‘Moderna currently has a trial ongoing with children between the ages of 12 and 17 with about 3000 participants, and apparently one of those participants, a 12-year-old girl named “Maddie,” is now paralyzed from the waist down, and reportedly is now suffering from an inability to urinate on her own, a bowel obstruction, excruciating pain, fainting episodes and other neurological problems.’https://rumble.com/vftyc5-12-year-old-girl-paralyzed-and-injured-in-moderna-covid-19-vaccine-trial.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=HealthImpactNews&ep=2
Was Police Officer Derek Chauvin ever going to get an unbiased fair trial? Consider, what is a fair trial? ‘In the U.S., the right to a fair trial is secured by the Fourteenth Amendment as a fundamental liberty. A fair trial is a legal trial conducted according to the rules of common law. In a fair trial, the accused’s legal rights are safeguarded and respected. A fair trial hears before it condemns. The trial proceeds on inquiry and renders judgment only after trial. In a fair trial, jurors are to be entirely indifferent as to the parties at the outset. The necessary elements of a fair trial are an adequate hearing and an impartial tribunal, free from any interest, bias, or prejudice. A fair trial presupposes full justice within human limitations. [Box v. State, 74 Ark. App. 82, 88-89 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001)].’https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fair-trial/
When Fake President Biden, Out of the Swamp Waters and other Leftists spewed forth their vitirol hatred Pre-Trial was it ever going to be FAIR?
‘Everything about the Chauvin trial and the media coverage of it showcases the subversion and transformation of our justice system into one of a third-world banana republic.
We can’t have a justice system that is ruled by threats of violence, doxxing, and harassment from the domestic terrorists in the mainstream media, on the streets, and in the Democratic party.
That’s not how civilized societies function, it’s how third-world countries function. If you import the third-world, don’t be surprised when your country becomes the third-world.
If you are caught in the censored echo chambers of Big Tech platforms, chances are you missed most of the stories I’ve gathered below. If you are trapped inside the Big Media echo chambers, you’ve been spoon-fed what the oligarchs want you to see and hear about the trial.
That’s why I’ve taken the time to curate a collection of stories for you so you can save them and never forget how this all played out.
Media’s slanted stories could ‘contribute’ to rioting, says constitutional expert
Compare what is happening in our streets right now and what is being said by our “leaders” to what happened with peaceful protestors at the Capitol on January 6th. Compare the media coverage and the reaction to it. Compare how the Officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt was treated by both the media and our “justice system.”
We still don’t even know his name!
Half of the country lives in reality and the other half lives in a bubble world of fear and loathing handcrafted by the oligarch elites. One side plays by one set of rules, the other plays by no rules at all.
This is a serious problem and it’s not getting better anytime soon. Our nation needs prayer and we as individuals must cling to the hope, peace, and Biblical justice of the Holy Spirit.
“Conservative” courts and judges mean nothing if our justice system is ruled by a mob of domestic terrorists. The rule of law means nothing if there are one set of rules for half of the country and a different set of rules for the other. Nothing about what we are seeing unfold right now is “justice” in any sense of the word and it certainly is not “normal.”
How long are we going to put up with it?’https://news.gab.com/2021/04/20/the-new-normal-a-justice-system-ruled-by-the-mob/
‘Former Pfizer Vice President Mike Yeadon discusses his thoughts as to why the lockdown was a mistake, and why the government strategies to manage the pandemic are only making things worse.’
Have you received the jab? I was scheduled for the jab on April 14 but canceled it because I am not sure of its effectiveness. Whether, I am right or wrong it is interesting that ‘Some 5,800 Americans have contracted COVID-19 despite being fully vaccinated against the virus that causes it, federal officials said April 15.
The Americans contracted the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19, despite getting both doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, or the single-shot Johnson & Johnson vaccine, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) told The Epoch Times via email.
Of the 5,800 fully vaccinated people who were confirmed as so-called breakthrough cases, nearly 400 required treatment at hospitals and 74 died.
A little over 40 percent of the infections were in people 60 years of age or older, and 65 percent were female. The CDC declined to make a state-by-state breakdown available, though it has developed a national database where state health department investigators can enter, store, and manage data for cases in their jurisdiction.
The figures were for cases through April 13.
More than 78 million people have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 in the United States as of April 15.
“To date, no unexpected patterns have been identified in case demographics or vaccine characteristics,” the CDC stated.
“COVID-19 vaccines are effective, and are a critical tool to bring the pandemic under control. All of the available vaccines have been proven effective at preventing severe illness, hospitalizations, and deaths. However, like is seen with other vaccines, we expect thousands of vaccine breakthrough cases will occur even though the vaccine is working as expected.”
