fox files

Kids Must Cry. Government schools have become day camps for indoctrinating a woke cadre.

Last week, the U.S. Department of Education awarded a coveted blue ribbon of excellence to Rota Elementary School, which serves children of military service members abroad in Spain. The DOE singled out Rota’s commitment to “families and educators work[ing] together in partnership.” But the “partnership” between teachers and parents that the DOE praises has a weird twist, as it appears to be rooted in keeping parents in the dark about classroom activities.

According to Rota teacher Genevieve Chavez, elementary school is the “ideal time” to introduce children to gender identity ideology because “kids as young as four years old are already starting to develop a stable understanding of their gender identity.” And once they hit middle school, according to Chavez, Rota will keep students’ alternative gender identities secret from their “unsafe” parents. So much for “families and educators work[ing] together in partnership.”

Chavez’s comments were part of the Department of Defense Education Activity’s (DoDEA) 2021 “Equity and Access Summit” video, which was the basis for Claremont’s recent report “Grooming Future Revolutionaries: Woke Indoctrination at K-12 Schools on America’s Military Bases.” The report covered how schools serving children of service members are peddling critical race theory, white-shaming, queer theory, and leftist activism to children. After the report was published, the videos were hidden from public view. But one aspect of DoDEA’s “Equity” agenda deserves further emphasis: the bizarre cruelty of the pedagogical practices that estrange children from their parents.

One practice highlighted in the conference was the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Let’s Talk!” toolkit, which encourages “critical conversations” that promote “intersectionality” and discuss “the ways that injustice affects our lives and society.” The “Let’s Talk!” toolkit prepares teachers for the inevitable moment when this exercise makes their students break down and cry. Normal pedagogical practice in America post-Dewey tends to avoid lesson plans that predictably result in tears.

But not under an “Equity” framework. Just as military bootcamps promise to break down recruits’ individuality to rebuild them as members of a corps, “Equity” pedagogy will decompose a student’s worldview to impose a new one. The Equity and Access Summit suggests that students and teachers can swear an oath to their new god. “My name is ____,” the program proposes, “and I have been impacted by systemic discrimination in society, and am committed to a lifelong journey of dismantling my own bias(es). I strive to thrive in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion every day!”

For the teachers at the summit, a key tool to re-orienting students’ souls to embrace DEI ideology was Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). In an exercise aptly called “crossing the line,” teacher Michelle Nipper explained that SEL can provide opportunities for “vulnerability” and “trust-building.” Students line up on one side of the room and take a step forward when the teacher prompt applies. The prompts range from silly to invasively serious, from “You like Fruity Pebbles,” to “You know someone who was thought about or attempted suicide,” and “You know someone affected by alcoholism.” Nipper also suggests asking students daily SEL questions, ranging from “What’s your favorite winter activity?” to “What does it mean to have a crush?” and, most importantly, “What is something your parents don’t know about you?”

One presenter emphasized the importance of gathering copious data for “Social and Emotional Wellness,” including daily “wellness check-ins” that would be stored and monitored over time to “see trends” in the emotional states of children and classrooms; another eagerly awaits the day that schools could use a brain-imaging device to see “objective data” from inside students’ minds. Data collected on students would be stored in perpetuity; parental consent to this brave new world was not addressed as an important concern.

Nor are families necessarily to be informed that some teachers are working to redefine the family itself. As one teacher, Ashley Kelley, put it “We don’t want to make them feel like family has this very nuclear, traditional sense … we wanted them to understand that family doesn’t mean we share blood, family means we share love.” And when “love” can be redefined in political terms to mean anything, then “family” is up for grabs.

We cannot say on the basis of these videos alone how widespread this ideological mania is within schools serving the children of American military service members. But DoDEA’s schools clearly contain a radical core of teachers who are operating with the blessing of its top brass. In 2021, DoDEA leadership announced a new DEI division, stating “we must not simply celebrate diversity, equity, and inclusion, it must be actively pursued for all our students and employees. It must be a foundational premise in every aspect of our organization.”

When Republicans retake either house of Congress, a top priority should be to haul DoDEA’s leaders in front of committees, take them to task for the politicization of education, and pass a bill providing federal funding for children to opt out of DoDEA schools. But there is a broader lesson here for all American parents. More and more public schools are prioritizing “equity,” an ill-defined word that can provide space and support for the radicalization of education. School leaders must eschew this buzzword, and parents must be on guard against it, lest it transform schools from institutions that work in loco parentis—in the place of parents—into institutions that work against them.

Max Eden and Scott Yenor

The communists meant well, you dope

All you primitive folks who think communism was evil, tsk tsk! The communists meant well!

The former political director of a state-level chapter of the Libertarian Party, which has since been recaptured by normal people, wrote this:

Someone in a Supporting Listeners group came back with this retort:

That comment alone kills him, but Woods can’t resist a few swings of his own rhetorical baseball bat.

