Sunday, September 29, 2019


This week from the Editor’s Desk, Michael Matt takes a much closer look at the eco-theology of the Pan-Amazonian Bishops Synod, to kick off in two weeks. Do you think this is really about women deacons and married priests? Or is there something much more sinister going on? Plus, in addition to calling for the establishment of a ‘new humanism,’ Francis borrows a page from Hillary Clinton’s playbook and tells the world that ‘it takes a village’ to establish peace and justice for all. And Jesus Christ? Well, Francis evidently forgot to mention Him again. Finally, in his latest video message, Francis scolds President Trump for being a heretic from the new Eco-Religion when it comes to opting America out of the Paris Treaty on Climate Change. Imagine that! And for that matter, imagine there’s no heaven, it’s easy if you try; no hell below us, above us only sky. Imagine there's no countries. . . Francis does!
JOHN 14:6-"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
One of the greatest deceptions in history is how the Roman Catholic Church was formed. This system is deeply rooted in paganism, worship of idols and false gods, un-Biblical practices like repetitive prayer, confession of sins to man, and the Pope himself, proclaiming to be God on earth.

Converted Irish Priest Richard Bennett Concerning Fake Catholic Religion: Praying to 

Dead, Mary, etc.

Ex Roman Catholic priest Richard Bennett (website: exposes the phony anti Bible Roman Catholic Religion such as their blasphemous Mass, their use of graven images, the necromancy of praying to the dead & the Virgin Mary, worthless confession boxes, vain traditions, useless sacraments, etc. all of which lead to the damnation of the soul in the end & a denial of the Biblical gospel (Galatians 1:6-9). See more on our playlist called "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" with 168 videos at
The most dangerous aspect of Catholic Church doctrine is that it appears to be based on the great, indispensable truths of God’s revelation.3 In reality, however, the telling fact is that Catholic doctrine denies essential, biblical doctrines by that which it adds on to biblical truths. For example, while Catholic doctrine affirms the worship of the three distinct Persons of the Trinity, it adds divine adoration for the Virgin Mary by addressing her in prayer as "the All Holy One". The exact words of the official statement are, "By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the ‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One".4 The Catholic Church also demands that worship, which according to Scripture is due exclusively to the one true God in three persons, is also to be given to the mother of Jesus.


At the 48th Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Council, we sat down with Alex Newman, author of “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy America's Children.” We discuss the high levels of illiteracy in America and what Alex Newman sees as the progressive agenda taking over the American school system to promote a collectivist, socialist, atheist worldview. And we look at what role individuals like John Dewey, Horace Mann, and Robert Owen played in transforming the US education system.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
My latest in PJ Media:
The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) sent out a press release last Wednesday demanding that Twitter suspend its most important account: that of President Trump. Because Trump has repeatedly enraged Leftists by going over the heads of the establishment media and talking directly to the American people through his tweets, there are no doubt a large number of tweets that have made Leftists want him gone from Twitter forever. But the one that sent CAIR over the edge committed the sin that is absolutely, finally, unanswerably unpardonable: Trump had the audacity to criticize that sacred cow of all sacred cows, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
Omar, with her hijab, her immigrant background, and her determination to see nothing good in her adopted homeland is a revered figure on the Left, and particularly among the Islamic establishment that is tied to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Leftists and Islamic supremacists in the United States love her anti-Americanism, her burning hatred and contempt for the chief executive, her endless victimhood posturing. And there is no reason why they shouldn’t: Antifa, CAIR and their allied organizations are working from the same playbook.
That’s why, when Trump first criticized “The Squad,” the Left was apoplectic. And when the president dared to skewer Omar in particular, CAIR determined that it was time for Twitter to pull the president’s Twitter plug. CAIR “strongly condemned President Trump for sharing a false, Islamophobic smear targeting Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) on Twitter and called on that social media company to suspend the president’s account for violating its terms of service. #SuspendTrump.”
CAIR was enraged because, they claimed, “Trump retweeted a video falsely indicating that Rep. Omar ‘partied on the anniversary of 9/11.’” The video, according to CAIR, “was in fact from a Congressional Black Caucus event held on September 13th to celebrate black women in Congress,” and had been taken down by the Twitter user who originally posted it.
All right. But the claim in this tweet was not Trump’s. Trump is not the nation’s Chief Fact-Checker. He was retweeting someone. If everyone who retweeted an inaccurate claim were banned from Twitter, there would be no Leftists on the platform. What’s more, there is Omar’s notorious characterization of 9/11 as “some people did something,” and her interview in which she laughingly likened the U.S. and Britain to al-Qaeda, saying: “When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. …  every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up. But you know… you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity…but you say these names [of terrorist groups] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.”
In light of that and more, the possibility that she sounded less than devastated on September 11, 2001, is not all that farfetched. If she did spend the day dazed and broken, as many Americans did, she hides it very, very well.
But that was not all that activated CAIR’s tripwire. The “nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization” raged that “the President added his own comment to the post, stating ‘IIhan Omar, a member of AOC Plus 3, will win us the Great State of Minnesota. The new face of the Democrat Party!’”
So now it is apparently an unpardonable offense that should get you banned from Twitter if you say that the far-Left advocacy of Omar and her Squad cohorts will ultimately redound to the benefit of Trump and the non-Romneyite Republicans. How dare Trump suggest that the Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot by embracing these radicals!
There is much more. Read the rest here.


