thewashingtonstandard--2020-10-07--Goal Of Marxism:  New Congressional Report Proves Institutions Of Marriage & Family Are Being System

Goal Of Marxism:  New Congressional Report Proves Institutions Of Marriage & Family Are Being Systematically Destroyed

The numbers that I am about to share with you are extremely sobering , and they should be a massive wake up call for all of us .
Yesterday , I wrote an article about how our society is breaking down everywhere we look and nowhere is this more evident than in our marriages and in our families .
But without strong marriages and strong families , no society can thrive for long .
Recently , the Social Capital Project of the Joint Economic Committee Republicans released a report entitled “ The Demise of the Happy Two-Parent Home ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until now because it was almost entirely ignored by the mainstream media .
I have never seen a congressional report document the collapse of marriage and family in American society to such an extent , and to be honest , it is quite surprising to see such a quality piece of work come out of Washington .
I have selected nine of the most alarming quotes from the report and put them in bold below .
Following each quote from the report , I am going to share some of my own commentary… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 , the percentage of women ages 15-44 who were married dropped from 71 percent to 42 percent ( Figure 1 ) .16 Furthermore , Figure 2 shows the percentage of women ages 30-34 who had never married increased from 7 percent in 1962 to 35 percent in 2019.17 Numbers for men are similar , but they were not included in the report .
We have never seen marriage rates collapse like this ever before , and most of the decline can be attributed to the fact that many young Americans simply do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anymore .
These days , many would prefer to be free to run around having sex with whoever they want .
When they become dissatisfied with their current sexual partner , they just move on and find someone else .
# 2 Today , around 45 percent of American children spend some time without a biological parent by late adolescence.3 That is up from around one-third of children born in the 1960s and one-fifth to one-quarter born in the 1950s.4 Study after study has shown that children do better with two parents , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our children have been raised by just one parent for at least a portion of their lives is extremely alarming .
I have tremendous respect for single parents , but if our society is going to thrive we need a whole lot more two-parent households .
# 3 Single parenthood is experienced by two-thirds of the children of mothers with less than a high school education and by eighty percent of black children .
Over the past several decades , impoverished Americans have increasingly been drawn to the ideology of the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic Party does not value marriage and family , and in impoverished communities all across America , the results have been absolutely disastrous .
Unfortunately , the Republican Party is increasingly moving away from traditional values as well , and that is an extremely alarming trend .
# 4 Among women ages 19 to 44 who married between 1965 and 1974 , just 11 percent had cohabited with their husbands prior to marriage , but that number jumped to 32 percent among those who married between 1975 and 1979 and continued to soar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , two-thirds of new marriages have been preceded by cohabitation.28 These days , the vast majority of young couples want to “ live together ” before they get married .
But study after study has shown that couples that “ live together ” before marriage have much less long-term success than couples that don ’ t .
In the old days , it was clearly understood that cohabitation prior to marriage was wrong , but these days hardly anyone wants to speak out against it .
# 5 The decline in marriage and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ substantial growth in unwed childbearing .
The percent of births to unmarried mothers has jumped from five percent in 1960 to 40 percent today ( Figure 6 ) .29 It is hard to believe that things have gotten this bad .
How in the world is our society going to be successful when 40 percent of our children are being born into unstable family situations ?
These days , many young men don ’ t feel any responsibility for the children that they father , and that is something that must change if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of turning our country in the right direction .
# 6 In a 2007 study researchers found that 50 percent of children born to cohabiting parents experienced a maternal partnership transition by their third birthday , compared to just 13 percent of children in married-parent families.32 Thus , children born into households where the parents are not married are much more likely to see their parents break up .
This is yet more evidence that cohabitation is a bad idea .
The order is supposed to go like this – get married , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But these days so many young couples are doing things in the exact opposite order , and the vast majority of the time that does not work out at all .
