thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-13--US Rejects Chinese Claim To South China Sea

In a major reversal of an Obama-era appeasement , the State Department has rejected the Chinese claim to the South China Sea .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed the policy change in a press release .
The United States champions a free and open Indo-Pacific .
Today we are strengthening U.S. policy in a vital , contentious part of that region – the South China Sea .
We are making clear : Beijing ’ s claims to offshore resources across most of the South China Sea are completely unlawful , as is its campaign of bullying to control them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we seek to preserve peace and stability , uphold freedom of the seas in a manner consistent with international law , maintain the unimpeded flow of commerce , and oppose any attempt to use coercion or force to settle disputes .
We share these deep and abiding interests with our many allies and partners who have long endorsed a rules-based international order .
These shared interests have come under unprecedented threat from the People ’ s Republic of China ( PRC ) .
Beijing uses intimidation to undermine the sovereign rights of Southeast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sea , bully them out of offshore resources , assert unilateral dominion , and replace international law with “ might makes right.
” Beijing ’ s approach has been clear for years .
In 2010 , then-PRC Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told his ASEAN counterparts that “ China is a big country and other countries are small countries and that is just a fact.
” The PRC ’ s predatory world view has no place in the 21st century .
The PRC has no legal grounds to unilaterally impose its will on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal basis for its “ Nine-Dashed Line ” claim in the South China Sea since formally announcing it in 2009 .
In a unanimous decision on July 12 , 2016 , an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention – to which the PRC is a state party – rejected the PRC ’ s maritime claims as having no basis in international law .
The Tribunal sided squarely with the Philippines , which brought the arbitration case , on almost all claims .
As the United States has previously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Convention , the Arbitral Tribunal ’ s decision is final and legally binding on both parties .
Today we are aligning the U.S. position on the PRC ’ s maritime claims in the SCS with the Tribunal ’ s decision .
Specifically : The PRC can not lawfully assert a maritime claim – including any Exclusive Economic Zone ( EEZ ) claims derived from Scarborough Reef and the Spratly Islands – vis-a-vis the Philippines in areas that the Tribunal found to be in the Philippines ’ EEZ or on its continental shelf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fisheries and offshore energy development within those areas is unlawful , as are any unilateral PRC actions to exploit those resources .
In line with the Tribunal ’ s legally binding decision , the PRC has no lawful territorial or maritime claim to Mischief Reef or Second Thomas Shoal , both of which fall fully under the Philippines ’ sovereign rights and jurisdiction , nor does Beijing have any territorial or maritime claims generated from these features .
As Beijing has failed to put forth a lawful , coherent maritime claim in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejects any PRC claim to waters beyond a 12-nautical mile territorial sea derived from islands it claims in the Spratly Islands ( without prejudice to other states ’ sovereignty claims over such islands ) .
As such , the United States rejects any PRC maritime claim in the waters surrounding Vanguard Bank ( off Vietnam ) , Luconia Shoals ( off Malaysia ) , waters in Brunei ’ s EEZ , and Natuna Besar ( off Indonesia ) .
Any PRC action to harass other states ’ fishing or hydrocarbon development in these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activities unilaterally – is unlawful .
The PRC has no lawful territorial or maritime claim to ( or derived from ) James Shoal , an entirely submerged feature only 50 nautical miles from Malaysia and some 1,000 nautical miles from China ’ s coast .
James Shoal is often cited in PRC propaganda as the “ southernmost territory of China.
” International law is clear : An underwater feature like James Shoal can not be claimed by any state and is incapable of generating maritime zones .
James Shoal ( roughly 20 meters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never was PRC territory , nor can Beijing assert any lawful maritime rights from it .
The world will not allow Beijing to treat the South China Sea as its maritime empire .
America stands with our Southeast Asian allies and partners in protecting their sovereign rights to offshore resources , consistent with their rights and obligations under international law .
We stand with the international community in defense of freedom of the seas and respect for sovereignty and reject any push to impose “ might makes right ” in the South China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 4th anniversary of a landmark ruling by a UN tribunal fast approaching , the State Department is planning a major policy change that could swiftly lead to even more heightened military tensions between Washington and Beijing in one of the world ’ s most dangerous geopolitical powder kegs : the South China Sea .
Since Trump ’ s inauguration , the Pentagon has stepped up Naval operations in the contested territory , and sent dozens , if not hundreds , of destroyer-class ships and others to engage in “ Freedom of Navigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for short .
Most recently , the US sent two aircraft carriers to the area to hold military exercises…while Chinese ships held exercises of their own nearby .
In a copy of the draft statement reviewed by WSJ , the administration claims that China ’ s refusal to acknowledge the landmark ruling and continue with its claims of supremacy over the area poses “ the single greatest threat to freedom of the seas in modern history.
” “ China ’ s maritime claims pose the single greatest threat to the freedom of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to a draft seen by Journal .
“ We can not afford to re-enter an era where states like China attempt to assert sovereignty over the seas , ” the draft said .
China ’ s territorial claims fall within what ’ s known as the nine-dash line , or the “ Cow ’ s Tongue ” , named for its peculiar shape .
At the time of the 2016 ruling , the Obama Administration decided not to get involved , and official set America on a course of non-interference in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Trump was inaugurated , as the president promised to reverse the Obama Administration ’ s policy of cooperation and appeasement in favor of a more resolute stance .
The Trump Administration has recently stepped up its criticism of the region ’ s maritime claims .
Even the Philippines , which initially brought the case against China to the Hague back in 2013 , is no longer pressuring Beijing to obey the ruling , after President Rodrigo Duterte was elected with a mandate to negotiate directly with Beijing .
Since the ruling , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ islands and fortify them with weaponry , leading to the creation of what Steve Bannon has described as “ mobile aircraft carriers ” .
Bannon has repeatedly warned that China is the most pressing threat to American security and economic interests .
While Beijing mostly just whines and complains when the US sends navy ships within 12 miles of the Spratly islands , we suspect the Foreign Ministry ’ s response once Washington confirms the policy change will be even more aggressive .
Perhaps the decision might even spur the People ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for fortification and weaponization , just like the initial ruling appears to have done .
Stay tuned , this will more than likely get ugly .
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