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:


  • “Vaxxed” is a film investigating claims that vaccines have nothing to do with the autism epidemic
  • A 2017 study, which examined health outcomes among 3- to 5-month-old infants following the introduction of DTP and oral polio vaccine in Guinea-Bissau, found that DTP vaccination was associated with fivefold higher mortality from all causes than being unvaccinated
  • William Thompson, Ph.D., a (now former) senior scientist at the CDC’s National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases, confessed that he conspired to cover up links found between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism
  • The original MMR vaccine was found to cause meningitis, and the younger the patient at time of vaccination, the higher the risk of developing meningitis. CDC-funded research suggested there’s a heightened risk for autism in some children when the first MMR dose is given at an earlier age
  • CDC whistleblower Thompson stated that a 2004 CDC study was manipulated to erase a link between MMR vaccine and autism in African-American boys who received their first MMR vaccine before the age of 36 months, which resulted in a 3.36 times greater risk of developing autism compared to those who received the vaccine after the age of 36 months
Can vaccines trigger autism? This is the topic of the film "Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,"1directed by Andrew Wakefield and produced by Del Bigtree, an Emmy Award-winning producer of "The Doctors" talk show.
The film became the center of controversy when it was pulled from the Tribeca Film Festival lineup in 2016 by Robert De Niro and Jane Rosenthal, the two founders of the well-known film festival. According to Rosenthal, other filmmakers had threatened to withdraw their films from the festival if "Vaxxed" was shown.
While De Niro admitted feeling pressured to pull the film, he urged people to see it, saying there are many issues relating to the way the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) evaluates and monitors the safety of vaccines that are not being openly spoken about, and really should be addressed.

Are Vaccines as Thoroughly Researched as Claimed?

The official stance repeated by most mainstream media is that vaccines have been thoroughly researched, that "hundreds" of studies have proven their safety, and that no link between vaccines and health problems, such as autism, have ever been found.
Again and again, you hear that the autism-vaccine link was based on a single study published in 1998 by a now-"discredited" doctor (Wakefield), and the hypothetical association between vaccines and autism has since been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. It sounds definitive enough, and is often repeated as established fact. Yet it's far from the whole truth.
Importantly, the vaccine industry has long shied away from evaluating vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations to determine potential differences in general health outcomes. The few independent scientists who have attempted such an investigation have little comfort to give to those who believe vaccines are essential for health, and mandatory use of vaccines by all children is the only way to protect society from disease.
One such study,2 published in 2017, examined health outcomes among infants 3 to 5 months old following the introduction of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) and oral polio vaccine in Guinea-Bissau, which took place in the early 1980s. This population offered the rare opportunity to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children due to the way the vaccines were rolled out in the West African country.
Shockingly, researchers discovered "DTP was associated with fivefold higher mortality than being unvaccinated." According to the authors, "All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis."
In other words, the researchers concluded that DTP vaccine weakened the children's immune systems, rendering them vulnerable to a whole host of other often deadly diseases and serious health problems.
Other clinical trials in West Africa revealed that a high-titer measles vaccine interacted with the DTP vaccine, resulting in a 33 percent increase in infant mortality.3 In this case, the finding led to the withdrawal of that experimental measles vaccine targeting very young infants, but what would have happened had those studies never been done? Clearly, we need many more like them.
In the U.S., the CDC now recommends that children receive 69 doses of 16 vaccines by the time they're 18 years old, with 50 doses of 14 vaccines given before the age of 6.4 How does this affect their health? And is anyone actually tracking the health outcomes of children adhering to the federally recommended childhood vaccine schedule and state mandatory vaccination programs?
The answer is no. We do not know if or how all of these vaccinations are affecting the general health and mortality of our children.
We do, however, know that the U.S. has one of the highest infant and maternal mortality rates of any developed nation,5,6 and we also have the highest vaccination rates with 94 to 96 percent of children entering kindergarten having received multiple doses of vaccines.7 This high vaccination rate among kindergarten children, mostly due to state vaccine laws that require vaccinations for school attendance, has been maintained in the U.S. since the 1980s.8

Whistleblower Admits CDC Manipulated Data

A central part of the "Vaxxed" storyline centers around William Thompson, Ph.D., a senior scientist at the CDC's National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases (NCIR), who confessed that he conspired with colleagues to cover up links found between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism.
According to Thompson, this scientific fraud was committed for the express purpose of covering up potential safety problems so the agency would be able to maintain that the MMR vaccine had been proven safe to give to all children. Thompson explained they simply eliminated the incriminating data, thereby vanishing the link.

