be 100% American produced so that 2ndVote shoppers can better support American economic independence. It should be noted that while any products or companies featured in this series have been vetted for being American-made, there is not a guarantee that all such companies have been scored by 2ndVote at the time of publication.

This week’s featured Made-in-America product is the Cold Brew No. 13 coffee from North Arrow Coffee Company:

North Arrow is a veteran-owned business founded by close friends who share a tremendous love for God, family, and coffee. They also donate at least 15% of all sales to help end abortion, which we think is pretty great. While the beans are farmed in South America (no where else in the lower 48 would suffice for that), but the rest of the magic is done in Temecula, California.

Check them out here for a 10% discount! 

Or use code 2NDVOTE10 when checking out.

The best way to make positive change in the world of woke businesses is to vote with your wallet, so remember: shop local, shop the highest score possible, and shop American! 2ndVote is not paid for this feature.

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

Can the Sarasota County School Board fire staff for teaching students dis/mis/mal-information?

/in , , , , , , , /by

“Teachers retain their rights as citizens in a public school environment, but those rights are altered. Public school teachers enjoy, for example, the right to freedom of expression, but they cannot promote a personal political agenda in the classroom. Teachers also enjoy freedom of association, privacy, and a limited right to academic freedom. Finally, teachers not only need to be aware of how the law affects them, they also need to know how the law impacts their students.” – Center for the Advancement of Digital Scholarship

There has been growing concern about what is happening in public school classrooms nationwide. Parents are beginning to take note of what subjects are being taught in public schools, what books are being used by classroom teachers, what books are in school libraries and media centers and what clubs are being promoted by school administrators.

There is also a growing concern that there is a lot of mis, dis and mal-information being promoted in public schools. The most recent examples include:

And on and on and on.

Teachers teaching dis, mis and mal-information

There is a growing concern that dis, mis and mal-information has creeped into public school classrooms. So much so that the Florida legislature passed a bill preventing mis, dis and mal-information in elementary schools.

Parents, grandparents and interested organizations are now focused on having children in public schools be taught only the critical personal skills of reading, writing and arithmetic. Only a solid foundation in reading, writing and cyphering will make our next generation successful citizens. However, Florida’s Department of Education recently removed 41% of mathematics books because they contained mis, dis and mal-information.

Watch Florida Governor DeSantis comments on dis, mis and mal-information in math books:

It would seem obvious that it is not the role of school teachers, or librarians, to:

  1. Lie to students by teaching dis, mis or mal-information.
  2. Use textbooks that promote an ideology versus the truth.
  3. Have books in libraries and media centers that are pornographic, not age appropriate or promote homosexuality.
  4. Push a particular political position in the classroom.
  5. Reject science in favor of global warming disinformation in the classroom.
  6. Fail to teach a child to read, write and cypher.

We decided to look at what the rules are for teachers to not teach dis, mis or mal-information in the classroom because Amber Mercier a gay teacher in Florida said she is willing to break the law and keep hiding sexual information about students from their parents even if she loses her job and gets thrown in jail for it.

We are concerned because PJMedia reported, “There is a disturbing trend of public schools actively keeping secrets from parents, which has led to suicide attempts and harm to children.”

Sarasota County School Board

We decided to look at our local Sarasota County School Board, their Collective Bargaining Agreement and the Sarasota County Schools Employee Handbook for information on holding teachers and administrators accountable for promoting mis, dis and mal-information upon K-12 students.

The only thing we found was in Chapter II – Being a School Employee of the handbook:

Political Activities

Florida Statute 104.31 and School Board policies 2.51 and 6.34 govern political activities of school public employees. Some things to remember are:

(1) Political posters shall not be displayed in schools
(2) Political literature shall not be distributed in schools or on school property
(3) Solicitations for votes or contributions shall not be conducted in schools or on school property
(4) Students shall not be required to distribute campaign literature
(5) Employees shall refrain from participation in partisan politics on school property during the hours school is in session

School Board employees shall not solicit support of any political candidate, partisan or nonpartisan, during regular work hours. A School Board employee who offers him/herself as a candidate for public office shall notify the Superintendent immediately upon qualifying for election. He/she shall conduct his/her campaign so as not to interfere with his/her responsibilities. Personal leave without pay may be taken during the campaign period.

We noted that the Sarasota County School Board uses the word “refrain.” The word refrain is defined as “stop oneself from doing something.” It implies that teachers, librarians and school administrators self-govern themselves when it comes to promoting mis, dis and mal-information.

The following questions came to mind:

  1. Who is ensuring teachers, school staff and administrations are refraining?
  2. What is considered political literature?

