CJ Coudriet is a 13 year-old 8th grader attending Philipsburg-Osceola middle school. On June 6, he was diagnosed with embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma. He will undergo 42 weeks of chemotherapy at CHOP and Geisinger. CJ’s family has avoided the COVID vaccine and is seeking unvaccinated blood donors with a blood type of O+ or O-.
If you are willing and can establish proof of blood type, text Tim @ 814-360-2999.
It is coming at us from all directions. It is a tsunami of weird, perverted propaganda that is meant to encompass every aspect of your life… and the end is far from sight!
Prior to 2020, I had never been much of a boycotter. However, that changed in 2020. Not so much for boycotting purposes, but because some stores wouldn’t let me in without a mask and I was not going to wear one for health reasons. After having to give up a couple of my favorite stores, boycotting became almost a pastime. Most people were not like me. Most people gladly pulled up their mask for entry regardless of how nonsensical the task. However, it seems a tide may be turning. The giant mega-corporations and government have awakened a sleeping giant. We are not living in the U.S. of yesteryear, but we are witnessing a timeless scenario- women and mothers who will do anything to protect their children. Women make up just over 50% of the U.S. population if we believe government statistics (which at this point, I honestly question everything). So when a company allows males into the bathroom with their girls, males into female sports, and men to start advertising feminine products, there is going to be an issue.
Women having been fighting for equal rights in almost every aspect of life since the beginning of time. It has only been recently, that women have begun to see some reality of that in ways never imagined. In 1966, Roberta Gibb unofficially ran the Boston Marathon, becoming the first woman to do so. Women were not allowed to run in the Olympic Marathon until 1984… that’s less than forty years ago. I can still remember walking into a male dominated company in the 1990s and seeing pornography on the wall… talk about uncomfortable. And now, we as women have to fight against men, dressing up as females, creating a sexualized idealization that we have fought so hard against. Men are putting on lipstick and dresses and forgetting that women are so much more than that. What it tells me is that a male is still a male. In their attraction to the physiology of women, they are trying to create that in which they fantasize about. Meanwhile I am just trying to match my top to my shoes and get through my day.
While this is happening on a micro basis (a man wearing lipstick and/or stilettos here and there), corporations, media, and the woke elite are attempting to cram it down our throats on a wide scale macro level. It is no wonder that companies like Anheuser-Bush and Target are losing billions. Did they even stop to think about what their branding does to 167.5 million people in the United States? Here is the deal, 70% of women make all of most of the household/children’s purchases for the home… women, the people who can actually give birth to the children and then become the protectors of these children. Of the 167.5 million women, about 35% of them have experienced some sort of sexual harassment or worse. Woke companies and retailers tell us how truly concerned they are for all people. Given this pervasive issue of sexual harassment and exploitation of so many women (their primary customers), why would they allow males into the most private and vulnerable spaces of all- public restrooms?
If that wasn’t enough, despite the narrative that Americans are losing their love of religion, Pew Research indicates that 98% of Americans still identify as being religious, 64% of the population, Christian. So when a store like Target decides to not only minimalize women with shared bathrooms, but hires a satanic clothing designer, it is bound to upset the majority of the people that has made the retail brand succeed in the first place. Or when a Budweiser marketing manager insults the very people who buy their product, how do they not expect fall out? Who is making the decisions at the top and how have they become so disconnected from the demographics of their shoppers?
Target has gone so far as to feature clothing lines with compression tops for females to hide their breasts. Is Target taking an already susceptible population, trying to be okay with their bodies, and telling them to hide it in shame? Is this really the messaging that a parent wants their daughter to receive? On a purely marketing, numbers and dollars game, the recent “marketing initiatives” of Target, Anheuser-Bush, North Face and others, don’t make a lick of sense. But maybe they really don’t care about their customers and are far more concerned with pushing a narrative. A $14 billion plus narrative, but these are the days of record inflation so even woke companies have very high price tags…
But this is just the beginning. Are you paying attention in the schools? Have you been introduced to Kooth? If you are in Pennsylvania, your state has voluntarily signed your child up for an experimental, mental health program where your child does not necessarily need your permission – the child for whom you are responsible to clothe, feed, and drive around like you are a taxi driver. You see, it doesn’t stop with Target, North Face, Kohls, or any of these companies creating a firestorm of confusion among children. It is just part of a bigger picture that will eventually separate the child from the parent and most of us are blindly waiting on the sidelines. Kooth is an online, social media platform that has message boards, peer-to-peer interactions, and practitioner to child messaging. If you are in Philadelphia, this means that a child aged 11, can message a mental health practitioner without parental consent. Other areas of the state, it’s the age of 14. What this really means is that your child, who cannot buy a lottery ticket, can in fact, hire their own mental health practitioner through the encouragement and financing of the school district.
While right now Kooth is subsidized via a $3 million block grant, this may soon become a tax payer liability. The current PA governor has budgeted $500 million to increase the mental health support within PA schools, along with $100 million to connect students to mental health services. Legislators are pushing this on the basis of anxiety and depression. I totally agree about increasing rates of depression. It is depressing when you walk into stores and they are telling you that you are not good enough and must compress your breasts to fit in- as should your 12 old daughter. Or if you’re a boy, just “tuck it in. We’ll provide the extra fabric.” Seriously? The real reason Kooth is in Pennsylvania is because the minor consent laws make it easy for them. This program has never been part of a school system even though it has been a self-referral program in the United Kingdom since the 1990s. It will initially seem harmless, but like all good conspiracy theories this one will be a doozy for the future. Your children are being surrounded by the gender dysmorphia propaganda from every angle in order to create confusion. They will get it while they are shopping, on the television, on social media, and now the school. Yes, the idea isn’t to stop anxiety and depression. That is just an excuse to initiate a starting point that travels down the path of indoctrination and separation from the nuclear family unit, a God-created base and system for society.