# 7 As of 2019 , 57 percent of highly-educated women ages 15-44 were married , compared to only 36 percent of moderately-educated women and 18 percent of women with low education ( Figure 8 ) .39 These differences were much smaller in the mid-1960s , with less than ten percentage points separating the three groups in 1964 .
Numbers for men @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers for men were not included in this report .
To be honest , I was a bit surprised by the huge differences among the various groups .
Does not having money make both men and women less desirable to potential marriage partners ?
# 8 Two-thirds of births ( 65 percent ) among women with low education occur outside of marriage as of 2018 along with half ( 52 percent ) of births to moderately-educated women ( Figure 9 ) .
Among highly-educated women , however , just 11 percent occur outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you have a child outside of marriage while you are very young , it is very likely that you will have to work to support that child .
So any dreams of a higher education are often delayed , and in many cases , those delays end up being permanent .
# 9 Women with a bachelor ’ s degree and married for the first time are very likely to be married for a long time ; 78 percent will still be married 20 years later .
However , among women entering their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no bachelor ’ s degree , it is as likely as not that their marriage will end within 20 years .
Among women with no more than a high school diploma , just 40 percent will still be in their first marriage after 20 years .
The U.S. has one of the highest divorce rates in the entire world , and things are especially bad in our impoverished communities .
As a result , vast numbers of children in our impoverished communities live in broken homes , and those that come from broken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to gravitate toward crime , drugs and violence .
The bottom line is that if we want to fix America , we have got to fix our families .
In the report , the authors included a remarkable quote from Princeton University sociologist Sara McLanahan… For thousands of years , two-parent families have worked , and the reason they have worked is because that is how things were originally designed .
Sadly , these days most Americans find traditional values repugnant , and they think that they have figured out a better way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the truth is that they have greatly deceived themselves , and if we stay on this current path there is absolutely no future for us as a nation .

The numbers that I am about to share with you are extremely sobering, and they should be a massive wake up call for all of us. Yesterday, I wrote an article about how our society is breaking down everywhere we look and nowhere is this more evident than in our marriages and in our families. But without strong marriages and strong families, no society can thrive for long. Recently, the Social Capital Project of the Joint Economic Committee Republicans released a report entitled “The Demise of the Happy Two-Parent Home”, but you probably never heard about it until now because it was almost entirely ignored by the mainstream media. I have never seen a congressional report document the collapse of marriage and family in American society to such an extent, and to be honest, it is quite surprising to see such a quality piece of work come out of Washington.
I have selected nine of the most alarming quotes from the report and put them in bold below. Following each quote from the report, I am going to share some of my own commentary…
#1 Overall, between 1962 and 2019, the percentage of women ages 15-44 who were married dropped from 71 percent to 42 percent (Figure 1).16 Furthermore, Figure 2 shows the percentage of women ages 30-34 who had never married increased from 7 percent in 1962 to 35 percent in 2019.17
Numbers for men are similar, but they were not included in the report. We have never seen marriage rates collapse like this ever before, and most of the decline can be attributed to the fact that many young Americans simply do not see any reason to get married anymore.
These days, many would prefer to be free to run around having sex with whoever they want. When they become dissatisfied with their current sexual partner, they just move on and find someone else.
#2 Today, around 45 percent of American children spend some time without a biological parent by late adolescence.3 That is up from around one-third of children born in the 1960s and one-fifth to one-quarter born in the 1950s.4
Study after study has shown that children do better with two parents, and so the fact that nearly half of our children have been raised by just one parent for at least a portion of their lives is extremely alarming.
I have tremendous respect for single parents, but if our society is going to thrive we need a whole lot more two-parent households.
#3 Single parenthood is experienced by two-thirds of the children of mothers with less than a high school education and by eighty percent of black children.
Over the past several decades, impoverished Americans have increasingly been drawn to the ideology of the Democratic Party.
But the ideology of the Democratic Party does not value marriage and family, and in impoverished communities all across America, the results have been absolutely disastrous.
Unfortunately, the Republican Party is increasingly moving away from traditional values as well, and that is an extremely alarming trend.
