thelibertybeacon--2020-06-26--Let’s fact-check Reuters: they say DNA Vaccines don’t change your genetic makeup—true or false?

As my readers know , I ’ ve been reporting on new types of technology that could be used in a coming COVID-19 vaccine—and warning about the consequences .
One such technology is : DNA vaccines .
They would alter recipients ’ genetic makeup permanently .
But Reuters has seen fit to claim : “ A future COVID-19 [ DNA ] vaccine will not genetically modify humans.
” This comes from their “ fact-check team ” — May 18 , 2020 : “ False claim : A COVID-19 vaccine will genetically modify humans.
” To reach this conclusion , Reuters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a visiting fellow at Cornell University ’ s Alliance for Science group ” , and “ Dr .
Paul McCray , Professor of Pediatrics , Microbiology , and Internal Medicine at the University of Iowa.
” I have cited the New York Times , March 10 , 2015 , “ Protection Without a Vaccine.
” Here are quotes from the Times article : “ By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [ experimental ] monkeys , the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.
” “ ’ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Michael Farzan , an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.
” “ The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer , or I.G.T .
— is underway , and several new ones are planned.
” [ That was five years ago . ]
“ I.G.T .
is altogether different from traditional vaccination .
It is instead a form of gene therapy .
Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions .
The genes are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tissue , usually muscle.
” [ Here is the punch line ] “ The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads , and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient ’ s own DNA .
If all goes well , the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.
” The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion : “ Still , Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA , even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So it ’ s a battle of the experts .
The two men Reuters cited , versus the Times ’ David Baltimore .
I don ’ t hold up the scientific work of any of these men for great acclaim .
I ’ m only interested in which man knows whether a DNA vaccine would permanently alter the genetic makeup of every recipient ’ s DNA .
David Baltimore ( pictured ) is a Nobel Laureate ( 1975 , in Physiology/Medicine ) and the past president of the American Association for the Advancement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s one of the most famous scientists in the world .
I ’ m betting Reuters would happily trade their unknown experts for Baltimore if he would side with their claim .
Perhaps they ’ ll now approach him , and perhaps he ’ ll change his mind .
But the NY Times has him on the record , in 2015 , admitting that DNA vaccines do alter genetic makeup .
World famous mainstream experts don ’ t readily admit this sort of thing out in the open , unless they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the Reuters fact-check team ?
Fact-checkers checked the wrong box .
Final point for the moment : Researchers are fond of saying their genetic technologies are quite safe .
This a bald-faced lie .
Claiming , for example , that a DNA COVID vaccine would alter humans ’ genetic makeup in entirely predictable and harmless ways is like saying a car without brakes , doing a hundred miles an hour , set loose on a highway during rush hour , would create no damage whatsoever .
Author Jon Rappaport was nominated for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an investigative reporter for 30 years , writing articles on politics , medicine , and health for CBS Healthwatch , LA Weekly , Spin Magazine , Stern , and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe .
Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics , health , logic , and creative power to audiences around the world .
This article was originally published at his blog No More Fake News .

JON RAPPOPORT
As my readers know, I’ve been reporting on new types of technology that could be used in a coming COVID-19 vaccine—and warning about the consequences.
One such technology is: DNA vaccines. They would alter recipients’ genetic makeup permanently.
But Reuters has seen fit to claim: “A future COVID-19 [DNA] vaccine will not genetically modify humans.” This comes from their “fact-check team” — May 18, 2020: “False claim: A COVID-19 vaccine will genetically modify humans.”
To reach this conclusion, Reuters cites two people: “Mark Lynas, a visiting fellow at Cornell University’s Alliance for Science group”, and “Dr. Paul McCray, Professor of Pediatrics, Microbiology, and Internal Medicine at the University of Iowa.”
I have cited the New York Times, March 10, 2015, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” Here are quotes from the Times article:
“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”
“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”
“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was five years ago.]
“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”
[Here is the punch line] “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”
The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:
“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”
So it’s a battle of the experts. The two men Reuters cited, versus the Times’ David Baltimore.
I don’t hold up the scientific work of any of these men for great acclaim. I’m only interested in which man knows whether a DNA vaccine would permanently alter the genetic makeup of every recipient’s DNA.
David Baltimore (pictured) is a Nobel Laureate (1975, in Physiology/Medicine) and the past president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1997-2006). He’s one of the most famous scientists in the world.
I’m betting Reuters would happily trade their unknown experts for Baltimore if he would side with their claim. Perhaps they’ll now approach him, and perhaps he’ll change his mind. But the NY Times has him on the record, in 2015, admitting that DNA vaccines do alter genetic makeup.
World famous mainstream experts don’t readily admit this sort of thing out in the open, unless they’re stating the obvious.
The verdict on the Reuters fact-check team? Fact-checkers checked the wrong box.
Final point for the moment: Researchers are fond of saying their genetic technologies are quite safe. This a bald-faced lie. Claiming, for example, that a DNA COVID vaccine would alter humans’ genetic makeup in entirely predictable and harmless ways is like saying a car without brakes, doing a hundred miles an hour, set loose on a highway during rush hour, would create no damage whatsoever.
SOURCES:
reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-covid-19-vaccine-modify/false-claim-a-covid-19-vaccine-will-genetically-modify-humans-idUSKBN22U2BZ
nytimes.com/2015/03/10/health/protection-without-a-vaccine.html
blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/dna/
Author Jon Rappaport was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize and has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. This article was originally published at his blog No More Fake News.
************


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-26--In a nutshell, the annoying tale of Hydroxychloroquine

Once upon a time on a badly run planet far , far away from common sense , there was a quite handy little drug called Hydroxychloroquine .
Hydroxychloroquine , also known as Plaquenil , had been around for a very long time as it had proven very good in treating malaria , rheumatoid arthritis , lupus , and porphyria cutanea tarda .
It was thus generally regarded as a Good Thing , which was more than could be said for many of the drugs peddled by the Big Pharma syndicate .
It was not subject to patent ( it had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expired ) and was therefore cheap and plentiful , and whilst , like any drug , it had known side-effects , these had raised no major safety concerns over the decades it had been in broad use and prescribed across the world billions of times .
Then one day , that very same world was struck by a psychological warfare attack known as “ Coronavirus ” , in which a fake pandemic was used to bring the world ’ s myriad kingdoms under the rule of a global crime syndicate .
The crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never been brought to justice on account of its ability to bamboozle , bribe , intimidate or blackmail politicians .
Primary among these lucrative rackets run by various branches of the so-called Big Bucks crime families were money lending ( “ The Bankers ” ) , drug pushing ( “ Big Pharma ” ) , counterfeiting ( also “ The Bankers ” ) , protection rackets ( “ Governments ” ) and so forth .
The drug pushers in particular were hoping to make a packet from the Coronavirus , their cohorts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by cleverly lending strapped governments billions in counterfeits of their own currencies .
Then one day an infectious diseases expert in Marseille ( Prof Dider Raoult ) discovered that good old Hydroxychloroquine was very effective in treating people suffering from Coronavirus .
At the same time , another doctor , in New York , Dr. Vladimir Zelenko , quite independently had similar remarkable success with hydroxychloroquine .
These doctors had no vested interest in the drug , stood to make no money from it but thought it worth mentioning that they had tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients and found that it had a high degree of workability on a large number of the cases they treated .
But was “ making people well ” sufficient to justify broad use of a drug ?
There were other factors and other criteria much more important than merely curing people .
Indeed , the discovery that Hydroxychloroquine was quite successful at treating Coronavirus upset the Big Pharma syndicate because it chucked a ruddy great spanner in their money making plans .
This was on account of the fact that not being subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making little profit for the cartels .
On the other hand , if they could successfully “ discover ” and patent their own drug that they could show by fiddling the tests results did a similar job but much more expensively , they could make pots of dough .
The second problem with these annoying doctors discovering a simple , relatively safe and very inexpensive cure was that it undermined the FEAR of the Coronavirus upon which their scam depended for its success .
They were having enough trouble in that regard already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quite so easy to intimidate as they had hoped despite the media going into overdrive with scare stories , wildly inflated stats and so forth .
In fact , the Coronavirus had been a bit of a disappointment as it didn ’ t kill anywhere near as many people as they had hoped it would .
In terms of pinning their hopes on it as the basis of an entire psyop it had proven a bit of a liability .
Besides , people had the annoying habit of ( a ) not catching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ catching it and getting better .
The last thing that was needed was a drug that enabled even more people to recover even faster !
Therefore , both Professor Raoult in Marseille and Dr Zelenko in New York were targeted for elimination in the traditional manner .
The doctors came under attack as Big Pharma ’ s assassins went into DefConOne in an effort to murder their reputations as well as the reputation of their cure .
Crime syndicates are known for how they rule their turf with FEAR and Big Pharma was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well known for the viciousness with which it attacked anyone who threatened its racket , thus discouraging all and sundry from sticking their neck out .
The attacks came as no surprise and the two brave doctors must have known what they were in for .
Professor Raoult even received death threats and had to go to the police for protection .
It later transpired that the person making the threats was in the pay of GILEAD a pharmaceutical company in France that operated as a front for transatlantic pharmaceutical interests .
Gilead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coronavirus that it was hoping to patent and make lots of money from so long as it could prevent Hydroxychloroquine from getting in its way .
Meanwhile aspersions were cast upon the repute of Hydroxychloroquine and all manner of ways were found to instill in the hearts of men the idea that it was not all that it had been cracked up to be after all .
By way of one example , it was suddenly “ discovered ” after decades of use and billions of prescriptions that the drug could cause cardiac @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allegedly , had completely escaped the attention of the entire medical profession for many years until the French health authorities did the miraculous discovering almost overnight .
In a short while the Big Pharma cartels managed to get the drug banned in France and ignored almost everywhere else thanks to the valuable assistance of the proxies and henchmen they had previously placed according to tradition into positions of influence as health ministers and so forth .
Thus was Hydroxychloroquine ’ s reputation undermined in Washington , Westminster and other crime syndicate strongholds .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ doubts were sown in the topsoil of credulity , whose cosmetic veneer lay thinly over the substrate of duplicity and governments were able to quietly drop it without raising too much of a hullabaloo .
Thus , the alleged millions of Coronavirus sufferers were denied the help of a cheap and plentiful drug .
This did not bother governments at all as they were not particularly interested in the health of their citizenry beyond bleating and hand-wringing disingenuously about it on TV .
It was considered a Very Good Thing by the governments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , whilst people lost their lives in the interim , a few dead people was never considered a problem by a crime syndicate that had been making people dead in droves ever since it was set up by Rockefeller in 1913 .
Besides , this opened the door to some people maybe , if they were lucky , having the opportunity to be , albeit belatedly , helped by a patented drug a lot more profitably .
The above feature is from UK Reloaded

by Steve Cook
Once upon a time on a badly run planet far, far away from common sense, there was a quite handy little drug called Hydroxychloroquine.
Hydroxychloroquine, also known as Plaquenil, had been around for a very long time as it had proven very good in treating malaria, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and porphyria cutanea tarda.
It was thus generally regarded as a Good Thing, which was more than could be said for many of the drugs peddled by the Big Pharma syndicate.
It was not subject to patent (it had been around so long its patent had expired) and was therefore cheap and plentiful, and whilst, like any drug, it had known side-effects, these had raised no major safety concerns over the decades it had been in broad use and prescribed across the world billions of times.
Then one day, that very same world was struck by a psychological warfare attack known as “Coronavirus”, in which a fake pandemic was used to bring the world’s myriad kingdoms under the rule of a global crime syndicate.
The crime syndicate had many rackets ongoing and had never been brought to justice on account of its ability to bamboozle, bribe, intimidate or blackmail politicians.
Primary among these lucrative rackets run by various branches of the so-called Big Bucks crime families were money lending (“The Bankers”), drug pushing (“Big Pharma”), counterfeiting (also “The Bankers”), protection rackets (“Governments”) and so forth. The drug pushers in particular were hoping to make a packet from the Coronavirus, their cohorts, The Bankers, having already done so by cleverly lending strapped governments billions in counterfeits of their own currencies.
Then one day an infectious diseases expert in Marseille (Prof Dider Raoult) discovered that good old Hydroxychloroquine was very effective in treating people suffering from Coronavirus.
At the same time, another doctor, in New York, Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, quite independently had similar remarkable success with hydroxychloroquine.