In a major reversal of an Obama-era appeasement, the State Department has rejected the Chinese claim to the South China Sea.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed the policy change in a press release.
The United States champions a free and open Indo-Pacific. Today we are strengthening U.S. policy in a vital, contentious part of that region – the South China Sea. We are making clear: Beijing’s claims to offshore resources across most of the South China Sea are completely unlawful, as is its campaign of bullying to control them.
In the South China Sea, we seek to preserve peace and stability, uphold freedom of the seas in a manner consistent with international law, maintain the unimpeded flow of commerce, and oppose any attempt to use coercion or force to settle disputes. We share these deep and abiding interests with our many allies and partners who have long endorsed a rules-based international order.
These shared interests have come under unprecedented threat from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Beijing uses intimidation to undermine the sovereign rights of Southeast Asian coastal states in the South China Sea, bully them out of offshore resources, assert unilateral dominion, and replace international law with “might makes right.”
Beijing’s approach has been clear for years. In 2010, then-PRC Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told his ASEAN counterparts that “China is a big country and other countries are small countries and that is just a fact.” The PRC’s predatory world view has no place in the 21st century.
The PRC has no legal grounds to unilaterally impose its will on the region. Beijing has offered no coherent legal basis for its “Nine-Dashed Line” claim in the South China Sea since formally announcing it in 2009. In a unanimous decision on July 12, 2016, an Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention – to which the PRC is a state party – rejected the PRC’s maritime claims as having no basis in international law. The Tribunal sided squarely with the Philippines, which brought the arbitration case, on almost all claims.
As the United States has previously stated, and as specifically provided in the Convention, the Arbitral Tribunal’s decision is final and legally binding on both parties. Today we are aligning the U.S. position on the PRC’s maritime claims in the SCS with the Tribunal’s decision. Specifically:
The PRC cannot lawfully assert a maritime claim – including any Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) claims derived from Scarborough Reef and the Spratly Islands – vis-a-vis the Philippines in areas that the Tribunal found to be in the Philippines’ EEZ or on its continental shelf.
Beijing’s harassment of Philippine fisheries and offshore energy development within those areas is unlawful, as are any unilateral PRC actions to exploit those resources. In line with the Tribunal’s legally binding decision, the PRC has no lawful territorial or maritime claim to Mischief Reef or Second Thomas Shoal, both of which fall fully under the Philippines’ sovereign rights and jurisdiction, nor does Beijing have any territorial or maritime claims generated from these features.
As Beijing has failed to put forth a lawful, coherent maritime claim in the South China Sea, the United States rejects any PRC claim to waters beyond a 12-nautical mile territorial sea derived from islands it claims in the Spratly Islands (without prejudice to other states’ sovereignty claims over such islands). As such, the United States rejects any PRC maritime claim in the waters surrounding Vanguard Bank (off Vietnam), Luconia Shoals (off Malaysia), waters in Brunei’s EEZ, and Natuna Besar (off Indonesia). Any PRC action to harass other states’ fishing or hydrocarbon development in these waters – or to carry out such activities unilaterally – is unlawful.
The PRC has no lawful territorial or maritime claim to (or derived from) James Shoal, an entirely submerged feature only 50 nautical miles from Malaysia and some 1,000 nautical miles from China’s coast. James Shoal is often cited in PRC propaganda as the “southernmost territory of China.” International law is clear: An underwater feature like James Shoal cannot be claimed by any state and is incapable of generating maritime zones. James Shoal (roughly 20 meters below the surface) is not and never was PRC territory, nor can Beijing assert any lawful maritime rights from it.
The world will not allow Beijing to treat the South China Sea as its maritime empire. America stands with our Southeast Asian allies and partners in protecting their sovereign rights to offshore resources, consistent with their rights and obligations under international law. We stand with the international community in defense of freedom of the seas and respect for sovereignty and reject any push to impose “might makes right” in the South China Sea or the wider region.
Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge writes:
With the 4th anniversary of a landmark ruling by a UN tribunal fast approaching, the State Department is planning a major policy change that could swiftly lead to even more heightened military tensions between Washington and Beijing in one of the world’s most dangerous geopolitical powder kegs: the South China Sea.
Since Trump’s inauguration, the Pentagon has stepped up Naval operations in the contested territory, and sent dozens, if not hundreds, of destroyer-class ships and others to engage in “Freedom of Navigation” operations – or “Freeops”, for short. Most recently, the US sent two aircraft carriers to the area to hold military exercises…while Chinese ships held exercises of their own nearby.
In a copy of the draft statement reviewed by WSJ, the administration claims that China’s refusal to acknowledge the landmark ruling and continue with its claims of supremacy over the area poses “the single greatest threat to freedom of the seas in modern history.”
“China’s maritime claims pose the single greatest threat to the freedom of the seas in modern history,” according to a draft seen by Journal. “We cannot afford to re-enter an era where states like China attempt to assert sovereignty over the seas,” the draft said.
China’s territorial claims fall within what’s known as the nine-dash line, or the “Cow’s Tongue”, named for its peculiar shape.
At the time of the 2016 ruling, the Obama Administration decided not to get involved, and official set America on a course of non-interference in the area.
That changed almost as soon as Trump was inaugurated, as the president promised to reverse the Obama Administration’s policy of cooperation and appeasement in favor of a more resolute stance. The Trump Administration has recently stepped up its criticism of the region’s maritime claims. Even the Philippines, which initially brought the case against China to the Hague back in 2013, is no longer pressuring Beijing to obey the ruling, after President Rodrigo Duterte was elected with a mandate to negotiate directly with Beijing.
Since the ruling, China has continued efforts to build artificial islands and fortify them with weaponry, leading to the creation of what Steve Bannon has described as “mobile aircraft carriers”. Bannon has repeatedly warned that China is the most pressing threat to American security and economic interests.
While Beijing mostly just whines and complains when the US sends navy ships within 12 miles of the Spratly islands, we suspect the Foreign Ministry’s response once Washington confirms the policy change will be even more aggressive. Perhaps the decision might even spur the People’s Liberation Army-Navy to speed up their plans for fortification and weaponization, just like the initial ruling appears to have done.
Stay tuned, this will more than likely get ugly.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-13--Criminal Investigation of Trump Coming: Supreme Court Rules He Must Turn Over Tax Records

The U.S. Supreme Court voted Thursday to uphold a subpoena from a grand jury in New York for President Trump ’ s tax returns and related records .
The president ’ s attorneys had argued that presidents are immune from criminal investigation while in office , but seven justices , including the Trump-appointed Gorsuch and Kavanaugh , voted to deny this .
And so now it is certain : whatever is found in Trump ’ s tax records , no matter how benign , no matter how innocuous , the president will be subjected to a criminal investigation .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Democrat rage .
The Court ’ s ruling may be entirely sound on legal grounds .
But it assumes an America that is not rent by civil conflict , an America in which judges are still more interested in dispensing impartial justice rather than in using their position to advance their political agenda , an America in which the full weight of the political and media establishment is not bearing down on the president , determined to discredit and destroy him , and remove him from office .
That America no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in now is the America in which Michael Flynn was ferociously persecuted for years , bullied into pleading guilty to spurious charges , and on the brink of serving a long prison sentence , all as part of an elaborate effort to frame President Trump on equally spurious charges that would serve as grounds for his impeachment and removal .
The America we live in now is the America in which Roger Stone is about to go to prison for the crime of supporting the president and being caught up in the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have is one in which numerous people , notably Hillary Clinton , James Comey , and a host of others are getting off scot-free for far more serious offenses than anything Flynn or Stone were even accused of doing , because they have the good fortune to be among the privileged classes , the reigning political elites .
In this atmosphere , only the most naïve and blinkered , or only those who are so much a part of the old system that they can not or will not see how seriously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that prosecutors in New York are going to treat Trump ’ s tax records fairly and impartially .
Anyone who has been paying attention to the political scene ever since Lois Lerner , Obama ’ s director of the Exempt Organizations Unit of the Internal Revenue Service , used the IRS to harass and discriminate against conservative organizations , knows that the New York prosecutors are not out to administer justice , they are out to get Trump .
And they know that with tax laws being as complicated as they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ records being of necessity as voluminous as they must be , it will not be hard to establish the appearance of impropriety , even if they don ’ t find any instance of the president actually breaking the law .
The forthcoming Rating America ’ s Presidents : An America-First Look at Who Is Best , Who Is Overrated , and Who Was An Absolute Disaster evaluates the presidents of the United States , from Washington to Trump , on the only basis upon which they ever should be evaluated : were they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discusses how Trump , unlike any other president in American history , faces an entrenched , anti-American , globalist , socialist cabal that is bent on destroying him for the crime of putting America first , and of extricating the United States from numerous aspects of the old international order established after World War II that have proven to be detrimental to American sovereignty and to the well-being of the American people .
That ’ s what this is all about .
It isn ’ t about possible tax irregularities .
It certainly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show that no one is above the law ; if no one were above the law , there are numerous Obama administration officials who would be sitting in prison cells right now .
All this is about is yet another attempt by the political elites to destroy the biggest threat to their hegemony that they have faced since the international order from which they benefit so much personally and professionally was established .
Trump , as Rating America ’ s Presidents shows , is – as he himself has often avowed – an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world , not the leader of the foremost cog in the globalist machine , with its decline being carefully managed for the benefit of international socialism .
That is why the elites hate Trump with such incandescent hatred .
That is why New York prosecutors want his taxes .
That is why they are 100 % certain to find irregularities in them that , they will insist , require prosecution .
That is also why Trump must ultimately prevail against this new challenge as he has prevailed against all the others .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ will make the difference between continuing as a free people , or continuing to degenerate into globalist socialist drones .

The U.S. Supreme Court voted Thursday to uphold a subpoena from a grand jury in New York for President Trump’s tax returns and related records. The president’s attorneys had argued that presidents are immune from criminal investigation while in office, but seven justices, including the Trump-appointed Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, voted to deny this. And so now it is certain: whatever is found in Trump’s tax records, no matter how benign, no matter how innocuous, the president will be subjected to a criminal investigation. This is as certain as death, taxes, and Democrat rage.
The Court’s ruling may be entirely sound on legal grounds. But it assumes an America that is not rent by civil conflict, an America in which judges are still more interested in dispensing impartial justice rather than in using their position to advance their political agenda, an America in which the full weight of the political and media establishment is not bearing down on the president, determined to discredit and destroy him, and remove him from office.
That America no longer exists. The America we live in now is the America in which Michael Flynn was ferociously persecuted for years, bullied into pleading guilty to spurious charges, and on the brink of serving a long prison sentence, all as part of an elaborate effort to frame President Trump on equally spurious charges that would serve as grounds for his impeachment and removal. The America we live in now is the America in which Roger Stone is about to go to prison for the crime of supporting the president and being caught up in the same effort to frame him. The America we have is one in which numerous people, notably Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and a host of others are getting off scot-free for far more serious offenses than anything Flynn or Stone were even accused of doing, because they have the good fortune to be among the privileged classes, the reigning political elites.
In this atmosphere, only the most naïve and blinkered, or only those who are so much a part of the old system that they cannot or will not see how seriously it is breaking down, could possibly think that prosecutors in New York are going to treat Trump’s tax records fairly and impartially. Anyone who has been paying attention to the political scene ever since Lois Lerner, Obama’s director of the Exempt Organizations Unit of the Internal Revenue Service, used the IRS to harass and discriminate against conservative organizations, knows that the New York prosecutors are not out to administer justice, they are out to get Trump. And they know that with tax laws being as complicated as they are, and with Trump’s financial records being of necessity as voluminous as they must be, it will not be hard to establish the appearance of impropriety, even if they don’t find any instance of the president actually breaking the law.
The forthcoming Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster evaluates the presidents of the United States, from Washington to Trump, on the only basis upon which they ever should be evaluated: were they good for America and Americans? It discusses how Trump, unlike any other president in American history, faces an entrenched, anti-American, globalist, socialist cabal that is bent on destroying him for the crime of putting America first, and of extricating the United States from numerous aspects of the old international order established after World War II that have proven to be detrimental to American sovereignty and to the well-being of the American people.
That’s what this is all about. It isn’t about possible tax irregularities. It certainly isn’t some high-minded effort to show that no one is above the law; if no one were above the law, there are numerous Obama administration officials who would be sitting in prison cells right now. All this is about is yet another attempt by the political elites to destroy the biggest threat to their hegemony that they have faced since the international order from which they benefit so much personally and professionally was established.
Trump, as Rating America’s Presidents shows, is – as he himself has often avowed – an American president, not the president of the world, not the leader of the foremost cog in the globalist machine, with its decline being carefully managed for the benefit of international socialism. That is why the elites hate Trump with such incandescent hatred. That is why New York prosecutors want his taxes. That is why they are 100% certain to find irregularities in them that, they will insist, require prosecution.
That is also why Trump must ultimately prevail against this new challenge as he has prevailed against all the others. For America, and Americans, it will make the difference between continuing as a free people, or continuing to degenerate into globalist socialist drones.
Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-13--Congressional Deviance For Children Straight Ahead