Regardless of the reasons (calculated or stupid), I’m going to have to say, “no thanks.” I’ll be shopping elsewhere, sending my kids elsewhere, and I am not coming back. I’d rather put on a mask (which also is not happening- for the purpose of health, physical, mental, and spiritual). And if you don’t think there is a bigger issue at play here, I’d advise you to open your eyes and loosen your mask. Lack of oxygen can have significant long-term consequences.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, Donate here.
On the heels of overwhelming interest in research that examined the connection between autopsy results and COVID vaccines, The Lancet has made a chilling decision to pull the study from its pre-print server. The paper was written by cardiologist, Dr. Peter McCullough, epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch, and others at The Wellness Company. Both are extensively published and cited, and renowned in their respective fields. “Pre-print” is a stage of publication where a paper is submitted for peer review, so in taking this action, The Lancet effectively prevented the study from even being subjected to peer review. The implications of this are far-reaching. If the peer-review process can be prevented, McCullough warned that there can actually be “a misleading of the scientific community”.
The study consisted of 325 autopsies, and found that 240 deaths – almost 74% – were found to be either a direct or indirect result of the COVID vaccine. For those who have been alleging causation and not just correlation, this study appears to provide the smoking gun.
As a justification for its decision, The Lancet asserted that “the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology”. In response to the assertion, Dr. McCullough was quick to point out, “they had two chances to make that determination before they accepted it”, and further that “it is standard methodology”. When asked if any further detail was provided by The Lancet about what was lacking in the methodology, Dr. McCullough said directly, “No”. He went on to suggest that this may well be referred to “Lancet-gate 2”. Lancet-gate 1 alludes to a previous paper at The Lancet on Hydroxychloroquine that was later found to be “fraudulent”.
As it has turned out, Dr. McCullough says the “Lancet’s intentional censorship of the scientific truth” is having quite a boomerang effect with much greater exposure in the mainstream than it ever would have received, had the Lancet just published the paper. Other journals are reaching out with interest in the study, and he has had extensive opportunity to discuss the findings in the public square.
“…The next person we see [who died with] no explanation for the death, we have to ask the question, ‘did they take the vaccine?’. …If they took the vaccine – at any time – we know that, more likely than not, that the vaccine is the cause of death… That’s the implication of our paper.”
The study is now available for viewing at the Zenodo pre-print server, and under review at another high-level journal.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, Donate here.
This week, controversy was sparked over the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) portion of Chick-fil-A’s website. The content, apparently not entirely new, brought some calls for boycott on social media. To be clear, this piece is not one of those calls. But it is still important for Christians to recognize the situation for what it is: it is a shift away from the values that we appreciated about the company.
The DEI page reads that “One of our core values at Chick-fil-A, Inc. is that we are better together.” And “Chick-fil-A, Inc.’s commitment to being Better at Together means embedding Diversity, Equity & Inclusion in everything we do.”
It is true that the company explains that it aims to achieve DEI by promoting equal opportunity, understanding and honoring unique experiences and perspectives, and promoting a culture where all individuals can thrive. But this is mere flowery language that provides cover for something more nefarious.
Based upon this author’s observations on social media, many Christians are falling for these platitudes. After all, it is true that environments free of discrimination sound loving.
But language is not always meant to be taken at face value. The verbiage used signals the intent. Here, Chick-fil-A signals pride in its policy. It created a slogan to go along with it. It is not bland boilerplate hidden deep within the website’s policy section. Rather, it reads like a press release. And, it uses the words “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” which is the same exact language used by progressives. It signals alignment with progressivism. And that is the concern.
Progressivism is never inclusive of the Christian worldview. Progressivism seeks to cancel those who believe in the sanctity of marriage, those who believe that our sex/gender is God-given and cannot be changed, and those who believe that one should not be treated according to their skin color. These Christian ideals are pushed out of the spaces that progressives take over.
Further concerning, and telling, is the statement that this DEI effort is involved in “everything we do.” So, any claim that there is simply an effort to be inclusive of those who are different is not true. “Everything” includes the company’s beliefs, values, and mission. The same mission that used to be unequivocally Christian.
DEI is not Christian. It is rooted in critical theory, which claims that society is to be divided into oppressor/oppressed groups which view people based on their sex, race, sexuality, etc. classifications. So, policies that focus on DEI would, by extension, seek to remedy the “oppressed” groups by giving them advantages. And, when a company makes an effort toward “valuing differences,” as Chick-Fil-A puts it, they are trying to accommodate lived experiences that value one’s perception over objective truth.
Scripture tells us to not place focus on oppressor/oppressed classifications. “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.” – Romans 10:12. Historically, the Jew and Greek would have had an oppressor/oppressed dynamic. And clearly, the Romans were focused on this dynamic. But Paul tells us to only focus on those who “call on him.”
Similarly, we cannot place too much emphasis on “lived experience.” Lived experience requires us to give deference to one’s own experience rather than objective truth. In this time in history, this “lived experience” requires us to hear how one came to adopt unbiblical life decisions. But objective truth rests in the Bible. One cannot reconcile some lived experiences with Biblical truth.