This person’s thesis: the USSR was not evil, but simply wrong in good faith.

Now note: this same person considers Woods to be flat-out evil.

You’ve got to believe folks: Woods is not genuinely trying not to be evil. After all, here are his totals:

Famines caused by Woods: 0
Famine deaths caused by Woods: 0
Gulags opened by Woods: 0
People imprisoned in gulags by Woods: 0
Political executions by Woods: 0
Political purges by Woods: 0
Books banned by Woods: 0

Pretty good, huh?

Nope.

Woods, says our friend, is an evil, “racist,” “white supremacist” (yes, he has even said this, so we may well be dealing with outright mental illness here), and “neo-Confederate.”

But the USSR? Why, they were “wrong in good faith”!

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn had a bit to say about the nature of the Soviet regime, I might add, but something tells me this person would consider Solzhenitsyn, rather than his captors, to be the evil one.

They just wanted to improve conditions for the working class, you see. Sure, they went about it the wrong way, but their motives were pure.

Do you detect a slight — slight, I say — naivete and slight of hand there?

The Bolshevik Revolution gave rise almost instantly to a one-party state with suppression of dissent, summary executions, concentration camps (with some 70,000 inmates by the time of Lenin’s death in early 1924), a concerted state campaign against religion, terror against the countryside — and on and on.

Not to mention a secret police sixteen times as large as anything the tsar had ever built.

And that’s not to mention the far worse atrocities that came later.

Hey, Ukrainians, we’re carrying out collectivization in a way that’s bound to starve millions of you to death, but honey, don’t you dare forget that our hearts are in the right place. Smooch!

Read Harvest of Sorrow by Robert Conquest, and see what was done to those people. Then consider that an outspoken so-called libertarian, who accuses the whole world of fascism and “white supremacy” (a term that to my mind instantly discredits its user), thinks this was not an evil regime.

This is the great moral exemplar who presumes to lecture the libertarian movement.

This is the same person who said it would be a “huge stretch” to call Murray Rothbard an Austrian School economist. I’ll bet Murray Rothbard, too, is to be considered more evil than the USSR.

That’s just mind-bogglingly idiotic.

Whose price theory, production theory, interest theory, business-cycle theory, and monetary theory did Rothbard hold and promote, if not the Austrian?

Not to mention: Henry Hazlitt himself matter-of-factly described Rothbard as a member of the Austrian School, and one who in fact failed to appreciate his own significance.

Hayek, too, said Rothbard was clearly working in the Austrian tradition, as did Mises.

So we are dealing with a special kind of dumb vortex of stupid here — or someone more brilliant than Hazlitt, Hayek, and Mises. I don’t know about you, but I’m going with Option 1.

In the meantime, inside the Woods Show Elite, they have a special slicer used on arguments and claims like these — namely, the collective intelligence of the amazing folks inside.

The wickedness of communist regimes shouldn’t be a controversial issue among libertarians, now should it?

Letter to SalesForce CEO marc jerkoff, er benioff

Attn.:  marc benioff

Since you’ve decided to go woke, leftist, pro-abortion, telling people to kill babies in the womb and leaving Indiana because of Christian morals, principles and moral brakes, good people and I say that’s great.  Go.  And take your politics with you.  Good riddance already. C’ya later.  They’re not gonna’ surgically attach their lips to your big ass.  

But China.  China you love.  You know.  The country with their forced abortion policies, imprisonment of muslim uyghurs, the surveillance state, political tortures and imprisonments.  Yea.  Yea, that one.

I say to anyone who does support life and real true heartbeats, marc benioff doesn’t want ‘ur business apparently and I will be certain to get that info out as far, wide and quickly as I can and having been a user of the product and others like Sage Act! and others, I have the reach to do so.  Enough to get the word out.  More than enough vehicle to do so.

Worse, while on cnn, the cartoon nut network, you speak about a state that has under Pence, enacted a religious freedom law so people can’t be attacked for their faith and be forced to do things against their religion, but YOU somehow hilariously turned that into something against your woke lgbtiqfyzgh etc., et, el sicko ‘friends’ community; notice how you did that.  not a protection against an attack against Christians.  See how you so ‘tactfully’ did that.  *Rhetorical

If you’re a person of faith and you support not killing babies in the womb, you don’t want those kind of customers.  YOU said it.  YOUR words; not mine jerkoff, er, ah, I mean benioff.  Why people would ever use your product is beyond belief.  You and your company don’t deserve their money.  At all.

Applause benioff.  Applause.  You just single-handedly showed ‘ur ass to who you really are senator.  Just a great move.  Applause.

