<em>by <a href="https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/2frontlinenews/endless-symptoms-flowing-to-us-every-hour/"><strong>Dr. Yaffa Shir-Raz </strong></a></em>

<strong><a href="https://www.covil.co.il/en/this-is-how-pfizer-managed-to-obtain-the-fdas-emergency-authorization-for-children/">Analysis and comparison</a></strong> of the review document submitted by Pfizer to the US Food and Drug Administration, on the basis of which the FDA gave the green light to expand the emergency permit for vaccination also for children aged 12-15 (<strong>1</strong>), as opposed to the study protocol in children (<strong>2, 3</strong>), reveal concerning findings,  including violations of the protocol established by Pfizer itself, and no less serious, designing the trial protocol in a way that will allow the company to present as positive findings as possible in terms of vaccine safety in children.
<h3><strong> Violation of protocol conditions - How did children with a psychiatric diagnosis get to be included in the study?</strong></h3>
According to the review document submitted by Pfizer to the FDA, four of the 1,131 children in the study arm who received Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine suffered from serious adverse events ("SAEs") - that is, events in which at least one criterion was met: caused death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent disability/incapacity, or congenital anomaly/birth defect.

Of these four children, three had such severe depression that they were hospitalized shortly after vaccination (in the first 7 days after the first dose, in the second only one day after the second dose, and in the third 15 days after the first dose, respectively).

<img class="wp-image-4354 aligncenter" src="http://rafaelr58.sg-host.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/yaffa-report-1.png" alt="" width="543" height="388" />

The consequence of this finding is extremely worrying, as it means that one in every 350-400 children who are vaccinated might suffer from severe depression and need hospitalization.

To reassure us, Pfizer notes in its review document that in fact, all three children had a pre-existing diagnosis of anxiety and depression. Moreover, they explain - all three actually reported a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) that began within 1-2 months prior to vaccination.

"Worsening suicidal ideas with initial SSRI treatment in adolescents", they explain, "is a recognized risk and provides a reasonable alternative explanation for depression exacerbation in these BNT162b2 recipients". So here you go - why blame the vaccine, when there is a perfectly reasonable and logical alternative explanation for the exacerbation of their depression?
<h6><strong>What is the problem with this explanation?</strong></h6>
<h6><strong>Two problems:
</strong></h6>
<ol>
 <li><strong>The claim that the SSRIs the children received is an alternative explanation for the deterioration of the children's mental state is doubtful.</strong> According to the scientific literature, exacerbation of suicide and mental state occurs right at the beginning of treatment with antidepressants, usually in the first two weeks, and certainly not more than a month after starting treatment - which is the time when you start to see improvement. In fact, the opposite is true: if there is no improvement within four weeks, a medication is usually replaced.</li>
 <li><strong> More importantly, according to the study protocol – participants with a previous psychiatric diagnosis should never have been included in the study in the first place (see page 41 in the protocol).
</strong>It turns out that one of the exclusion criteria in the study is: "Other medical or psychiatric condition including recent (within the past year) or active suicidal ideation/behavior or laboratory abnormality that may increase the risk of study participation or, in the investigator’s judgment, make the participant inappropriate for the study“.</li>
</ol>
<img class=" wp-image-4355 aligncenter" src="http://rafaelr58.sg-host.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Yaffa-report-2.png" alt="" width="667" height="191" />

This is therefore a blatant violation of the study protocol established by the company itself and approved by the FDA. The implication of such a violation is severe: if Pfizer were so negligent that they included subjects with a psychiatric background in the experiment - contrary to the protocol they themselves established - it means that the subjects' well-being is not their main concern. As Pfizer itself notes in the protocol: such a background may increase the risk of study participation. And if they do not adhere to ethics in recruiting subjects, who can assure us that they adhere to ethics in other sections of the study - for example, analysis of results?
<h3><strong> Designing the protocol in a way that will allow the company to present positive findings regarding the safety of the vaccine</strong></h3>
In at least two criteria, the company appears to have manipulatively designed the protocol in a way that would allow it to present as positive findings as possible in terms of vaccine safety in children:
<ol>
 <li>Designing the protocol in a way that will reduce, as much as possible, the inclusion of severe adverse events in a report submitted to the FDA.</li>
</ol>
In the Pediatric Study Protocol (see table on page 12), Pfizer undertook that the duration of follow-up for serious adverse events (SAEs) would be "from Dose 1 to 6 months after the second dose”.

<img class=" wp-image-4356 aligncenter" src="http://rafaelr58.sg-host.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Yaffa-report-3.png" alt="" width="692" height="413" />

A six-month follow-up period is considered to be very short compared to the usual follow-up time in Phase 3 studies for vaccines. According to the FDA, Phase 3 in vaccine studies should last between one and four years (<strong>4</strong>).

Yet it turns out from Pfizer's review document that the company did not complete even this relatively short follow-up period, and in fact was content with only 30 days of follow-up of the severe adverse events. This fact emerges from the chapter dealing with the date of analysis (page 30, under the heading of the SAEs chapter): "12-15-year-olds: SAEs from Dose 1 through up to 30 days after Dose 2 in ongoing follow-up were reported by 0.4% of BNT162b2 recipients and 0.1% of placebo recipients“.

<img class=" wp-image-4357 aligncenter" src="http://rafaelr58.sg-host.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Yaffa-report-4.png" alt="" width="610" height="141" />
<h4><strong>How has this been made possible?</strong></h4>
On page 114 of the study protocol - in the chapter dealing with the timing at which the statistical analyzes will be performed, Pfizer set a number of time points for the purpose of performing these analyzes. While the maximum time period for monitoring severe adverse events in the general study population is six months (the seventh section), the fifth section set an additional cut-off point, of only 30 days after the second dose for the purpose of comparing data between two age groups - one of ages 12-15 and one  of ages 16-25.