We also found this on the Sarasota County School District’s Human Resources website page:

Equity Procedures for Employees/Applicants/Students

The Sarasota County School Board prohibits discrimination in its educational programs, services or activities, or employment conditions or practices on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, ethnic or national origin, genetic information, marital status, qualified disability defined under the ADAAA, or on the basis of the use of a language other than English, except as provided by law. The Sarasota County School Board also ensures equal access to school facilities for the Boy Scouts of America and other patriotic youth groups. Any person who believes he or she has experienced any such prohibited discrimination may file a complaint with the district Equity Coordinator Al Harayda by calling (941) 927-9000, ext. 31217, or writing him at 1960 Landings Blvd., Sarasota, Florida 34231.

Equity coordinator? Really? When we asked Craig Maniglia, Director Communications and Community Relations, how many non-binary, cis-gender, gender-queer, lesbian, gay or bisexual teachers and staff in the district he wrote, “Dr. Swier, We do not track that information.” Hmmmmm.

Contacting the Superintendent of Sarasota County Schools

We decided to contact Dr. Brennan Asplen the Superintendent of Sarasota County Public Schools. His office referred us to Craig Maniglia, Director Communications and Community Relations. We both called and emailed Mr. Maniglia our questions.

Here are the questions we asked the Sarasota County School District to answer:

  1. What action is taken if these individuals don’t refrain?
  2. What is the policy on teachers lying to their students?
  3. What is the policy on teachers teaching a political agenda in the classroom?
  4. What is the policy on librarians and teachers obtaining recommending or using pornographic materials or age inappropriate material in libraries and the classroom?
  5. What is the policy on librarians ordering pornographic or age inappropriate materials?
  6. What is the policy on suspending or firing teachers for doing any of the above?
  7. What is the policy of suspending or firing librarians for doing any of the above?
  8. What is the role of the school principal and superintendent in supervising these activities and where can I find them in School policies?
  9. Who specifically is responsible for policing the use of age inappropriate or pornographic materials in schools and libraries?
  10. Has the School Board or any school hosted an “Anti-Racism Fight Club” presentation by Doyin Richards? Does the district have in its classrooms or libraries the “Fist Book“?
  11. What after school clubs  approved by staff, are promoting political agendas?

We also asked Mr. Maniglia to provide references to School Board policies and documents to address each of these questions.

We are waiting for Mr. Maniglia’s replies and when we have them we will update this column.

Parents are challenging books in school libraries and classrooms in record numbers.  They’re objecting to sexually explicit content, profanity, anti-police messaging, and other left-wing indoctrination found in schoolbooks. The most-challenged books are “Gender Queer” and “Lawn Boy”, the latter a gay story normalizing sex acts between 4th-graders which has been criticized for encouraging pedophilia.

Understand that mis, dis and mal-information is propaganda writ large. Those teaching, promoting or ignoring this do so at the risk of harming children. It is child abuse!

We hope that the Sarasota County School Board, the Superintendent, principals, assistant principals, district staff all take notice.

©Dr. Rich Swier, Ed.D. All rights reserved.

References:

Teachers and the Law: Evolving Legal Issues

Legal Issues in Teaching

RELATED VIDEO: Nina Jankowicz: “Gender Disinformation is a Threat to National Security”

All Oregon Public Schools Must Declare the Right to ‘Menstrual Dignity, Sanitary Protection’ In Boys Bathrooms

/in , , , , , , , /by

Democrat Governor Brown thinks its crucial to have tampons available in elementary boys’ bathrooms. Insane.

Oregon forces all schools — elementary and up — to put ‘menstrual products’ in boys’ bathrooms with ‘instructions on how to use’ them

The law aims to ‘affirm the right to menstrual dignity for transgender, intersex, nonbinary, and two-spirit students.’

By: Phil Shiver, The Blaze, May 04, 2022

Every public school in Oregon — including elementary institutions — will soon be required to provide tampons and other feminine products in boys’ bathrooms with “instructions on how to use” them.

The controversial requirement is in accordance with the state’s new Menstrual Dignity Act, signed into law by Democratic Gov. Kate Brown last year, which mandates that menstrual products be made available in “every student bathroom.”

Following the bill’s passage, the Oregon Department of Education developed and distributed a “Medical Dignity for Students” toolkit to aid local districts and set forth a phased plan for districts to meet the law’s standards and requirements.

Read the full article.

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

With Disinformation Governance Board under fire, Biden’s handlers call in another disinformation peddler

/in , , , , , , , /by

These people can’t get out of their own way. They can search till doomsday for a “disinformation” chief who isn’t a purveyor of “disinformation” himself, and they won’t find one. It’s what they do. And of course they aren’t even really trying to find one, but just to give the appearance of propriety.