WaPo Attacks Libs of TikTok Again, This Time for Not Policing Their Most Ridiculous Reporter

The drama between the Wasington Post and Libs of TikTok (LoTT) is never ending. It is clear that the leftist rag wants the Twitter user to win.

Although the Bezo’s ‘news’ source is owned by Bezos, it clearly harbors a grudge. However, it’s their fault. WaPo has never recovered from the reputational damage Taylor Lorenz tried to cause to it by trying to sink it through a hit piece in which she showed up at LoTT’s homes. Lorenz continues to dig the same hole that she dug for the site.

Lorenz, for example, is still trying to sink LoTT, but she’s failing miserably. It would seem that LoTT’s editors are also having trouble controlling Lorenz. WaPo editors almost put the burden on LoTT to ensure that their reporter has accurate facts.

LoTT published a DM conversation with WaPo Silicon Valley correspondent Elizabeth Dwoskin about a Post article that mentioned a hospital which was said to have been evacuated because of threats it received over a LoTT post. Only the hospital was not evacuated. Lorenz asked LoTT about Dwoskin’s hospital activities, but LoTT just recited the story without any confirmation.

Hilariously, LoTT confronted Dwoskin over the lie and Dwoskin claimed that LoTT was responsible for the error, not Lorenz. Dwoskin tried to make LoTT accountable for Lorenz’s reporting and policing, but not herself nor WaPo’s editors.

There is no better example of the extent to which the Washington Post, and the rest of the mainstream media, have fallen. Although journalists are human beings, it is important for them to apologize for major errors.

But here is a major publication holding the hated subject responsible for its reporting accuracy. This is the WaPo’s current behavior. It cannot be considered a news source. It is a gossip magazine that holds grudges against individuals.

WaPo must start paying its subjects if it wants to hold them responsible for the accuracy and reliability of the reports it publishes.

What the ‘lizard’ people mean by ‘democracy’

If there’s one thing — other than the Covid shots, that is — that we’re lectured about 24 hours a day, it’s ‘democracy.’

Oh, our elites can’t get themselves enough democracy!

They are deeply concerned about following the will of the people, you understand.

But as what is already well known, the Progressive Era in the United States has not been so much about ‘democracy’ as it has been about transitioning toward a so-called expert direction of society, albeit with a veneer of democracy. What mattered to the Progressives was that they themselves were ultimately in charge.

This is how their modern counterparts can say, in all seriousness, that they’re “saving democracy” even when they’re sabotaging officials who won democratic elections. In case it sounds like they’re contradicting themselves, they’re really not. They are democracy. They and their colleagues and cronies and so-called experts are democracy, and the stupid rubes who won’t just bend the knee to them and do as they say are the enemies of democracy.

Have a future in mind that doesn’t involve crippling energy prices, eating bugs, having your kids brainwashed, and watching central banks siphon away your wealth? Why, you may be a danger to ‘democracy,’ citizen.

As Sam Francis wrote back in 2004, “What they mean by ‘democracy’ is nothing more than the system of dominance that came to prevail in the United States and the Western world in the last half of the last century.  That system has nothing to do with elections, opposition parties, civil and political rights, or ‘liberty,’ nor does it have anything to do with political theory, ancient or modern. ‘Democracy,’ as the neocons and the President and most others who are enthusiastic about it use the word, means the centralized leviathan state under the firm and unqualified control of the managerial bureaucracy and those political forces able to influence it.”

So to review: democracy means rule by a self-identified elite, or people endorsed by that elite.

I present to you the most recent example of this phenomenon, this one from Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission.

She recently said, referring to Italy, “We’ll see if things go in a difficult direction — I have spoken of Hungary and Poland — we have tools.”

In other words: sorry, people, but if you vote for parties we dislike, we’ll sanction you. That’s ‘democracy’! (Of course, our elites don’t dislike left-wing parties no matter how much wreckage or destruction they cause.)

Oh, and incidentally, try to make sense of this: the sacred ‘people’ are supposed to be capable of choosing among political candidates, but they are evidently incapable of choosing among ideas, which is why the federal government — which loves democracy, remember — spent the Covid panic suppressing dissident voices, generally through pressure on Big Tech (which was all too happy to go along).

Incidentally, there are ways to avoid the privacy problems and censorship of Big Tech, but most people either don’t know how or don’t know where to start and that’s a topic for another time.

WORLD DOMINATION SERIES – PART 1 of 7

Is there really an agenda for world domination?

Since the beginning of time, power hungry madmen have attempted to seize control over the entire world. The desire to rule all of humanity is as old as humanity itself.

Egyptian pharaohs, Asian emperors, European warlords, Roman emperors, Russian tsars, and British kings waged relentless wars, trying to gain absolute power over the rest of humanity. One world empire succeeded the other: the Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Roman, Chinese, Spanish, British empires all had one goal: conquer the nations, and if possible… rule the entire world.