<img class=" wp-image-4358 aligncenter" src="http://rafaelr58.sg-host.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Yaffa-report-6.png" alt="" width="500" height="483" />

In other words, the protocol appears to be designed in such a way that the review submitted to the FDA will only include the serious adverse events that appeared during the first month after vaccination.

Indeed the follow-up of the serious adverse events continues for another five months, but any adverse event that will be discovered during these months, or an adverse event that was observed during the first month but was defined as non-serious and has been worsening during the following months (or the diagnosis will change) - will simply not appear in the review report.

<em><strong>The concerning implication of this practice is that serious adverse events may not appear in the report on the basis of which the FDA issues the emergency authorization for children, so continued follow-up, even if published a few months or years after the temporary authorization was issued, will not help children who will be harmed or die following the FDA's green light. </strong></em>
<h3><strong> Designing the protocol so that diagnoses of serious adverse events given in hospitals unrelated to the study site can be ignored.</strong></h3>
Within the terms of the Outcome Measures in the study protocol, as it is presented in <a href="http://Clinicaltrials.gov"><strong>Clinicaltrials.gov</strong></a> Pfizer determined that the research team selected by Pfizer will be the ones defining the adverse events as such: "As elicited by investigative site staff".

This way, the company has in effect given researchers selected by them the power to define for themselves what the diagnosis will be, regardless of the diagnosis given at the hospital/ward which is not defined as the research site.

<img class=" wp-image-4359 aligncenter" src="http://rafaelr58.sg-host.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Yaffa-report-7.png" alt="" width="705" height="327" />
<h4><strong>Why is this problematic?</strong></h4>
Because such a determination means that if a particular participant suffers from serious adverse events and has been treated, for example, outside the hospital or ward that functions as the research site, then in fact, the diagnosis made by the attending physicians at the hospital/ward in which the participant is treated is irrelevant.

This way, Pfizer has actually allowed its team to define what the diagnosis will be, rather than letting the diagnosis given by the attending physicians confuse them.
<h4><strong>Beyond the severe criticism towards Pfizer, the analysis and comparison raise serious questions for the FDA itself:</strong></h4>
<ul>
 <li>How is it possible that the FDA has even approved a protocol that allows such manipulations?</li>
 <li>Why did the FDA allow the company to perform the data analysis and submit the application for the emergency permit in children after such a short follow-up time of only 30 days?</li>
 <li>What made the FDA so eager to approve the emergency permit for children? Why is this approval given based on a safety report that is not even "cooked" half way? After all, there is no emergency situation for children.</li>
 <li>Why did the FDA not address these manipulations and violations of the protocol after the company submitted its review?</li>
</ul>
<em><strong><a href="https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/2frontlinenews/endless-symptoms-flowing-to-us-every-hour/">Yaffa Shir-Raz</a></strong>, PhD, is a risk-communication researcher and a teaching fellow in the University of Haifa and the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya in Israel.</em>
<h6><strong>References: </strong></h6>
<ol>
 <li>Pfizer-BioNTech. (2021). Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) Amendment for an Unapproved Product Review Memorandum. <a href="https://www.fda.gov/media/148542/download">https://www.fda.gov/media/148542/download</a></li>
 <li>(2021). A PHASE 1/2/3, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, RANDOMIZED, OBSERVER-BLIND, DOSE-FINDING STUDY TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY, TOLERABILITY, IMMUNOGENICITY, AND EFFICACY OF SARS-COV-2 RNA VACCINE CANDIDATES AGAINST COVID-19 IN HEALTHY INDIVIDUALS<a href="https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pdf">https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pdf</a></li>
 <li>(2021). Study to Describe the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of RNA Vaccine Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals. <a href="https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728">https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728</a></li>
 <li>(2018). Step 3: Clinical Research<a href="https://www.fda.gov/patients/drug-development-process/step-3-clinical-research">https://www.fda.gov/patients/drug-development-process/step-3-clinical-research</a></li>
</ol>
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

serious-violations-and-manipulations-of-trial-protocol-how-pfizer-obtained-fda-emergency-authorization-for-children.jpg

'Serious violations and manipulations of trial protocol': How Pfizer obtained FDA emergency authorization for children