These doctors had no vested interest in the drug, stood to make no money from it but thought it worth mentioning that they had tried it in an effort to help their patients and found that it had a high degree of workability on a large number of the cases they treated.
But was “making people well” sufficient to justify broad use of a drug? There were other factors and other criteria much more important than merely curing people. Indeed, the discovery that Hydroxychloroquine was quite successful at treating Coronavirus upset the Big Pharma syndicate because it chucked a ruddy great spanner in their money making plans.
This was on account of the fact that not being subject to patent it could be produced cheaply making little profit for the cartels. On the other hand, if they could successfully “discover” and patent their own drug that they could show by fiddling the tests results did a similar job but much more expensively, they could make pots of dough.
The second problem with these annoying doctors discovering a simple, relatively safe and very inexpensive cure was that it undermined the FEAR of the Coronavirus upon which their scam depended for its success.
They were having enough trouble in that regard already as millions of people were proving not quite so easy to intimidate as they had hoped despite the media going into overdrive with scare stories, wildly inflated stats and so forth.
In fact, the Coronavirus had been a bit of a disappointment as it didn’t kill anywhere near as many people as they had hoped it would.
In terms of pinning their hopes on it as the basis of an entire psyop it had proven a bit of a liability. Besides, people had the annoying habit of (a) not catching it at all or (b) catching it and getting better. The last thing that was needed was a drug that enabled even more people to recover even faster!
Therefore, both Professor Raoult in Marseille and Dr Zelenko in New York were targeted for elimination in the traditional manner. The doctors came under attack as Big Pharma’s assassins went into DefConOne in an effort to murder their reputations as well as the reputation of their cure.
Crime syndicates are known for how they rule their turf with FEAR and Big Pharma was no exception. It was by then well known for the viciousness with which it attacked anyone who threatened its racket, thus discouraging all and sundry from sticking their neck out. The attacks came as no surprise and the two brave doctors must have known what they were in for.
Professor Raoult even received death threats and had to go to the police for protection.
It later transpired that the person making the threats was in the pay of GILEAD a pharmaceutical company in France that operated as a front for transatlantic pharmaceutical interests. Gilead itself was working on a drug for Coronavirus that it was hoping to patent and make lots of money from so long as it could prevent Hydroxychloroquine from getting in its way.
Meanwhile aspersions were cast upon the repute of Hydroxychloroquine and all manner of ways were found to instill in the hearts of men the idea that it was not all that it had been cracked up to be after all. By way of one example, it was suddenly “discovered” after decades of use and billions of prescriptions that the drug could cause cardiac problems and was unsafe. This, allegedly,had completely escaped the attention of the entire medical profession for many years until the French health authorities did the miraculous discovering almost overnight.
In a short while the Big Pharma cartels managed to get the drug banned in France and ignored almost everywhere else thanks to the valuable assistance of the proxies and henchmen they had previously placed according to tradition into positions of influence as health ministers and so forth.
Thus was Hydroxychloroquine’s reputation undermined in Washington, Westminster and other crime syndicate strongholds.
And so it came to pass that doubts were sown in the topsoil of credulity, whose cosmetic veneer lay thinly over the substrate of duplicity and governments were able to quietly drop it without raising too much of a hullabaloo.
Thus, the alleged millions of Coronavirus sufferers were denied the help of a cheap and plentiful drug. This did not bother governments at all as they were not particularly interested in the health of their citizenry beyond bleating and hand-wringing disingenuously about it on TV.
It was considered a Very Good Thing by the governments’ handlers in the drugs cartels because, whilst people lost their lives in the interim, a few dead people was never considered a problem by a crime syndicate that had been making people dead in droves ever since it was set up by Rockefeller in 1913.
Besides, this opened the door to some people maybe, if they were lucky, having the opportunity to be, albeit belatedly, helped by a patented drug a lot more profitably.
The above feature is from UK Reloaded
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-26--History Shows Free Speech Is The Loser In Mob Action

History Shows Free Speech Is The Loser In Mob Action Below is my column in The Hill on the ongoing destruction of memorials and statues .
After this column ran , I learned that one of the iconic busts of George Washington University had been toppled on my own campus .
I did not learn that from our university , which was conspicuously silent about this destructive act at the very center of our campus .
There is something eerily familiar in the scenes of bonfires with police watching passively as public art is destroyed .
Such acts are akin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ images that they do not want others to see .
There are valid issues to address on the removal of some public art but there is no room or time for debate in the midst of this spreading destruction .
Even when there is merit to objections to literally or artistic or historical works , mob action threatens more than the individual work destroyed by such action .
The media has largely downplayed this violence , including little comparative coverage of an attack on the Democratic state senator who simply tried to videotape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man who actually gave his life fighting against slavery in the Civil War .
As discussed earlier , history has shown that yielding to such mob rule will do little to satiate the demand for unilateral and at times violent action .
People of good faith must step forward to demand a return to the rule of law and civility in our ongoing discourse over racism and reform .
Here is the column : The scenes have played out nightly on our television screens .
In Portland , a flag was wrapped around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington and burned .
As the statue was pulled down , a mob cheered .
Across the country , statues of Christopher Columbus , Francis Scott Key , Thomas Jefferson , and Ulysses Grant have been toppled down as the police and the public watch from the edges .
We have seen scenes like this through history , including the form of mob expression through book burning .
Alarmingly , this destruction of public art coincides with a crackdown on academics and writers who criticize any aspects of the protests today .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to free speech in our history and it is coming , not from the government , but from the public .
For free speech advocates , there is an eerie candescence in these scenes , flames illuminating faces of utter rage and even ecstasy in destroying public art .
Protesters are tearing down history that is no longer acceptable to them .
Some of this anger is understandable , even if the destruction is not .
There are statues still standing to figures best known for their racist legacies .
Two decades ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Georgia legislature to take down its statue of Tom Watson , a white supremacist publisher and politician who fueled racist and antisemitic movements .
Watson was best known for his hateful writings , including his opposition to save Leo Frank , a Jewish factory manager accused of raping and murdering a girl .
Frank was taken from a jail and lynched by a mob enraged by such writings , including the declaration of Watson that “ Frank belongs to the Jewish aristocracy , and it was determined by the rich Jews that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the death of a working class Gentile.