Anti Fed Ed Warriors , just about a month ago , I wrote about S 3398 , The EARN It Act .
The Bill is supposedly all about catching sexual predators of our children .
Now , do NOT misunderstand me , if that is where this Bill began and ended , I would be supportive .
HOWEVER , like we ’ ve seen so many times in Congress , lots more has been embedded in this Bill which overreaches into family/student privacy .
S 3398 also doesn ’ t properly address the CCSS Machine ’ s overload of CSE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ to our young children , well before they even understand their bodies .
The highlighted link above , not only takes you to the article , but the broadcast from Sons of Liberty during our weekly Rotten to the Core Wednesdays .
My host is also gracious enough to include all the links and images I include so YOU can do yoyur own homework and decide how much of a Warrior Parent/Taxpayer you will be .
From the original article I wrote , look below at the image and see what other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ families : So , what updates are there concerning S 3398 ?
1 ) The NCOSE ( National Center on Sexual Exploitation ) worked with other groups to help create a stronger version of S 3398 .
This move allowed the Bill to advance to the Senate floor .
This took place July 2 , 2020 .
2 ) According to the NCOSE , S 3398 was made stronger while in the Judiciary Committee .
From the Senate Judiciary Committee ’ s press release , Congress will incentivize Big Tech/Big Data to NOT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) available on their platforms .
It also removes blanket immunity .
( *Note : Sen. Graham is the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee .
As far as the “ Allies ” seen in the image above , they are : Rights4Girls and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children ( NCMEC ) .
No mention of the Child Protection League ( fights CSE in K-12 schools ) was made by the NCOSE or the Judiciary Committee .
There was also no mention of the Reisman Institute/Child Protection Institute , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposure of modern day child pornography which is all a result of Dr. Alfred Kinsey ’ s twisted experiments .
Much of Kinsey ’ s ‘ sexuality ’ research is found in Sex Ed for Social Change ( formerly SEICUS ) .
Lastly , the Stop CSE organization was also not mentioned in the Judiciary information .
Also worth mentioning , many of the Committee members voted to pass ESSA , Every Student Succeeds Act .
ESSA embedded ways for Comprehensive Sexuality Education , CSE to easily be inserted into K-12 education , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and , elsewhere . )
Back in 2014 , my fellow Warrior , Bradlee Dean , on his Sons of Liberty Media site , published an article about the perverse child trafficking and pedophilia going on in DC .
The video in the article is no longer available , but I did find the 56 minute documentary which has since been banned .
**Warning : graphic descriptions of pedophilia** 1 ) From NCOSE , an account of the 7th grader exposed to porn in education with a Google Chromebook issued at school .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ list of providers of explicit child sexuality material .
Will these be included in Sen. Graham ’ s definition of ‘ child sexual abuse materials ’ ?
Warriors , I don ’ t think S 3398 is TOUGH enough , do you ?
Giving the NCOSE is a lobbying group that HAS made a bit of progress , I believe , as taxpayers we can do more .
We need to DEMAND our tax dollars do NOT fund CSE , which IS child pornography .
WE SEE THIS , but WILL D.C. ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ up NOW !
The banned video told that the trail of sexual abuse and child trafficking in D.C. wouldn ’ t go away..and it hasn ’ t !
It still exists TODAY in 2020 !
What about the fact that the U.S. Dept .
of Education AND the U.S. Dept .
of Health/Human Services fund some of the very offensive CSE resources NOT on the Dirty Dozen list ?
Where did the federal government GET that RIGHT to overreach in education ?
!
Given the fact that Sen. Graham has been recorded in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ include high ranking officials like himself ?
!
Don ’ t forget Congress wants to pay the ‘ child sexual abuse material providers ’ off !
Why not charge them as the criminals they are ?
!
Lastly , consider this : IF D.C. is made into the 51st State the standing D.C. laws as a District , for child abuse , will have to be changed .
How will this water down/beef up protecting children , especially in schools .
Remember , D.C. uses vouchers , which mean government assigned resources .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ been a featured speaker at small meetings and large conferences .
Since 2009 , she has served as a frequent guest on nationwide radio and multimedia shows .
Lynne also co-established PIE NC ( Preserving Integrity and Excellence in Education ) .
She is a retired private ( homeschool ) teacher and regionally recognized support group leader .
She has also been a business owner , worked with children 's ministry and currently is an education liaison for Protecting Innocence Campaign ( based in OH ) , wife and mom .
Lynne is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign `` Child Abuse in the Classroom '' , where it is the campaign 's belief that `` Repealing ESSA and Restoring FERPA '' are the best ways to help restore our nation 's education system .
She was also awarded the 2011 Distinguished Educator from the National Society of High School Scholars , as well as the 2016 L & B Network 's Torchbearer Award for educational advocacy .
She has been recognized by her peers as an expert in Common Core , Career Tech Education , Career Pathways , workforce and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ education and our families .

Anti Fed Ed Warriors, just about a month ago, I wrote about S 3398, The EARN It Act. The Bill is supposedly all about catching sexual predators of our children. Now, do NOT misunderstand me, if that is where this Bill began and ended, I would be supportive. HOWEVER, like we’ve seen so many times in Congress, lots more has been embedded in this Bill which overreaches into family/student privacy. S 3398 also doesn’t properly address the CCSS Machine’s overload of CSE, Comprehensive Sexuality Education being ‘taught’ to our young children, well before they even understand their bodies.
The highlighted link above, not only takes you to the article, but the broadcast from Sons of Liberty during our weekly Rotten to the Core Wednesdays. My host is also gracious enough to include all the links and images I include so YOU can do yoyur own homework and decide how much of a Warrior Parent/Taxpayer you will be.
From the original article I wrote, look below at the image and see what other types of S 3398 raises for our families:
So, what updates are there concerning S 3398?
1) The NCOSE (National Center on Sexual Exploitation) worked with other groups to help create a stronger version of S 3398. This move allowed the Bill to advance to the Senate floor. This took place July 2, 2020.
2) According to the NCOSE, S 3398 was made stronger while in the Judiciary Committee. From the Senate Judiciary Committee’s press release, Congress will incentivize Big Tech/Big Data to NOT have CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Material) available on their platforms. It also removes blanket immunity.
(*Note: Sen. Graham is the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. As far as the “Allies” seen in the image above, they are: Rights4Girls and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC). No mention of the Child Protection League (fights CSE in K-12 schools) was made by the NCOSE or the Judiciary Committee. There was also no mention of the Reisman Institute/Child Protection Institute, where Dr. Judith Reisman heads up her watchdog exposure of modern day child pornography which is all a result of Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s twisted experiments. Much of Kinsey’s ‘sexuality’ research is found in Sex Ed for Social Change (formerly SEICUS). Lastly, the Stop CSE organization was also not mentioned in the Judiciary information.
Also worth mentioning, many of the Committee members voted to pass ESSA, Every Student Succeeds Act. ESSA embedded ways for Comprehensive Sexuality Education, CSE to easily be inserted into K-12 education, libraries, community after school programs, and, elsewhere.)
(In the image you see here, the NCOSE’s IRS 990 form expressed their purpose and ability to educate the general public on sexual exploitation. My added emphasis points out that the exploitative resources on their Dirty Dozen list is very selective when it comes to K-12 education materials available to EVERY school choice out there.)
Back in 2014, my fellow Warrior, Bradlee Dean, on his Sons of Liberty Media site, published an article about the perverse child trafficking and pedophilia going on in DC. The video in the article is no longer available, but I did find the 56 minute documentary which has since been banned. **Warning: graphic descriptions of pedophilia**
(*Note: mentioned in the documentary was Boys Town, USA (in Nebraska). Back in 2016, I exposed how Boys Town USA had ties to the CCSS Machine via grants from the NIH (National Institutes of Health). The grants were for biomedical research. What we now call SEL, social-emotional learning, was a result of that ‘research’. Warriors, SEL is key in CSE! It reshapes values, beliefs, and, attitudes. CSE seeks to shift attitudes about sexuality as young as 3 years old!)
Related:
1) From NCOSE, an account of the 7th grader exposed to porn in education with a Google Chromebook issued at school.
2) The full 2018/19 IRS Form 990 for NCOSE.
3) From Stop CSE, a list of providers of explicit child sexuality material. Will these be included in Sen. Graham’s definition of ‘child sexual abuse materials’?
Closing:
Warriors, I don’t think S 3398 is TOUGH enough, do you? Giving the NCOSE is a lobbying group that HAS made a bit of progress, I believe, as taxpayers we can do more. We need to DEMAND our tax dollars do NOT fund CSE, which IS child pornography. WE SEE THIS, but WILL D.C.? Not if we don’t speak up NOW! The banned video told that the trail of sexual abuse and child trafficking in D.C. wouldn’t go away..and it hasn’t! It still exists TODAY in 2020!
What about the fact that the U.S. Dept. of Education AND the U.S. Dept. of Health/Human Services fund some of the very offensive CSE resources NOT on the Dirty Dozen list? Where did the federal government GET that RIGHT to overreach in education?!
Given the fact that Sen. Graham has been recorded in some compromising situations, will S 3398 include high ranking officials like himself?! Don’t forget Congress wants to pay the ‘child sexual abuse material providers’ off! Why not charge them as the criminals they are?! Lastly, consider this: IF D.C. is made into the 51st State the standing D.C. laws as a District, for child abuse, will have to be changed. How will this water down/beef up protecting children, especially in schools. Remember, D.C. uses vouchers, which mean government assigned resources.
Article posted with permission from Lynne Taylor