How FDA and CDC Hid Evidence of Mercury Poisoning

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., founder of the former World Mercury Project and chairman of the Children's Health Defense, has exposed how officials at the CDC and FDA knew that infant vaccines were exposing American children to mercury far in excess of federal safety guidelines since 1999.
Even so, when they held a meeting in 2000 to discuss it, the CDC "moved aggressively to hastily gin up five poorly designed epidemiological studies" to deny any link between mercury (thimerosal) and its dangers to children.
As Kennedy told The Epoch Times, three of those five studies were published in the journal Pediatrics, which is severely compromised since it depends heavily on vaccine revenues for its existence. He added:9
"In response to pressure from Congress and the public, the FDA conducted a review in the late 1990s that found that the amount of mercury in the childhood vaccine schedule surpassed some federal safety guidelines. Accordingly, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a lukewarm statement in 1999 about thimerosal's potential risks.
The statement's authors called for the phase-out of thimerosal-containing vaccines 'as expeditiously as possible,' while still avowing that 'the large risks of not vaccinating children far outweigh the unknown and probably much smaller risk, if any, of cumulative exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines over the first 6 months of life.'"
The reason you don't hear about this is because federal health officials conceal it with a statistical trick that massages the numbers to reflect what the CDC and FDA want them to say — a trick they employ often when determining vaccine "safety" — while journalists continue to spout whatever the CDC tells them. As noted by Kennedy:10
"Thimerosal is 50% ethylmercury, which is far more toxic and persistent in the brain than the highly-regulated methylmercury in fish.
Hundreds of peer reviewed studies by leading government and university scientists show that thimerosal is a devastating brain poison linked to neurological disorders now epidemic in American children. My book, 'Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak,' is a summary of these studies, which CDC and its credulous journalists swear don't exist."
This is why journalists who merely parrot the approved FDA and CDC talking points do readers such a tremendous disservice. Both federal health agencies have been accused of malfeasance and cover-up of important drug and vaccine safety data and, until the truth is known, it is unwise to blindly accept them as the final arbiters of what's safe and what's not.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), which includes the CDC, FDA and NIH, also owns a number of vaccine patents and sells $4.1 billion in vaccines each year while simultaneously being responsible for vaccine regulation, policymaking, monitoring of vaccine safety and promotion of universal use of all CDC-recommended vaccines.
How can these federal health agencies effectively meet all of these different goals when they have inherent conflicts of interest? They cannot. Yet, these conflicts of interest are rarely if ever mentioned by the media.

What You Need to Know About the 'Discredited Autism Study'

In the film, Wakefield explains the genesis of his now infamous paper, the so-called "discredited autism study" that vaccine advocates insist is the sole evidence for a link between autism and vaccines.
What many people don't know is that Wakefield and 12 other coauthors of the paper never actually performed a study to ascertain whether the MMR vaccine caused autism. They also did not state that MMR vaccine causes autism in the paper, but simply called for more research into the potential association.
It all began when a mother contacted Wakefield about her son, whose gastrointestinal and autism symptoms began after he received his MMR vaccination. An academic gastroenterologist, Wakefield told her he couldn't help, as he had no knowledge about autism. She insisted, saying her son had terrible digestive problems but no one was taking them seriously.
Wakefield decided to look into it and, in 1998, he and 12 colleagues published a case series paper in The Lancet, reporting that parents of 9 of 12 children, who had been seen for chronic gastrointestinal symptoms, reported their children's health deterioration began shortly after MMR vaccination.
It's important to realize that a case series paper is very different from a case control study. A case series simply describes the experiences of a single patient or group of patients with a similar diagnosis.
As Wakefield points out in his book, "Callous Disregard," the purpose of a case study is to "generate new hypotheses." It is not supposed to determine or investigate possible causality — and Wakefield's paper did not make any causal claims. Rather, he and his colleagues concluded:11
"We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to neuropsychiatric dysfunction. In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps and rubella immuni[z]ation.
Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine."
The paper also explicitly stated that:
"We did not prove an association between measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described …
If there is a causal link between measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and this syndrome, a rising incidence might be anticipated after the introduction of this vaccine in the U.K. in 1988. Published evidence is inadequate to show whether there's a change in incidence or a link with measles, mumps and rubella vaccine."

Was Wakefield's Paper Fraudulent?

Wakefield's paper was eventually retracted after generating massive international controversy and denials by public health officials and doctors giving vaccines to children, who claimed the paper unnecessarily frightened and caused parents to question the safety of MMR and many other vaccines.
But to use Wakefield's case series paper as "proof" that there is no link between vaccination and autism simply because this paper was retracted is grossly misleading.
It wasn't a case-controlled clinical study designed to investigate or determine causation by comparing health outcomes of two different groups of patients; it was merely a case series paper that described similar health outcomes in patients and presented a hypothesis, nothing more.
According to detractors, including Bill Gates, Wakefield's paper was based on fraudulent, completely made-up data, but such accusations have been rebutted by David Lewis, Ph.D.,12 a research microbiologist and director of the Research Misconduct Project13 of the National Whistleblower Center in Washington, D.C.
A summary of the Wakefield case can be found on in the article, "How the Case Against Andrew Wakefield Was Concocted."14 In fact, Lewis' investigation led him to accuse The British Medical Journal of institutional research misconduct15 for publishing false accusations of fraud against Wakefield. According to Lewis:16
"Documents recovered from Dr. Wakefield's files during my investigation at the National Whistleblowers Center reveal that a pathologist associated with the study, Dr. Andrew Anthony, interpreted a number of the children's biopsies as evidence of colitis.
Altogether, the evidence contained in Wakefield's files suggested to me that the BMJ's fraud theory was more tabloid news than science."
In the end, what happened to Wakefield is powerful testimony of the danger that research scientists and physicians face if they draw the ire of the vaccine industry, government health officials and medical organizations promoting mandatory vaccination. The threat to one's livelihood is in and of itself a factor that prevents much-needed independent vaccine safety research.

Does Age of Exposure to MMR Vaccine Influence Autism Risk?