<p>The Supreme Court has requested a response from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to a petition from a peaceful J6 protestor who is appealing his conviction for disorderly conduct.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><h3>99% rejected</h3><p>The High Court only agrees to grant certiorari, i.e., review a request for appeal, in about <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2020/11/24/how-the-supreme-court-decides-which-cases-to-hear" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">eighty out of seven to eight thousand </a>petitions for “a writ of certiorari” each year. Normally, the justices do not give an indication of whether they are inclined to include a particular case in the one percent that get to the next stage, which includes additional briefs and oral arguments, until after receiving a response to the petition and the petitioner's reply to the response.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><h3>Confident feds</h3><p>In the case of J6 protestor Russell Alford, however, the justices may have already signaled that they are inclined to grant certiorari, a decision which would require the agreement of four of the nine justices. Alford filed his petition to cancel his conviction with SCOTUS in early April and the government had 30 days to respond. Instead of responding, however, the DOJ penned a single <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-7158/307520/20240412164019362_Waiver%20Letter%20-%2023-7158.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">sentence</a> to the High Court:</p><blockquote><p>The Government hereby waives its right to file a response to the petition in this case, unless requested to do so by the Court.</p></blockquote><p>The justices then announced that they do indeed <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-7158.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">want the DOJ to respond</a>, giving it a May 23, 2024 deadline, indicating their interest in the matter.</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">As Josh Gerstein just reported at Politico, SCOTUS requested a response from DOJ in petition for writ of cert filed by Russell Alford, convicted by a DC jury of 4 misdemeanors for J6.<br><br>This doesn't mean SCOTUS will take up the case but it does mean they want some answers.<br><br>The… <a href="https://t.co/esI7QgEbam">pic.twitter.com/esI7QgEbam</a></p>— Julie Kelly  (@julie_kelly2) <a href="https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1782798939562905608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>1 act, 13 minutes, 4 convictions</h2><p>Most J6 defendants, facing multiple charges for the one act of trespassing, waived their right to argue that their entrance into the Capital was an unknowing trespass, <a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-pressure-jan-6-defendants-to-falsely-confess-to-knowingly-trespassing" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fearing the potential for multiple prison sentences</a>. Alford, like America's Frontline Doctors' (AFLDS) Creative Director <a href="https://frontline.news/post/bureau-of-prisons-overrides-own-scoring-system-to-incarcerate-j6-defendants-in-more-dangerous-locations" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">John Strand</a>, was one of the few J6 defendants to refuse a plea deal.</p><p>Alford's trespass was <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/23-3023/23-3023-2024-01-05.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">described</a> by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.</p><blockquote><p>Alford remained inside the Capitol for approximately<strong> thirteen minutes</strong>…&nbsp;</p><p>While inside, he <strong>mostly stood to the side and observed. He filmed protestors</strong> chanting “stop the steal” and pounding on a door that led to the floor of the House, behind which sheltered dozens of Congress members. [Emphasis added.]</p></blockquote><p>The court added that Alford left within three minutes of police telling the crowd to leave:</p><blockquote><p>Police arrived within about ten minutes of Alford’s entry and began physically and verbally directing the crowd back out through the Upper House Door. Alford initially moved further down the hallway before turning and making for the exit … He left once someone managed to open the second double door.&nbsp;</p></blockquote><p>For this, the trial court convicted Alford on four separate counts, all stemming from that 13-minute walk during which he did <a href="https://www.conservativenewszone.com/articles/big-supreme-court-signals-it-may-throw-out-1000-january-6-convictions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">not so much as yell</a>. He was given the maximum sentence for each charge, to be served concurrently, resulting in a 12-month sentence for:</p><ol style="list-style-type:decimal;"><li>Remaining in a restricted building</li><li><strong>Disorderly or disruptive conduct</strong> in a restricted building</li><li><strong>Disorderly or disruptive conduct</strong> in the Capitol Building and parading</li><li>Demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol Building [Emphasis added.]</li></ol><h3>&nbsp;</h3><h3><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);">Overcharging banned; not banned</span></h3><p><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);">The DOJ is actually </span><a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-coerce-jan-6-defendants-to-waive-right-to-appeal-jail-time" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);">prohibited</span></a><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);"> from engaging in so-called overcharging, particularly in the the District of Columbia Circuit, in which Alford's trial court sits, where the circuit's appellate court has, for more than 50 years,&nbsp;explicitly </span><a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4792425287924462607&amp;q=Scott+v+United+States,+135+US+App+DC+377&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2003"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(17,85,204);"><u>banned the practice of overcharging defendants</u></span></a><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);"> where the intent is to coerce a guilty plea on a lesser charge:</span></p><blockquote><p><span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);"><strong>. . . the prosecutor&nbsp;<u>clearly cannot</u> have carte blanche to apply whatever&nbsp;<u>tactics</u> he wishes&nbsp;<u>to induce a guilty plea</u>.&nbsp;</strong>A policy of&nbsp;<strong>deliberately&nbsp;<u>overcharging</u> defendants with no intention of prosecuting on all counts simply in order to have chips at the bargaining table would</strong>, for example,&nbsp;<strong>constitute&nbsp;<u>improper</u> harassment&nbsp;</strong>of the defendant. [Emphasis added.]&nbsp;</span></p></blockquote><p>Nonetheless, J6 protestors have been uniformly subjected to multiple charges in the absence of separate actions. Technically, though, Alford's case does not fit this classic definition of overcharging, since the DOJ, perhaps sensing a jury pool antagonistic to J6 protestors, did in fact prosecute Alford on multiple charges. But it is not, in any case, overcharging that is at issue in the petition to the Supreme Court.