#4 Among women ages 19 to 44 who married between 1965 and 1974, just 11 percent had cohabited with their husbands prior to marriage, but that number jumped to 32 percent among those who married between 1975 and 1979 and continued to soar thereafter. For the past two decades, two-thirds of new marriages have been preceded by cohabitation.28
These days, the vast majority of young couples want to “live together” before they get married.
But study after study has shown that couples that “live together” before marriage have much less long-term success than couples that don’t.
In the old days, it was clearly understood that cohabitation prior to marriage was wrong, but these days hardly anyone wants to speak out against it.
#5 The decline in marriage and the increase in cohabitation has led to substantial growth in unwed childbearing. The percent of births to unmarried mothers has jumped from five percent in 1960 to 40 percent today (Figure 6).29
It is hard to believe that things have gotten this bad.
How in the world is our society going to be successful when 40 percent of our children are being born into unstable family situations?
These days, many young men don’t feel any responsibility for the children that they father, and that is something that must change if we ever want to have any hope of turning our country in the right direction.
#6 In a 2007 study researchers found that 50 percent of children born to cohabiting parents experienced a maternal partnership transition by their third birthday, compared to just 13 percent of children in married-parent families.32 Thus, children born into households where the parents are not married are much more likely to see their parents break up.
This is yet more evidence that cohabitation is a bad idea.
The order is supposed to go like this – get married, live together and then have children.
But these days so many young couples are doing things in the exact opposite order, and the vast majority of the time that does not work out at all.
#7 As of 2019, 57 percent of highly-educated women ages 15-44 were married, compared to only 36 percent of moderately-educated women and 18 percent of women with low education (Figure 8).39 These differences were much smaller in the mid-1960s, with less than ten percentage points separating the three groups in 1964.
Numbers for men are similar, but once again the numbers for men were not included in this report.
To be honest, I was a bit surprised by the huge differences among the various groups.
Does not having money make both men and women less desirable to potential marriage partners?
#8 Two-thirds of births (65 percent) among women with low education occur outside of marriage as of 2018 along with half (52 percent) of births to moderately-educated women (Figure 9). Among highly-educated women, however, just 11 percent occur outside marriage.40
If you are a woman and you have a child outside of marriage while you are very young, it is very likely that you will have to work to support that child.
So any dreams of a higher education are often delayed, and in many cases, those delays end up being permanent.
#9 Women with a bachelor’s degree and married for the first time are very likely to be married for a long time; 78 percent will still be married 20 years later. However, among women entering their first marriage who have some college but no bachelor’s degree, it is as likely as not that their marriage will end within 20 years. Among women with no more than a high school diploma, just 40 percent will still be in their first marriage after 20 years.
The U.S. has one of the highest divorce rates in the entire world, and things are especially bad in our impoverished communities.
As a result, vast numbers of children in our impoverished communities live in broken homes, and those that come from broken homes tend to be much more likely to gravitate toward crime, drugs and violence.
The bottom line is that if we want to fix America, we have got to fix our families. In the report, the authors included a remarkable quote from Princeton University sociologist Sara McLanahan…
If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children’s basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent ideal. Such a design, in theory, would not only ensure that children had access to the time and money of two adults, it also would provide a system of checks and balances that promoted quality parenting. The fact that both parents have a biological connection to the child would increase the likelihood that the parents would identify with the child and be willing to sacrifice for that child, and it would reduce the likelihood that either parent would abuse the child.
For thousands of years, two-parent families have worked, and the reason they have worked is because that is how things were originally designed.
Sadly, these days most Americans find traditional values repugnant, and they think that they have figured out a better way of doing things.
Of course, the truth is that they have greatly deceived themselves, and if we stay on this current path there is absolutely no future for us as a nation.
Article posted with permission from Michael Snyder


thewashingtonstandard--2020-10-07--Bombshell Never Before Seen Videos From Inside Joe Biden’s Office In the 1990s – Comments From Biden

Bombshell Never Before Seen Videos From Inside Joe Biden ’ s Office In the 1990s – Comments From Biden Sexual Assault Accuser Tara Reade , a former aide to Joe Biden , has accused the former vice president of sexual assault .