” Yet today there is no room or time for such reasoned discourse , just destruction that often transcends any rationalization of history .
Rioters defaced the Lincoln Memorial in Washington and a statue of Abraham Lincoln in London .
Besides attacking those monuments to the man who ended slavery , rioters attacked statues of military figures who defeated the Confederacy , like Grant and David Farragut , who refused to follow Tennessee and stayed loyal to the Union .
In Boston , rioters defaced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the all black volunteer regiment of the Union Army .
In Philadelphia , the statute of abolitionist Matthias Baldwin was attacked , despite his fight for black voting rights and his financial support for the education of black children .
This systematic destruction of public art is now often rationalized as the natural release of anger by those who have been silenced or marginalized .
Even rioting and looting has been defended by some as an expression of power .
However , a far more extensive movement is unfolding across the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in opposition to these protests .
In Vermont , Windsor School principal Tiffany Riley was placed on leave for questioning protest rhetoric on Facebook , where she posted , “ While I understand the urgency to feel compelled to advocate for black lives , what about our fellow law enforcement ?
” She was denounced on social media as “ insanely tone deaf ” and is being forced to retire .
At the University of Chicago , there is an effort to fire Harald Uhlig , who is a professor and senior editor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His offense was questioning the logic of defunding the police and other messaging from the protests .
Writers like Paul Krugman of the New York Times denounced him , and he was accused of the unpardonable sin of “ trivializing ” the Black Lives Matter movement .
Professors across the country are being targeted because they object to aspects of these protests or specific factual claims .
Students also face punishment .
Syracuse University student journalists at the Daily Orange have fired a columnist for writing a piece in another publication that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ institutional racism ” in police departments .
Adrianna San Marco discussed a study published last year by the National Academy of Sciences that had found “ no evidence ” of disparities against Blacks or Hispanics in police shootings .
Such a view could be challenged on many levels .
Indeed , this once was the type of debate that colleges welcomed .
Yet San Marco was accused of “ reinforcing stereotypes.
” The merging of journalism and advocacy is evident in academia , where intellectual pursuit is now viewed as reactionary or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given by the American Association of University Professors to an academic viewed by many as antisemitic .
I disagreed with the campaign against the professor as a matter of free speech .
However , I was struck by the statement that she “ transcends the division between scholarship and activism that encumbers traditional university life.
” That “ encumbrance ” was once the distinction between intellectual and political expression .
As academics , we once celebrated intellectual pluralism and fiercely defended free speech everywhere .
However , we now increasingly join the mob @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” of academics who utter opposing views .
In my 30 years of teaching , I never imagined I would see such intolerance and orthodoxy on campuses .
Indeed , I have spoken with many professors who are simply appalled by what they are seeing but too scared to speak up .
They have seen other academics put on leave or condemned by their fellow faculty members .
Two professors are not only under investigation for criticizing the protests but received police protection at home due to death threats .
The chilling effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is successful .
Such cases are mounting across the country as academics and students enforce this new orthodoxy on college campuses .
What will be left when objectionable public art and academics are scrubbed from view ?
The silence that follows may be comforting to those who want to remove images or ideas that cause unease .
History has shown , however , that orthodoxy is never satisfied with silence .
It demands speech .
Once all the offending statues are down , and all the offending professors are culled , the appetite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for collective expression .
It is a future that is foreshadowed not in loud cries around the bonfires we see every night on the news .
It is a future guaranteed by the silence of those watching from the edges .
Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law .
He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell , Duke , Georgetown , Harvard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other schools .
After a stint at Tulane Law School , Professor Turley joined the George Washington faculty in 1990 and , in 1998 , was given the prestigious Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law , the youngest chaired professor in the school ’ s history .
In addition to his extensive publications , Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades including the representation of whistleblowers , military personnel , judges , members of Congress , and a wide range of @ @ @

History Shows Free Speech Is The Loser In Mob Action
JONATHAN TURLEY
Below is my column in The Hill on the ongoing destruction of memorials and statues. After this column ran, I learned that one of the iconic busts of George Washington University had been toppled on my own campus. I did not learn that from our university, which was conspicuously silent about this destructive act at the very center of our campus. There is something eerily familiar in the scenes of bonfires with police watching passively as public art is destroyed. Such acts are akin to book burning as mobs unilaterally destroyed images that they do not want others to see. There are valid issues to address on the removal of some public art but there is no room or time for debate in the midst of this spreading destruction. Even when there is merit to objections to literally or artistic or historical works, mob action threatens more than the individual work destroyed by such action. The media has largely downplayed this violence, including little comparative coverage of an attack on the Democratic state senator who simply tried to videotape the destruction of a statue to a man who actually gave his life fighting against slavery in the Civil War. As discussed earlier, history has shown that yielding to such mob rule will do little to satiate the demand for unilateral and at times violent action. People of good faith must step forward to demand a return to the rule of law and civility in our ongoing discourse over racism and reform.
Here is the column:
The scenes have played out nightly on our television screens. In Portland, a flag was wrapped around the head of a statue of George Washington and burned. As the statue was pulled down, a mob cheered. Across the country, statues of Christopher Columbus, Francis Scott Key, Thomas Jefferson, and Ulysses Grant have been toppled down as the police and the public watch from the edges. We have seen scenes like this through history, including the form of mob expression through book burning.
Alarmingly, this destruction of public art coincides with a crackdown on academics and writers who criticize any aspects of the protests today. We are experiencing one of the greatest threats to free speech in our history and it is coming, not from the government, but from the public. For free speech advocates, there is an eerie candescence in these scenes, flames illuminating faces of utter rage and even ecstasy in destroying public art. Protesters are tearing down history that is no longer acceptable to them. Some of this anger is understandable, even if the destruction is not. There are statues still standing to figures best known for their racist legacies.
Two decades ago, I wrote a column calling for the Georgia legislature to take down its statue of Tom Watson, a white supremacist publisher and politician who fueled racist and antisemitic movements. Watson was best known for his hateful writings, including his opposition to save Leo Frank, a Jewish factory manager accused of raping and murdering a girl. Frank was taken from a jail and lynched by a mob enraged by such writings, including the declaration of Watson that “Frank belongs to the Jewish aristocracy, and it was determined by the rich Jews that no aristocrat of their race should die for the death of a working class Gentile.”