The age old desire for world domination is one of the most basic realities in the history of humanity.

Many people in our time have however been led to believe that the dark desire to rule the world has somehow miraculously disappeared. Nothing could be further from the truth. This diabolical lust is more alive and dangerous today, than ever before. New technologies and the all encompassing mind control by the omnipresent news media is creating unprecedented opportunities to enslave the entire human race, without most people even realizing it.

In the past, invading other nations was hard: iron clashed against iron, and every blast was answered with an even louder blast. Today the game has changed. In order to conquer the world, there is no longer a need for swords and spears, or guns and rockets.

All the invaders need to do, is tell the world that a terrible danger is threatening everybody, and most people will immediately surrender all their rights and freedoms, in order to feel “safe”.

After World War II the nazis were prosecuted during the historic Nuremberg trials. Judges were puzzled by the fact that Hitler had been able to get the support from the majority of the German people, for his insane mass murdering of millions of innocent people. Hitler’s right hand, Hermann Goring, explained how they did it:

“It’s easy. All you have to do, is tell them they are being attacked, and… they will follow their leader. This works in every nation.” Basically Goring said: simply make the people afraid, and they will do whatever you want, in order to feel safe again.

The tool to make the entire world terrified of some “terrible danger” is the news media. With news media you can control exactly what the public thinks. A synonym for news media is mind control. It’s essentially the same.

Most people brainlessly believe anything they see on the news.

Let the news tell the masses a dangerous virus threatens them, and they throw themselves at your feet, willing to do anything you demand, to keep them “safe”. Even drive around in their car, all by themselves, wearing a dirty, bacteria infested cloth on their face that keeps pure air out, and toxic air in. They even bring you their babies, and beg you to please inject them with an experimental, untested, gene altering cocktail of different toxins.

People will literally do anything, no matter how devastating it is to the well being of themselves, their beloved ones, and their fellow citizens, as long as it goes along with the hypnotizing mantra “this will keep you safe”.

Because of this, it has become a piece of cake for criminal rulers to submit the masses to their fingertips of totalitarian control. Especially because they have full control over all mainstream media. They acquired it for this very reason:

to have the ability to invade the mind of mankind and mold it exactly according to their agenda.

What is the supreme level of brainwashing?

Although the lust for world domination has been the common theme throughout history, in our day the mind control has reached the supreme level where it has led many to entirely reject the idea that there could be a plan to rule the world.

“Hahaha, that’s a conspiracy theory”, they echo loudly, brainlessly repeating what “the Lord of the News” told them.

Those who know history, are stunned by such display of stupidity, yet it is the perception of the majority of the public. Explain how powerful people with boundless financial resources are planning to dominate the world, and many will give you a blank stare… as if you just claimed the moon is one giant ball of vanilla ice cream.

The supreme level of brainwashing is when an entire population calls the most basic realities of human history a “conspiracy theory”.

To be continued…

Top scientist writes book: The Year the World Went Mad

Joe Biden declared the pandemic over a few days ago, and that made some people very unhappy.

I look at it this way: without a doubt we are at the stage now where what matters most is making sure we get the story of what happened right, so future generations are not misled.

Mark Woolhouse, one of Scotland’s top infectious disease epidemiologists, just released The Year the World Went Mad: A Scientific Memoir. It’s certainly a step in the right direction.

I thought I’d share bits and pieces with you (I’ve preserved the UK spelling):

“My main aim in writing this book is that lockdown scepticism will become the mainstream view.”

“There is comfort in following the crowd even while it is stampeding in the wrong direction. We wouldn’t let go of lockdown even after the evidence of the harm it was causing became so compelling that the WHO itself came to reject it.”

“The advisory system was dominated by clinicians and public health specialists who weren’t looking at the bigger picture, such as economists, ethicists…which is why they kept recommending lockdown…. The response was being driven too much by epidemiology, and I’m an epidemiologist.”

“Richard Horton — editor of the Lancet — and others continued to rail against their straw man version of a herd immunity strategy…the debate descended into farce…like the tide, herd immunity happens whether you believe in it or not.”

“Lockdown was never going to solve the problem, it just deferred it to another day, and it did so at great cost…everyone needs to understand what such a harmful intervention can and cannot achieve before we introduce it. They didn’t.”

“Lockdown was conceived by the WHO and China as a means of eradicating the virus once and for all from the face of the earth. With hindsight, this plan was doomed to fail from the outset.”

“During the pandemic, several politicians adopted the position that ‘no death from covid is acceptable’…. This made it impossible to tackle the virus in a rational manner…. We do not treat any other public health issue this way.”

“Will the cure turn out to be worse than the disease?… As early as April 2020, ONS used quality adjusted life years (QALY) lost to weigh harms and benefits…. The best estimate was three times more harm…we got the balance wrong.”