In a recent release by 60 Minutes Australia , never before seen video footage of Joe Biden ’ s office in the 1990s reveals what it was like inside and also the kind of clothing that Reade wore , which validates her claims regarding that smear campaign that was launched against her .
In exclusive footage inside Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tara Reade reveals her experiences as a young senator ’ s aide .
The footage which Tara recorded on a Super 8 camera in the early ’ 90s was only recently rediscovered .
Reade also comments on the video .
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media SonsOfLibertyMedia.com , Minds , MeWe , Spreely , Tim Brown is an author 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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

Bombshell Never Before Seen Videos From Inside Joe Biden’s Office In the 1990s – Comments From Biden Sexual Assault Accuser
Tara Reade, a former aide to Joe Biden, has accused the former vice president of sexual assault. In a recent release by 60 Minutes Australia, never before seen video footage of Joe Biden’s office in the 1990s reveals what it was like inside and also the kind of clothing that Reade wore, which validates her claims regarding that smear campaign that was launched against her.
In exclusive footage inside Joe Biden’s office, his accuser Tara Reade reveals her experiences as a young senator’s aide.
The footage which Tara recorded on a Super 8 camera in the early ’90s was only recently rediscovered.
Reade also comments on the video.
Take a look.
Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-10-07--CDC Changes Its Mind Again:  CON-VID-19 Is “Sometimes” Airborne

Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention can not just give a straight answer or provide people with the truth , they have said the “ smartest virus on Earth ” is sometimes airborne .
COVID-19 is apparently , not always airborne , but it can be .
If this makes no sense to you , you ’ re not alone .
The agency is once again claiming that the coronavirus can be airborne , but that it is not the main method of transmission .
This is from a mainstream media source , and even they are feeling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For the third time in less than a month , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has altered its guidance on how Covid-19 spreads .
The agency said Monday that airborne transmission is possible , but that it ’ s not the most common way the virus travels from person to person — a position that was published and then removed from its website in September .
–NBC News They are desperately trying to push that this virus is contagious even with more than six feet of distance .
The CDC updated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Monday to say that “ some infections can be spread by exposure to the virus in small droplets and particles that can linger in the air for minutes to hours.
” Those small droplets and particles in turn may be able to infect people who are farther than 6 feet away “ from the person who is infected or after that person has left the space.
” –NBC News The coronavirus is the most intelligent virus on Earth apparently .
There is desperation to keep the fear about this virus going for as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CDC issued a statement on the latest set of transmission guidelines , acknowledging “ the existence of some published reports showing limited , uncommon circumstances where people with Covid-19 infected others who were more than 6 feet away or shortly after the COVID-19-positive person left an area.
” “ In these instances , ” the statement said , “ transmission occurred in poorly ventilated and enclosed spaces that often involved activities that caused heavier breathing , like singing or exercise.
” This could be leading up to another lockdown , especially as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States .

Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cannot just give a straight answer or provide people with the truth, they have said the “smartest virus on Earth” is sometimes airborne. COVID-19 is apparently, not always airborne, but it can be.
If this makes no sense to you, you’re not alone. The agency is once again claiming that the coronavirus can be airborne, but that it is not the main method of transmission. This is from a mainstream media source, and even they are feeling like this is a mixed message:
For the third time in less than a month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has altered its guidance on how Covid-19 spreads. The agency said Monday that airborne transmission is possible, but that it’s not the most common way the virus travels from person to person — a position that was published and then removed from its website in September. –NBC News
They are desperately trying to push that this virus is contagious even with more than six feet of distance.
The CDC updated its page on the spread of virus Monday to say that “some infections can be spread by exposure to the virus in small droplets and particles that can linger in the air for minutes to hours.” Those small droplets and particles in turn may be able to infect people who are farther than 6 feet away “from the person who is infected or after that person has left the space.” –NBC News
The coronavirus is the most intelligent virus on Earth apparently.