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-13--Massachusetts:  Parents Seek Reparations After Special Needs Students Punished By Government Funded

Massachusetts:  Parents Seek Reparations After Special Needs Students Punished By Government Funded Electric Shock

Bristol County , MA – As TFTP reported , in 2018 , Family Court Judge Katherine Field denied a motion to stop the use of electric shock on disabled students , a form of punishment that has been controversial for years after news of the practice first reached the public in 2013 when video surfaced of an 18-year-old student receiving dozens of shocks for refusing to take off his jacket .
“ ( The state ) failed to demonstrate that there is now a professional consensus that the Level III aversive treatment used at JRC does not conform to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with intellectual and developmental disabilities , ” Judge Field wrote in her decision .
The facility in question is the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center ( JRC ) , a special needs day and residential school in Canton , and it is the only school in the country that was still using electric shocks on its students .
Records show that at least 58 students at the school have received shocks as of August 2017 .
People living at JRC aren ’ t just from Massachusetts .
According to The Guardian , they come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York , Illinois and California .
In 2014 , ProPublica found that New York taxpayers spend $ 30 million a year sending children from their state to the Massachusetts school .
The things that have taken place at JRC have prompted calls for the FDA to ban the use of electric shock as a punishment for students , but the FDA ignored the issue for years and even had protesters arrested for attempting to raise awareness about the issue outside of their headquarters .
Even after the original story went viral , special @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After years of protests and testimony , the FDA finally banned the practice this year but the former victims say that it ’ s not enough .
While the rare ban is considered a “ significant step forward ” and giving people with disabilities and advocates “ a sigh of relief ” advocates said — they also said it ’ s not enough .
“ A ban will do nothing to undo the decades of torture that people confined to JRC have had to suffer through until now , ” said Lydia Brown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fairness at Georgetown Law ’ s Institute for Tech Law and Policy .
“ And Massachusetts has a responsibility to make reparations to the survivors.
” Despite the ban in March of this year , a technicality allowed it to remain legal for up to six more months .
According to Masslive , the ban goes into effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register , and for those who need a transition period compliance is required 180 days after publication .
“ [ The ban ’ s ] so overdue , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Brown said .
“ It ’ s been condemned twice by the United Nations , the Department of Justice opened a civil rights investigation .
And yet , it ’ s still legal .
Technically , it is still legal for 30 days in general .
And up to six months for some other people.
” JRC reported to the FDA that they are still shocking some students once a week — in 2020 — in America .
Despite the obvious ethical concerns with this practice , there is a cult-like support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for what they call “ aversive treatment.
” After the family court refused to ban it in 2018 , a statement from the JRC Parents Group was released in support of it : Even after the FDA ’ s ban on shock therapy , the school is still battling to keep it .
JRC Parents Association said in a statement to MassLive , that the FDA ’ s decision “ can only be interpreted one way : FDA is saying that our children ’ s lives do not matter.
” However , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disagree , and there are several former staff members who began speaking out against the use of electric shock .
Whistleblower Greg Miller , who taught at the facility from 2003-2006 , told MassLive.com that he truly believed that this barbaric therapy was saving lives .
“ I believed in that place at first because I was told that it was the only place in the world that could really save these kids lives and most of them would be dead if they weren ’ t hooked up to the electric shock , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electric shock was used on students for the smallest infractions , even something as small as standing up or speaking without permission .
Eventually , he began to observe that the students were horrified of the shocks and they were rarely aggressive enough to require such a painful punishment .
“ I was seeing more and more ways I could do something other than shock the students , ” Miller said .
Miller ultimately quit , unable to cope with the ethical dilemma that came along with the job .
The use of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ineffective , and it is not used very often because other treatments work much better .
“ People don ’ t use it anymore because they don ’ t need to .
It is not the standard of care .
There are alternative procedures that do not involve aversives like electronic shock .
And I am not talking about drugs as an alternative .
I am talking about other behavioral treatments , ” Dr. William Pelham , a behavioral specialist , and director of the Center for Children and Families at the State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told the New York Times .

Bristol County, MA – As TFTP reported, in 2018, Family Court Judge Katherine Field denied a motion to stop the use of electric shock on disabled students, a form of punishment that has been controversial for years after news of the practice first reached the public in 2013 when video surfaced of an 18-year-old student receiving dozens of shocks for refusing to take off his jacket.
“(The state) failed to demonstrate that there is now a professional consensus that the Level III aversive treatment used at JRC does not conform to the accepted standard of care for treating individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities,” Judge Field wrote in her decision.
The facility in question is the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center (JRC), a special needs day and residential school in Canton, and it is the only school in the country that was still using electric shocks on its students. Records show that at least 58 students at the school have received shocks as of August 2017.
People living at JRC aren’t just from Massachusetts. According to The Guardian, they come from 15 states including Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and California. In 2014, ProPublica found that New York taxpayers spend $30 million a year sending children from their state to the Massachusetts school.
The things that have taken place at JRC have prompted calls for the FDA to ban the use of electric shock as a punishment for students, but the FDA ignored the issue for years and even had protesters arrested for attempting to raise awareness about the issue outside of their headquarters.
Even after the original story went viral, special needs students were still being shocked. After years of protests and testimony, the FDA finally banned the practice this year but the former victims say that it’s not enough.
While the rare ban is considered a “significant step forward” and giving people with disabilities and advocates “a sigh of relief” advocates said — they also said it’s not enough.
“A ban will do nothing to undo the decades of torture that people confined to JRC have had to suffer through until now,” said Lydia Brown, Associate for Disability Rights and Algorithmic Fairness at Georgetown Law’s Institute for Tech Law and Policy. “And Massachusetts has a responsibility to make reparations to the survivors.”
Despite the ban in March of this year, a technicality allowed it to remain legal for up to six more months. According to Masslive, the ban goes into effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, and for those who need a transition period compliance is required 180 days after publication.
“[The ban’s] so overdue, they started shocking people in 1988,” Brown said. “It’s been condemned twice by the United Nations, the Department of Justice opened a civil rights investigation. And yet, it’s still legal. Technically, it is still legal for 30 days in general. And up to six months for some other people.”
JRC reported to the FDA that they are still shocking some students once a week — in 2020 — in America.
Despite the obvious ethical concerns with this practice, there is a cult-like support among the staff and even some parents for what they call “aversive treatment.”
After the family court refused to ban it in 2018, a statement from the JRC Parents Group was released in support of it:
“As parents whose children attend and received treatment at the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center (JRC) we welcome the court’s ruling and repudiation of Massachusetts government officials at the Department of Developmental Service (DDS), who acted in bad faith and impermissibly made treatment decisions for JRC Clients—our children, just as officials within the agency had done in the 1980s and 1990s.”
Even after the FDA’s ban on shock therapy, the school is still battling to keep it. JRC Parents Association said in a statement to MassLive, that the FDA’s decision “can only be interpreted one way: FDA is saying that our children’s lives do not matter.”
However, the students being subjected to this abuse obviously disagree, and there are several former staff members who began speaking out against the use of electric shock.
Whistleblower Greg Miller, who taught at the facility from 2003-2006, told MassLive.com that he truly believed that this barbaric therapy was saving lives.
“I believed in that place at first because I was told that it was the only place in the world that could really save these kids lives and most of them would be dead if they weren’t hooked up to the electric shock,” Miller said.
Miller said that electric shock was used on students for the smallest infractions, even something as small as standing up or speaking without permission. Eventually, he began to observe that the students were horrified of the shocks and they were rarely aggressive enough to require such a painful punishment.
“I was seeing more and more ways I could do something other than shock the students,” Miller said.
Miller ultimately quit, unable to cope with the ethical dilemma that came along with the job.
The use of shock therapy has been proven to be ineffective, and it is not used very often because other treatments work much better.
“People don’t use it anymore because they don’t need to. It is not the standard of care. There are alternative procedures that do not involve aversives like electronic shock. And I am not talking about drugs as an alternative. I am talking about other behavioral treatments,” Dr. William Pelham, a behavioral specialist, and director of the Center for Children and Families at the State University of New York at Buffalo, told the New York Times.
Article posted with permission from Matt Agorist