According to Wakefield, the history of the MMR vaccine may offer valuable clues to its safety, or lack thereof. The original MMR vaccine was linked to meningitis,17,18,19 and the filmmakers cite research suggesting the age of exposure was a significant factor. The younger the patient at time of the vaccination, the higher the risk of developing meningitis.
Wakefield wondered if perhaps there might be a similar age-related link between MMR vaccine and autism. This research was ultimately done by the CDC, and Thompson was part of that team. As explained in the film, CDC whistleblower Thompson ended up contacting Brian Hooker, Ph.D., and advising him on how to obtain this and other vaccine data from the CDC.20
Copies of the files Hooker obtained from the CDC — about 10,000 in all — can be downloaded from the Vaxxed website.21 While Thompson could not legally give the studies to Hooker, he told Hooker to file a citizen's request to the CDC, and guided him on which studies and data sets to ask for.
Among them was a study22 Thompson co-wrote that looked at autism rates and time of MMR vaccine administration, and found evidence for a heightened risk for autism when the first MMR dose was given at 15 months — a finding that was subsequently covered up.
A letter23 requesting the retraction of this study has been sent, based on the evidence of fraud presented by Thompson.

Protecting MMR Vaccine More Important Than Children's Health

Wakefield also describes the research he did into the testing and licensing of the MMR vaccine and how, based on that research, he could no longer support the use of the combination MMR vaccine. After he urged parents to avoid the triple vaccine and get the single vaccines (i.e., the individual vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella), demand for the single vaccines dramatically increased.
However, rather than allowing parents to choose between MMR and individual vaccines, the U.K. stopped importing the single vaccines and Merck decided to cease production of the single vaccines in the U.S. This action effectively removed parental choice altogether, compelling parents to use the combination MMR vaccine if they wanted to vaccinate their children.
When Wakefield questioned the rationale behind the U.K.'s decision to eliminate the single vaccines, a senior representative at the British department of health told him that if parents were allowed to choose between the triple MMR and single vaccines, it would destroy the MMR program. "In other words, the concern was for the protection of the program, over and above the protection of children," Wakefield said.

Whistleblower Admits Omitting Data Showing MMR-Autism Link

Thompson also co-wrote a widely cited 2004 CDC study24 that concluded there was no link between the MMR vaccine and autism. However, Thompson admitted this conclusion is actually false, as the team simply massaged the outcome by excluding the data that showed a link.
According to Thompson, he and the other scientists who worked on the study were pressured "from the top" to come to conclusions that would support the government's policy on MMR vaccine safety. The omitted data, Thompson claimed, showed a distinct link between early MMR vaccination and a risk for the development of autism in young African-American boys.
Hooker published a reanalysis of the 2004 CDC data set in 2014, in the journal Translational Neurodegeneration,25 concluding that African-American boys who receive their first MMR vaccine before the age of 36 months have a 3.36 times greater risk of developing autism, compared to those who receive the vaccine after the age of 36 months. (The CDC's childhood vaccination schedule recommends getting the MMR vaccine between 12 and 18 months.)
For males in general, regardless of race, the risk for autism was 1.69 times greater when MMR was given prior to 36 months of age. Just how was Thompson's team able to hide this rather obvious connection? In short, data were originally obtained on 2,583 children living in Atlanta, Georgia, born between 1986 and 1993.
The original scientific analysis plan specified that school records and/or birth certificates were to be used to obtain race data. By excluding children who did not have a valid state of Georgia birth certificate, they were able to reduce the cohort size by more than 40 percent, and by including fewer subjects — through the introduction of the arbitrary criteria of a valid birth certificate to ascertain race — the statistical power of the findings was eliminated.

How Vaccines May Cause Harm

While a lot of attention has been given to thimerosal, a mercury compound used in some vaccines as a preservative, it's a mistake to think thimerosal is the sole problem when it comes to vaccine safety.
Thimerosal preservatives are not present in live virus vaccines such as MMR, and are not even included in significant amounts in most inactivated childhood vaccines anymore, yet vaccine-related injury and death, including the unexplained big increase in autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders among children in the past three decades, is still a pressing reality.
What's more, vaccine safety is not simply a matter of proving or disproving the link between vaccines in general and autism specifically. There are many other, potentially severe vaccine side effects, including immune system dysfunction, that can lead to or exacerbate any number of health problems.
Examples of other vaccine ingredients and factors related to vaccination that may be harmful to health include:
Lack of research into the safety of the CDC's recommended childhood vaccine schedule 
that subjects infants and young children to 50 doses of 14 vaccines during the first six 
years of life, starting on the day of birth, including receipt of six to 10 vaccines on the 
same day.26
Failure of one-size-fits-all vaccine policies and laws to acknowledge increased individual 
susceptibility to harm from vaccination that include genetic, biological and environmental 
high-risk factors often not identified, or, dismissed as unimportant by doctors and other 
vaccine providers.27
Research28 showing an increase in death following receipt of inactivated vaccines
Aluminum adjuvants might be a factor, but it appears inactivated vaccines may also 
program your immune system in a way that decreases your body's ability to fight off 
disease later. To learn more about this, please follow the hyperlink provided.
The gut-brain axis, and the compelling synergy between compromised gut flora and 
autism, where vaccines can act as a trigger. To learn more, please see the hyperlinks, as 
I've written about this on previous occasions.
The association between autism increases with the introduction of vaccines using human 
fetal cell lines and retroviral contaminants.29
The potential for DNA fragments in vaccines to produce an exaggerated and 
potentially fatal immune response.30

What Do Statistics Suggest About Vaccine Safety?