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><h3>Not disorderly; disorderly</h3><p>Alford appealed his convictions on the two charges requiring the government to prove “disorderly or disruptive conduct.” The trial court refused Alford's motion to acquit on those charges, despite the lack of any evidence of such conduct, arguing that he should be held guilty on account of the actions of (a small minority) the other protestors:</p><blockquote><p>Mr. Alford’s mere presence inside the Capitol disturbed the public peace or undermined public safety” and that “<strong>his presence was an aspect of the disorder and disruption</strong> of the Capitol.” <span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);">[Emphasis added].</span></p></blockquote><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>“Even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly”</h2><p>The appellate court <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/federal-court-rules-even-passive-jan-6-protestors-who-were-inside-capitol-can-be-convicted/ar-AA1my8bN" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">agreed</a> with prosecutors and the lower court:</p><blockquote><p>The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that <strong>trespassers </strong>in the Capitol during the riot <strong>did not need to be acting "disorderly" or "disruptive" to be found guilty of disorderly conduct</strong>, because such definitions “are nebulous but time has given them concrete contours in two ways important here.”</p><p>"First, it is well-established that whether conduct qualifies as disorderly <strong>depends on the surrounding circumstances</strong>," the court wrote …</p><p>"Second, it is equally clear from caselaw that <strong>even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly</strong>," the ruling continued. <span style="background-color:transparent;color:rgb(0,0,0);">[Emphases added].</span></p></blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">JUST IN: <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> signals it may undermine more common <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Jan6?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Jan6</a> charges as justices ask DOJ to respond to petition challenging 'disorderly or disruptive' charges v. Russell Alford. DC Cir ruled charges valid even for nonviolent protesters. Earlier: <a href="https://t.co/QMDbF9UM7z">https://t.co/QMDbF9UM7z</a></p>— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) <a href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1782793703788077417?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><p>It is this ruling, that "passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly,” that is at issue in Alford's appeal to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><h4>High Court may help … others</h4><p>Should the nation's highest court rule that such peaceful behavior as Alford's cannot be the basis for a disorderly conduct conviction, it may not actually benefit Alford, as his two convictions for “remaining” and “demonstrating” in the Capital would still stand and for each he was sentenced to the maximum prison time, as mentioned above, to run concurrently.&nbsp;</p><p>Since the maximum sentence for the charge of merely remaining in a restricted building is <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1752" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">one year</a>, even vacating the two disorderly charges would still leave Alford facing a year in prison, though he could argue that, without the disorderly charges, one year is excessive for trespassing.</p><p>Alford is far from the only peaceful J6 protestor to be charged with disorderly conduct, however. <a href="https://www.conservativenewszone.com/articles/big-supreme-court-signals-it-may-throw-out-1000-january-6-convictions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">According</a> to <i>Conservative Zone</i>, 1,156 of those protestors were charged with disorderly conduct despite their peaceful conduct.</p><blockquote><p>1,156 peaceful January 6 protesters have been charged with engaging in disorderly or disruptive conduct. 1,021 have been charged with disorderly or disruptive conduct in a Capitol building. About 1,000 of them have been hit with both misdemeanor charges. These are the most common charges that the 1,300+ total January 6 peaceful protesters have been hit with.</p><p>None of the people facing these charges did anything violent or caused any property damage. They were welcomed into the building by police officers who were high-fiving them and holding doors open for them, they wandered around for a while, and they peacefully left when asked to do so.</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><h4>See our other coverage of Jan 6 defendants:</h4><ol><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/mr-biden-wheres-dr-golds-pardon-for-peaceful-capitol-speech"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Mr Biden - Where is Dr Gold's pardon for peaceful medical speech at Capitol?</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-coerce-jan-6-defendants-to-waive-right-to-appeal-jail-time"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Feds coerce Jan 6 defendants into waiving right to appeal jail time</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-pressure-jan-6-defendants-to-falsely-confess-to-knowingly-trespassing"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Feds pressure Jan 6 defendants to falsely confess to ‘knowingly’ trespassing</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/judge-in-dr-gold-case-applauded-anti-free-speech-socialists-disrupting-scotus"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Judge in Dr Gold case applauded anti-free speech socialists disrupting SCOTUS</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/fbidojcourt-jail-dr-simone-gold-for-trespass-politicizing-medicine"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Politicizing medicine: FBI/DOJ/Court jail Dr Simone Gold for trespass</u></span></a></li><li><a href="http://frontline.news/post/fbi-no-time-to-interview-rape-victims-plenty-for-jan-6-trespass"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>FBI - No time to interview rape victims; plenty for Jan 6 trespass</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/aflds-founder-waives-selective-prosecution-defense-accepts-misdemeanor-plea-deal-for-delivering-medical-talk-on-govt-property"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>AFLDS founder waives ‘selective prosecution’ defense; accepts misdemeanor plea deal for delivering medical talk on gov’t property</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/congressman-introduces-j6-bill-to-counter-political-prosecutions"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Congressman introduces ‘J6 Bill to Counter Political Prosecutions’</u></span></a><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#000000;">&nbsp;</span></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/judge-allows-doj-to-hide-exculpatory-evidence-from-january-6-defendants"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Judge allows DOJ to withhold exculpatory evidence from J6 defendants</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/j-6-prisoner-of-conscience-punished-with-isolation-after-jailhouse-interview-analysis"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>J6 prisoner of conscience punished with isolation after jailhouse interview - analysis</u></span></a></li></ol>