Yet today there is no room or time for such reasoned discourse, just destruction that often transcends any rationalization of history. Rioters defaced the Lincoln Memorial in Washington and a statue of Abraham Lincoln in London. Besides attacking those monuments to the man who ended slavery, rioters attacked statues of military figures who defeated the Confederacy, like Grant and David Farragut, who refused to follow Tennessee and stayed loyal to the Union. In Boston, rioters defaced the monument to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry, the all black volunteer regiment of the Union Army. In Philadelphia, the statute of abolitionist Matthias Baldwin was attacked, despite his fight for black voting rights and his financial support for the education of black children.
This systematic destruction of public art is now often rationalized as the natural release of anger by those who have been silenced or marginalized. Even rioting and looting has been defended by some as an expression of power. However, a far more extensive movement is unfolding across the country, as people are fired for writing in opposition to these protests. In Vermont, Windsor School principal Tiffany Riley was placed on leave for questioning protest rhetoric on Facebook, where she posted, “While I understand the urgency to feel compelled to advocate for black lives, what about our fellow law enforcement?” She was denounced on social media as “insanely tone deaf” and is being forced to retire.
At the University of Chicago, there is an effort to fire Harald Uhlig, who is a professor and senior editor of the prestigious Journal of Political Economy. His offense was questioning the logic of defunding the police and other messaging from the protests. Writers like Paul Krugman of the New York Times denounced him, and he was accused of the unpardonable sin of “trivializing” the Black Lives Matter movement. Professors across the country are being targeted because they object to aspects of these protests or specific factual claims. Students also face punishment.
Syracuse University student journalists at the Daily Orange have fired a columnist for writing a piece in another publication that questioned the statistical basis for claims of “institutional racism” in police departments. Adrianna San Marco discussed a study published last year by the National Academy of Sciences that had found “no evidence” of disparities against Blacks or Hispanics in police shootings. Such a view could be challenged on many levels. Indeed, this once was the type of debate that colleges welcomed. Yet San Marco was accused of “reinforcing stereotypes.”
The merging of journalism and advocacy is evident in academia, where intellectual pursuit is now viewed as reactionary or dangerous. Many opposed a recent recognition given by the American Association of University Professors to an academic viewed by many as antisemitic. I disagreed with the campaign against the professor as a matter of free speech. However, I was struck by the statement that she “transcends the division between scholarship and activism that encumbers traditional university life.” That “encumbrance” was once the distinction between intellectual and political expression. As academics, we once celebrated intellectual pluralism and fiercely defended free speech everywhere.
However, we now increasingly join the mob in demanding the termination or “retraining” of academics who utter opposing views. In my 30 years of teaching, I never imagined I would see such intolerance and orthodoxy on campuses. Indeed, I have spoken with many professors who are simply appalled by what they are seeing but too scared to speak up. They have seen other academics put on leave or condemned by their fellow faculty members. Two professors are not only under investigation for criticizing the protests but received police protection at home due to death threats. The chilling effect on speech is as intentional as it is successful.
Such cases are mounting across the country as academics and students enforce this new orthodoxy on college campuses. What will be left when objectionable public art and academics are scrubbed from view? The silence that follows may be comforting to those who want to remove images or ideas that cause unease. History has shown, however, that orthodoxy is never satisfied with silence. It demands speech.
Once all the offending statues are down, and all the offending professors are culled, the appetite for collective suppression will become a demand for collective expression. It is a future that is foreshadowed not in loud cries around the bonfires we see every night on the news. It is a future guaranteed by the silence of those watching from the edges.
*********
Pictorial content added by (TLB) editors.
(TLB) published this article from J
Bio
Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and other schools.
After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the George Washington faculty in 1990 and, in 1998, was given the prestigious Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law, the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. In addition to his extensive publications, Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades including the representation of whistleblowers, military personnel, judges, members of Congress, and a wide range of other clients.
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-26--Hunter Biden’s Ukraine firm… Deal while under investigation

Hunter Biden ’ s Ukraine firm landed deal with USAID program while under corruption investigation Just a few months after Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma Holdings , the Ukrainian gas company landed a deal with an Obama administration renewable energy program that had been championed by one of his father ’ s key vice presidential advisers , newly released State Department memos show .
The Memorandum of Understanding between Burisma and USAID ’ s Municipal Energy Reform Project in Ukraine ( MERP ) was signed in October 2014 , according to a copy of the agreement obtained by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Information Act .
At that time , Burisma was under very public investigations by both the British government and the Ukrainian prosecutor general ’ s office and considered by the State Department to suffer from corruption issues .
And the Burisma official who signed the MOU , Andrii Kicha ( Pictured below via Twitter screen shot ) , was publicly identified in British court documents in 2014 as someone whose conduct was questioned during the probe .
More recently , Kicha was detained in Ukraine in what law enforcement authorities there said was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 6 million bribe to prosecutors designed to end continuing investigations of the controversial gas company .
Kicha has long denied wrongdoing , and Burisma has said it did not have any involvement in the bribery plot .
The company has fought allegations of corruption for years and settled some of the Ukrainian cases against it at the end of the Obama administration by paying a fine .
Burisma officials did not respond to a request for comment about the 2014 MERP deal .
State Department and USAID press officials also declined comment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ only on condition of anonymity , said officials do not have much current documentation to show how Burisma landed the 2014 deal with USAID , the department ’ s foreign aid arm , but they believe it wasn ’ t fully vetted by the department .
Instead , the official said , it appeared the MOU was approved by USAID ’ s contractor managing the program .
The official added that State recently received inquiries from U.S. Senate investigators examining the Bidens ’ dealings in Ukraine .
“ This is clearly a matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now it looks like Burisma signed the deal with our contractor , and our embassy didn ’ t even know much about it until 2016 , ” the official said , declining to provide more information .
Remarkably , the multimillion dollar MERP program ’ s involvement with Burisma escaped notice during last year ’ s impeachment proceedings , which focused heavily on the Bidens ’ dealings in Ukraine and efforts by Rudy Giuliani , one of President Trump ’ s lawyers , to get the issues surrounding Burisma investigated by Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecutors to investigate Joe Biden ’ s successful effort to get the Ukrainian prosecutor leading the Burisma investigation fired in 2016 .