Coronavirus Mutations? Or More MSM Fear Mongering?
There is desperation to keep the fear about this virus going for as long as possible. On Monday, the CDC issued a statement on the latest set of transmission guidelines, acknowledging “the existence of some published reports showing limited, uncommon circumstances where people with Covid-19 infected others who were more than 6 feet away or shortly after the COVID-19-positive person left an area.”
“In these instances,” the statement said, “transmission occurred in poorly ventilated and enclosed spaces that often involved activities that caused heavier breathing, like singing or exercise.”
This could be leading up to another lockdown, especially as we see positive cases rising all over the United States.
Article posted with permission from Mac Slavo


thewashingtonstandard--2020-10-07--Leading World Epidemiologists Create Petition to End CONVID-19 Draconian House Arrests

As the CON-VID-19 continues and lawsuits against tyrannical governmental overreach begin to see the light of day in the courts , the lamestream government-controlled propaganda entertainment enemedia ( LGCPEE ) continues to quote “ old ” statistics compiled by the Centers for Disease Control ( CDC ) while parading out government tool and less than knowledgeable National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease head Anthony S. Fauci to push for an extension of restrictions to include house arrests , mask wearing and business closures .
Despite the lack of proof of a “ new ” coronavirus , the updated statistics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physician ’ s association questioning withholding of Hydroxychloroquine for treatment of what can only be called “ influenza ” , the narrative coming from the LGCPEE and Fauci never waivers .
Even though the numbers being floated indicate an increase in cases using flawed logic and a “ new ” method of calculation and the CDC updated its own website to indicate that only 6 % of the over 200,000 deaths attributed to CON-VID-19 died of CON-VID-19 alone , the public still is inundated with false information and data to instill fear .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ have come together creating a petition to call for the end to the house arrests of healthy individuals around the globe while calling for protections for high-risk individuals .
Known as The Great Barrington Declaration , “ Professors Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard , Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford and Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya of Stanford announced the effort in an interview Monday with Fox News ’ Laura Ingraham.
” As of this writing , 3,298 medical and public health scientists , 5,049 medical practitioners , and 76,538 general public individuals have signed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a veritable “ Who ’ s Who ” of epidemiologists , microbiologists , infectious disease experts , researchers , mental health scientists , and professors worldwide .
As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies , and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection .
Coming from both the left and right , and around the world , we have devoted our careers to protecting people .
Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( to name a few ) include lower childhood vaccination rates , worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes , fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come , with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden .
Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice .
Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage , with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed .
Fortunately , our understanding of the virus is growing .
We know that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young .
Indeed , for children , COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms , including influenza .
As immunity builds in the population , the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls .
We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e .
the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by ( but is not dependent upon ) a vaccine .
Our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and social harm until we reach herd immunity .
The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity , is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection , while better protecting those who are at highest risk .
We call this Focused Protection .
Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19 .
By way of example , nursing homes should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors .
Staff rotation should be minimized .
Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home .
When possible , they should meet family members outside rather than inside .
A comprehensive and detailed list of measures , including approaches to multi-generational households , can be implemented , and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals .
Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal .
Simple hygiene @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold .
Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching .
Extracurricular activities , such as sports , should be resumed .
Young low-risk adults should work normally , rather than from home .
Restaurants and other businesses should open .
Arts , music , sport and other cultural activities should resume .
People who are more at risk may participate if they wish , while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Their approach is focused on returning life to pre-CON-VID-19 levels to develop widespread or “ herd ” immunity while protecting the vulnerable .
Their premise is that immunity should not be based solely upon a vaccine , but be assisted by one .
It follows the standard procedure and protocol to isolate the sick and protect the vulnerable while allowing the healthy to go about business as usual .
While it is agreed that acquired immunity through exposure is best , the suggestion of continuing to use the RT-PCR test for diagnostic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ designed to perform – should not be considered .