SCOTUS.jpg

US News

High Court could vacate more than one thousand sentences 

SCOTUS asks DOJ to defend disorderly conduct convictions of J6 protestors who were not disorderly

<h2>Smartphones dangerous for children</h2><p>A new book by <span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0);">NYU social psychologist Jonathan Haidt may confirm what many parents have already deduced and may be eye-opening to others — the harmful effects of smartphones on children and youth. His book, "</span><a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/729231/the-anxious-generation-by-jonathan-haidt/">The Anxious Generation</a><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0);">: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness," is “downright alarming” according to </span>John Sundholm <a href="https://www.yourtango.com/self/psychologist-urges-parents-end-phone-based-childhood?utm_medium=amp-mid-recent-block" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">writing</a> for <i>Your Tango.</i> Haidt says that smartphones, social media, and helicopter parenting have altered childhood for Gen-Z and Gen-Alpha, resulting in greater mental illness, social ineptness, and declining academic achievement.</p><hr><blockquote><p>According to <a href="https://www.today.com/specials/generation-z/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Today</a> teens:</p><p>Gen Z<span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,42,42);"> was born between 1997 and 2012 and is considered the first generation to have largely grown up using the internet, modern technology and social media. Members of Gen Z are sometimes known as zoomers.</span></p><p><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,42,42);">Alex Doyle, a 20-year-old Gen Z’er from South Carolina, says she thinks the relationship with technology is what distinguishes Gen Z from the other generations.</span></p><p><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,42,42);">“I feel like it’s unique how we know the world before social media but also have seen how it can be useful, whereas the generations before us are more averse to that and Gen Alpha are iPad kids and, like, can’t read,” Doyle said.</span></p><p><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,42,42);">Gen Alpha is the youngest generation to date, encompassing those born from 2011 to 2024. This generation is known for being digital natives, even more so than Gen Z, having been born into a world that is fully integrated with technology, social media and global connection.</span></p></blockquote><hr><p>Haidt's research, based on many studies and CDC statistics, showed that rates of depression and anxiety, which had been stable during the 2000s, increased by over 50% during the 2010s. Worse still are the rates of suicide which have increased by 48% for children from 10-19 years and by 131% for girls from 10-14 years of age. Haidt documented the increased loneliness and friendlessness among teens and plunging academic achievement.&nbsp;</p><p>Gen-Z adults, he said, have more problems with mental illness and difficulty integrating into society than previous generations, as Sundholm reported:</p><blockquote><p>It's well known that Gen Z adults have much <a href="https://www.yourtango.com/news/study-finds-gen-z-struggles-more-mental-health-previous-generations">higher rates of mental illness</a> than other generations, and Haidt pointed&nbsp;to data showing they are also <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37104750/">more shy and&nbsp;risk-averse</a>, more socially isolated,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-08-03/young-adults-less-sex-gen-z-millennials-generations-parents-grandparents">especially with respect to dating</a>, less confident, less successful — the list goes on and on.</p></blockquote><p>In a discussion about his book on MSNBC's Morning Joe (see the video below), Haidt voiced the concerns raised by parents and teachers:</p><blockquote><p>&nbsp;What I hear from most parents and most teachers, which is, “It's a hell of a problem, it is ruining everything. We're losing control but what are you going to do? The problem is too big. We'll never solve it.” It is resignation. . . .&nbsp;</p></blockquote><p>He also offers hope:</p><blockquote><p>We parents and teachers — we can solve this if we act together. . . .<br>&nbsp;</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><iframe width="964" height="542" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yrL_ksihP3w" title="How a phone-based childhood is having disastrous effects" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>Not exclusive to U.S.</h2><p>The phenomena noted by Haidt are not exclusive to American youth but are found in countries around the world and point to two issues, he said. The first issue is the advent of smartphones and social media, “the neurological, psychological, and developmental harms of which are well established by myriad scientific studies.”</p><p>The other issue he identified as “helicopter parenting,” which began in the 1980's:</p><blockquote><p>Second, the loss of independence and exploration for kids due to parenting changes since the 1980s (like so-called "helicopter parenting").</p><p>"In the 1990s, American parents began pulling their children indoors or insisting that afternoons be spent in adult-run enrichment activities," he wrote in The Atlantic. "Free play, independent exploration, and teen hangout time declined."</p></blockquote><h2>“The entire internet in their pockets”</h2><p>Sundholm quoted Haidt, further, noting that the internet completely changed childhood:</p><blockquote><p>"Once young people began carrying the entire internet in their pockets, available to them day and night, it altered their daily experiences and developmental pathways across the board," he went on to say. "Friendship, dating, sexuality, exercise, sleep, academics, politics, family dynamics, identity — all were affected."</p></blockquote><h2>“The Great rewiring of childhood” &nbsp;&nbsp;</h2><p>During an interview about Gen-Alpha smartphone addiction at the ARC (Alliance for Responsible Citizenship) November 2023 conference, as seen in the video below (5:06-6:40), Haidt <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1SyCZwMqfY&amp;t=400s" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">describes</a> some of the significant changes in childhood development brought about by smartphones, particularly the end of &nbsp;in person, play-based childhood:</p><blockquote><p style="margin-left:0px;">Childhood is about building up your brain and you do that through play. Anyone who had a puppy knows it's all about play. So we had play-based childhoods up until around 2010. . . . Kids used to actually see each other in person and once they all got phones and loaded with social media for the girls, it's video games for the boys, childhood stops being play-based, which is what a mammal brain needs to wire up properly.&nbsp;</p><p style="margin-left:0px;">It stops being play-based, it becomes phone-based where phone includes video game consoles all the stuff that makes your social interactions virtual, often asynchronous, disembodied, transitory. So it's a complete what I'm calling it “The Great rewiring of childhood.” &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><iframe width="964" height="542" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/k1SyCZwMqfY" title="Smartphone Addiction and Gen Alpha | Jonathan Haidt, Social Psychologist" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div><p>&nbsp;</p><h2>The remedy — smartphone-free children</h2><p>To combat these phenomena, Haidt makes several suggestions including giving children simple flip-phones until high school just so parents can remain in contact with their children, removing phones from school, and giving children more independence and responsibility:</p><blockquote><ol><li>No smartphones before high school, suggesting&nbsp;parents&nbsp;opt for simple flip phones in order to remain in contact with kids.</li><li>No social media before the age of 16.</li><li>Phone-free schools, which Haidt discussed, tend&nbsp;to have myriad positive benefits in schools, with even some students saying they prefer a phone-free experience.</li><li>More independence, free play, and responsibility in the real world.<br>&nbsp;</li></ol></blockquote><h2>15-year-olds reading like 8-year olds &nbsp;</h2><p>Removing smartphones from children and adolescents may be what's needed to turn things around as the experience of this New Jersey high school teacher shows. She is considering quitting, as Lauren Reams <a href="https://www.yourtango.com/self/teacher-considers-quitting-because-high-school-students-cant-read" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reported</a> for <i>Your Tango. </i>Her 10th-grade students, she realized, were reading on a second to third-grade level.&nbsp;</p><blockquote><p>The teacher in New Jersey shared in a Reddit post that the past couple of years have been very stressful for her, but the straw that broke the camel's back was when she realized her 10th-grade students could not read at their grade level. In fact, they could barely read at all.</p><p>She explained that instead of reading books at a high school level, these sophomores are reading 2nd and 3rd-grade books like "Charlotte's Web" and "The Bridge to Terabithia."&nbsp;</p></blockquote><p>Her experience is not unique, Reams wrote. Other teachers she turned to had the same experience:</p><blockquote><p>In absolute shock, she turned to fellow teachers in her school for advice. As it turns out, her experience wasn't limited to her classroom, but many teachers observed that students homeschooled during the pandemic, versus students exposed to the virtual classroom, were much more advanced.</p><p><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0);">The parents are mad because the kids are failing, but there's not much she can do,&nbsp;especially </span>when it comes to their behavior<span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0);">&nbsp;which she categorized as “rude, always on their phones, destructive.”</span></p></blockquote>