This isn’t to say that you are somehow endorsing untruth or an unbiblical worldview by eating at Chick-fil-A. But the currents of the world right now are dangerous. The Church cannot continue to be unaware of the significance of messaging. Christians must be able to recognize when there is danger so that they do not drown in the worldly currents that presently exist. And with DEI, the danger is real.
As for Chick-fil-A, it is hard to understand this shift. A good portion of their success has come from them being “one of us.” Christians rightly admire and support people and companies who do not conform to the pattern of this world. Sadly, Chick-fil-A seems to be doing just that.
Like so many young, first-year teachers, I was completely overwhelmed by the world of teaching. There were so many moving parts, documents and aspects to consider when it came to managing a classroom and creating the best learning environment for all my students. I was just trying to keep my head above water and praying my supervisor never walked in. So when an older, veteran teacher came in and started talking sternly to me about my need to join the teacher’s union, I immediately complied. I was told I needed the union because it would protect me and fight for my teacher’s contract — and because every teacher in the school was already part of the union and I wouldn’t want to be the lone holdout. She handed me the form and a pen and told me to sign right then and there. So I joined.
Over the next eight years, I never had any issues with being a dues-paying member of the teacher’s union. All was quiet and time just moved along. Then in June 2021, the red flags started to fly. The Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) put out a legislative position statement speaking on behalf of its 178,000 members, urging opposition to SB 618, which would prohibit Pennsylvania school districts from requiring proof of vaccination against COVID-19 to access buildings or receive services. The union’s statement violated my beliefs and I was offended that PSEA presumed to speak on behalf of its entire membership without first asking anyone’s opinion.
The second red flag appeared when the National Education Association (NEA) pledged to push Critical Race Theory (CRT) through the entire nation’s public school system. It also pledged to oppose attempts to ban Critical Race Theory and/or the 1619 Project. After this came out, I felt completely helpless, and it seemed I had no control over what these organizations were supporting and pushing. Then it hit me the only thing I can ever control is me — and, in this case where my money goes and what it funds.
So I made the decision to opt out of the union. I was then put into contact with the Freedom Foundation’s Pennsylvania team. The Freedom Foundation was able to answer all my questions and ease my concerns regarding opting out of the union, such as the legality of it, benefits and wages being denied, and being discriminated against. They provided me with professional representation, including an opt-out letter stating that I resign membership on all levels to the PSEA and that my dues can no longer be taken from me. I signed the document, and they mailed it certified to PSEA. I then notified my HR department of my departure from the union.
The Freedom Foundation served as an indispensable buffer between myself and PSEA, and I was never contacted or bullied about my decision to opt out of the union. Having the Freedom Foundation’s help to opt out of the union was a simple, free, enlightening, and empowering process that helped reinforce and solidify my decision.
So there I was, out of the teacher’s union, but still a special education teacher employed in a public school system. Now what? I had been following a public school teacher from Virginia, Lilit Vanetsyan, on social media, and her posts went viral multiple times after speaking at school board meetings regarding masks and the evolving downfall of the public school system. Her social media page, “Teachers for Truth,” provided me the resource for how to move forward. I contacted a professional Pennsylvania teachers association called KEYTA (Keystone Teachers Association). They are an independent and nonpartisan teachers’ association that has been around since 1993. I reached out to them and reviewed the KEYTA website and found that they provide educators with liability insurance and legal advice. They have many overlapping similarities with the union, such as providing member representation, attorney assistance, liability coverage and additional insurance benefits. However, they differ in that they do not endorse political candidates, have a Political Action Committee (PAC), or contribute to political parties or political organizations.
KEYTA’s objective is to promote professionalism in education and do what is best for students. Its members work on educational issues and shield dues against use for unrelated social agendas or other extraneous issues. The icing on the cake is that monthly payments are a tiny fraction of what I was paying to the union. After joining KEYTA, I felt an immense relief and happiness that I had found something I was proud to be a part of, but also frustration that I have never heard of KEYTA years earlier.
Since finding KEYTA and leaving the union thanks to the Freedom Foundation, I have been motivated and driven to bring this information to other educators so they can also make the most informed decision for themselves. Through different social media outlets and word of mouth, I have been able to meet and speak with many teachers and support staff about the common misconceptions surrounding leaving the teachers’ union. I also created and run the website Union Choice for School Workers which provides factual information and resources to all school workers regarding their rights, options and making informed decisions about the teachers union. Along with how union dues paying members money is funding political agendas and organizations. What I have found is that most of them feared the backlash they may face from their peers and building union representatives. They’re unsure whether their job security and position would remain intact, and if they left, what protection and coverage would they be able to get?
Almost all the educators I’ve spoken with told me they felt alone in their thinking and were the minority in their schools when it came to how they viewed the union. Being able to connect like-minded public school employees and provide them the answers, support and resources they otherwise would not have received, has been extremely rewarding.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, donate here.
Does God rule in the affairs of humans and nations? Has God spoken? is what He says authoritative in 21st century America? Does truth matter? Does God give rights no government can take away?
America is a divided nation. I’m not talking about Republicans and Democrats. Answers to the core questions above divide us. In most cases, conservatives answer, “Absolutely. while Marxists answer, “Absolutely not.” How do you answer?
The answer to these questions in 1776 was quite clear, and it’s enshrined in the Declaration of Independence: “Absolutely!” Americans don’t have political disagreements; they have spiritual disagreements that play out in politics.
The Declaration of Independence lays out the principles of government in the first two paragraphs:
Most Conservatives embrace God’s absolute principles and believe rights come from Him. The founders and framers agreed as well. However, Conservatives generally believe that the majority of Progressives are in open rebellion against God. Their positions on these and many other issues are driving America toward a totally secular, anti-theistic society.