Barring large-scale studies comparing unvaccinated and vaccinated populations, general health statistics can give us an inkling as to how well the U.S. vaccination program protects our children's health, and it doesn't look promising.
  • One in 6 children today has a developmental disability,31 which includes ADD/ADHD, autism, hearing loss, learning disabilities, mental and behavior disorders and seizures, which have been associated with vaccine side effects.
  • Fifty-four percent of children have a diagnosed chronic illness,32,33 including anxiety, asthma, behavioral problems, bone and muscle disorders, chronic ear infections, depression, diabetes, food and/or environmental allergies and epilepsy.
This list again mirrors brain and immune system dysfunction that has been reported following vaccination. The rise in prevalence of these chronic diseases among children and young adults parallels the rise in the numbers of required vaccines, yet promoters of mandatory vaccination insist that these illnesses are in no way associated with vaccinations.
In his book, "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies," Neil Z. Miller also provides eye-opening information about vaccine safety. He downloaded the entire vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) database and created a program to extract all reports involving infants. In all, the reports of 38,000 infants who experienced an adverse reaction following the receipt of one or more vaccines were extracted.
Another program was then created that was able to determine the number of vaccines each infant had received before suffering an adverse reaction.
Next, reports were stratified by the number of vaccines (anywhere from one to eight) the infants had received simultaneously before the reaction took place. They specifically homed in on serious adverse reactions requiring hospitalization or that led to death. Here's what he found:
  • Infants who received three vaccines simultaneously were statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die after receiving their vaccines than children who received two vaccines at the same time
  • Infants who received four vaccines simultaneously were statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who received three or two vaccines, and so on all the way up to eight vaccines
  • Children who received eight vaccines simultaneously were "off-the-charts" statistically in that they were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die after receiving those vaccines
  • Children who received vaccines at an earlier age were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who receive those vaccines at a later age

Why We Must Protect Vaccine Exemptions

All of these facts are why we simply must protect the legal right to exercise voluntary, informed consent to vaccination and to obtain vaccine exemptions in the U.S. We must have the right to choose, which includes the right to refuse one or more vaccines for ourselves or our children if we determine the risks are too great.
Make sure you take action to protect and expand the legal right to make voluntary vaccine decisions in your state by signing up to use the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal.
Moreover, when an individual experiences a deterioration in health after vaccination, doctors need to understand the danger of giving more vaccinations until or unless the vaccine can be conclusively exonerated as a causative or contributing factor to that health deterioration.
Physicians who recommend and administer vaccines to people, particularly to vulnerable infants and children, need to apply the precautionary principle of "first do no harm." This is critically important when the foundation of science supporting the safety of any given vaccine, alone or in combination, for any given individual is so weak — and in some cases, based on outright fraud.
If you haven't watched "Vaxxed" yet, I hope you will take the time to view it now, while you can watch it for free.