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky stated during a congressional hearing on April 15 that the causes of the breakthrough cases are being probed.
“Some of these breakthroughs are, of course, failure of an immune response in the host. And then some of them we worry might be related to a variant that is circulating. So we’re looking at both,” she said.
The number of cases the CDC has identified does not include people who contracted COVID-19 less than two weeks after their final dose, according to Walensky.
In March, states began reporting numbers for people who had gotten infected despite full vaccination. Epidemiologists in Washington state identified 217 of the cases, five of whom died. In Michigan, 246 of the cases were recorded between Jan. 1 and March 31. Three of those patients died.
Texas, South Carolina, and Oregon are among the other states that have reported more than 100 cases among residents.’https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/5800-fully-vaccinated-americans-have-contracted-covid-19-74-dead-cdc_3777637.html?&utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-04-15-1&mktids=8e8a707e3d00f4fef5a527c721e13103&est=JzMAJrftaP4izpSwXEL%2FEpJPCZpnDKrJPr2tWroUwvp9DBb6NrxRE%2BWlzU2kgMQ6xw%3D%3D
If anyone SHOULD celebrate FREE SPEECH it would be a law school; Right?! Well, not so fast!
‘SAN DIEGO, Calif., April 13, 2021 — Almost a month after launching a preliminary investigation into law professor Tom Smith’s online comments criticizing the Chinese government, the University of San Diego School of Law is doubling down on its violation of Smith’s expressive rights. In defiance of free speech advocacy efforts by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and others, the law school has now passed the investigation to the university for an official review.
“We have an oppressive institution cracking down on dissent by investigating a professor for criticizing an oppressive government cracking down on dissent,” said Sabrina Conza, FIRE program analyst. “USD’s unconscionable treatment of Smith is a delight for fans of irony and censorship alike.”
On March 10, Smith posted an excerpt from a Wall Street Journal op-ed on his personal blog, along with his own commentary: “If you believe that the coronavirus did not escape from the lab in Wuhan, you have to at least consider that you are an idiot who is swallowing whole a lot [sic] of Chinese cock swaddle.”
After the post prompted cries of racism from student groups, the university opened an investigation into Smith’s reference to “Chinese cock swaddle.” In response to the criticism, Smith updated the post to clarify that he was referring to the Chinese government, not to Chinese people generally.
FIRE defended Smith’s freedom of expression in March with a letter to the university. The university’s general counsel responded, offering only that USD was “reviewing the matter and expeditiously will take action as appropriate.” FIRE sent a second letter on April 1 expressing its disappointment with the tepid response and reminding the university that investigations alone are enough to create an impermissible chilling effect on campus.
“It’s easy to say that you have the right to free speech, but there’s a climate where there’s so much that you risk by exercising that right,” Smith told FIRE. “And it ends up really diminishing academic freedom.”
FIRE received no response to its second letter, but Smith let FIRE know on April 6 that rather than backing down, the university launched an official “review.”
“Against the objections of free speech advocates and all common sense, and in defiance of its own promises to protect extramural expression, USD continues to obsess over Smith’s comments,” said Conza. “The school must immediately end its review so that all faculty can feel free to express themselves and engage in open dialogue.”
In his inaugural address as president, USD President James Harris said the university can set an example in higher education by playing a “central role as a bastion of free speech and open dialogue in a free and democratic society.”
Though USD is a private institution not bound by the First Amendment, it is required to live up to its promises of free expression.’https://www.thefire.org/a-professor-is-under-investigation-for-criticizing-the-chinese-government-defend-his-rights-with-two-clicks/
Bill and Hillary ought to be proud of their leftist cancel culture daughter! Yes, ‘Chelsea Clinton wants Facebook to ban Fox News host Tucker Carlson from its website after a clip from Carlson’s program casting doubt on the effectiveness of coronavirus vaccines went viral this week.’https://www.theblaze.com/news/chelsea-clinton-facebook-ban-tucker-carlson?utm_source=theblaze-dailyPM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__PM%202021-04-15&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Daily%20PM
You have to hand it to Xi Jinping. The Chinese “president for life” last September schmoozed the royalty of the United Nations with his unexpected pledge that his country aims “to have CO2 emissions peak before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality (Net Zero) before 2060.”
Xi then urged other nations “to pursue innovative, coordinated, green and open development for all” through rapid deployment of new technologies so as to “achieve a green recovery of the world economy in the post-COVID era and thus create a powerful force driving sustainable development.”
The eloquent sage, confident that the mantle of world leadership was passing from the United States into his hands, concluded his prepared remarks as follows:
“The baton of history has been passed to our generation, and we must make the right choice, a choice worthy of the people’s trust and of our times. Let us join hands to uphold the values of peace, development, equity, justice, democracy, and freedom shared by all of us and build a new type of international relations and a community with a shared future for mankind. Together, we can make the world a better place for everyone.”