teenager with phone in bed.jpg

Technology

Technocracy

Medical

'Neurological, psychological, and developmental harms are well established by myriad scientific studies'

Mental illness and suicide in children and adolescents linked to smartphones

<p>By Alex Newman</p><p>Sheriffs have the power and the duty to stand for the U.S. Constitution they swore an oath to uphold, and to protect the rights of the people in their counties, regardless of what state or federal authorities might do, explained a wide range of speakers including sheriffs, media personalities, victims of political persecution, businessmen, and military leaders.</p><p>Respect for the oath of office to the U.S. Constitution was one of the clear messages from the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association’s (CSPOA) “Resist the Temptation” conference on April 17. That constitutional mandate applies to everything from elections and immigration to free speech and even the protection of order from lawlessness, the lawmen and their allies heard.</p><p>The event made headlines worldwide and was broadcasted globally by FrankSpeech, reportedly being seen live by more than 50,000 people. Videos from the event continue to circulate widely on social media and beyond. &nbsp;</p><p>Organized by CSPOA founder Sheriff Richard Mack and CEO Sam Bushman, a syndicated radio host, the summit brought together an impressive array of Trump insiders, lawmen, elected officials, and experts. Each had unique insights and perspectives to share. Taken together, the speakers offered a long list of action items for the law-enforcement community and for citizen activists concerned about America.</p><p>Sheriff Mack, who served two terms as sheriff in Arizona, sued the Clinton administration in the ’90s over a gun-control bill that he refused to enforce. The case eventually made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of sheriffs and against the Clinton gun-control scheme.</p><p>In the landmark decision,&nbsp;<i>Printz v. United States</i>, the Supreme Court, citing the 10th Amendment and more, ruled once again that the federal government could not “commandeer” state or local governments. Known as the “anti-commandeering doctrine,” the case upholds the Constitution’s reservation of powers not delegated to the federal government to states and the people. &nbsp;</p><p>Numerous speakers at the event touted the ruling as key, not just for sheriffs but also for state and local governments. Hundreds of sheriffs nationwide are members of CSPOA and have been trained on their authority under the U.S. Constitution and common law, as well as the details of the 1997 ruling.</p><p>Unsurprisingly, federal supremacists and totalitarians seeking to centralize coercive power in Washington, D.C., are on the warpath against Mack and CSPOA. And the dishonest attacks by the media offered fresh evidence that constitutional sheriffs are a major thorn in the side of those who would run roughshod over the rights of Americans. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>Several sheriffs offered ideas for their colleagues in other counties. One of the lawmen who spoke at the conference, Klickitat County, Washington, Sheriff Bob Songer, explained how sheriffs across the nation could deputize citizens and form a posse. Sheriff Songer, whose posse includes some 150 carefully screened citizens, even offered his department’s policy manuals and guidelines for other sheriffs across the nation who may wish to set up their own.</p><p>In an interview with&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;magazine, Sheriff Songer noted that the radical left was furious about his decision to supplement his department’s ranks with everyday citizens. However, considering the savings to taxpayers and the need for more manpower in everything from search and rescue to dealing with potential threats to the community, Songer said creating a posse could be helpful to law-enforcement nationwide.</p><p>Another chief law-enforcement officer (CLEO) with experience deputizing citizens was Sheriff Glenn Hamilton of Sierra County, New Mexico, who went on stage with Pastor Caleb Cooper of New Hope Revival Church. When state authorities demanded lockdowns and claimed churches were not essential during Covid, Cooper knew he could not close his doors.</p><p>The only thing worse than having somebody die from Covid because his church stayed open, Cooper told state police, would be having somebody die of Covid without having heard the Gospel and ending up in hell. “We just could not close our church,” Cooper told&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;magazine, emphasizing the importance of the Church continuing to shine the light in dark times. “We&nbsp;<i>are</i>&nbsp;essential.”</p><p>Cooper and Sheriff Hamilton devised a plan. Because law enforcement was considered essential and was therefore not subject to the lockdown orders, Sheriff Hamilton went to New Hope Revival Church right before Resurrection Sunday and deputized the entire congregation. “I would have deputized every man, woman, and child in my county if that is what it took,” Sheriff Hamilton told&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;in an interview.</p><p>The whole saga was featured prominently in the documentary&nbsp;<i>Non-Compliant 2&nbsp;</i>by KrisAnne Hall. It was contrasted with the outrageous behavior of an anti-constitutional sheriff in Florida, who arrested a pastor for refusing to shut his church before Governor Ron DeSantis shut down the rogue sheriff by declaring churches essential. As Sheriff Hamilton explained, almost all New Mexico sheriffs also resisted unconstitutional abuses against gun rights in the state. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>A third lawman who spoke at the summit, Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf, offered details of his ongoing investigations into irregularities in the 2020 election. Upon being given evidence of alleged criminal acts, Sheriff Leaf said he had a duty to investigate. And yet, instead of helping get to the bottom of it, state officials including the far-left attorney general responded by waging war on Sheriff Leaf and his efforts. &nbsp;</p><p>“It’s been nothing but walls and having to knock down walls to get to the information that I need to get to,” Leaf told&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;in an interview before his talk. “The walls being put up are probably the most frustrating — and walls put up by people you’d think would be helping you out in an investigation, like the attorney general’s office and the secretary of state.”</p><p>Considering the enormity of the crimes being alleged and the significance of them, Sheriff Leaf told&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;that there should have been a task force of local, state, and federal law enforcement investigating. “Everybody should have been involved in it,” he said. “There’s a lot to this. I think we would have had this all resolved by now if we had done that.”</p><p>“You’re talking about, potentially, the greatest fraud ever committed in the world — committed on the American people,” added Sheriff Leaf. &nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>Numerous other sheriffs have also opened investigations into widespread reports of voter fraud and election crimes. In fact, at a previous CSPOA event in Las Vegas, this writer interviewed more than half-a-dozen sheriffs for&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;who were trying to get to the bottom of it all, only to be viciously attacked by the far-left media, the Democratic Party, and their allies.