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-14--COVID Cures & COVID Fears

COVID Cures & COVID Fears

he great USA – the land of the free – where life , liberty , and the pursuit of happiness are supposed to be the foundation of this country , is being shredded by tyrannical governors for a political agenda .
And , by all appearances , they seem to be okay with sending people to their death to achieve this goal .
When cures and freedoms are intentionally suppressed and fear is stoked , it is a recipe for disaster .
Ask Yourself These Questions Despite the fact that Hydroxychloroquine was well documented to have been saving lives from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FDA , coronavirus task force , politicians , and Hollywood all pushed dangerous messages and fear tactics around it , only later after thousands allegedly died from COVID-related deaths , did they come clean about its ability to cure .
Only then , did the FDA lift the restrictions on it .
Many of these individuals and organizations knew the history and benefits of Hydroxychloroquine , as well as recent data on its life-saving abilities with COVID .
Why didn ’ t they want Americans to have access to this extremely inexpensive drug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dr. Birx of the coronavirus task force , all repeatedly instructed every American citizen to stay home and not seek help if they didn ’ t feel well .
They told people that only those who were extremely sick and couldn ’ t breathe should go to a hospital for help , which meant the inflammation caused by the virus would be so drastic that they would more than likely be put on a ventilator , resulting in death .
This is not how America deals with sickness , virus , or disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people before symptoms worsen .
Why did they want Americans to stay home and suffer until the virus escalated instead of allowing them to be treated ?
Perhaps the biggest atrocity are the hospitals in New York that were putting healthy people in with COVID-positive patients , and in some cases documenting some as positive who in fact tested negative .
If that wasn ’ t enough to inflate the numbers , Governor Cuomo made sure the death toll vastly increased by sending COVID-positive patients to nursing homes – the very place that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why would he do that ?
The level of reports coming out on how COVID-positive patients allegedly tested positive , how these numbers were documented , and how deaths were recorded , reveals overwhelming data illustrating how the numbers have been conflated since the virus hit .
In fact , the tactics being used after the US “ flattened the curve ” are even more disturbing because they are being used by governors to instill mandatory masks and lockdown businesses again .
Dr. Birx and several state officials have told people that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that also tested positive for COVID , was being documented as COVID for cause of death in numerous states .
There are volumes of evidence , whereby even the CDC had to fess up to the antibody test showing COVID-positive when in fact a person could have the common cold , a different coronavirus strain all together , and if the antibody tests come up positive for COVID , they are being documented as new cases .
Why are these numbers being intentionally inflated and how are governors getting away with creating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overstep their authority , based on these numbers ?
And finally , why are governors trying to force everyone to wear masks when the Surgeon General , Dr. Fauci , and the World Health Organization all told people they will not protect anyone from the virus ?
Why are they pushing this , when even the CDC doesn ’ t have scientific evidence to prove they work , let alone telling people to wear basic cloth masks ?
Instead of providing evidence that they can prevent the spread of COVID , mainstream media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the science that shows the harm wearing masks can cause .
Millions of people are suffering from respiratory issues , asthma , anxiety , and PTSD by wearing masks that are illegally mandated , yet some states are failing to provide these medical exemptions .
What is the real reason they want you masked ?
In a recent poll Corey ’ s Digs ran , asking if people suffer from any symptoms when wearing masks , 39.1 % of 4,451 people said they suffer from asthma or respiratory issues , 31.5 % suffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % suffer from dizziness , while only 11.4 % said that the masks do not bother them .
There were over 250 comments with a large amount saying , “ I can ’ t breathe ” when wearing a mask .
The very slogan splashed across every mainstream news headline , in every marketing ploy , on thousands of protester signs , and even on masks themselves , allegedly for the purpose of bringing attention to George Floyd .
But the reality is , they are inducing the thought “ I can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people suffocating by masks to intensify fear , weaken people ’ s minds , and bring them to their knees .
It is quite a destructive psychological game they are playing , and unfortunately , many are succumbing to it .
Aside from Hydroxychloroquine , which has shown great success in curing one from the virus , there is another cure that allegedly exists , which will likely be getting more attention soon through both real news and fake news , and given how Hydroxychloroquine was shut down by those with a political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retaliation .
In fact , Dr. Bartlett is already being attacked in the mainstream news .
When doctors aiming to discredit this treatment make the claim that “ it is too good to be true ” while others suggest there is no evidence it works , it ’ s difficult to take them seriously , being as the low death rate is a good indicator of evidence .
Dr. Richard Bartlett , a 28-year general practitioner in Odessa Texas , has been using a treatment since March that has successfully worked on all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same treatment has been used in several other countries who just so happen to have some of the lowest COVID-19 death rates .
Bartlett has been using a combination treatment of Budesonide , Clarithromycin , and Zinc .
He refers to Budesonide as “ the silver bullet ” which is a steroid given through a nebulizer .
It has been safely used for over 25 years for treatment of those suffering from asthma , and Bartlett says the delivery method works much better on coronavirus through a nebulizer rather than a standard inhaler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the inflammation .
Just how well does this steroid treatment work ?
In other countries that have been using the same method of treatment , but a slightly different steroid , have seen very little deaths , especially compared to the rest of the world .
Now , the mainstream news setting out to attack this , will push the narrative that their death rates are low due to wearing masks and social distancing , yet these same sources will allege that the thousands of people rioting and protesting are not spreading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to them , masks must not work at all , as California is set to release another 8,000 prisoners after having already released 10,000 , because the virus is allegedly spreading in prisons .
But , those bumping bodies all day and night at protests surely have no impact .
Taiwan – only 7 deaths Japan – only 972 deaths Singapore – only 26 deaths Iceland – only 10 deaths California Gov .
Gavin Newsom just put the state of California on lockdown again , shutting down businesses and leaving people unable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no one can pray in church , but they can swap sweat in the streets during packed protests – those are still allowed , so long as the protests are not against the lockdown .
Does this make any logical sense ?
Bartlett explains that Budesonide is very inexpensive , costing only $ 200 without insurance .
That alone will likely put a target on it by those carrying out an agenda to seek trillions from a future vaccine .
In fact , Bartlett stated that NIH is currently doing a study on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for failure by testing it on people who are in the hospital with advanced stages and possibly comorbidities .
Their study is scheduled to release in October .
This is the same scenario everyone witnessed with the attack on Hydroxychloroquine .
Sen. Ted Cruz ’ s office reached out to Bartlett recently , and requested his unpublished paper because they were interested in his success with treating the virus .
They also informed him that President Trump would have this information within the next week .
The WHO , GAVI , President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officially pulled out of the World Health Organization ( WHO ) , there is still concern over his potential support for Bill Gates ’ GAVI and funding for a COVID-19 vaccine .
As reported by Corey ’ s Digs in April , USAID committed $ 1.16 billion to GAVI over the course of the next four years when Mark Green was the administrator of USAID .
Green announced his resignation in March and later went on to be the Executive Director of the McCain Institute .
USAID has granted over $ 2 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s repeated calls for Hydroxychloroquine and other potential treatments , in a recent summit , President Trump recorded a short message in support of GAVI , and the $ 8.8 billion that was raised is said to be going toward “ essential vaccines ” to the most vulnerable children in other countries , as well as a COVID-19 vaccine they intend to jab the globe with .
The question on everyone ’ s mind remains – is a vaccine inevitable ?
By April 2020 , Iceland had already discovered 291 mutations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus to produce a “ life-saving ” vaccine , they would continuously have to reassess and create a new vaccine as it mutates which would be incredibly difficult for a respiratory virus .
To date , they have never been able to produce a successful vaccine for a coronavirus .
Is a vaccine even necessary when there is one treatment and quite possibly two treatments that are working effectively ?
If they do produce one , will it pass the FDA ’ s regulations ?
What happens if they do manage to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was ineffective ?
Will they falsify that information , or will they be ok with reflecting ultra-low efficacy rates just as they do with the flu vaccine that is still recommended , despite thousands of injury and death claims ?
These are all realistic questions rolling through everyone ’ s mind , and it ’ s important to maintain perspective as new information comes out , without jumping to conclusions .
We don ’ t have all the answers yet .
In Florida and other states they have sneaky clauses stating that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ means necessary when it comes to the health and safety of the country .
This is important legislation everyone should be aware of , primarily before it is passed in your state .
There are lawyers in the midst of battling this right now in Florida .
This very scenario is reminiscent of 1907 , when the forced “ sterilization law ” was created in the US , and resulted in sterilizing 60,000 Americans against their will by 1935 when it was shut down .
Is it possible that there simply aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to win these overreaching laws and mandates against humanity ?
Is it possible that even if they do know how to win them , that they are faced with a corrupt justice system and a judge that will allow this injustice to continue ?
This is all plausible .
Where are the citizens in all of this ?
Are they storming the court houses , calling their representatives , hiring lawyers to fight these battles , telling their communities to rise up and fight , assisting with campaigns and registering voters , making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are recalled and removed while voting in those who will fight for our constitutional rights ?
Or is everyone staying snug as a bug in their homes because they ’ ve been instructed to stand down , submit , and hide in fear while slipping into cognitive dissonance and depression ?
Fear is a funny thing – it can cause one to see things that aren ’ t really there , to believe things that don ’ t truly exist , and to submit to tyrants while rationalizing in their mind that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ selfish.
” All the while , their rights are being stripped away , and one day that fear is going to catch up with them and they will know what real fear is .
The reality of the situation is that there are accessible and affordable treatments available , masks do not protect against coronavirus spread and are being used for intimidation and psychological warfare while shielding the terrorists and normalizing new “ mandates ” in the US .
The reality is that there is a political agenda that seeks to destroy us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the presidential election , into a land of communism that will stifle everyone and bring your life to a hard stop .
The reality is , if you think George Floyd was an “ I can ’ t breathe ” movement for Black Lives Matter to rally this country together for black justice , you are sadly mistaken , and if you feel like “ you can ’ t breathe ” while wearing your mandatory mask – just you wait until you see what other “ mandates ” they have in store for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make , right here , right now .
You either recognize the gravity of the situation , the magnitude of what is being attempted against all of humanity , and the complete and utter charade being played out via a totally treatable virus with a death rate less than half a percent , and you stand up and fight – Or , you continue to hide behind that mask in fear , you close up your business and submit to your masters , you shame your fellow Americans for standing up for everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost in the abyss as our country self-destructs .
What ’ s it going to be ?
Are you going to be “ selfless ” and care about humanity and your God given rights and freedoms , or are you going to be “ selfish ” and wallow in your fear ?
A Cuban defector recently warned Americans of the communist agenda being rolled out in the U.S. because he is all too familiar with it .
His profound story of our great country , how blessed we are , and how this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be shared around the globe .
Article posted with permission from Corey Lynn , originally published at CoreysDigs.com