“As far back as March 2020 there was evidence from China that outdoor transmission was extremely rare…. To my knowledge, no outbreaks have been linked to a beach anywhere in the world, ever.”

“The average age of death in the UK is 78 years old…. The average age of death from covid-19 up to October 2020 was 80 years…. I’d say that was a reasonable definition of a disease of old age.”

“Even more important: never rely on a single model…. Many people believed [the UK fall 2020 lockdown] occurred on the basis of a ‘dodgy dossier’ — a term used in the build up to the Iraq War in 2003.”

“I was not prepared for the hate mail either, as vicious as any I received throughout the pandemic…. People who spent the past year indoors did not want to be told that it had been safe to go out all along…. Decision-makers had lost all sense of proportion.”

An interesting book, as you can see.

And it reminds us of all the looniness from “public health” officials and even from your local doctor, who more often than not endorsed these measures. Your local doctor to this day thinks he’s saving lives by separating the “clean” pens from the used pens.

Who can blame all those people who watched this spectacle and reached the obvious conclusion that if the medical establishment could take such consistently irrational and destructive decisions, that maybe there’s something rotten at the heart of it?

At the very least, there are today a lot more people in favor of medical freedom for themselves than there were three years ago.

Some of them aren’t really sure what to do next, whether or how they should speak up without alienating people close to them.

NYT 2012

Wait. What? This is the NYT. Leftist as can be.
What’s changed since 2012?

I will tell you what’s changed. Then it was elderly and overseas troops who were both Conservatives and it didn’t fit the liberal narrative back then.

Just as illegal minorities now flooding the country will over a generation or two turn Conservatives, leftists at that time will suddenly turn on open borders.

YOU JUST WATCH IF YOU LIVE LONG ENOUGH!

Huh!!!??? WHAT!!!???

Smoking gun? FDA refusing to provide key covid ‘vaccine’ safety analyses, suggesting massive coverup

Government regulators at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) say they will not release any of the agency’s Covid-19 “vaccine” safety analyses for independent review because their findings are allegedly part of internal discussions that are protected by law.

Back in July, The Epoch Times submitted a request to the FDA for all analyses performed using a special method called Empirical Bayesian data mining. This method involves comparing adverse events recorded after injection with a Fauci Flu shot to adverse events recorded after injection with some other non-covid vaccine.

Whatever data these analyses produced was used by the FDA to foist Chinese Virus shots on everyone, including infants and toddlers. (Related: Check out our earlier coverage about the FDA’s suspicious secrecy to learn more.)

The operational procedures laid out by the agency and its partner in January 2021 and February 2022 stipulate that the FDA is to perform data mining “at least biweekly,” if not more often than that, to identify adverse events “reported more frequently than expected following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines.” That data was to come from the official Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Fast-forward to today and the FDA is now refusing to release any information about this data mining, claiming an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that allows governments to withhold inter-agency and intra-agency memorandums and letters “that would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency.”

The FDA also cited the Code of Federal Regulations, which states that “all communications within the Executive Branch of the Federal government which are in written form or which are subsequently reduced to writing may be withheld from public disclosure except that factual information which is reasonably segregable in accordance with the rule established in § 20.22 is available for public disclosure.”

Why doesn’t the FDA want us to see its covid injection data?

The FDA is refusing to release even redacted versions of the data, which strongly suggests that the agency has a lot to hide. It really, really does not want the public to see these analyses, presumably because they expose Fauci Flu shots as dangerous and ineffective.

“The secrecy is unacceptable for an agency that said it is transparent with the public about vaccine safety,” says Kim Witzcak, co-founder of the non-profit advocacy group Woodymatters, which wants the FDA to be stronger and more transparent.

“What’s the point of having VAERS if you’re not releasing it to the public?”

Witzcak, who also sits on one of the FDA’s outside advisory panels, says her own concerns about the injections are also highlighted in a recent paper from Dr. Joseph Fraiman, which identified higher rates of serious adverse events in people who took the mRNA (messenger RNA) shots from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna versus those who took a placebo.

“If this data is available, shame on you for not making it known to the public,” Witczak said about that data. “It’s as if they don’t trust the people to make their own best decision for what’s good for them and their families.”

The Times says it is appealing the FDA’s decision to withhold the analytical data, which will hopefully at some point in the future force the agency to comply with the request.

“Hiding the evidence … again,” wrote a Times commenter about the FDA’s shady behavior.

“Didn’t your parents warn you not to trust the government?” asked another. “The swamp is a cesspool. Power corrupts people. Term limits are desperately needed.”

The latest news about the corrupt FDA can be found at FDA.news.