Moreover , without proper isolation of the microorganism , there is no way to determine what is causing this type of influenza or what the test is gathering .
Therefore , even the promotion of a vaccine to “ assist ” with immunity is still suspect .
You can ’ t develop a vaccine for something not proven to exist while knowing that vaccines have never been proven safe and/or effective .
COVID is not a “ death sentence , ” Bhattacharya argued , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % for those under 70 and nearly 95 % for those who are older .
“ I think we ’ ve created this idea in the public mind that it is something so unique and so deadly that we should utterly end all normal existence as a result of it , ” he said .
“ That ’ s not right .
We can have a much better way .
Protect the vulnerable .
Shield them for a short period of time until we reach a level where there is population immunity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And for the rest of the world , let us live our lives.
” By its own data , the CDC has indicated the survival rate for individuals under the age of 50 who contract CON-VID-19 is nearly 100 % .
For those over 50 , the survival rate is 99.5 % for ages 50-69 and 94.6 % for those 70 and over .
“ It broke down to a 99.997 % survival rate for 0-19 ; 99.98 % for ages 20-49 ; 99.5 % for 50-69 ; and 94.6 % for those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contrast to the numbers floated to the public .
The CDC admitted that individuals who had died of CON-VID-19 had an average of 2.6 comorbidities or more than 2 chronic diseases in addition to CON-VID-19 .
As mentioned earlier , the number of individuals recorded as dying of CON-VID-19 alone were only 6 % ; however , that number is still suspect .
Because of inexperienced individuals in infectious disease and epidemiology the likes of Fauci , Birx , and Redfield , the individuals residing in the united States were subjected to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to include business closures based upon a “ projection model ” that has been everything but accurate .
It ’ s like those climate change models used by the United Nations – totally fraudulent and inaccurate .
In a startling confession , the World Health Organization ( WHO ) admitted that it estimated 10 % of the world ’ s population has been infected , bringing the infection mortality rate for CON-VID-10 to 0.13 % or that of the seasonal flu .
For this , world economies and individual livelihoods were disrupted , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the WHO ’ s own estimate of a 3.4 % death rate from this unproven “ illness ” that sparked panic worldwide , mostly in the LGCPEE , government officials , and people like Drs .
Fauci , Birx , and Redfield despite Fauci and Redfield publishing in The New England Journal of Medicine the infection fatality rate for CON-VID-19 was 0.1 % .
Adding insult to injury , the CDC ’ s own data shows that influenza is deadlier in the 0-17 age group than CON-VID-19 with 480 deaths from flu in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from CON-VID-19 from the beginning of the “ pandemic ” to mid-August .
Dr. Gupta estimated that a three to six-month time period would be sufficient for immunity to develop among the healthy to allow the vulnerable to resume normal living .
Gupta suggests not wasting testing on low-risk populations and reserving resources for those more vulnerable .
When discussing the strategy of herd immunity adopted by Sweden , Dr. Battacharya says , “ I think that denying herd immunity is like denying gravity .
Gravity exists and herd immunity exists.
” Yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company , whom Trump placed in front as “ experts ” , have caused more harm than help .
That ’ s painfully obvious in the number of businesses that will never reopen , the damage to the livelihood of millions of Americans , the destruction of the economy , and the additional trillions of dollars added to the debt of future generations .
To say the response Trump ’ s appointed team recommended and governors jumped high to implement should never have happened is beyond proven at this point .
What has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommended by a government paper pusher and medical breakthrough thief is criminal and egregious beyond the pale .
There should be untold numbers of lawsuits against these criminals personally , impeachment of officials for crimes against the people , and criminal charges applied to all with prosecution to the fullest extent of the law .
Moreover , those in the medical profession who continue to tow the CDC and WHO narrative by conveying old and faulty data should be held accountable as well .
It is the worst of medical malpractice – withholding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deceiving the public with false data/information .
But , don ’ t hold your breath for anything to happen .
The sheeple will have to come out of their willful ignorance and cognitive dissonance to exact justice .