Seventy-four percent of Americans say government is infringing on their rights and freedoms. Just 33% who believe the infringement of rights caused war with Great Britain in 1775. If the American culture that the Founders and Framers envisioned is to survive against Marxist Progressives, we must proudly, loudly, and boldly proclaim the virtues of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
LIFE
God alone gives life, and no one has the right to take it away unless God’s law against murderers and rapists says so. Marxists in our government and education systems malign and attack life. They told our kids global warming will kill them by 2023, they may be a different sex, and fetuses are just a mass of cells that can be flushed from the body. As a result, according to the CDC, suicide rates have increased by 62% since 2007 (they decreased under Trump but have gone up since). While 4-in-10 kids say they feel hopeless, 1-in-10 kids attempt suicide. Homicide rates have increased among youth 91% since 2014. Marxists advocate for the abortion of nearly one million babies every year. Nancy Pelosi believes abortion will help Democrats re-take the House in 2024. State heartbeat bills and the Dodd decision last year will decrease the rate of abortions (10,000 in Texas). However, most abortions take place in blue states and cities, so Democrats will keep abortion alive and babies dead.
LIBERTY
The words ‘freedom‘ and ‘liberty‘ are often used interchangeably, but they have separate meanings. Liberty means we have the God-given right not to be ruled by men but by citizen agreed-upon Constitutional law. Liberty is the gift of God; liberty can only exist in a culture that embraces biblical Christianity. Liberty means we consent to give the government minimal power enumerated in the Constitution. It means government has no power outside those enumerations and can’t limit our speech, religious practices, political views, gun rights, government-petitioning rights, or assembly rights. Government also has the power and responsibility to protect our rights from encroachment by government agencies or evil people. The Supreme Court ruled in June a Christian mail carrier doesn’t have to work on Sundays. During “pride month”, the Court ruled a Christian Web designer doesn’t have to create alphabet mafia wedding sites. In 2018, the Court ruled a Christian baker doesn’t have to bake wedding cakes for a homosexual wedding, these cases correctly interpreting unalienable rights. (Notice an anti-Christian assault dividing us?) We have the liberty to say “NO!!!.
You hear the antithesis of liberty spoken about in different ways: “We must end the gridlock in Washington;” “We need to reach across the aisle.” (Does anyone notice that this ‘reaching‘ is only done by Republicans?) The Framers disagreed with those sentiments. They limited the power of the government, wanted Congress to meet briefly each year, and designed the system to CAUSE gridlock because they believed law enactment by the federal government limited liberty and freedom and moved toward tyranny. This website, “Liberty Lens,” has a liberty mission, “We provide a means by which the practice of journalism is accessible to the people.”
FREEDOM
Freedom means we have the God-given right to do as we please as long as we don’t trample other’s rights (not feelings). Freedom is expressed in the Declaration as the “pursuit of happiness.” If we have liberty, then we can “pursue happiness,” which was an idea unheard of in 1776. “Happiness” doesn’t mean to feel good but means “chance” or “fortune.” In Europe, this was a radical, jaw-dropping statement—America will give you a chance to be in any class or do any job you want. (Now, however, the government pursues equal outcomes.) “Happiness” means, in America, there’s no aristocracy or class because of your birth, like Europe. In Europe, if you were born a tradesman, you died a tradesman; if you were born a farmer, you died a farmer; if you were born poor, you died poor. That ended in America. You’re free to become whatever you want and free from the subjugation of tyrants—except for men to become women or men having babies (“truth” matters). Marxist want equity, or equal outcomes; God, the Declaration, and the Constitution want equal opportunity since all are created equal.
The Founders and Framers believed a person could pursue the American Dream, i.e., “happiness,” because America was an exceptional country. They advocated the masculine worldview when it came to government—each person was responsible for his own success without help or interference from the federal government. For example, the first five presidents refused, based on the enumerated powers in the Constitution, to give aid to local building projects or relief to victims of natural disasters. James Madison vetoed a congressional bill, saying the Erie Canal could not be built with federal funds because such public works were unconstitutional since they were only a gain for New York at the expense of the nation. John Quincy Adams changed that policy.
In June, the Court ruled student loan forgiveness is unconstitutional – a win for our freedom not to be saddled with others’ debts. They also ended affirmative action, ending systemic racism that everyone might pursue happiness equally.
The founders and framers believed free people should have no intrusion by the government on their God-given liberties. So, liberty means I can believe and say whatever I want; freedom means liberty gives me the basis to become whatever I want.
Jefferson continued: “To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” The Founders understood there will always be evil people in this world who seek to oppress and take away unalienable rights. “Consent” is how liberty happens and how tyranny is prevented. The Founders created a society never seen before where we the people rule the government, not the other way around. Our government is legitimate only when it rules by our consent. Ruling without our consent is unjust and tyrannical. Limited government based on the consent of the governed isn’t just a desirable objective; it’s the essential foundation of our Republic.
The main purpose of government is to protect me from evil people so I can achieve what I want in life—my pursuit of happiness and my pursuit of God. If the American culture that the founders and framers envisioned is to survive for our descendants against Marxist, anti-Christian Progressives, we must proudly, loudly, and boldly proclaim the virtues of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our kids desperately need to hear this.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, donate here.
Many older adults ask me “Why aren’t young persons concerned about the safety and long term effects of COVID-19 vaccines?” One of many factors is that that our educational K-12 and college level courses and certainly schools of public health are probably chocked full of misleading promotional materials for the genetic vaccines.