The fall of luciferian-dominated Western Civilization is a highly disruptive but NECESSARY step for human progress: Life, liberty and freedom hang in the balance

Today’s Situation Update podcast (below) reveals a stunning truth: Nearly all the institutions of modern Western Civilization are holding back humanity from progress, truth, liberty and happiness. Almost without exception, every Western institution — government, media, entertainment, sports, education, finance, tech, science, medicine and more — has been overtaken by anti-human, luciferian forces that push policies rooted in pure evil:

• Child grooming, pedophilia and transgenderism maiming
• Satanism and luciferin indoctrination
• Transhumanism
• Anti-human depopulation
• Mass censorship and the suppression of human knowledge and truth (Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc.)
• Mass poisoning of humanity through toxic food, toxic medicine and toxic fake news
• Mass obedience and authoritarian control over individuals’ actions
• Mass surveillance / total invasion of privacy and the right to be left alone
• The dismantling of food resources (hunger / starvation / scarcity) that keep human civilization fed
• The dismantling of energy resources that keep human economies functioning
• Engineered bioweapons labeled “vaccines” that are designed to achieve global genocide
• Attacks on family values, White men, straight couples, reason, rationality and normalcy
• Attacks on the biosphere / geoengineering (see my recent bombshell interview with Dane Wigington here)

The White House is now hiring straight-up satanist homosexuals like Demetre Daskalakis, whose photos are featured below. He wears leather S&M bondage gear in the shape of the satanic pentagram star, and he has tattoos depicting luciferin themes. He is depicted in photos implying he has sex with other homosexuals who self-identify as animals. The White House obviously knew all this before they hired him which means they want you to know you are being ruled by luciferin homosexuals.

Yes, you are being ruled by a homosexual monkeypox ambassador that goes by the name, “Nastypig Hero.”

In case you were looking for a gay sailor hypnosis therapy doctor, he can also do that. Perhaps the CDC is hiring:

That is one sick puppy… almost literally, as some of these homosexual freaks ‘identify’ as animals as part of their sex rituals:

The monkeypox doctor will see you now… no doubt the NIH will provide millions in funding for his ‘research’ into monkeypox transmission vectors:

There are no words for this one. Is it the Gay Green Goblin on a Spiderman bike? Remember, it was Joe Biden’s choice to put this man in the White House administration:

Here’s a photo composition that’s been circulating, showing what in my opinion is a cabal of perverts and freaks that now represent the illegitimate Biden White House, which looks something like “Satan’s Evil Avengers.” (The “admiral” on the left is so mentally ill, he thinks he’s a woman, and currently one-fourth of Democrats actually believe men can get pregnant…)

Is it any surprise that the Biden regime is also pushing child mutilations, pedophilia, sodomy and indoctrination of children in public schools?

You need to understand, what you see here is also present in Canada (Trudeau), the UK, Germany, France, Australia, Ukraine, etc. Nearly all the nations of Western Civilization are run by demonic freaks and perverts who despise humanity and who worship Satan. They are no longer hiding it. The demons have come out for all the world to see.

Do not cry as the demon-infested institutions of Western Civilization collapse into ruin

The more you understand the level of pure satanic evil that has infested the governments and institutions of Western Civilization, the easier it is to realize that their collapse is a necessary step for humanity to ever be free from their reign of evil.

Humanity will never be free (or sane) as long as these freaks, perverts, demons and child-grooming lunatics remain in charge. The coming collapse of Western Europe’s demonic governments (and fake fiat currencies) is actually a blessing for the world. That doesn’t mean there won’t be suffering, because there most certainly will be. But the demise of this luciferin global control cartel is absolutely necessary for the re-founding and rebuilding of human societies rooted in Christian principles, family values and honest money.

There is no reforming this system from within, by the way. It can only be dismantled and replaced. Fortunately for all of us who are pro-human, pro-Christian advocates for life and liberty, the luciferin-dominated Western nations are dismantling themselves with policies of economic suicide. They are cutting off their own energy supplies, food supplies and infrastructure. They are demanding the end of human civilization via “green” energy policies and LGBT mutilations of children, combined with genocidal bioweapons “vaccines” and the mass poisoning of the world through pesticides, herbicides and chemtrails.

They are so maniacally insane and arrogant, they don’t yet realize they have already set wheels in motion that will destroy the entire West, taking down governments, central banks and institutions that are all rooted in demonism and anti-human agendas. They are going to achieve their own destruction. Meanwhile, those who prepare to survive the implosion will make it through the hell being unleashed on our planet, positioning themselves to help re-found and rebuild human society after the collapse of the current luciferin system.

Only the prepared will survive, while the oblivious degens will be deprecated

“Degens” are degenerates. “Deprecated” means to be removed after being rendered obsolete.

In other words, get ready for the total collapse of Western Civilization on a truly Biblical scale, because that’s exactly where this is headed. And it will be a blessing for humanity to finally see the pillars of satanism and perversion crash and burn, allowing God-honoring champions of life and liberty to structure a whole new civilization rooted in reason and individual freedom.