From the looks of all those continuing to wear masks , that ’ s not going to happen anytime soon .
As members of the general public , you can sigh the Great Barrington Dedication by visiting gbdeclaration.org .
Let your voice be heard and stand with those who are trying to at least counter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Redfield .

As the CON-VID-19 continues and lawsuits against tyrannical governmental overreach begin to see the light of day in the courts, the lamestream government-controlled propaganda entertainment enemedia (LGCPEE) continues to quote “old” statistics compiled by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) while parading out government tool and less than knowledgeable National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease head Anthony S. Fauci to push for an extension of restrictions to include house arrests, mask wearing and business closures. Despite the lack of proof of a “new” coronavirus, the updated statistics issued by the CDC, and a physician’s association questioning withholding of Hydroxychloroquine for treatment of what can only be called “influenza”, the narrative coming from the LGCPEE and Fauci never waivers. Even though the numbers being floated indicate an increase in cases using flawed logic and a “new” method of calculation and the CDC updated its own website to indicate that only 6% of the over 200,000 deaths attributed to CON-VID-19 died of CON-VID-19 alone, the public still is inundated with false information and data to instill fear.
Now, leading epidemiologists around the world have come together creating a petition to call for the end to the house arrests of healthy individuals around the globe while calling for protections for high-risk individuals. Known as The Great Barrington Declaration, “Professors Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford and Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya of Stanford announced the effort in an interview Monday with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham.” As of this writing, 3,298 medical and public health scientists, 5,049 medical practitioners, and 76,538 general public individuals have signed the document. Co-signers of the document are a veritable “Who’s Who” of epidemiologists, microbiologists, infectious disease experts, researchers, mental health scientists, and professors worldwide.
The Declaration reads:
As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.
Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.
Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.
Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.
As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.
The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.
Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.
Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.
Their approach is focused on returning life to pre-CON-VID-19 levels to develop widespread or “herd” immunity while protecting the vulnerable. Their premise is that immunity should not be based solely upon a vaccine, but be assisted by one. It follows the standard procedure and protocol to isolate the sick and protect the vulnerable while allowing the healthy to go about business as usual.
While it is agreed that acquired immunity through exposure is best, the suggestion of continuing to use the RT-PCR test for diagnostic purposes – a purpose it was not designed to perform – should not be considered. Moreover, without proper isolation of the microorganism, there is no way to determine what is causing this type of influenza or what the test is gathering. Therefore, even the promotion of a vaccine to “assist” with immunity is still suspect. You can’t develop a vaccine for something not proven to exist while knowing that vaccines have never been proven safe and/or effective.
WND reported:
COVID is not a “death sentence,” Bhattacharya argued, alluding to survival rates of nearly 100% for those under 70 and nearly 95% for those who are older.
“I think we’ve created this idea in the public mind that it is something so unique and so deadly that we should utterly end all normal existence as a result of it,” he said.
“That’s not right. We can have a much better way. Protect the vulnerable. Shield them for a short period of time until we reach a level where there is population immunity,” the Stanford professor said. “And for the rest of the world, let us live our lives.”
By its own data, the CDC has indicated the survival rate for individuals under the age of 50 who contract CON-VID-19 is nearly 100%. For those over 50, the survival rate is 99.5% for ages 50-69 and 94.6% for those 70 and over. “It broke down to a 99.997% survival rate for 0-19; 99.98% for ages 20-49; 99.5% for 50-69; and 94.6% for those over 70.” This is in stark contrast to the numbers floated to the public.
The CDC admitted that individuals who had died of CON-VID-19 had an average of 2.6 comorbidities or more than 2 chronic diseases in addition to CON-VID-19. As mentioned earlier, the number of individuals recorded as dying of CON-VID-19 alone were only 6 %; however, that number is still suspect. Because of inexperienced individuals in infectious disease and epidemiology the likes of Fauci, Birx, and Redfield, the individuals residing in the united States were subjected to “house arrest” and draconian tyrannical rules to include business closures based upon a “projection model” that has been everything but accurate. It’s like those climate change models used by the United Nations – totally fraudulent and inaccurate.