Homeland Security Pick To Clean Up ‘Disinfo Board’ Pushed Disinfo Himself

by Chuck Ross, Washington Free Beacon, May 5, 2022:

The Biden administration is calling in backup to bail out its Disinformation Governance Board just days after a disastrous launch. Their ringer is a former government official who blamed Russia for the Hunter Biden laptop story.

Department of Homeland Security chief Alejandro Mayorkas this week tapped former DHS secretary Michael Chertoff to advise the board. Its executive director, Nina Jankowicz, had come under fire after she asserted the release of Biden’s emails was a “Russian influence op.” Chertoff has made similar claims, arguing after the 2020 election that “human intelligence sources”—referring to Russian spies—likely obtained emails from Hunter Biden’s computer. Chertoff dismissed as “preposterous” the claim that the emails were recovered after Biden abandoned his laptop at a computer repair shop.

Chertoff’s appointment could signal more trouble for the board, which has come under intense scrutiny from Republicans. Critics have dubbed the board the “Ministry of Truth,” a nod to fears that it would enable the government to interfere with a free press. Republicans have criticized Jankowicz’s defense of the Steele dossier, the Democrat-funded opposition research that made false claims of a Trump-Russia collusion.

Mayorkas, citing “confusion” about the board’s role, requested the Homeland Security Advisory Council make recommendations for how his department could “effectively and appropriately address disinformation that poses a threat to the homeland.” He picked Chertoff, an advisory council member, and Washington, D.C., super lawyer Jamie Gorelick, the council’s co-chair, to oversee the initiative.

Two other members of the Homeland Security Advisory Council, former CIA director Leon Panetta and former representative Jane Harman (D., Calif.), also pushed the unfounded claim about Biden’s laptop….

Chertoff claimed in his dismissal of the Biden laptop story that Giuliani had “weaved a kind of preposterous story about getting this from a laptop that was left to be repaired.”

“But it looks like the evidence that’s emerging shows that these purported documents were circulating by the Russians in Ukraine for some period of time. This suggests that this information is not only online but it’s an old-fashioned spy story involving human intelligence sources,” said Chertoff, who served in the George W. Bush administration.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED VIDEO: Nina Jankowicz: “Gender Disinformation is a Threat to National Security”

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Half-Baked’: DHS Admitted Some Stunning Details About Its ‘Disinformation’ Board To Congress

Check out U.S. Ministry of Truth [@USMiniTru] a Twitter Parody Account that well, tells the truth

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

Blinken says U.S. will rejoin anti-Israel UNESCO, reopen ‘Palestinian’ consulate in Jerusalem

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The world is on fire, but Biden’s handlers are not too busy to enable and embolden the jihad.

Blinken: US will rejoin anti-Israel UNESCO, establish Palestinian consulate in Jerusalem

JNS, April 30, 2022:

Israel has no objection to an U.S. return to UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told Congress last week.

The United States officially withdrew from UNESCO on Dec. 31, 2018 under the Trump administration. The move reflected “U.S. concerns with mounting arrears at UNESCO, the need for fundamental reform in the organization, and continuing anti-Israel bias at UNESCO,” the State Department said in a statement at the time….

Blinken described concerns about the organization’s anti-Israel bias as understandable, but added, “I can say with authority that our partners in Israel feel the same way. They support our rejoining of UNESCO.” The United States should “shape the discussion, not someone else,” he said.

The secretary of state also reiterated the administration’s commitment to reopening the U.S. consulate in Jerusalem, a campaign pledge made by President Joe Biden.

“It’s something we are working on with the Israeli government,” he said. “I was in Ramallah just a few weeks ago and saw [Palestinian Authority] President [Mahmoud] Abbas, we talked about that among other things,” he added.

“As you know, we re-established support for the Palestinians a year ago January, including significant humanitarian and economic assistance that had been previously held back, we have reengaged them across the board, and the consulate is a piece of that,” he said.

“It does require, of course, coordination with and support from Israel, including, for example, providing privileges and immunities for the staff of the consulate-to-be, so it’s a work in progress.”…

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

European Court of Human Rights acknowledges that converts to Christianity face persecution in Pakistan

Hamas top dogs go to Moscow to discuss Jerusalem situation with Russian officials

Australia: Convicted jihad terrorist tries to kill fellow inmate with gardening shears she hid in her hijab

Conservative senator demands to know why man linked to jihad group is allowed to live in Canada

Hamas Leader Claims It Will ‘Determine the Outcome of the Next Campaign’

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

Food Banks Straining to Meet Demand Show the Real Human Cost of Progressive Policies

/in , , , , , , , /by

Families are seeing the pinch at home, but so too are the charities that pick up the grocery bill for those who can’t make ends meet.