</p><p>Other highlights of the conference included a speech by former National Security Advisor General Mike Flynn (Ret.), who also served as a top intelligence official responsible for coordinating federal, state, local, tribal, and international intelligence. Among other topics, Flynn discussed his new documentary,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Flynn-Michael/dp/B0CT9JVB4F"><i>Flynn</i></a>, exposing how and why the Deep State targeted him as the first one of Trump’s key officials. In an interview with&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>, he noted that the DVD was number one in Amazon’s “Special Interests” category. “Remember, local action for national impact,” Flynn told the crowd. &nbsp;</p><p>Pointing to the open border and the ongoing invasion of hostile military and terrorist forces, veteran Boone Cutler, an associate of Flynn’s who helped write the book on Fifth Generation Warfare, announced a new training program for law enforcement on irregular warfare. Saxon Aerospace founder John Ferguson also offered resources to help law enforcement prepare for tough times ahead, later telling&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>&nbsp;that the nation might already be lost. &nbsp;</p><p>Also speaking was MyPillow founder Mike Lindell, a leading voice calling for election reforms to restore confidence and integrity to voting. In an interview with&nbsp;<i>The New American</i>, he called for citizens to sign the petition at&nbsp;<a href="https://lindelloffensefund.org/">LindellOffenseFund.org</a>&nbsp;for paper ballots and hand counting in elections. Especially urgent: getting rid of the machines that can be hacked.</p><p>Popular radio host Wayne Allyn Root enthusiastically called on Americans to get involved in the freedom fight, too.</p><p>Former Mesa County, Colorado, Clerk Tina Peters, who uncovered serious problems with the election and has been ruthlessly persecuted for speaking out, gave an update on her efforts. And former Arizona Representative Mark Finchem, who is running for state Senate and is endorsed by Donald Trump, also gave an update on his lawsuits against election fraud.</p><p>Dr. Richard Fleming, a medical doctor, attorney, and physicist, discussed the bioweapon attack on humanity in the form of the Covid injections. He urged viewers to contact their state attorneys general with a letter demanding action.</p><p>FreeAndEqual.org chief Christina Tobin, who is seeking to provide a platform for candidates outside the two-party duopoly, spoke on how the establishment seeks to keep Americans trapped in either the Republican or Democratic parties.</p><p>Several victims of the January 6 persecution by the Biden Department of Justice, including Casey Cusick and Tom Hamner, spoke about the horrors they endured, and yet offered a message of hope.</p><p>Also speaking were two congressmen targeted by the Deep State for speaking out, Steve Stockman of Texas and Steve King of Iowa.</p><p>Former Congressman Stockman explained how the Obama administration went after him with a vengeance, squandering over $20 million in tax dollars and going through multiple grand juries until they could find one willing to help in the persecution. He was eventually jailed in federal prison and treated terribly until Trump commuted his sentence. He urged Americans to pray for and write to former Arkansas State Senator Jon Woods, who was also persecuted by the same forces and remains behind bars in atrocious conditions. &nbsp;</p><p>Former Congressman King of Iowa, meanwhile, was smeared by the far-left media with fake allegations of racism until he was run out of office. During his talk, he exposed the “carbon capture” scam, the ongoing attack on private-property rights, the globalist undermining of national sovereignty, and more.</p><p>South Dakota farmer Jared Bossly, a victim of the “carbon capture” scheme, shared details of what is happening in his state and beyond. &nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>Entrepreneur Patrick Byrne, former CEO of Overstock.com, gave a detailed presentation on Deep State activities and how to fight back.</p><p>This writer, who served as the emcee, also spoke on the importance of the oath of office and the biblical foundations of law and resistance to tyranny.</p><p>Estimates cited in news reports suggest about 10 percent of the nation’s sheriffs are members of CSPOA.</p><p>As always happens when influential conservatives gather to effectively oppose tyranny and globalism, the establishment media, which was crawling all over the event, pretended to be outraged. The far-left U.K.&nbsp;<i>Guardian</i>, for instance, ran a propaganda piece demonizing the event before it even happened under the headline “‘Danger to our democracy’: fears over Trump allies’ summit with far-right sheriffs.”</p><p>Shortly after the conference finished, fringe left-wing activist Brandy Zadrozny, who repeatedly cackled as political prisoners shared horrifying details of abuse in federal prison, ran a vicious hit piece attacking the gathering. “<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/constitutional-sheriffs-las-vegas-conference-rcna147487">A sheriff, a felon and a conspiracy theorist walk into a hotel. They’re there for the same conference</a>,” screamed the headline. “The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association is urging lawmen to form posses, seize voting machines and investigate baseless claims of voter fraud.”</p><p>Virtually all of the attack pieces masquerading as journalism misrepresented the CSPOA and what it teaches its members, the public, and the nation’s sheriffs. The NBC “News” report by Zadrozny, who several attendees said has a reputation for lying and dishonesty, offered a representative example of the lie: “The group sees sheriffs as the highest authority in the U.S., more powerful than the federal government.”</p><p>Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Not one person at the summit or at CSPOA has ever claimed that a sheriff has more power than the federal government. However, it is a fact that sheriffs are the chief law-enforcement officers in&nbsp;<i>their</i>&nbsp;jurisdiction, that they are not accountable to or employed by the federal government, and that they all have an obligation to obey their oath of office to the U.S. Constitution and their state’s constitution — not enforce federal regulations and statutes. &nbsp;</p><p>Virtually all of the establishment media left before the press conference, when they would have had the opportunity to ask most of the speakers anything they wanted. Instead, they simply lied or distorted what the speakers said and what the CSPOA and its members stand for.</p><p style="text-align:justify;"><a href="https://libertysentinel.org/author/admin/"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Alex Newman</u></span></a><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#000000;"> is an award-winning international journalist, educator, author, and consultant who co-wrote the book “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children.” He writes for diverse publications in the United States and abroad</span></p><p>Read more at <a href="https://thenewamerican.com/featured/constitutional-sheriffs-event-offers-solutions-fake-media-loses-it/"><i>The New American.</i></a></p>