During those impeachment proceedings , Obama-era State Department officials testified they held strong corruption concerns about the Ukrainian gas company that had hired Hunter Biden in May 2014 and paid his firm more than $ 3 million in consulting fees .
They added they believed Burisma ’ s arrangement with the vice president ’ s son created the “ appearance of a conflict of interest ” for Joe Biden as he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The new documents , which include a copy of the 2014 signed MOU and some 2016 email chatter among State officials about the MERP relationship with Burisma , were obtained under a FOIA lawsuit brought by Just the News and its public interest law firm , the Southeastern Legal Foundation .
The memos do not mention either Biden but do show that the U.S. embassy in Kiev did not want Burisma to participate in a MERP event honoring journalists in 2016 , something Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent mentioned briefly during his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came after a Ukrainian raised concerns that Burisma , with its record of alleged corruption , was doing business with USAID ’ s program .
“ Burisma has been notified that MERP will be conducting the award ceremony without their participation , ” a U.S. embassy official wrote in an email that reached Kent and other top officials in September 2016 .
While the documents don ’ t make mention of the Bidens , the MERP program itself and Burisma have a direct connection to Joe Biden ’ s inner circle .
Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hochstein ( Pictured here with Biden ) , championed the MERP program in a Senate hearing in July 2014 , about three months before Burisma landed the MOU with USAID .
Hochstein testified that MERP was part of a multi-pronged U.S. effort by the Obama administration to make Ukraine more energy-independent from Russia by producing its own gas while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions .
“ It is critical that Ukraine reduce the country ’ s energy intensity , ” he told senators during the testimony .
“ Thankfully , the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy efficiency in Ukraine .
Most recently , USAID ’ s Municipal Energy Reform Project ( MER Project ) is designed to enhance Ukraine ’ s energy security as well as to reduce and mitigate GHG emissions resulting from the poor use of energy resources in Ukrainian municipalities .
A year later , Hochstein met with an American firm called Blue Star Strategies , which was hired by Burisma to try to change the gas firm ’ s image of corruption , according to a report in the Washington Examiner .
And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direct conversation with Joe Biden about Hunter Biden ’ s role with Burisma , one of the few publicly known conversations the vice president had about his son ’ s employment with the controversial company .
The MOU stipulated that Burisma would work with the program to “ enhance Ukraine ’ s energy security ” through the “ improvement of energy policies , ” the “ development of energy efficiency ” and the “ increase of investments in [ the ] energy sector.
” The $ 17 million program ended in March 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program was administered by what was then the Research Triangle Institute , now RTI International .
The specific agreement between Burisma and MERP dates to October 2014 and was set to expire a year later .
The agreement was “ implemented by ” International Resources Group , a contractor that facilitates government programs across the world , the MOU states .
That group was subsequently acquired by RTI International in 2017 .
Neither RTI nor the contractor who signed the MOU returned calls seeking comment about the Burisma deal .
The documents don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money under the program but federal procurement records do not list the Ukrainian gas firm as a recipient of U.S. aid .
The deal is notable for having occurred when Burisma was under two separate corruption investigations — one from the British government and one from Ukrainian authorities — over alleged illegal financial schemes carried out by the natural gas company .
Also notable is one of the memorandum ’ s signatories , Andrii Kicha , who signed on behalf of Burisma .
In 2014-15 , Kicha was named by British authorities in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the Ukrainian government .
“ Mr Andrii Kicha is a Ukrainian commercial lawyer , the chief legal officer of Burisma and other companies owned by the defendant .
He was the sole authorised signatory on the BNP accounts that are the subject to the restraint order , ” one British court filing stated .
You can read that document here .
The British probe was ordered shut in early 2015 , but the reasons are in dispute .
British officials claim Ukrainian authorities failed to get them essential evidence they were seeking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Multiple criminal cases were opened between 2014 and 2016 in Ukraine against Burisma and Zlochevsky , some of which were settled and closed in 2016 with a fine , and some which persist today .
Kicha was freshly implicated in controversy connected to Burisma this month , when Ukrainian authorities detained him and several others in connection with a $ 6 million bribe meant for a prosecutor investigating Burisma .
The Ukrainian government is currently pursuing an embezzlement case against the company and Zlochevsky .
A Kyiv court last Sunday revealed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has swirled around Burisma for several years since then-Vice President Joe Biden ’ s son Hunter took a seat on the gas company ’ s board of directors in May 2014 .
Joe Biden at the time played a significant role in foreign policy decisions regarding Ukraine , raising the specter of impropriety as his son joined a scandal-ridden firm at the same time the vice president had official dealings with the country .

Hunter Biden’s Ukraine firm landed deal with USAID program while under corruption investigation
Burisma official who signed 2014 deal was recently detained in alleged bribery plot in Ukraine and was publicly identified in 2014 British probe.
The General Prosecutor’s Office in Kyiv, Ukraine. (NurPhoto/Getty)
Just a few months after Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian gas company landed a deal with an Obama administration renewable energy program that had been championed by one of his father’s key vice presidential advisers, newly released State Department memos show.
The Memorandum of Understanding between Burisma and USAID’s Municipal Energy Reform Project in Ukraine (MERP) was signed in October 2014, according to a copy of the agreement obtained by Just the News under the Freedom of Information Act.
At that time, Burisma was under very public investigations by both the British government and the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office and considered by the State Department to suffer from corruption issues.
And the Burisma official who signed the MOU, Andrii Kicha (Pictured below via Twitter screen shot), was publicly identified in British court documents in 2014 as someone whose conduct was questioned during the probe. More recently, Kicha was detained in Ukraine in what law enforcement authorities there said was a failed attempt to deliver a $6 million bribe to prosecutors designed to end continuing investigations of the controversial gas company.
Kicha has long denied wrongdoing, and Burisma has said it did not have any involvement in the bribery plot. The company has fought allegations of corruption for years and settled some of the Ukrainian cases against it at the end of the Obama administration by paying a fine.
Burisma officials did not respond to a request for comment about the 2014 MERP deal. State Department and USAID press officials also declined comment.
A senior State Department official, speaking only on condition of anonymity, said officials do not have much current documentation to show how Burisma landed the 2014 deal with USAID, the department’s foreign aid arm, but they believe it wasn’t fully vetted by the department. Instead, the official said, it appeared the MOU was approved by USAID’s contractor managing the program.