Thanks to inflation, Americans increasingly cannot afford their grocery bills. Global food prices are projected to increase 23 percent this year, on top of the 30 percent they increased last year. And per usual, those already living on the margins are feeling the consequences the most.

Food banks are struggling to keep up with the increased demand they’re experiencing. Families are seeing the pinch at home, but so too are the charities that pick up the grocery bill for those who can’t make ends meet. Many are struggling to keep up with the increased demand on top of the increased cost of food.

Forgotten Harvest, which serves the metro Detroit area, said demand increased 25 to 45 percent since December. According to the Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index, grocery bills increased by 10 percent in March compared to the year before while restaurant charges went up by 6.9 percent.

Furthermore, Feeding America, one of the nation’s largest charities working to prevent hunger with over 200 food banks and 60,000 food pantries, reported 85 percent of their food banks saw increased demand for food assistance.

Tim Fetsch, the chief operating officer of the St. Louis Area Foodbank, which provides nearly 400,000 meals per year, told the Wall Street Journal, “We have had to work harder to secure the food needed to support the community.” He went on to explain that his organization is grappling with supply chain issues, increased transportation costs, and the increase in food prices. And he pointed out that while retail stores used to donate heavily to their program, they too are facing many of the same challenges.

For its part, Feeding America has begun purchasing its food for the first time to make up for the loss in donations. However, their President and Chief Operating Officer Katie Fitzgerald indicated that might not be a permanent solution, telling the Journal, “We’re still trying to purchase that food, but now it’s costing us 40 percent more.”

How do you say “we told you so” in progressive?

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the left has mocked those of us who said the response to the coronavirus might be worse than the disease itself. We were called grandma killers, selfish, idiots. (Never mind the fact that Democratic governors actually killed grandmas by sending infected patients back into nursing homes.)

But every step along the way we have been horribly right.

In March of 2020, we at FEE.org published a headline that read, “Panic Has Led to Government ‘Cures’ That Are Worse than the Disease, History Shows.”

While the New York Times called for more stimulus spending, Tyler Goodspeed (a Fellow at the Adam Smith Institute) wrote in The Hill, “Back to ’70s inflation? How Biden’s spending spree will hurt your wallet.” That was in July of 2021. The Washington Post was advocating lockdowns even as recently as this past December writing, “Lockdowns can be necessary to slow the spread of the coronavirus.” Meanwhile, my colleague at FEE.org has been presciently pointing to the unscientific nature of such claims—reporting all the way back in May of 2020, “Sweden’s Top Infectious Disease Expert Says COVID-19 Lockdowns Are Not Based on Science. History Shows He Could Be Right.”

It’s been like watching a car crash in slow motion while being unable to intervene and stop it.

The response to the coronavirus was worse than the disease, which has a less than 1 percent death rate for the vast majority of people, and for which a vaccine was quickly developed.

There are myriad repercussions we can point to that stemmed from lockdowns and stimulus spending: increases in domestic abuse, loss of education, an increase in poverty, staggering inflation, increases in hunger. The list goes on.

All of these repercussions were predictable and predicted by many who understand the tendency of central planning to generate adverse unintended consequences. Kids can’t just make up for years of learning lost. Trapping people in their homes can be dangerous when their living situation is unstable. Shutting down the economy was always going to lead to supply chain disruptions and shortages, while printing trillions of dollars is bound to lead to inflation.

Our government decided to be truly detached from economic reality and pursue both lockdowns and money printing—meaning you had a huge increase in dollars chasing a decreased number of goods. That’s the specific recipe for high inflation and anyone who didn’t say that all along should probably revisit basic economics.

And lastly, it was clear all along we would see an increase in poverty and hunger as a result of pushing people out of work, limiting the supply chain, and creating high inflation. All of this goes hand-in-hand.

This is yet another example of how the left’s policies hurt the very people they claim to stand for the most. It’s good to care about the poor, but we can’t help them if we don’t understand the economic factors that actually lead to prosperity. A bleeding heart paired with an economically illiterate mind never lifted anyone out of poverty.

Regrettably, those who were already on the margins in our society are being pummeled by the reckless policies of progressives. And let’s be clear, there were plenty of Republicans in the progressive camp as well. Many supported stimulus spending and even lockdowns. Trump himself and many of his supporters even tried to have Representative Thomas Massie (R, KY) kicked out of the GOP when he stood against stimulus spending in 2020.

But saying “I told you so” doesn’t feel good when there are real lives on the line. This story is a heartbreaking one that represents countless children and parents going to bed hungry tonight.