It’s time to lock up the groomers and child mutilators. Send them to prison for life. Dismantle the systems of tyranny and lawlessness that threaten humanity’s future. Restore the freedom to farm, the freedom to speak and the freedom to dissent. Humanity is on the cusp of both its most devastating — and promising — pivot point in history. What matters most is how we deal with the crisis that is being engineered: Do we surrender to tyranny, or do we take a stand for the future of human freedom?

The choice is ours. For me, I choose God and freedom.

The so-called ‘fact checker’ scam

One of the most laughable developments of recent years has been the rise of the ‘fact-checker(s).’

The ‘fact-checker’, in the fantasy version, is a nonpartisan, dispassionate expert who wants to prevent people from being misled.

In the planet-Earth version, the ‘fact checker’ is a hyper-partisan little snot-nosed fanatic kid sitting in his mommy’s basement with a Hot Pocket who wants to prevent people from entertaining thoughts at odds with the narrative the regime is trying to present.

One of the worst run-in’s with a ‘fact-checker’ happened, when else, in 2020. Speaker Tom Woods had given a 20-minute talk called “The COVID Cult” at a Ron Paul event outside Houston.

In those 20 minutes, he packed in as much common sense about the situation as possible, along with a bunch of charts that looked the opposite of how they should have if the alleged ‘mitigation measures’ did any good.

That video took off. By the time Big Tech banned it, it had 1.5 million views.

When they banned it, they rubbed salt in the wound with one of their absurd ‘fact checks.’

Mr. Woods devoted episode #1782 of the Tom Woods Show to refuting it.

Here’s a sample.

First, they sure didn’t like his mask charts!

Most of those charts showed one key thing: if you take an individual country, look at its graph of ‘cases’, and then tried to guess where the mask mandate went into effect, you’d have always been wrong. It’s entirely random.

It’s not like (1) there are lots of cases, then (2) at the top there’s a mask mandate, and then (3) the cases went away. It was just random and that’s all it was.

The ‘fact checkers’ thought Woods was comparing one country with another, and said that there were many factors other than masks that account for the differences. Well, duh. But most of his presentation wasn’t comparing one country with another. It was comparing countries with themselves.

(Although you’d better believe that if the charts showed masked countries doing better, Facebook would have cited that against him without any of this concern for subtlety.)

And the point is this: the CDC director at that time was obviously full of it when he said that 4-6 weeks of mask wearing would get so-called ‘cases’ way down. Even Michael Osterholm, on Joe Biden’s COVID team, called the remark “unfortunate” (which is academic-speak for complete bullshit).

Also in his talk he made oblique reference to the Great Barrington Declaration, a statement authored by scientists from Oxford, Stanford, and Harvard, and co-signed by countless more experts and citizens, calling lockdowns a public health fiasco and recommending instead a “focused protection” approach that would have allowed the young to resume their lives while still protecting the older and elderly.

The entirety of the ‘fact check’ on this was that some public health officials had said that it was a bad idea.

There’s controversy about it, so that makes it wrong!

Woods further said that the public health establishment had been silent on the collateral damages of lockdown. This is wrong, he was told. Then why hadn’t he seen, buried in paragraph 15, the World Health Organization saying something about it in September?

September! Six months after the fiasco started, they finally made the tiniest acknowledgment of the damage, and that merits a ‘fact check’??????

The Woke Cure for Children of Divorce

Two paradigm-smashing progressives insist that Americans “became convinced” that divorce is bad for kids. There’s so much wrong here. There’s no convincing here. It IS bad for the children. Period.

I recently learned of a certain article that appeared in Slate: “How Americans Became Convinced Divorce Is Bad for Kids.” The piece, by Gail Cornwall and Scott Coltrane, is a disjointed attempt to promote the “woke” theory that divorce itself—the direct dismantling of a child’s family—does not harm children long-term.

What is the real culprit, then? The authors tell us directly:

Most of the problems associated with being a child of divorce are instead related to sexism, racism, homophobia, shoddy recordkeeping, and insufficient government support.

The authors throw in everything but the kitchen sink and include over sixty links (except to my works cited) to make their case. For brevity’s sake, I will respond with three simple points.

1. The implication of the article is wrong.

Even the title assumes too much. Let’s back up and ask the obvious: have Americans become convinced that divorce is bad for kids? In all my work against divorce, I see the opposite.

Certainly, there was a time when Americans believed that divorce harms children, but those days are long gone. Since the Sexual Revolution, which spawned The Divorce Fantasy World, Americans have been taught that divorce is not bad for kids, that “Kids are resilient!” and “Kids are happy when their parents are happy!” The internet is flooded with “joyful co-parenting” photos and articles. Despite this ubiquitous cultural message, the authors insist there’s a “shared understanding” by Americans that children suffer long-term after their parents’ divorce.