Saturday, September 28, 2019


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The recent directive of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government in Pakistan that schoolgirls cover up in order to prevent “unethical incidents” calls to mind the fact that Iran’s supreme leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei, has said much the same thing. He has contended that Islam holds the answer to the problems of sexual mistreatment of women in Western societies.
If women were to wear the hijab, he argued, they would be spared such depraved behavior.
The “depraved behavior” that Khamenei ascribes to men, all men, in the West, is actually found much more often in the Muslim lands, where men are regarded as uncontrollable wild beasts when it comes to women, and they need to be protected from their own instinctive passions by women — devilishly attractive as they are — doing their part by covering up the way all obedient Muslimahs do.
But the licit behavior of Muslim men toward Muslim women certainly includes sexual mistreatment. A Muslim husband may demand sex from any of his wives, at any time and if she refuses, he may “beat” her for being disobedient (Qur’an 4:34). And “marital rape” of an unwilling wife certainly constitutes, for Western man, “depraved behavior.”
Khamenei doesn’t go into the full extent of the mistreatment of women under Islam. Men are superior to women, for whom they must act as guardians in all important matters. A daughter’s inheritance is half that of a son. Even more important, a woman’s testimony, for example, is worth only half that of a man, for as Muhammad himself explained, such a rule is necessary “because of a deficiency in her intelligence.”
Two days earlier, the Iranian regime executed a 24-year-old woman – reportedly a child bride who suffered domestic abuse while still a minor until her husband was killed. She claimed to have confessed to the murder under coercion, telling a judge the killer was in fact her husband’s brother, who she also accused of having raped her several times.
The accusation of repeated rape was not looked into, much less accepted, by the court, because in Islam, a charge of rape requires the testimony of four male eyewitnesses. Obviously there were none in this case, as indeed, there almost never are, which is one of the reasons why rape is so frequent a crime in Muslim lands — it’s almost impossible to get a conviction. Note that this girl was a “child bride.” That phenomenon is common in Islamic societies, because Muhammad himself married Aisha when she was six, and he consummated the marriage — that is, had sexual intercourse with her — when she was nine. Finally, she suffered “domestic abuse” because in Islam, a man can “beat” his wife, and there is little a wife can do about what is permitted by the Qur’an.
On an official Twitter account, Khamenei wrote, “The disaster of countless sexual assaults on Western women – including incidents leading to #MeToo campaign – and Islam’s proposal to resolve it.”
Islam’s proposal to “resolve” this “disaster of countless sexual assaults” is to have non-Muslim women dress like Muslim women, covered up, and the more covered up they are, the safer Khamenei believes they will be. Presumably it’s not as much fun to proposition a girl if she’s wearing a hijab or burqa; walking around naked in front of her also loses its appeal if she’s hijabbed. Making jokes with sexual innuendo — a third common #MeToo charge — would only be arousing if she doesn’t wear a veil. So put on that veil, and no one will proposition you, walk naked in front of you, or make certain kinds of jokes. Of course this is idiotic. Wearing the cover does not diminish the incidence of sexual assault. It’s a sign of male power over women. Many women are still subject to sexual assault, including rape, all over the Muslim world, the victims including many with cover, from simple hijabs to burkas and niqabs. Apparently that cover has not been enough to calm the raging beast within Muslim males.
What a squalid view of humanity Khamenei offers. No appeals to morality or decency will work with men, apparently. The only thing that will change their animal behavior will be to keep women covered up. And if it is the lack of cover that is responsible for rapes, why is there less sexual assault in the Western world than in Muslim lands? And why are Western women in Europe now so afraid, not of Western men, but of the Muslims in their midst? Could it not be more convincingly argued that Muslim men are taught to be contemptuous of women, to treat them as unequals, taught also that it is permissible to behave violently and aggressively toward women, especially Infidel women, and that men should not be held legally or morally responsible for actions which they cannot help?
He then linked a video clip which begins with news footage of some of the many [Western] women who have come forward with stories of sexual assault and harassment in workplace environments over the past year.
The slickly-produced video moves to brief excerpts from a speech Khamenei delivered on International Women’s Day last March in which he extolled the virtues of the hijab.
“You might have heard, a few months ago, that a large number of Western female politicians announced one right after another they had been subjected to abuse, harassment or violence at times while they were working in government offices,” he said, according to the subtitles.
“By introducing hijab, Islam has shut the door on a path that would pull women towards such deviation.”
The video ends with images of Iranian women wearing the Islamic head covering, and another Khamenei quote: “Hijab gives women freedom and identity.”
In Islam, the “hijab” does not give women “freedom,” for it is mandated for them by men. Those who seek to exercise real freedom, and choose not to wear the hijab, have  suffered everything from being murdered by their male relatives, as happened to Aqsa Parvez in Canada, to being sentenced to several years in jail simply for removing their hijabs in public by way of protest, as has happened to women in Iran.
“During the hundreds of years of oppression that the patriarchal Western civilization imposed on the female gender and particularly on Western women, some movements were launched by women to revive their rights,” the article begins.
This is rich: here is Ayatollah Khamenei describing the centuries “of oppression” that women suffered in the “patriarchal Western civilization.” It is not that Western civilization that permitted polygamy (which devalues each wife), that allowed a husband to divorce his wife by uttering the triple-talaq, that permitted a husband to “beat” his wife, that made a woman’s testimony worth half that of a man because of, according to Muhammad himself, “the deficiency in her intelligence.” Men are supposed to handle all the important matters, including finance, because of women’s inferior intelligence. It is male relatives who can punish a girl or woman who does not wear her prescribed cover or who does anything else to “dishonor” the family. Doesn’t all this add up to the “patriarchal civilization” that Khamenei absurdly ascribes to the Western world?
“One of these movements is the #MeToo movement which was initially launched by famous Western women who had experienced humiliation and sexual harassment. But, will this movement find the cause of this human disaster and the real solution to it?”