In a startling confession, the World Health Organization (WHO) admitted that it estimated 10% of the world’s population has been infected, bringing the infection mortality rate for CON-VID-10 to 0.13% or that of the seasonal flu. For this, world economies and individual livelihoods were disrupted, damaged, and destroyed. It was the WHO’s own estimate of a 3.4% death rate from this unproven “illness” that sparked panic worldwide, mostly in the LGCPEE, government officials, and people like Drs. Fauci, Birx, and Redfield despite Fauci and Redfield publishing in The New England Journal of Medicine the infection fatality rate for CON-VID-19 was 0.1%.
Adding insult to injury, the CDC’s own data shows that influenza is deadlier in the 0-17 age group than CON-VID-19 with 480 deaths from flu in the 2018-2019 season compared with 90 deaths from CON-VID-19 from the beginning of the “pandemic” to mid-August.
Dr. Gupta estimated that a three to six-month time period would be sufficient for immunity to develop among the healthy to allow the vulnerable to resume normal living. Gupta suggests not wasting testing on low-risk populations and reserving resources for those more vulnerable. When discussing the strategy of herd immunity adopted by Sweden, Dr. Battacharya says, “I think that denying herd immunity is like denying gravity. Gravity exists and herd immunity exists.”
Yet, the measures recommended by Fauci and company, whom Trump placed in front as “experts”, have caused more harm than help. That’s painfully obvious in the number of businesses that will never reopen, the damage to the livelihood of millions of Americans, the destruction of the economy, and the additional trillions of dollars added to the debt of future generations.
To say the response Trump’s appointed team recommended and governors jumped high to implement should never have happened is beyond proven at this point. What has been done and is continuing to be recommended by a government paper pusher and medical breakthrough thief is criminal and egregious beyond the pale. There should be untold numbers of lawsuits against these criminals personally, impeachment of officials for crimes against the people, and criminal charges applied to all with prosecution to the fullest extent of the law. Moreover, those in the medical profession who continue to tow the CDC and WHO narrative by conveying old and faulty data should be held accountable as well. It is the worst of medical malpractice – withholding valuable health information from the public while deceiving the public with false data/information. But, don’t hold your breath for anything to happen. The sheeple will have to come out of their willful ignorance and cognitive dissonance to exact justice. From the looks of all those continuing to wear masks, that’s not going to happen anytime soon.
As members of the general public, you can sigh the Great Barrington Dedication by visiting gbdeclaration.org. Let your voice be heard and stand with those who are trying to at least counter the Trump-appointed frauds – Fauci, Birx, and Redfield.


thewashingtonstandard--2020-10-07--The Muppet Propaganda Of The World Economic Forum’s Great Reset

The World Economic Forum is at the center of the coming Great Reset .
However , now , it ’ s targeting children via Sesame Street , with Elmo as its mascot .
On today ’ s episode of Rotten to the Core Wednesday on The Sons of Liberty , we ’ ll hear from Sesame Workshop ’ s Sherrie Westin on The World Economic Forum ’ s recent podcast as to what ’ s in store and Lynne Taylor will provide what she has uncovered about both Westin and the muppets being used by TWEF .
Partner with us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : https : //thesonsofliberty.squarespace.com/membership/ Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media SonsOfLibertyMedia.com , Minds , MeWe , Spreely , Tim Brown is an author 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 @

The World Economic Forum is at the center of the coming Great Reset. However, now, it’s targeting children via Sesame Street, with Elmo as its mascot. On today’s episode of Rotten to the Core Wednesday on The Sons of Liberty, we’ll hear from Sesame Workshop’s Sherrie Westin on The World Economic Forum’s recent podcast as to what’s in store and Lynne Taylor will provide what she has uncovered about both Westin and the muppets being used by TWEF.
Additional information.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/sesame-and-the-muppets-the-great-reset-podcast/
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