he great USA – the land of the free – where life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are supposed to be the foundation of this country, is being shredded by tyrannical governors for a political agenda. And, by all appearances, they seem to be okay with sending people to their death to achieve this goal. When cures and freedoms are intentionally suppressed and fear is stoked, it is a recipe for disaster.
Ask Yourself These Questions
Despite the fact that Hydroxychloroquine was well documented to have been saving lives from COVID-19, the media, CDC, FDA, coronavirus task force, politicians, and Hollywood all pushed dangerous messages and fear tactics around it, only later after thousands allegedly died from COVID-related deaths, did they come clean about its ability to cure. Only then, did the FDA lift the restrictions on it. Many of these individuals and organizations knew the history and benefits of Hydroxychloroquine, as well as recent data on its life-saving abilities with COVID. Why didn’t they want Americans to have access to this extremely inexpensive drug?
The CDC, Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx of the coronavirus task force, all repeatedly instructed every American citizen to stay home and not seek help if they didn’t feel well. They told people that only those who were extremely sick and couldn’t breathe should go to a hospital for help, which meant the inflammation caused by the virus would be so drastic that they would more than likely be put on a ventilator, resulting in death. This is not how America deals with sickness, virus, or disease. This is a country that treats people before symptoms worsen. Why did they want Americans to stay home and suffer until the virus escalated instead of allowing them to be treated?
Perhaps the biggest atrocity are the hospitals in New York that were putting healthy people in with COVID-positive patients, and in some cases documenting some as positive who in fact tested negative. If that wasn’t enough to inflate the numbers, Governor Cuomo made sure the death toll vastly increased by sending COVID-positive patients to nursing homes – the very place that hosts those most susceptible to the virus. Why would he do that?
The level of reports coming out on how COVID-positive patients allegedly tested positive, how these numbers were documented, and how deaths were recorded, reveals overwhelming data illustrating how the numbers have been conflated since the virus hit. In fact, the tactics being used after the US “flattened the curve” are even more disturbing because they are being used by governors to instill mandatory masks and lockdown businesses again. Dr. Birx and several state officials have told people that anyone who has died from other comorbidities, that also tested positive for COVID, was being documented as COVID for cause of death in numerous states. There are volumes of evidence, whereby even the CDC had to fess up to the antibody test showing COVID-positive when in fact a person could have the common cold, a different coronavirus strain all together, and if the antibody tests come up positive for COVID, they are being documented as new cases. Why are these numbers being intentionally inflated and how are governors getting away with creating unconstitutional mandates and unlawful demands that grossly overstep their authority, based on these numbers?
And finally, why are governors trying to force everyone to wear masks when the Surgeon General, Dr. Fauci, and the World Health Organization all told people they will not protect anyone from the virus? Why are they pushing this, when even the CDC doesn’t have scientific evidence to prove they work, let alone telling people to wear basic cloth masks? Instead of providing evidence that they can prevent the spread of COVID, mainstream media focuses on trying to debunk all of the science that shows the harm wearing masks can cause. Millions of people are suffering from respiratory issues, asthma, anxiety, and PTSD by wearing masks that are illegally mandated, yet some states are failing to provide these medical exemptions. What is the real reason they want you masked?
In a recent poll Corey’s Digs ran, asking if people suffer from any symptoms when wearing masks, 39.1% of 4,451 people said they suffer from asthma or respiratory issues, 31.5% suffer from PTSD or anxiety, and 18% suffer from dizziness, while only 11.4% said that the masks do not bother them. There were over 250 comments with a large amount saying, “I can’t breathe” when wearing a mask. The very slogan splashed across every mainstream news headline, in every marketing ploy, on thousands of protester signs, and even on masks themselves, allegedly for the purpose of bringing attention to George Floyd. But the reality is, they are inducing the thought “I can’t breathe” with a visual of people suffocating by masks to intensify fear, weaken people’s minds, and bring them to their knees. It is quite a destructive psychological game they are playing, and unfortunately, many are succumbing to it.
Another Powerful Cure May Exist
Aside from Hydroxychloroquine, which has shown great success in curing one from the virus, there is another cure that allegedly exists, which will likely be getting more attention soon through both real news and fake news, and given how Hydroxychloroquine was shut down by those with a political agenda, this too will likely receive retaliation. In fact, Dr. Bartlett is already being attacked in the mainstream news. When doctors aiming to discredit this treatment make the claim that “it is too good to be true” while others suggest there is no evidence it works, it’s difficult to take them seriously, being as the low death rate is a good indicator of evidence.
Dr. Richard Bartlett, a 28-year general practitioner in Odessa Texas, has been using a treatment since March that has successfully worked on all of his patients thus far. This same treatment has been used in several other countries who just so happen to have some of the lowest COVID-19 death rates. Bartlett has been using a combination treatment of Budesonide, Clarithromycin, and Zinc. He refers to Budesonide as “the silver bullet” which is a steroid given through a nebulizer. It has been safely used for over 25 years for treatment of those suffering from asthma, and Bartlett says the delivery method works much better on coronavirus through a nebulizer rather than a standard inhaler device because it instantly begins to break up the inflammation.
Just how well does this steroid treatment work? In other countries that have been using the same method of treatment, but a slightly different steroid, have seen very little deaths, especially compared to the rest of the world. Now, the mainstream news setting out to attack this, will push the narrative that their death rates are low due to wearing masks and social distancing, yet these same sources will allege that the thousands of people rioting and protesting are not spreading the virus. In fact, according to them, masks must not work at all, as California is set to release another 8,000 prisoners after having already released 10,000, because the virus is allegedly spreading in prisons. But, those bumping bodies all day and night at protests surely have no impact.
Taiwan – only 7 deaths
Japan – only 972 deaths
Singapore – only 26 deaths
Iceland – only 10 deaths
California Gov. Gavin Newsom just put the state of California on lockdown again, shutting down businesses and leaving people unable to support their families. Once again, no one can pray in church, but they can swap sweat in the streets during packed protests – those are still allowed, so long as the protests are not against the lockdown. Does this make any logical sense?
Bartlett explains that Budesonide is very inexpensive, costing only $200 without insurance. That alone will likely put a target on it by those carrying out an agenda to seek trillions from a future vaccine. In fact, Bartlett stated that NIH is currently doing a study on it but have already set it up for failure by testing it on people who are in the hospital with advanced stages and possibly comorbidities. Their study is scheduled to release in October. This is the same scenario everyone witnessed with the attack on Hydroxychloroquine.
Sen. Ted Cruz’s office reached out to Bartlett recently, and requested his unpublished paper because they were interested in his success with treating the virus. They also informed him that President Trump would have this information within the next week.
The WHO, GAVI, President Trump and A Vaccine
Though President Trump has officially pulled out of the World Health Organization (WHO), there is still concern over his potential support for Bill Gates’ GAVI and funding for a COVID-19 vaccine. As reported by Corey’s Digs in April, USAID committed $1.16 billion to GAVI over the course of the next four years when Mark Green was the administrator of USAID. Green announced his resignation in March and later went on to be the Executive Director of the McCain Institute. USAID has granted over $2 billion to GAVI between 2001-2019.
Despite President Trump’s repeated calls for Hydroxychloroquine and other potential treatments, in a recent summit, President Trump recorded a short message in support of GAVI, and the $8.8 billion that was raised is said to be going toward “essential vaccines” to the most vulnerable children in other countries, as well as a COVID-19 vaccine they intend to jab the globe with.
The question on everyone’s mind remains – is a vaccine inevitable? By April 2020, Iceland had already discovered 291 mutations of COVID-19. In order to isolate the virus to produce a “life-saving” vaccine, they would continuously have to reassess and create a new vaccine as it mutates which would be incredibly difficult for a respiratory virus. To date, they have never been able to produce a successful vaccine for a coronavirus. Is a vaccine even necessary when there is one treatment and quite possibly two treatments that are working effectively? If they do produce one, will it pass the FDA’s regulations? What happens if they do manage to pass it and collect data that shows it was ineffective? Will they falsify that information, or will they be ok with reflecting ultra-low efficacy rates just as they do with the flu vaccine that is still recommended, despite thousands of injury and death claims? These are all realistic questions rolling through everyone’s mind, and it’s important to maintain perspective as new information comes out, without jumping to conclusions. We don’t have all the answers yet.
In Florida and other states they have sneaky clauses stating that they can give mandatory vaccines by any means necessary when it comes to the health and safety of the country. This is important legislation everyone should be aware of, primarily before it is passed in your state. There are lawyers in the midst of battling this right now in Florida. This very scenario is reminiscent of 1907, when the forced “sterilization law” was created in the US, and resulted in sterilizing 60,000 Americans against their will by 1935 when it was shut down.
Is it possible that there simply aren’t enough constitutional lawyers that know how to win these overreaching laws and mandates against humanity? Is it possible that even if they do know how to win them, that they are faced with a corrupt justice system and a judge that will allow this injustice to continue? This is all plausible. Where are the citizens in all of this? Are they storming the court houses, calling their representatives, hiring lawyers to fight these battles, telling their communities to rise up and fight, assisting with campaigns and registering voters, making darn sure that the corrupt in power are recalled and removed while voting in those who will fight for our constitutional rights? Or is everyone staying snug as a bug in their homes because they’ve been instructed to stand down, submit, and hide in fear while slipping into cognitive dissonance and depression?
COVID CURES vs COVID FEARS
Fear is a funny thing – it can cause one to see things that aren’t really there, to believe things that don’t truly exist, and to submit to tyrants while rationalizing in their mind that they are just being “selfless instead of selfish.” All the while, their rights are being stripped away, and one day that fear is going to catch up with them and they will know what real fear is. The reality of the situation is that there are accessible and affordable treatments available, masks do not protect against coronavirus spread and are being used for intimidation and psychological warfare while shielding the terrorists and normalizing new “mandates” in the US. The reality is that there is a political agenda that seeks to destroy us from within, that goes far beyond the presidential election, into a land of communism that will stifle everyone and bring your life to a hard stop. The reality is, if you think George Floyd was an “I can’t breathe” movement for Black Lives Matter to rally this country together for black justice, you are sadly mistaken, and if you feel like “you can’t breathe” while wearing your mandatory mask – just you wait until you see what other “mandates” they have in store for you.
There is a choice to make, right here, right now. You either recognize the gravity of the situation, the magnitude of what is being attempted against all of humanity, and the complete and utter charade being played out via a totally treatable virus with a death rate less than half a percent, and you stand up and fight – Or, you continue to hide behind that mask in fear, you close up your business and submit to your masters, you shame your fellow Americans for standing up for everyone’s freedom, and you get lost in the abyss as our country self-destructs. What’s it going to be? Are you going to be “selfless” and care about humanity and your God given rights and freedoms, or are you going to be “selfish” and wallow in your fear?
A Cuban defector recently warned Americans of the communist agenda being rolled out in the U.S. because he is all too familiar with it. His profound story of our great country, how blessed we are, and how this agenda is now destroying us, should be shared around the globe.
Article posted with permission from Corey Lynn, originally published at CoreysDigs.com