As economist Murray Rothbard once said, “It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”

Those who waged economic war on the American people over the last two years need to stand down and let entrepreneurs and workers rebuild our ravaged economy.

AUTHOR

Hannah Cox

Hannah Cox is the Content Manager and Brand Ambassador for the Foundation for Economic Education.

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

No Increase in Flight Cancellations After CDC Mask Mandate Lifted, Data Show

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Data suggest that fears of widespread cancellation of flights in the wake of the CDC mask mandate being lifted are baseless, thankfully.

It’s been two week since a federal court threw out the CDC’s transport mask mandate, to the glee of some and the outrage of others.

While many people—including flight attendants and passengers on planes—celebrated the court’s decision, others predicted the move would have dire consequences.

CBS News, for example, reported that European airlines were forced to “cancel hundreds of flights as they grapple with coronavirus-related staffing shortages weeks after they ditched rules requiring passengers and staff to mask up in the air.”

The news agency noted that UK airlines alone canceled 769 flights in total between March 31 and April 7 because of a shortage of flight crews due to illness. CBS quoted Eric Feigl-Ding, an epidemiologist and health economist, who said such outbreaks were needless and predictable.

“It’s very clear that the airline industry is particularly vulnerable, and this creates a cascading effect on society more than, say, a restaurant closing would,” Feigl-Ding said. “This is critical infrastructure and these are essential employees, and we’re endangering our economy. Stopping COVID is good for our economy, ‘letting it rip’ is the exact opposite.”

Few would disagree with Feigl-Ding that airlines are important infrastructure, but his claim that mask mandates are crucial to their success bears scrutiny.

First, it’s worth noting that the 769 UK flights canceled between March 31 and April accounted for just 4 percent of those flights, which means that 96 percent went off without a hitch. Even more importantly, a single airline—EasyJet—accounted for roughly 40 percent of the canceled flights.

This suggests the UK’s numbers were skewed to a large extent by a single outbreak that disrupted many flights. Whether a mask mandate would have prevented this outbreak from occurring is impossible to know. But what we do know is that similar cancellations—much larger ones, in fact—occurred when mask mandates were still in place, so the idea that such mandates can prevent cancellations is simply not true.

We also have fresh data on cancellations of US flights since the CDC’s mask mandate was lifted. One astute Twitter user analyzed the data, which can be found here, and pointed out that in the two weeks since the CDC’s mask order was struck on April 18, there was no widespread cancellation of flights.

On the contrary, the four largest airlines in the US—American Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and Southwest Airlines—all had a cancellation rate of 0 percent, as did JetBlue and Allegian. Frontier Airlines, meanwhile, had a cancellation rate of 1 percent, and Alaska Airlines had a cancellation rate of 7 percent. (Since the publication of the tweet, Alaska’s cancellation rate has fallen to 4 percent, and Delta’s has increased to 1 percent.)

The total number of canceled flights within, into, or out of the US in the past two weeks currently stands at 72—about 0.15 percent of the roughly 45,000 flights the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) oversees each day, on average.

To be sure, we’re still in a pandemic, at least in the sense that many people are still getting COVID-19, still getting sick, and still dying. This means that we can expect there will be times when flights are interrupted by spikes of illness.

That said, so far the data suggest that fears of widespread cancellation of flights in the wake of the mask mandate being lifted are baseless, thankfully.

In many ways, this should not surprise us.

Even mask champions like The New York Times have come around to the idea that cloth masks are not very effective against Covid, which is why many scientists have long doubted their efficacy. (And even if cloth masks are effective, are we really supposed to just overlook the fact that there’s a period of time on flights when patrons just remove them to eat and drink, which hardly seems like an effective virus containment strategy?)

None of this is to say masking isn’t or can’t be effective. Perhaps it is. But I think we have an abundance of evidence that shows mask mandates are not effective, and the absence of a surge in flight cancellations following the striking down of the mask mandate is one more piece of that evidentiary record.

All of this brings to mind a crucial lesson of economics. The Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman once observed that one of the biggest problems of the modern world is how we assess public policy.

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results,” Friedman noted.

There’s no better example of Friedman’s adage, I think, than masks, which became a symbol of supporting “the common good,” which is why so many people publicly vowed to continue wearing them even after the CDC policy requiring them on transportation was struck down.

If people wish to continue wearing masks to show they’re not “selfish” or because they believe it will protect them, they are of course perfectly free to do so. That’s the beauty of choice.

But how much pain could have been avoided during this pandemic if only we’d embraced the freedom of choice from the beginning, instead of succumbing to fear?

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.

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.

RELATED TWEET:

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