I learned recently from William Sumner Scott, J.D., executive director of World Peace Through Education Foundation who explained: “Formal education can grant the license for accreditation only if the US Department of Education (“DoEd”) approves. The DoEd has traditionally delegated the review of the accreditation process to the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (“NACIQI”) to provide a recommendation of the grant of accreditation authority by the Secretary of the DoEd.
Scott, myself, and Steve Kirsch, President of the Vaccine Safety Research Council, are formally complaining that the DoEd NACIQI has failed to conduct proper past pandemic reviews of the Council on Education of Public Health (“CEPH”) which has resulted in serious conflicts of interest by graduates of the schools its accredits in the promotion of vaccines without proper evaluation standards because of monetary incentives and research grants provided by the US government and Big Pharma to the schools of public health.
We have requested a public hearing and denial of the renewal application for accreditation authority of CEPH because it has failed to adopt proper criteria to accredit the schools, particularly they neglected to teach that conflicts of interest must be eliminated. Promotion of COVID-19 vaccines has been influenced by the favor of acceptance of bonuses, bribes, grants, and employment, and as a result, has caused death and injury to patients as a result of CEPH failure to properly enforce public health education standards.”
Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, Donate here.
While the world awaits Twitter’s release of the much anticipated “Fauci Files”, both the FBI and the Department of Energy have now acknowledged that SARS-COV-2 was likely leaked from a laboratory, although discrepancies as to exactly which one it may have originated from remain.
Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that the White House received a classified intelligence report addressing the probable lab leak. Days later, FBI director Chris Wray went on Fox News stating that the virus origins were “most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan.” The latest turn of events beg the question: After nearly three years of claiming that the newest coronavirus evolved naturally, why the sudden shift in narrative?
Jacob Creech, who goes by Clandestine on Twitter, wrote a series of Substacks pointing to Ukraine as another potential origin of the pandemic. In one particular Substack, Clandestine reveals information cited by General Igor Kirillov, where Russia openly accuses the US of creating Covid as a human-engineered pathogen. In light of Russia’s allegations of US involvement, why are China and Ukraine the only countries being examined as possible ground zero sites of lab leak origins?
As the world remains silent on the United States being the potential root of the leak, let us examine laboratory activity here in our own backyard.
According to the CDC, only two Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratories were in existence in the US before 1989; one in Fort Detrick, Maryland, and the other in Atlanta, Georgia. BSL-4 laboratories necessitate the highest safety standards due to housing dangerous and highly contagious diseases for which no known vaccine or cure exists. In 1998, 3 more were added. By 2008, the US had opened 10 additional BSL-4 labs.
In the weeks following the 9/11 attacks in 2001, anthrax-laced letters sent through the US postal service killed five Americans and sickened 17. Initially blamed on Al Queada, the FBI finally concluded in 2010 that the anthrax attacks originated from a BSL-4 lab at Fort Detrick, MD. Mounting fears over bioweapon threats as a result of the 2001 anthrax attacks spurred a rapid increase in BSL-4 labs across the county. During a 2007 Select Committee Oversight Hearing on Proliferation of Bio-Laboratories in the US, Representative Bart Stupak noted that the government had already spent over $1B on construction alone of the high-containment biological research laboratories (BSL-3 and BSL-4) after the passage of the Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, with approximately $50B in additional government funding allocated to combatting bioterrorism. Even at that time, there was apprehension that no one really knew how many of these labs there were in the US, “much less what research they are doing or whether they are safe and secure.” Today, a total of 14 BSL-4 laboratories are in operation in the United States, with an unknown number of BSL-3 labs, as there is no singular federal agency responsible for their tracking.
Concerns arising from the scientific community related to gain-of-function (GOF) research, a process that improves the ability of a pathogen to cause disease, led to a 2014 moratorium on GOF studies by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The pause in funding only applied to certain GOF studies, specifically those meeting criteria involving SARS, MERS, and Influenza viruses. Moreover, exceptions to the moratorium allowed for research that was “urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security,” as outlined in the DHHS Frequently Asked Questions. The limited ban on GOF funding was lifted in 2017.
Examples of GOF or directed evolution government-funded research can be found at Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT), a reporting system for all National Institutes of Health (NIH)-supported grants, contracts, and award recipients. One such example is a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) project that utilized GOF experiments in HIV-1 viral budding research. Dr. Anthony Fauci was the director of the NIAID overseeing these projects from 1984 until his recent retirement at the end of 2022.
In 2015, during the same period the White House GOF moratorium was in effect, the Department of Defense (DoD) Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) posted a government grant for $500 million for “Fundamental Research to Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)” (See Image 1). The grant is open through 2024.
The original DTRA Broad Agency Announcement, HDTRA1-14-24-FRCWMD-BAA, from March 2015, outlines several specific Thrust Area topics. Thrust Area 6 focuses on Cooperative Counter WMD Research with Global Partners, to include a Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP), a component of the DoD Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, which seeks to address the risk of outbreaks of dangerous infectious diseases. One of the listed goals of CBEP international research partnerships is to promote the One Health Initiative that emphasizes “the nexus of human health, animal health, and the environment, and seeks to further understand the mechanisms and factors involved in disease transmission.” CBEP engagements aim to have partner countries “comply with World Health Organization (WHO), International Health Regulations (IHR), and World Organization for Animal Health (OIE)/U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) reporting guidelines” and “promote the One Health Concept.” The directive states that CBEP has a particular interest in collaborative research engagements with foreign partners including countries of the Former Soviet Union (specifically, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine).