And just how is China preparing itself for Net Zero?
The London-based energy and climate research group Ember reports that China generated 53 percent of the world’s total coal-fired power in 2020, a jump of 9 percent from 2015, while adding 38.4 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power installations in 2020 alone. China is also financing billions of dollars’ worth of coal-fired power plants in other “developing” nations.
[It should be noted that in 2020 China also added a record 71.7 GW of wind power and 48.2 GW of solar. And China has set a goal of 70 GW of installed nuclear energy by 2025. But “progress is nowhere near fast enough,” according to Ember power analyst Dave Jones. Jones added that “coal power needs to collapse by 80 percent by 2030 to avoid dangerous levels of warming.” Or so he believes.]
Analysis by the Asia Society Policy Institute and Climate Analytics, as reported in Climate Change News, indicates that to reach the Paris Agreement’s goal of 1.5o C temperature reduction by 2060, China would have to achieve peak CO2 emissions by 2025 and rapidly reduce them thereafter, with a total phaseout of coal-fired power by 2040.
Yet, according to the Renewable Energy Institute, the typical coal-fired power plant has a lifespan of about 40 years. Would China throw away massive investments just to kowtow to the UN? Zhang Shuwei, chief economist for the Draworld Environment Research Center, claims Chinese coal may have to absorb over $300 billion in stranded assets if the nation follows through and undertakes a “cliff fall of coal power generation after 2030.”
But, as the New York Post recently editorialized, China’s betrayal of its commitment to Hong Kong, together with its duplicity regarding the COVID pandemic and its dissembling on treatment of the Uighurs, signals that the Middle Kingdom cannot be trusted to keep its word. The trampling of Hong Kong’s freedoms, the paper argues, demonstrates that there is no point negotiating with the Chinese Communist Party on long-term issues like climate change.
Agence France-Presse reported in March that China’s latest five-year plan increases investment in coal and omits any cap on total energy consumption. Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, compares Xi’s words with China’s deeds, stating that, “The central contradiction between expanding the smokestack economy and promoting green growth appears unresolved.”
Similarly, Japanese journalists also question China’s commitment to the Green economy – in contrast to the “excellent” responses of Japan and its Western allies (despite the fact that new Japanese coal plants in 2020 exceeded retirements and that high-efficiency coal plants are unlikely to disappear soon. [The Japanese in their zeal to single out China ignored the fact that India and many other nations are also beefing up coal mining and power generation.]
Other journalists are equally offended at China’s apparent duplicity. Michael Standaert, a China-based free-lancer, wrote in Yale E360, under the headline, “Despite pledges to cut emissions, China Goes on a Coal Spree.” Standaert argued that there is a “real and figurative haze about how strong [China’s] climate ambitions really are and how quickly the country can wean itself from … coal.” [When Mother Jones reposted Standaert’s article, the headline read in part, “China Is Bingeing on Coal.”]
Vox correspondent Lili Pike provides a backstory excuse for China’s seemingly odd behavior. She notes that China’s provinces, who gained authority to approve new power plants in 2014, see new coal plants as a way to boost their GDP and provide jobs. The economic slowdowns linked to COVID provided extra incentives for these provincial plants.
Perhaps Vox thinks that, once the provincial economies are rolling along, they will recognize their bad investments and shutter their coal plants almost immediately. Perhaps pigs will fly.
China’s “slouching towards Net Zero” approach belies the panicked warnings of UN
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who insists “the climate emergency” — the defining crisis of our time — is happening even more quickly than we feared. It “is a race we are losing, but it is a race we can win.”
Guterres made a toothless plea to China last July to stop building new coal plants, but he giddily applauded Xi’s rhetoric in September. Xi has also won praise from mega-billionaire Bill Gates, who in a February 2021 interview with China Daily gushed over China’s “determination” to prioritize the climate and its contributions to carbon reduction.
According to Gates, “It’s great that President Xi is making climate a priority and wants to work with other countries on this…. Without the contributions of China, many of the key ingredients (in fighting climate change) like the batteries and solar power wouldn’t be so affordable.” [We’re on the same team, babee!]
In the real world, not every environmental disaster prediction has come true – actually, hardly any of them have. Paul Ehrlich’s best-seller, The Population Bomb, opened with this frightful bit of “news”:
“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.”
Today, we have the wisdom of apparent REM fan Greta Thunberg: “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change…. Around 2030 we will be in a position to set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control that will lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.” In criticizing China for detaining a young Chinese “climate striker,” Thunberg added, “Billions of people will die, and children will die while parents lose their jobs!”