To end sexual harassment of women in the West, Khamenei has an easy solution: Western women need only dress like their Muslim sisters, who, just as soon as they put on the hijab or better still, the burka or niqab, will find that the men around them will be instantly subdued, their animal passions dissipated, and the women will be safe, as Khamenei is convinced happens in Iran. Yet we have plenty of examples of Iranian women, properly covered, who nonetheless have been raped, such as Reyhaneh Jabbari, who killed her rapist and was executed for that act of self-defense. And Iranian women are as subject to sexual harassment as Western women. The #MeToo movement has arrived in Iran, and many women have recounted their own assaults, even when they were fully covered. Here is one such testimony: “I have been sexually assaulted several times, even wearing chador, although I have never been quiet about. Not having ‘appropriate dress’ is nothing more than a patriarchal excuse.” “Even wearing chador” will not protect you. Khamenei needs to read what Iranian women are saying.
Ayatollah Khamenei presents himself as a defender of women, but the Supreme Leader is recorded as saying that “gender equality is one of the biggest mistakes of western thought.” Iran’s Islamic regime has, according to Iranian opposition groups, institutionalized, legalized and normalized misogyny, rape culture, and gender violence.
Another excerpt from Khamenei’s statements:
“In spite of the dim-witted and superficial propaganda campaigns of materialistic people, hijab does not shackle women.”
When hijab is made mandatory for girls and women, and if they disobey, that can bring severe punishment — prison terms — by  the state, and even murder by male relatives, this certainly “shackles” women. They are not free to refuse. They must obey. Their freedom has been curtailed.
“[The West] wants women to entertain men’s eyes.”
Western man is not the lust-crazed beast that Ayatollah Khamenei believes all men to be. Does he include himself, I wonder? Why would “the West” want women “to entertain men’s eyes”? Is he talking about the West that really exists? Last I looked, Western women were being urged to do everything that men do, to study STEM subjects, to run for office, to rise high at work and break all glass ceilings, to lean out. No one was being told to “entertain men’s eyes.” Ayatollah Khamenei has sex on the brain; he seems to think of America as one big show in Las Vegas, with leggy chorines and men in the audience straining at the bit.
“They want men to be free to even fulfil their visual lusts; so they persuade women to uncover, wear makeup and exhibit themselves before men!”
Who is “they” in Khomeini’s fantasy? Zionist spies? The C.I.A.? Who? Is he talking about Western agents who want “Iranian men” to fulfill their visual lusts so they persuade “Iranian” women “to uncover, wear makeup and exhibit themselves before men”? No one has been going around persuading Iranian women to uncover; they do it themselves, as a brave act of defiance against the Islamic clerics such as Khamenei himself. No one has to persuade them to wear makeup and lipstick; it is their own choice, their refusal to kowtow, their rebellion against the grim constraints of dour ayatollahs. Khamenei makes these acts of individual defiance sound like the product of a sinister conspiracy.
“If this [hijab wearing] is not observed, the society will be afflicted with the same depravity that the West is plagued with today.”
The greatest sexual depravity in the world today is that exhibited by Muslim grooming gangs in Rotherham, U.K., where 1400 “white, English girls, “some as young as eleven,” were repeatedly raped by Muslim men, the mass rape of Yaziidi girls and women by the Muslim fanatics of the Islamic State in Iraq, the kidnapping and use as sex slaves of Christian girls by the Muslim terrorists of Boko Haram in Nigeria, the repeated examples of mass sexual assault and rape, by Muslim men, of Christian girls and women, during public celebrations, as at the New Year’s Eve celebration in Cologne in 2015/2016, during which 1,000 German women were sexually assaulted (and some raped) in public, by up to 2,000 Muslim men, while 400 other women were similarly assaulted in Hamburg, and many hundreds more groped, or raped, throughout Germany.
Rape statistics from all over Europe have shown  a great recent rise in the number of rapes, and they are related precisely to the number of Muslim migrants. The U.K. has the highest Muslim population and the highest sexual assault rate. Sweden has the second highest non-indigenous Muslim population rate in Europe and the second highest sexual assault rate in Europe. Belgium has the third highest Muslim population rate and the third highest sexual violence rate. The Netherlands has the fourth highest sexual assault rate in Europe and the fourth highest Muslim population rate. Germany has the sixth highest assault rate and the sixth highest Muslim population rate. Are all of these numbers just a random coincidence?
There are plenty of cases of Muslim men raping Muslim girls, too, in Europe, in the Muslim “ghettos” of the housing projects, though given a choice, Muslims prefer to rape Infidel girls, who are seen  as the “enemy” deserving such treatment, and who, by their dress and mien, are “asking for it.”
With little hope of making it outside the housing projects, many of these young men try to dominate their own neighborhoods, resorting to violence, especially against young women.
They rule gangland style, combined with the male-dominated traditions of the Arab countries they came from. It’s gotten so bad that, today, most of the young women only feel safe if they are covered up, or if they stay at home. Girls who want to look just like other French girls are considered provocative, asking for trouble.
So the cover is worn not voluntarily, but out of fear.  It’s a sign that says “I’m a dutiful Muslim, please don’t attack me” — to ward off attacks by other Muslims. It doesn’t always work.
There is the case of Samira Belli, who was attacked though she wore the hijab:
Samira Bellil wasn’t asking for trouble, but trouble came to her. She’s the granddaughter of Algerian immigrants and she’s written a book about surviving the hell of the Paris ghettos.
“I was gang raped by three people I knew, and I couldn’t say anything, because in my culture, your family is dishonored if you lose your virginity,” says Bellil. “So I kept quiet, and the rapes continued. The next time, I was pulled off a commuter train and no one lifted a finger to help me. …Everybody turned their head away. They were all looking out the window.”
When Bellil’s family discovered that she had been raped, they weren’t sympathetic. They threw her out onto the streets. But she’s since discovered that what happened to her was not the only case.
“There was a trial in Lille where a 13-year-old girl was gang raped by 80 men. Sometimes, it’s 80, or 50 or 10. It’s absolutely terrible,” says Bellil. “In the case of Argenteuil, it was horrible. A young woman was raped in a school. Of course, everybody knew, but they’re so afraid of these young men that they prefer to close their eyes. That’s the price of peace in the ghettos.”
When the verdicts came down in this case, the courthouse turned into a madhouse. Eighteen teenagers were convicted of raping a 15-year-old girl over a two-month period. But what really shocked France was how the mothers of those boys reacted.
“You call this justice, seven years in prison for some oral sex,” says one mother. “It’s the girl who should be behind bars.
Does any of this suggest that Muslim girls and women who wear the hijab are immune to attack?
Khamenei has a dim view of humanity. Like many Muslims, he sees men as uncontrollable beasts, unable to stop themselves if women appear without cover. That is more true of Muslim men, certainly, for they have been raised in a misogynistic faith, and believe they have a right to control “their” women and to make sure that those women make themselves, through cover, as un-alluring as possible. If there is a rape, it’s always the fault of the victim.