Embedded in the grant package are several areas of concern, including research on the role of host pathways in Viral Hemorrhagic Fever virus pathogenesis, which closed to applicants in June 2021. Then, on February 14, 2023, the WHO held an emergency meeting of the Marburg virus vaccine consortium to discuss a recent outbreak of hemorrhagic fever similar to Ebola in Equatorial Guinea.
Rocky Mountain Labs (RML) in Hamilton, Montana is a BSL-4 laboratory in the US that conducts research on various pathogens including hemorrhagic fevers like Ebola. In 2004, Dr. Marshall E. Bloom, the Associate Director for Science Management for RML, directed the group’s attention to pathogenesis of tickborne flaviviruses. Dr. Dylan Paul Flather is listed on the NIH site as a member of the Bloom Research Group. Dr. Flather’s research focus is tick-borne flaviviruses and betacoronaviruses. Covid-19 is a betacoronavirus.
In an interview with Montana Public Radio (MPR), Dr. Bloom describes how RML began running experiments on the novel coronavirus (Covid-19) before the first case was ever confirmed in the US on January 20, 2020: “There is staff here at Rocky Mountain labs poised to go after that problem,” he said. “And that’s what happened in the instance of the new coronavirus.”
The first reported cases in China were not announced until December 31, 2019. How was RML, a laboratory that specializes in vector-borne viruses, already conducting experiments on the Covid-19 virus in the US in the less than three week span before its confirmed arrival? Perhaps oversight investigations led by the House Select Committee on the Coronavirus Pandemic will reveal answers to these glaring questions.
Additionally, in March of last year, U.S. News reported of Heartland virus spreading across the country; a new, potentially deadly tick-borne virus native to the US. Given the latest reports from the FBI and the Department of Energy on the possible lab origins of Covid-19, known GOF research, and vector-borne viral experiments being conducted on US soil, it wouldn’t be a far leap for Americans to surmise that this latest tick-borne virus could also be the result of a lab release. After Project Veritas revealed footage of Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Jordan Trishton Walker, describing the company’s plans to engage in directed evolution research, Americans are understandably beginning to question whether any number of pathogenic outbreaks could be the product of government agency or non-government organization experimentation operating with little to no oversight.
More concerning yet is the transition of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC) to the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) in Manhattan, Kansas. Chosen in 2008 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as the site of the new facility, Manhattan, Kansas, lies in the heart of cattle country. The new BSL-4 facility, completed in May 2022 with a price tag of over $1.25B, will research deadly zoonotic diseases, that is infectious diseases that are transmitted between animals and humans. NBAF will also conduct research on dangerous livestock diseases like foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). With an infection rate of nearly 100% upon exposure, FMD is a highly infectious disease that affects cloven-footed animals like pigs and cattle. In the 1970’s, FMD leaked from the Plum Island facility and was carried through the air off of the island, fortunately in the direction of the Atlantic Ocean. Because of its serious transmissibility, FMD research had previously been restricted to off-continent islands. The 2008 Farm Bill approved by Congress authorized, at DHS’s request, FMD to be brought onto the mainland into PIADC’s successor facility in Kansas. A 2010 report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) concluded that the site had a high probability of FMD release occurring from the NBAF site within 50 years due to human error.
Written at the onset of the Covid pandemic, an article from The New Yorker details the inevitability of human error when dealing with deadly pathogens. A number of additional incidents such as the Pennsylvania crash involving 100 possibly infected test monkeys and the purportedly mislabeled smallpox vials found by a lab worker inside a Merck facility have occurred since the article’s publication.
NAS further asserted in their 2010 report that the U.S. cattle industry could suffer an economic impact of $9-50 billion if a FMD release occurred. That amount would be significantly higher still if an event took place today. DHS adamantly rejected NAS’s claims and revised their report to reflect a much lesser, more palatable estimation. According to DHS, NBAF is set to become operational in 2023. Again, obvious questions emerge for House oversight investigators: Why would the federal government promote such an irresponsible risk to our nation’s food security by housing an extremely dangerous livestock virus, previously not allowed on the mainland, right in the middle of cattle country? Given the recent toxic train scandal in East Palestine, Ohio, is it possible that the government is intentionally setting up potential scenarios that could destroy our own infrastructure?
DailyMail.com claims that “more than 40 facilities certified as biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) or BSL-4 have either been built or have gone into construction since 2020.” Undoubtedly, government officials and public observers alike must be wondering if the latest worldwide rush to build these new high-containment labs is this century’s new arms race.
These recent developments run contrary to the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) of 1975. According to the United Nations’ BWC page, the convention “effectively prohibits the development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling and use of biological and toxin weapons”. Today nearly every nation in the world is a signatory to that convention, including China, Ukraine, and the US. The unsettling trend of increased bio-lab development suggests that not only has the BWC long since been abandoned, but that world powers may have no intention of ever returning to compliance with the agreement.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Make sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, Donate here.
For the better part of two years, school boards across Pennsylvania have given parents an incredibly cold shoulder. In unprecedented numbers, parents have poured into school board meetings in an attempt to be heard and redirect out of touch progressive school boards who have lost touch with the values of those who elected them. Board members, with curious unanimity, opposed the passionate pleas of parents who are fed up with the sprint to Leftist identity politics, essentially telling them to “talk to the hand”… but only for 2 or 3 minutes before time expires.