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-14--If Liberals Don’t Take on Identity Politics, They’ll Lose

Identity politics believes a liberal society is racist , and liberals are losing the argument .
The Harper ’ s letter protesting cancel culture , while being too afraid to even put the name of the beast on paper , was doomed even before it hit the social media grinder .
After over two centuries of liberals being guillotined by leftists , it would be nice if they had learned something .
Unfortunately , American liberals have learned nothing from France in the 18th century , and Russia in the 20th century , as they set themselves up for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t help that less than half of the Harper ’ s letter signatories are even liberals .
Instead of making a case for liberal values , the letter is reduced to arguing that fellow allies shouldn ’ t be lynched for questioning dogma or accidentally falling out of step with the movement .
That ’ s not a defense of liberal values , but a plea to Stalin not to shoot quite so many socialists .
The Harper ’ s letter never names the ideas driving cancel culture , such as intersectionality and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are either too afraid to offer an ideological critique or because many of them agree with those ideas .
Their dissent isn ’ t a liberal disagreement with the ends , but with the extremism of some of the means , and that ’ s why they ’ re losing .
The opposition to cancel culture is a mixed bag of actual liberals , traditional lefties who reject identity politics in favor of old-fashioned class warfare , and a cocktail party set that ’ s fine with the purges as long as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their friends and allies .
This latter group is the first one to self-cancel and defect , followed by the liberals , and then the lefties .
Membership in the Democrat Party and in its allied post-liberal culture establishments of the media , academia , and the smart set requires getting on board with identity politics .
The few liberal holdouts are becoming the Mensheviks and the lefty holdouts are the Trotskyists .
Neither seems likely to enjoy a happy future under the spiked bootheels of intersectional Bolsheviks .
And an alliance between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under very different premises .
Lefty holdouts argue , correctly , that identity politics is a convenient means for the existing establishment to hold on to power by substituting racial conflict for economic conflict .
Put in a few minority CEOs , have Nike run ads about racism , and nothing really has to change .
The Trots have no problem with cancel culture .
What they dislike is its trajectory and direction .
They want to see capitalists hanging from lampposts , not white women lynched for dialing 911 .
And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone from anything because it just isn ’ t very nice .
American liberalism began its slow death when it embraced identity politics .
When liberals began validating tribalism , they dismantled the moral and intellectual premise of liberalism .
Black Lives Matter is just the idiot Marxist grandchild of the Black Panthers partying with upper-crust Manhattanites two generations ago .
The liberals who embraced radical chic , as long as it was wrapped in racial packaging , disavowed their movement and the rest is history .
Now their children and grandchildren are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with them .
Identity politics created an exception to liberalism .
And what was meant to be an exception is now swallowing up everything .
The identity politics exception to liberalism is why free speech is vital until it offends someone , a free press is important until it prints something politically incorrect , and mob violence is to be deplored unless it ’ s the outcry of the racially oppressed .
When liberals create exceptions to liberalism , then liberalism disappears .
That ’ s what actual liberals like Alan Dershowitz understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the principle .
And the principle that compromised liberalism was that it didn ’ t apply to the oppressed .
The radical leftist idea that liberals had rejected when it came to violent class revolution became acceptable when it came to race and then the rest of identity politics .
The essential radical idea is that a crisis can not be met with anything short of radical change .
Liberals can only win a debate against radicals when they don ’ t just dissent from the means , but also from the ends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dictatorship of the proletariat became Communist sympathizers and ceased to be liberals .
Their occasional critiques of the mass executions and the gulags were as weak and ineffective as the Harper ’ s letter .
Mostly they carried the bloody water of the Marxist regimes that reflected their aspirations .
Those liberals who dissented , not just from Soviet repression , but from its totalitarian ends , who understood that the atrocities were not an occasional aberration , but the nature of the beast , carried the torch of liberalism during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives .
The Communist pitch to liberals was that radicalism was needed because a liberal society would not work in Russia .
Not with all those oppressed peasants and workers .
The fundamental premise of Black Lives Matter is that liberalism doesn ’ t work because it ’ s an invention of powerful white people .
Equality , due process and open debate are invalidated by white people and institutionalized whiteness .
A free society inherently privileges white people over oppressed minorities .
And so a free society will oppress and enslave black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argument about free societies and workers .
A free society would inherently privilege those who had wealth over those who did not .
Free speech and a free press would mean very different things for a factory owner and for his workers .
The only answer was to first forcibly equalize society by using the power of the state to purge the bourgeois and then , in time , a truly equal Communist society would emerge from the mass graves and gulags .
True liberals understood that this was a hypocritical argument for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a generation later , many liberals failed to rebut the same argument being made in racial terms .
Now , Black Lives Matter ’ s “ trained ” Marxist leaders have gotten the leadership of what used to be the liberal establishment to accept that liberalism is systemically racist .
The defenses of cancel culture all come down to the argument that liberalism is racist .
Free speech privileges white people .
So does a free press , intellectual inquiry , open debate , or not destroying people ’ s lives because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we are told , don ’ t have the physical endurance or the emotional energy to tolerate the trauma of disagreement .
Any liberal campaign against cancel culture has to challenge this exception to liberalism .
Cancel culture asserts that any disagreement , dissent , or even mistake , from Trump down to a liberal professor arguing in favor of free speech , is a traumatic form of oppression that is literally killing trans people of color , and must be immediately stopped by any means necessary .
This is the crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And liberals have failed to meet it .
Cancel culture weaponizes rage , performative pain , outrage , and trauma .
Its liberal critics resort to abstractions without ever mounting a serious effort to close the old loophole of liberalism .
Identity politics is killing liberalism because liberals have failed to shut down identity politics .
A real defense of liberalism must be that a free society is for everyone .
The only people who find a free society oppressive are totalitarians .
Cancel culture and its vanguard of Marxists , black nationalists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ society oppressive because it restricts their freedom to destroy some people and force everyone else to conform to their ideology .
A free society isn ’ t racially oppressive , but it can be ideologically oppressive for totalitarians .
If the few remaining liberals want a free society , they will have to defend its moral legitimacy , not just through abstract principles , but by exposing the totalitarianism of the radicals warring on it .
Communists , Nazis , Islamists , and BLMers find a free society oppressive for the same reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choose freedom over power .
Those who would rather have power than freedom will always find such a society oppressive and conspire to destroy it .