We can test their theory by going to the pulse of the culture, which is social media. Try writing the following on any mainstream women’s Facebook group or media comment section: “People in unhappy marriages should stay together for the sake of their kids, because divorce harms children.” You will soon—and loudly—have your answer about where America stands on this issue.

The voices that claim that divorce is harmful to children are so few that one wonders if articles like the one in Slate are really about quashing the last dying gasp of a nation’s guilty conscience.

Interestingly, the authors themselves seem to admit by the end of their piece that their premise is untenable:

You may have noticed that we haven’t been able to cite any research to support the idea that the majority of us still mistakenly believe divorce commonly does irreparable harm to kids. That’s because the question isn’t asked by nonpartisan national surveys anymore.

And that brings me to the second point:

2. The article is largely an anti-Christian hit piece.

The authors claim they can’t provide evidence for their thesis because wide-scale research on the effects of divorce on children ended decades ago. Why ended, you ask? The authors blame conservative Christians:

The [narrative] influenced by sexism, racism, homophobia, and other types of fear prevailed. . . . As a result of the way the Christian right was able to frame—and effectively close—the policy debate, national solutions have focused on individuals’ decisions and bolstering the institution of marriage: choose the right spouse. Go to couples [sic] therapy. All but ignored is the government’s opportunity and obligation to families.

The authors decry the “conservative ‘family values’ movement” for running “pro-marriage PR campaigns” that were “deeply homophobic,” because they “promoted heterosexual marriage with funding from conservative groups.” They lament: “If national policy were based on research rather than zealotry, we would invest in children’s well-being” (emphasis mine).

There you have it! “We”—i.e., the government, through “progressive” policies and social programs—could quickly and effectively end the suffering of the children of divorce, if only the racist, sexist, homophobic conservative-zealot Christians would get out of the way and let the children be well.

Forget for a moment that the authors appear to be wholly unfamiliar with Natural Law philosophy or the fact that marriage as conjugal union (“bride-groom” presupposes “bride”) has been about the begetting and rearing of children in every pre-Christian, non-Christian, and even atheist society since time immemorial. Forget that marriage is the most ancient of human relationships, pre-political, pre-nation-state, and that its nature and purpose was not invented by the modern American “Christian right.”

Even on its face, the authors’ claim that conservative Christians are the problem here doesn’t hold water. After all, the one researcher with whom the authors take the most issue, and whose seminal research they equate with “zealotry,” is Dr. Judith Wallerstein—a Jewish professor who taught at leftist Berkeley, and who was herself surprised at the devastating findings of her own long-term study.

The intimate and primal bond of mother-father-child is not a modern construct dreamed up for American culture wars. Men and women of every place and time have always come together in lifelong marriage, and children have always been the natural fruit of marriage. Children have a natural right to be raised by their married mother and father, and to deny that is not a slap against the “Christian right” as the authors might believe; it’s a slap against Natural Law, human reason, and the collective human understanding and experience from time immemorial.

This brings me to my final point:

3. Are we losing our humanity?

Are we at the point where we believe that government— through bureaucrats, policy wonks, and social workers—can substitute for intimate human relationships? Can “good recordkeeping,” feminist activism, and LGBT ideology heal broken hearts and despairing spirits when a child’s mom and dad have stopped loving each other?

The authors believe that with the right government assistance and policies, the children of divorce will become as “successful” as children from intact families. But the “success” we see and measure on the outside can be deceptive. I hear this sentiment repeatedly from the adult children of divorce:

The kids may grow up to be successful, like I did, but the psychological damage will always occur in the child…You can’t tear up a child’s foundation of security (which is their parents’ marriage) and expect them to be fine.

The “successes” of school and career were, in part, because I felt the pressure to have it all together, since the rest of my life was so unstable.

I didn’t just lose parents, I also lost siblings, nieces, and nephews. My entire nuclear family disintegrated. Yet if you knew me only as a professional, you wouldn’t have any idea of what utter catastrophe my nuclear family represents in my world.

Yes, we may go on to live successful lives, but with a lot of baggage. For me personally, that means a past that still haunts me to this day.

It’s hard to fathom an authentically human argument that would suggest government programs and leftist politics as a cure for the loss of a family. I’m sure that our “progressive” authors realize that the profound grief of a widower, an abandoned spouse, or a mother who has lost her child can’t be made right by any form of bureaucracy, and so I pray that they will extend that realization to the long-term grief of the children of divorce as well.

Because in the end, the authors’ beef is not with “sexist, racist, homophobic” boogeyman Christians who oppose good recordkeeping, thwart sound research, and block government “services.” In the end, their beef is with the natural order of human relationships and God’s order of things.