The transgender agenda had parents pushing back on the notion that there is no problem allowing biological males who identify as female to use the girls bathroom or to compete in girls sports. Until now, kids and parents – who were previously inclined to just roll their eyes at the thought of these ideas being normalized – finally slipped down the slippery slope that we’ve been told doesn’t exist. Then, for all the talk of “following the guidance” and “trusting the science”, it became clear that the idea of local representative government had given way to rule of the “experts”, bypassing their actual stakeholders – local parents and taxpayers. (It’s worth noting that countless peer-reviewed studies and papers have since established that those “experts” turned out to be wrong on just about everything COVID-related). Why would we trust “experts” cut from the same Marxist mold to get gender and identity right?
These boards love “diversity” as long as no-one departs from the prescribed ideology. There is to be no diversity when it comes to ideology. For parents who dared to have an independent mind and oppose the religious doctrines of Leftist school boards, they faced being characterized as “terrorists”. Nice, huh? Behind their stoic posture, as they endure the impassioned comments from parents with manifest indifference, would seem to these parents to be utter contempt for opposing views. And what about the kids who attempt to take a stand for values that run contrary to the priests of “education”? They may want to think twice about expressing it. And they do. Kids self-censor to avoid the tyranny of students and teachers alike who, for all their preaching of tolerance, are anything but tolerant. Certainly this is not representative of all students and teachers but the prevailing climate does not even begin to cultivate an environment that respects ideological diversity.
Well now it’s campaign season and these school boards want you, the voter, to forget about all that. Instead they want you to understand what a great job they’ve been doing. But remember those unprecedented numbers of parents being shown “the hand” in school board meetings? Turns out that this phenomenon is translating to unprecedented numbers of challenges to school board incumbents. There is a wave of opposition to incumbents across the state unlike anything Pennsylvania has seen before. What was a ripple of flipped seats and boards over the last few years may be shaping up to be a tidal wave in 2023. The record tells quite a different story than the one that many incumbents across the state are telling. But it’s campaign season, so certain narratives are expedient, and the ends justifies the means. Let’s look at a couple of examples.
According to Douglas Durham, a parent in the Southern Lehigh School District and Chair of the Southern Lehigh Republican Committee, “Nine out of ten candidates in our race are registered as Republicans. Of those, the Southern Lehigh Republican committee has endorsed five who we regard as ‘authentic’ Republicans by virtue of their affirmation of principles in a document called My Commitment to the SLSD Community. Amazing that nearly half wouldn’t pledge support to plainly Republican values. But what about the others? “Beyond these five”, Douglas continues, “two of the candidates, Candi Kruse and Eric Boyer, switched their party affiliation to Republican since the 2022 midterms, and Eric Boyer has never voted as a Republican. The remaining two, Emily Gehman and Tim Kearney, were both enthusiastic advocates for continued masking and virtual learning, and were strong advocates for a DEI consultant and mixed gender bathrooms”. I know the party isn’t monolithic, but that doesn’t sound very ‘Republican’, does it?
Similarly, in Centre County, in a recent letter to the editor of the Centre Daily Times, Dr. Gretchen Brandt, an incumbent board member for the State College Area School District, begins by asserting that the school board simply wants to “learn from and utilize the expertise, energy and creative ideas of ALL our residents to solve issues”. Sounds great, but later she continues a posture of non-responsiveness, deflecting, and blocking by saying, “We will not be sidetracked by political talking points that have nothing to do with our students or our district…”. You see how this works? Your passion and values are dismissed by reducing them to mere “political talking points”. In public comment sessions, according to a parent who does not want to be identified, these “talking points” allude to things like 1) different emails to parents based on students’ race, 2) non-academic surveys being given to students after parents have opted their kids out, 3) over-emphasis on group identity at the expense of student individuality, 4) Creating racial divisions (Example), 5) drawing childrens’ attention to sexual matters too soon, and 6) de-normalizing the notion of binary gender. Evidently some people call this “progress”. Dr. Brandt may want to reconsider that these are, in reality, ‘constituent talking points’, and these constituents are in fact a subset of the “ALL” that she pretended to care about earlier in her letter. Clearly, there is no true intention to listen to ALL constituents. She then goes on to endorse the rest of the slate that she is running with – who are likely very likeminded about policy – and tactics.
Incidentally, at least in some districts, there is a practice of asking newly-elected board members to sign a non-disclosure statement. If transparency is truly a value for students, parents, and taxpayers, why would an NDA be necessary?
NOTE to readers: Consider asking your school board if there are any NDAs in place for school board members in your district. If so, ask what the justification is for that.
If you live in a blue or purple school district, chances are your school board is comprised of incumbents who want to act against the interests of their constituents’ values, but appear another way during campaign season. Don’t trust the rhetoric. They know what their constituents want to hear, and they’re happy to say all the right words. Don’t fall for it. These folks would make Pinocchio blush. This is your chance. Make it count. Get educated on who these people *really* are. Vote on May 16. And bring some friends with you.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Make sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at The Liberty Lens! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, Donate to Lions for Liberty.
Never underestimate the power of ideas. Ever. Philosophical geeks like me that have a strange fascination with the power of ideas know that ideas can enrich humanity immeasurably or transform free societies into genocidal nightmares that are cruel beyond human comprehension. I logically follow ideas where they lead, turning over every stone, trying to comprehend how simple thoughts and opinions transform lives and nations.
The twentieth century demonstrates, through cause and effect and experiential contrast, the power ideas have to shape the world. The century was a conundrum as the people of the West thrived in prosperity while those living in Marxist nations suffered under unimaginable conditions. The prevailing ideology of your country, the ideas your leaders embraced determined your fate, whether you lived life in relative comfort or faced genocide. The lesson? Ideas create peace or unimaginable suffering. They can cause ordinary people to improve their circumstances or become extraordinary monsters. They are the ultimate force shaping humanity and the fate of nations.