Stop it, President Xi! You are making her cry!
But perhaps Xi Jinping knows Greta is dead right. Perhaps he knows it is too late to save the planet. So why not just “binge” on coal, keep the peasants happy, and stay in office until the end. Maybe Xi has read the tea leaves, or the astronomical charts, and rightly foresees the second coming of the killer asteroid.
Or maybe he figures that by 2030 the whole world will be under his control.’https://papundits.wordpress.com/2021/04/15/chinas-strange-endorsement-of-net-zero/
Follow the science say those in authority, but whose science? Wear a mask and then don’t wear a mask! This stuff is scary!
‘Quoting from the results of a study carried out in 1963 by Stanley Milgram, Chuck Colson predicted the kind of C0V1D-19 lockdown authoritarianism that was birthed by Communist Chinese authorities and copycatted all around the world.
The Milgram ‘shock experiment’ was a study into “the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience.”
Milgram’s aim was to see how “easily ordinary people could be influenced into committing atrocities, for example, Germans in WWII.”
He designed the study to answer questions raised by the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, and the defence’s justification that those on trial “were only following orders.” [i]
In 1974, Milgram himself wrote:
“I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist.
“Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not.”
Colson explained that up to 80% of those who participated in Milgram’s experiment were willing to “inflict painful electric shocks on another person if an authority figure told them to do so.” [ii]
In 2007, Santa Clara University’s, Jerry Burger ‘replicated the experiment, and Burger’s results were nearly identical with Milgram.’
This prompted New York Times’ Adam Cohen to conclude that “ordinary Americans are about as willing to blindly follow orders to inflict pain on an innocent stranger as they were four decades ago.”
Colson, not surprised by the results said, “the two experiments are a huge cautionary tale of how people respond to authority.”
The studies, he said, show that “nothing changes about human nature; we really do blindly follow authority, and very few people challenge it.”
Colson wrote, “when there’s social chaos, people will choose order over liberty. It’s the reason why, if you give a prison guard or a government clerk a little power, they become abusive.”
The “only real barrier preventing people from inflicting pain is conscience,” which Colson explains is our God-given “internal moral bearings” (see Romans 2:15) that have to be nurtured into maturity.
The problem and its cause are, as the Milgram/Burger studies infer, a lack of Godly nurturing, which is the consequence of “the breakdown of the family and moral decay in American life.”
The abdication from nurturing our God-given internal moral bearings blinds us to tyranny and binds us to sinful participation in it.
People will obey a lawful authority without question because there’s no acknowledgement of God; no other authority or power higher than Government fiats and stuffy, bloated Bureaucratic rules.
This is God vs. Government-become-god territory.
Where unjust laws are obeyed because, as Colson argued, “people have lost the concept of a law beyond the law.”
Which, says Colson, leads to a rejection of civil liberties, because “given a choice between order and chaos, Americans will always choose order – even if it shuts down some of our freedoms.”
The act of civil disobedience, he said, also becomes a farce, because “in a morally relativistic era, there’s nothing that kicks in and tells us that something is wrong.”
A docile, conditioned polis simply can’t know what they’re protesting, or find reasons to justify why.
It was a dismal prediction. Now a C0V1D-19 reality.
Atheist, secular humanist Governments following their Communist Chinese counterparts turned neighbour against neighbour. The police were weaponised against the people they’re paid to protect, and fighting the virus became about denouncing people perceived to be lockdown “lawbreakers.”
The highest civic duty was the surrender of civil liberties, wearing a mask, not questioning the mandated medical advice from bureaucrats, applauding their disaster porn, and staying glued to the media’s daily “briefings.”
As Milgram, commenting on the outcome of his experiment noted: “The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.”
To paraphrase Colson, the only sure-fire way to protect civil liberties, and live out just civil disobedience, is by ‘courageously asserting the law beyond the law’; disobeying unjust laws that are contrary to our internal moral bearings, informed as they are, by the self-revealing God of Grace, and His objective moral law.
Though it may seem like we are being “plunged into the abyss of hell,” Charles Spurgeon once said, “God does not leave us there alone.”
The “star of hope is still in the sky when the night is blackest. Surely out of death, darkness, and despair, we shall yet arise to Life, light and liberty.”’https://caldronpool.com/follow-the-science-obedience-to-authority-vs-personal-conscience/
[i] McLeod, S. 2017. The Milgram Shock Experiment, Simply Psychology
[ii] Colson, C. 2015. My Final Word, Zondervan (pp.58-59)
[iii] Spurgeon, C. Not Left to Perish, Faith’s Checkbook March 3rd
‘Internationally renowned physicist absolutely proves 2020 election was biggest cyber-crime in world history.’