The official added that State recently received inquiries from U.S. Senate investigators examining the Bidens’ dealings in Ukraine.
“This is clearly a matter of interest in their investigation, but right now it looks like Burisma signed the deal with our contractor, and our embassy didn’t even know much about it until 2016,” the official said, declining to provide more information.
Remarkably, the multimillion dollar MERP program’s involvement with Burisma escaped notice during last year’s impeachment proceedings, which focused heavily on the Bidens’ dealings in Ukraine and efforts by Rudy Giuliani, one of President Trump’s lawyers, to get the issues surrounding Burisma investigated by Ukrainian authorities. Specifically, Giuliani wanted Ukrainian prosecutors to investigate Joe Biden’s successful effort to get the Ukrainian prosecutor leading the Burisma investigation fired in 2016.
During those impeachment proceedings, Obama-era State Department officials testified they held strong corruption concerns about the Ukrainian gas company that had hired Hunter Biden in May 2014 and paid his firm more than $3 million in consulting fees. They added they believed Burisma’s arrangement with the vice president’s son created the “appearance of a conflict of interest” for Joe Biden as he oversaw U.S.-Ukraine policy for the Obama administration.
The new documents, which include a copy of the 2014 signed MOU and some 2016 email chatter among State officials about the MERP relationship with Burisma, were obtained under a FOIA lawsuit brought by Just the News and its public interest law firm, the Southeastern Legal Foundation.
The memos do not mention either Biden but do show that the U.S. embassy in Kiev did not want Burisma to participate in a MERP event honoring journalists in 2016, something Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent mentioned briefly during his impeachment testimony.
The decision to cancel came after a Ukrainian raised concerns that Burisma, with its record of alleged corruption, was doing business with USAID’s program.
“Burisma has been notified that MERP will be conducting the award ceremony without their participation,” a U.S. embassy official wrote in an email that reached Kent and other top officials in September 2016.
While the documents don’t make mention of the Bidens, the MERP program itself and Burisma have a direct connection to Joe Biden’s inner circle.
Joe Biden’s energy advisor, Amos Hochstein (Pictured here with Biden), championed the MERP program in a Senate hearing in July 2014, about three months before Burisma landed the MOU with USAID. Hochstein testified that MERP was part of a multi-pronged U.S. effort by the Obama administration to make Ukraine more energy-independent from Russia by producing its own gas while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
“It is critical that Ukraine reduce the country’s energy intensity,” he told senators during the testimony. “Thankfully, the United States has a long history of support for energy efficiency in Ukraine. Most recently, USAID’s Municipal Energy Reform Project (MER Project) is designed to enhance Ukraine’s energy security as well as to reduce and mitigate GHG emissions resulting from the poor use of energy resources in Ukrainian municipalities.
A year later, Hochstein met with an American firm called Blue Star Strategies, which was hired by Burisma to try to change the gas firm’s image of corruption, according to a report in the Washington Examiner.
And the New Yorker magazine reported Hochstein had a direct conversation with Joe Biden about Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma, one of the few publicly known conversations the vice president had about his son’s employment with the controversial company.
The MOU stipulated that Burisma would work with the program to “enhance Ukraine’s energy security” through the “improvement of energy policies,” the “development of energy efficiency” and the “increase of investments in [the] energy sector.”
The $17 million program ended in March 2018. The contract history indicates that the program was administered by what was then the Research Triangle Institute, now RTI International. The specific agreement between Burisma and MERP dates to October 2014 and was set to expire a year later.
The agreement was “implemented by” International Resources Group, a contractor that facilitates government programs across the world, the MOU states. That group was subsequently acquired by RTI International in 2017. Neither RTI nor the contractor who signed the MOU returned calls seeking comment about the Burisma deal. The documents don’t indicate whether Burisma received any money under the program but federal procurement records do not list the Ukrainian gas firm as a recipient of U.S. aid.
The deal is notable for having occurred when Burisma was under two separate corruption investigations — one from the British government and one from Ukrainian authorities — over alleged illegal financial schemes carried out by the natural gas company.
Also notable is one of the memorandum’s signatories, Andrii Kicha, who signed on behalf of Burisma. In 2014-15, Kicha was named by British authorities in court filings targeting Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky against the Ukrainian government.
“Mr Andrii Kicha is a Ukrainian commercial lawyer, the chief legal officer of Burisma and other companies owned by the defendant. He was the sole authorised signatory on the BNP accounts that are the subject to the restraint order,” one British court filing stated. You can read that document here.
The British probe was ordered shut in early 2015, but the reasons are in dispute. British officials claim Ukrainian authorities failed to get them essential evidence they were seeking; Burisma and Ukrainian authorities dispute that.
Multiple criminal cases were opened between 2014 and 2016 in Ukraine against Burisma and Zlochevsky, some of which were settled and closed in 2016 with a fine, and some which persist today.
Kicha was freshly implicated in controversy connected to Burisma this month, when Ukrainian authorities detained him and several others in connection with a $6 million bribe meant for a prosecutor investigating Burisma.
The Ukrainian government is currently pursuing an embezzlement case against the company and Zlochevsky. A Kyiv court last Sunday revealed the seizure of the bribery funds.
Controversy has swirled around Burisma for several years since then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter took a seat on the gas company’s board of directors in May 2014. Joe Biden at the time played a significant role in foreign policy decisions regarding Ukraine, raising the specter of impropriety as his son joined a scandal-ridden firm at the same time the vice president had official dealings with the country.
Notably, Burisma would secure the USAID agreement just five months later.
_________
THE FACTS INSIDE OUR REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-26--Horace Cooper to Tucker Carlson: America Isn’t a Racist Country

When Bubba Wallace – the only full-time black NASCAR driver – asked the motorsport ’ s leadership to ban Confederate Battle Flags from races , NASCAR acquiesced despite opposition from many fans .
Even though NASCAR rejected gun advertisements last year , it did nothing to prevent Wallace from painting “ # BlackLivesMatter ” on his car this year .
And when a noose was reportedly found in Wallace ’ s assigned garage at the Talladega Superspeedway , every driver participating in that race helped push Wallace ’ s car out to the track in a show of overwhelming support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noose was retaliation by “ simple-minded people ” who are “ afraid of change.
” Yet that is not the case .