Ideas give, and ideas take away. Pursuing freedom and liberty created immeasurable prosperity and security for the West, lifting more people out of poverty than any other ideology the world has ever known. But ideas aren’t always so kind. While the West has enjoyed safety and security, Marx’s theory of exploitation and equity led his disciples to starve tens of millions in order to gain control of societies. Famines became powerful tools to subdue populations. Stalin and Mao used hunger and death to force compliance with communist philosophy, and the results were horrific. Famines were intentionally protracted, becoming a valuable tool to break people’s will, and force them into submission. The pain of hunger became so unbearable that people resorted to eating their children. During the Holodomor, the great famine that resulted from Stalin’s collectivization of Ukrainian farms, Soviet posters kindly reminded people, “To Eat Your Children is a Barbarian Act.” The Soviets forced starvation upon millions yet dared to chide people about resorting to the unthinkable because the pain of hunger pushed them beyond the limits of humanity.
Mao Zedong used similar tactics to reorganize Chinese society to conform to Marxist principles during the period known as “The Great Leap Forward,” starving tens of millions to death. He knew of the horror, yet he pushed forward; suffering was necessary because the ends always justified the means. Marxists achieve their utopian visions, regardless of the cost. People resorted to cannibalism, and parents were forced to murder their children when hunger drove them to scrounge even the tiniest scrap of excess food. Such self-preservation violated the Marxist virtues of economic equity. They had to pay, and parents were forced to execute their children for their “disobedience.”
Most Americans are unaware that these nightmares occurred throughout the twentieth century. They tend to think humanity had progressed beyond this kind of barbarism, and the prospects of genocide ended with the Holocaust and the defeat of the Third Reich. It wasn’t true; cruelty was alive and well. Historians generally agree that Marxist atrocities led to the murder of over one hundred million people in the twentieth century in their pursuit of a utopian society. Still, we will never know the actual number. Genocide was a constant plague upon the world even after World War II. The worst of Mao’s atrocities occurred between 1958 and 1962 – the end of the Eisenhower and the beginning of the Kennedy administrations.
Consider the contrasts.
On the other hand, for those who lived under the protection of the ideology of the West, the twentieth century was a gilded age of prosperity and relative safety unlike any the world has known. Yet, the twentieth century brought horrors that neither you nor I even want to try to imagine to people living under Marxism. They died by the tens of millions. In 1959, our grandparents were basking in the mythical aura of Eisenhower’s America while Lennon and McCartney began to take flight in the Quarrymen. In that same year, the people of China were faced with the pain of hunger so maddening that they chose to eat their neighbors, while many were forced to murder their children who gleaned spilled grains of rice from fields trying to survive.
America and the West remain blissfully unaware.
One of the things I learned while overturning intellectual stones is how we are dangerously unaware that genocidal ideas, masquerading as platitudes, wreaked havoc all over the world. At the same time, we lived in the comparative safety and comfort of twentieth-century America. We didn’t know – or want to know – that toxic ideas in the hands of madmen destroyed nations and incited universal madness among their people, during the same gilded age of America and the West. Our public schools and universities failed to tell you and me that Soviet people were dying in gulags and the Chinese were eating their neighbors, killing their children during the golden age of 1950s America. We didn’t know such genocide was happening during America’s heyday. Our ignorance led us to believe that Marxism was buried under the rubble of the Berlin wall and never was a legitimate threat. We created the convenient myths that genocidal ideas no longer roamed the earth seeking whom they could destroy and that American exceptionalism protects us from within. We think this can’t happen here. America is bulletproof. We don’t have to worry. We can continue with our God-given destiny, enjoying unparalleled comfort and prosperity without the inconvenience of getting involved in protecting and preserving the unique ideology of America and the West.
We aren’t immune; America is vulnerable. Variants of Marxism, the ideological tradition that created the horrors for the Soviets and Chinese, are now the moral paradigm of the Progressive Left. They’re advancing through our institutions, transforming America from within. The ideas that caused Ukrainians to eat their children have come to America. The days of blissful ignorance and detached hubris for conservatives have ended. We’ve ignored school board elections to our kid’s peril and conceded so much cultural ground that America is becoming unrecognizable. All because, in our ignorance, we didn’t understand the power of ideas, wanting to believe that America was immune. We desperately want to believe that the things we didn’t know were happening during America’s gilded age could never happen here.
Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, the Nobel Prize winner who survived a decade in Soviet gulags, reminds us that such hubris is deadly.
“If it were possible for any nation to fathom another people’s bitter experience through a book, how much easier its future fate would become and how many calamities and mistakes it could avoid. But it is very difficult. There is always this fallacious belief: “It would not be the same here; here such things are impossible.”
Alas, all the evil of the twentieth century is possible everywhere on earth.” (The Gulag Archipelago, Introduction to the abridged version)
Ignorance and hubris only increase the opportunities for bad ideas to take root in our backyard. The Russians, Ukrainians, Chinese, and Cambodians all believed the myth we believe today – it’s not possible where we live. And yet we see Marxism rising as the new moral vision for the Progressive Left and America. Take the Marxists at their word and Solzhenitsyn at his, “Alas, all the evil of the twentieth century is possible everywhere on earth.” Which means our backyard.
Enjoy comfort and security, but never underestimate the power of ideas. They can make you rich and make you eat your children, even in America.
Appreciate what you’re reading? Be sure to share it!
Have a story? Break it at LibertyLens.News! Become a Contributor.
To Support The Liberty Lens, donate here.
© 2023 Lions For Liberty