In the non-Muslim West, men are not seen, nor treated, as ravenous sex-mad beasts. And though Ayatollah Khamenei might not believe it, Western women, even those who are models and film stars, are not regarded as fatally alluring, and pounced upon. And no one thinks that if Western women refuse to cover, that must mean they “are asking for it.” The West has its rapists, but nothing like the number who are to be found in the Muslim world, with its inculcated violence and misogyny. Rape is grossly underreported in Muslim lands for several reasons. It can get the victim in trouble for “dishonoring” the family. The victim receives not sympathy, but condemnation, and many girls are afraid, as a consequence, to report the crime. And remember, too, that a woman’s testimony is worth only half that of a man, so if it is only a case of he said-she said, the victim has no chance of prevailing. Finally, to make a charge of rape under the Sharia requires the testimony of four male witnesses. How often is a rape victim going to have four male witnesses present who are not friends of the rapist? That requirement discourages many rape victims from going forward, and for those who do, their chances of seeing justice done are small.
“[The West says] women have to give up their modesty and morality and use their physical appeal in order to gain the approval of men. Is this humiliation or respect? Influenced by Zionist elements, the ignorant and intoxicated western world presented this idea under the guise of respect for women.”
Actually “the West” makes no such demand of women, about giving up their “modesty and morality” and using their “physical appeal.” Respect for women in the West is demonstrated in both their full legal and social equality. It is also shown in their exercise of free choice: women are not required to cover, nor forced not to cover. They can do as they decide, as individuals, and unlike in Islam, are not to be ordered about by their husbands, fathers, and brothers. If women do not cover in the West, it is their decision entirely. Khamenei’s reference to the “western world” being “influenced by Zionist elements” is of course both bizarre and incomprehensible. What could he mean? We don’t regard women as incapable of moral behavior if they dress in a certain way. Nor do we see men as unable to control themselves. If a Western man rapes a Western woman, she is not too ashamed to report it. Her family does not suffer “dishonor” as a result. In court, her testimony is not “worth half that of” the male defendant. Nor need she produce four male witnesses to the rape.
The #MeToo movement in the West began by addressing the abuse of women by powerful men, beginning with Harvey Weinstein, and it metastasized from that, with many other women  coming forward with their own tales of being forced to endure some kind of sexual assault, verbal or physical. The#MeToo movement is a sign not of weakness, but of female strength, given that some of the behavior described went back decades, with women at long last eager to reveal what had been kept quiet, for so long, out of fear of retribution from powerful men. It’s not a sign of decadence, as Khamenei thinks, but rather, of a salutary cleansing of the societal stables,
Raising questions about Khamenei’s arguments on compulsory hijab wear, Radio Farda, a U.S.-funded Farsi-language broadcaster, reported last March that “billboards disdaining sexual harassment in Tehran and other major Iranian cities indicate that despite four decades of forceful enforcement of compulsory hijab the issue of sexual harassment is still a major social problem in Iran.”
Indeed,  for forty years all Iranian girls and women have been forced to wear hijab and many women wear burqas, yet sexual harassment of all kinds — including rape — is still of major concern. That suggests that wearing cover turns out to be of little efficacy in preventing sexual assault.
Despite Khamenei’s idealized portrayal of the lives of women in Iran, a 2017 U.N. report on Iran cited official discrimination against women including underage marriage, the underrepresentation of women in decision-making positions and the labor force, and harassment of women’s rights campaigners. It said women and girls also faced discrimination with regard to divorce, child custody and freedom of movement and dress.
Earlier U.N. reports noted that under Iran’s Islamic penal code, “a woman’s testimony in a court of law is regarded as half that of a man’s” and that abuses of female prisoners include forced marriages, sexual violence and torture, and the rape of virgins awaiting execution.
The execution of 24-year-old Zeinab Sekaanvand has focused attention not only on the Iranian judiciary’s treatment of people convicted of crimes committed while minors, but on the issue of child marriage and abuse.
In Iran, girls may be legally married at 13, although those as young as nine may be married with the permission of their fathers and a court. (Nine is the age at which Islam’s prophet Mohammed consummated his marriage to Aisha, the youngest of his dozen wives and concubines, according to an authoritative Hadith.)
Seventeen percent of Iranian girls are married younger than 18, according to 2018 UNICEF data. (The highest rates are in sub-Saharan Africa. The figure for the U.S. is 0.46 percent, according to the Pew Research Center.)
Iran lies near the bottom – in 140th place out of 144 – of the World Economic Forum’s “Global Gender Gap” rankings for 2017. The survey examines political empowerment, economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, and health and survival, among men and women.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a terrible place for a woman. All the misogynistic Islamic rules apply. Husbands can take up to four wives; they can divorce any wife for any reason, merely by saying the triple-talaq; they can beat disobedient wives; they can marry girls as young as 13, and with special dispensation, even girls as young as 9, if the girl’s father, and a court, permit it. Daughters inherit half of what a son inherits. A Muslim woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man because of “women’s deficiency in judgment.” A rape victim must produce four male eyewitnesses to the rape. Women are required, whether they wish to or not, to wear cover, from hijab to burqa.
Crime statistics show that Muslims everywhere in Europe engage in much more rape and sexual assault than do non-Muslims. In Muslim countries, sexual assault statistics are hard to come by, for there is underreporting by victims, to safeguard their own and their family’s “honor,” and because it is so often not worth bringing charges, given the kind of testimony — four male eyewitnesses —  that the Sharia requires. But the testimony of rape victims in Iran, including many who wear the chador, undermines Khamenei’s claim that wearing islamically correct clothing will end sexual assaults.
Ayatollah Khamenei thinks we in the West are decadent and depraved because “our” women don’t wear hijab, which is needed to hide a woman’s natural allure, because men — according to Khamenei — are beasts. Perhaps it would be truer to say that all the Muslim men Khamenei meets are beasts in their attitude toward women. What could be more depraved than the Muslim grooming gangs of Rotherham, or the Islamic State members mass-raping helpless Yazidi girls? Khamenei should look at what the Islamic Republic has done to women over the past 40 years, and compare the freedoms and status enjoyed by women under the Shah’s regime, with what they must now endure under the misogynistic Islamic Republic, where merely removing your hijab for a bright shining moment of freedom can lead to several years in a dank, dark, thoroughly Islamic prison.