Identity politics believes a liberal society is racist, and liberals are losing the argument. The Harper’s letter protesting cancel culture, while being too afraid to even put the name of the beast on paper, was doomed even before it hit the social media grinder.
After over two centuries of liberals being guillotined by leftists, it would be nice if they had learned something. Unfortunately, American liberals have learned nothing from France in the 18th century, and Russia in the 20th century, as they set themselves up for a beating in 2020.
It doesn’t help that less than half of the Harper’s letter signatories are even liberals. Instead of making a case for liberal values, the letter is reduced to arguing that fellow allies shouldn’t be lynched for questioning dogma or accidentally falling out of step with the movement.
That’s not a defense of liberal values, but a plea to Stalin not to shoot quite so many socialists.
The Harper’s letter never names the ideas driving cancel culture, such as intersectionality and critical race theory, because its members are either too afraid to offer an ideological critique or because many of them agree with those ideas. Their dissent isn’t a liberal disagreement with the ends, but with the extremism of some of the means, and that’s why they’re losing.
The opposition to cancel culture is a mixed bag of actual liberals, traditional lefties who reject identity politics in favor of old-fashioned class warfare, and a cocktail party set that’s fine with the purges as long as they don’t go overboard and affect their friends and allies. This latter group is the first one to self-cancel and defect, followed by the liberals, and then the lefties.
Once upon a time, Bernie Sanders opposed identity politics.
Membership in the Democrat Party and in its allied post-liberal culture establishments of the media, academia, and the smart set requires getting on board with identity politics. The few liberal holdouts are becoming the Mensheviks and the lefty holdouts are the Trotskyists. Neither seems likely to enjoy a happy future under the spiked bootheels of intersectional Bolsheviks.
And an alliance between the two is difficult because they operate under very different premises.
Lefty holdouts argue, correctly, that identity politics is a convenient means for the existing establishment to hold on to power by substituting racial conflict for economic conflict. Put in a few minority CEOs, have Nike run ads about racism, and nothing really has to change.
The Trots have no problem with cancel culture. What they dislike is its trajectory and direction. They want to see capitalists hanging from lampposts, not white women lynched for dialing 911.
And the liberals don’t want to hang anyone from anything because it just isn’t very nice.
American liberalism began its slow death when it embraced identity politics. When liberals began validating tribalism, they dismantled the moral and intellectual premise of liberalism.
Black Lives Matter is just the idiot Marxist grandchild of the Black Panthers partying with upper-crust Manhattanites two generations ago. The liberals who embraced radical chic, as long as it was wrapped in racial packaging, disavowed their movement and the rest is history. Now their children and grandchildren are being cancelled as the revolution catches up with them.
Identity politics created an exception to liberalism. And what was meant to be an exception is now swallowing up everything. The identity politics exception to liberalism is why free speech is vital until it offends someone, a free press is important until it prints something politically incorrect, and mob violence is to be deplored unless it’s the outcry of the racially oppressed.
When liberals create exceptions to liberalism, then liberalism disappears. That’s what actual liberals like Alan Dershowitz understand. Exceptions to a principle eventually become the principle. And the principle that compromised liberalism was that it didn’t apply to the oppressed. The radical leftist idea that liberals had rejected when it came to violent class revolution became acceptable when it came to race and then the rest of identity politics.
The essential radical idea is that a crisis cannot be met with anything short of radical change.
Liberals can only win a debate against radicals when they don’t just dissent from the means, but also from the ends. Those liberals who decided to support a dictatorship of the proletariat became Communist sympathizers and ceased to be liberals. Their occasional critiques of the mass executions and the gulags were as weak and ineffective as the Harper’s letter.
Mostly they carried the bloody water of the Marxist regimes that reflected their aspirations.
Those liberals who dissented, not just from Soviet repression, but from its totalitarian ends, who understood that the atrocities were not an occasional aberration, but the nature of the beast, carried the torch of liberalism during the dark days of the Cold War alongside conservatives.
The Communist pitch to liberals was that radicalism was needed because a liberal society would not work in Russia. Not with all those oppressed peasants and workers.
The fundamental premise of Black Lives Matter is that liberalism doesn’t work because it’s an invention of powerful white people. Equality, due process and open debate are invalidated by white people and institutionalized whiteness. A free society inherently privileges white people over oppressed minorities. And so a free society will oppress and enslave black people.
This isn’t an original argument.
The Communists made the same argument about free societies and workers. A free society would inherently privilege those who had wealth over those who did not. Free speech and a free press would mean very different things for a factory owner and for his workers. The only answer was to first forcibly equalize society by using the power of the state to purge the bourgeois and then, in time, a truly equal Communist society would emerge from the mass graves and gulags.
True liberals understood that this was a hypocritical argument for an endless totalitarian state.
And yet, a generation later, many liberals failed to rebut the same argument being made in racial terms. Now, Black Lives Matter’s “trained” Marxist leaders have gotten the leadership of what used to be the liberal establishment to accept that liberalism is systemically racist.
The defenses of cancel culture all come down to the argument that liberalism is racist.
Free speech privileges white people. So does a free press, intellectual inquiry, open debate, or not destroying people’s lives because they disagree with you. The oppressed, we are told, don’t have the physical endurance or the emotional energy to tolerate the trauma of disagreement.
Any liberal campaign against cancel culture has to challenge this exception to liberalism.
Cancel culture asserts that any disagreement, dissent, or even mistake, from Trump down to a liberal professor arguing in favor of free speech, is a traumatic form of oppression that is literally killing trans people of color, and must be immediately stopped by any means necessary.
This is the crisis at the center of the movement. And liberals have failed to meet it.
Cancel culture weaponizes rage, performative pain, outrage, and trauma. Its liberal critics resort to abstractions without ever mounting a serious effort to close the old loophole of liberalism.
Identity politics is killing liberalism because liberals have failed to shut down identity politics.
A real defense of liberalism must be that a free society is for everyone. The only people who find a free society oppressive are totalitarians. Cancel culture and its vanguard of Marxists, black nationalists, and assorted radicals find a free society oppressive because it restricts their freedom to destroy some people and force everyone else to conform to their ideology.
A free society isn’t racially oppressive, but it can be ideologically oppressive for totalitarians.
If the few remaining liberals want a free society, they will have to defend its moral legitimacy, not just through abstract principles, but by exposing the totalitarianism of the radicals warring on it.
Communists, Nazis, Islamists, and BLMers find a free society oppressive for the same reasons.
A liberal society requires people to choose freedom over power. Those who would rather have power than freedom will always find such a society oppressive and conspire to destroy it.
Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield


thewashingtonstandard--2020-07-14--The Nazis Never Lost!

The Nazis Never Lost!

Many may think the Nazis actually lost , but that would be a mistake to think such a thing .
In fact , following the Nuremberg Trials , only 10 Nazis were executed and a handful imprisoned .
What happened to the rest who were alive following the war ?
Celeste Solum joins me in this episode to discuss the fact that many of them came to live among us and their work continues to this day… in the US .
Video mentioned from Dana Ashlie concerning HAARP and nano technology .
Books mentioned by Celeste in this episode for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Fear and Hope in an Overcrowded World War Against the Weak : Eugenics and America ’ s Campaign to Create a Master Race , Expanded Edition Forced Exit : The Slippery Slope from Assisted Suicide to Legalized Murder The Holocaust Chronicle ( A History in Words and Pictures ) Lab 257 : The Disturbing Story of the Government ’ s Secret Germ Laboratory Partner with us as a Son or Daughter of Liberty : https : //thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/ Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media SonsOfLibertyMedia.com , Minds , MeWe , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com .
He is husband to his `` more precious than rubies '' wife , father of 10 `` mighty arrows '' , jack of all trades , Christian and lover of liberty .
He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina .
.
Follow Tim on Twitter .
Also check him out on Gab Mumbl It and Steemit

Many may think the Nazis actually lost, but that would be a mistake to think such a thing. In fact, following the Nuremberg Trials, only 10 Nazis were executed and a handful imprisoned. What happened to the rest who were alive following the war? Celeste Solum joins me in this episode to discuss the fact that many of them came to live among us and their work continues to this day… in the US.
Video mentioned from Dana Ashlie concerning HAARP and nano technology.
Previous interview with Celeste
Books mentioned by Celeste in this episode for further study.
https://sonsoflibertyradio.com
https://sonsoflibertymedia.com
Sons of Liberty Store: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/
Support us through a donation: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/donate
Partner with us as a Son or Daughter of Liberty: https://thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media