There were 15 FBI agents dispatched to investigate the noose , and they determined the rope in question had been there for months before the garage was randomly assigned to Wallace .
The noose was not a symbol of hate – probably just something installed by workmen as a way to help people open and close the garage door .
But , as Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson said on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to believe an absurd story because it could be used to advance a political agenda.
” Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper , a guest on Carlson ’ s program , agreed .
He explained that there is a “ grand delusion that racism is running rampant in America.
” His reminder of a similar event moved the normally staid Carlson to laughter : Horace was of course referencing last year ’ s high-profile hoax perpetrated by actor Jussie Smollett .
After giving a hearty laugh , Carlson remarked : “ I wish I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” On a serious note , Horace highlighted a disparity intentionally being created among the races .
Certain minorities , to their detriment , are being held to a different standard to aid those seeking to exploit disunity for political gain .
These race hustlers are using unrest to perpetuate their power : Part of the problem is it feeds a narrative that some people , who sustain themselves politically , it feeds a narrative that they are empowered by solving .
“ We come to rescue you from the bug boogeyman racist.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , white , brown , gay , straight , male , female – all Americans occasionally find they have struggles and setbacks .
But , because of this narrative , only a few groups are allowed to experience their struggles and their setbacks and their difficulties .
But what that has done is that it has divided the rest of America… It ’ s not racism .
It ’ s not bigotry .
America is an amazing place .
But , as our economy has changed , our elites haven ’ t responded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poor people – mostly white – too bad for you .
Finding racism where there is none , as appears to be the case with Bubba Wallace and the rope in his garage , is a typical tactic of those elites .
Wallace , who has rejected the FBI ’ s conclusion , is now only feeding into the division Horace warned Carlson about during the segment .
Project 21 , a leading voice of black conservatives for over 25 years , is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ or published over 40,000 times since the program was created in 1992 .
Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated , and may be earmarked exclusively for the use of Project 21 .
Founded in 1982 , the National Center for Public Policy Research is a non-partisan , free-market , independent conservative think-tank .
Ninety-four percent of its support comes from some 60,000 individuals , less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations .
Sign up for email updates here .
Follow Project 21 on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To be alerted to upcoming media appearances by Project 21 members , follow our media Twitter at @ NCPPRMedia .
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

Horace Cooper to Tucker Carlson: America Isn’t a Racist Country
WATCH VIDEO BELOW ARTICLE
By: David Almasi
When Bubba Wallace – the only full-time black NASCAR driver – asked the motorsport’s leadership to ban Confederate Battle Flags from races, NASCAR acquiesced despite opposition from many fans. Even though NASCAR rejected gun advertisements last year, it did nothing to prevent Wallace from painting “#BlackLivesMatter” on his car this year.
And when a noose was reportedly found in Wallace’s assigned garage at the Talladega Superspeedway, every driver participating in that race helped push Wallace’s car out to the track in a show of overwhelming support. Still bitter, Wallace suggested the noose was retaliation by “simple-minded people” who are “afraid of change.”
Yet that is not the case. There were 15 FBI agents dispatched to investigate the noose, and they determined the rope in question had been there for months before the garage was randomly assigned to Wallace. The noose was not a symbol of hate – probably just something installed by workmen as a way to help people open and close the garage door.
But, as Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson said on his show, people “rushed in to believe an absurd story because it could be used to advance a political agenda.”
Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper, a guest on Carlson’s program, agreed. He explained that there is a “grand delusion that racism is running rampant in America.” His reminder of a similar event moved the normally staid Carlson to laughter:
America isn’t a racist country. In fact, racism is so hard to find you have to create these circumstances in order to find one. You remember that guy in Chicago? He had to hire foreigners to do the racism… that America just won’t do.
Horace was of course referencing last year’s high-profile hoax perpetrated by actor Jussie Smollett. After giving a hearty laugh, Carlson remarked: “I wish I thought of that. So good!”
On a serious note, Horace highlighted a disparity intentionally being created among the races. Certain minorities, to their detriment, are being held to a different standard to aid those seeking to exploit disunity for political gain. These race hustlers are using unrest to perpetuate their power:
Part of the problem is it feeds a narrative that some people, who sustain themselves politically, it feeds a narrative that they are empowered by solving. “We come to rescue you from the bug boogeyman racist.”… Whether you’re black, white, brown, gay, straight, male, female – all Americans occasionally find they have struggles and setbacks. But, because of this narrative, only a few groups are allowed to experience their struggles and their setbacks and their difficulties. But what that has done is that it has divided the rest of America… It’s not racism. It’s not bigotry. America is an amazing place. But, as our economy has changed, our elites haven’t responded to those changes. And they tell poor people – mostly white – too bad for you.
Finding racism where there is none, as appears to be the case with Bubba Wallace and the rope in his garage, is a typical tactic of those elites. Wallace, who has rejected the FBI’s conclusion, is now only feeding into the division Horace warned Carlson about during the segment.
••••
••••
To schedule an interview with a member of Project 21, contact Judy Kent at (703) 759-0269.
BLACK LEADERSHIP NETWORK
Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over 25 years, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research. Its members have been quoted, interviewed or published over 40,000 times since the program was created in 1992. Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated, and may be earmarked exclusively for the use of Project 21. Founded in 1982, the National Center for Public Policy Research is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from some 60,000 individuals, less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations. Sign up for email updates here. Follow Project 21 on Twitter at @Project21News for general announcements. To be alerted to upcoming media appearances by Project 21 members, follow our media Twitter at @NCPPRMedia.
••••
••••
Read more great articles by Project 21 – David Almasi
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-26--Full Professorship to Academic Who Said “White Lives Don’t Matter”

Cambridge Promotes Academic Who Said “ White Lives Don ’ t Matter ” to Full Professorship The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Comment Policy : As a privately owned web site , we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam , advertising , vulgarity , threats of violence , racism , or personal/abusive attacks on other users .
This also applies to trolling , the use of more than one alias , or just intentional mischief .
Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators .
Repeat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without prior warning .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .
Disclaimer : The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including , but not limited to , text , graphics , images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction .
Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice , diagnosis or treatment .

Cambridge Promotes Academic Who Said “White Lives Don’t Matter” to Full Professorship
Institution rewards Priyamvada Gopal for publishing racist hate speech.
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.