sheriff.jpg

Sheriffs not accountable to federal government; have obligation to obey oath of office to state and federal constitutions

Constitutional sheriffs event offers solutions

<h1>Correct, now go to the principal's office</h1><p>North Carolina high school student Christian McGhee was suspended for asking his teacher which of two possible meanings was intended by the word “alien” included on a vocabulary list the class was instructed to learn. Law Enforcement Today <a href="https://lawenforcementtoday.com/debate-ignites-free-speech-vs-cultural-sensitivity-at-central-davidson-high" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">recorded</a> the teen's question, as relayed by his mother:</p><blockquote><p>Christian McGhee’s teacher assigned vocabulary words during class last Tuesday, including the word "alien." According to his mother, Leah McGhee, Christian responded to his teacher, asking,<strong> “Like space aliens or illegal aliens without green cards?” </strong>[Emphasis added].</p></blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">NEW: North Carolina high school student Christian McGhee was suspended from school for saying "illegal alien" in the classroom.<br><br>Calling an illegal alien and illegal alien is not offensive, it's just a fact.<br><br>McGhee was suspended for three days after doing an assignment in… <a href="https://t.co/TUPX0sRmtg">pic.twitter.com/TUPX0sRmtg</a></p>— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) <a href="https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1780341543439602050?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 16, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>Threaten fellow student - get <i>him </i>suspended</h2><p>The teacher might have been expected to be impressed with the 16-year-old student, as he demonstrated a familiarity with both possibilities for the word's definition. Perhaps the teacher would have been, had it not been for another student who “took offense to the question and threatened physical violence against Christian.”</p><p>At that point, one might assume that the teacher would refer the student who threatened Christian for administrative action. But it was Christian who, after being sent to the assistant principal, received a three-day suspension, prompting concern from his mother that he may lose out on college scholarship opportunities with an infraction for racist language now on his record.</p><h3>&nbsp;</h3><h3>It's OK when the government does it</h3><p>Christian argued that he did not anticipate his question being objectionable since, “‘illegal alien’ is an actual term that I hear on the news and can find in the dictionary.” X users bolstered his argument, noting that the federal government refers to migrants from foreign nations as "aliens,” and suggested that he file a lawsuit that would get him at least as much as a scholarship would offer.</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Hey Christian McGhee’s Mama…<br>Stop worrying. Sue them. It’s a term used in our DHS handbooks. Your boy may have just gotten his tuition covered  <br><br>This is one screen shot with alien throughout — head to the website, and it’s like a treasure trove of the word “ALIEN” … <a href="https://t.co/X5NNz9Qpv6">pic.twitter.com/X5NNz9Qpv6</a></p>— Heatherheather007 (@LibertyValkyrie) <a href="https://twitter.com/LibertyValkyrie/status/1780344554949951962?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 16, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h3>&nbsp;</h3><h3>Let's get political</h3><p>Education is a hot issue with voters and Christian's punishment for using vocabulary accurately could make it easy for politicians to score points in an election year. One presidential candidate appears to have weighed in already on the controversy:&nbsp;</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Donald Trump invited Christian McGhee and his family to join him yesterday at his rally!<br><br>Hate it had to happen this way but glad to see the support for this family.<br><br>This was the student suspended for using the term "illegal alien". <a href="https://t.co/tki3WXUyJO">pic.twitter.com/tki3WXUyJO</a></p>— Haley Kennington (@ladykennington) <a href="https://twitter.com/ladykennington/status/1782056146548695419?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>Been there</h2><p>Christian is not the first to suffer censorship and punishment for perfectly appropriate use of language. In 1999, David Howard, an aide to the then mayor of Washington, D.C., was pressured to resign when other city employees were <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/williams/williams020499.htm?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_14" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">offended</a> that he “used the word ‘<strong>niggardly</strong>’ in describing <strong>how he would have to manage a fund's tight budget</strong>.” &nbsp;[Emphasis added].</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Bill Maher: Remember David Howard fired for using the word "niggardly", which means stingy. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DeathByPC?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DeathByPC</a> <a href="https://t.co/tw146Zs4fh">pic.twitter.com/tw146Zs4fh</a></p>— Butch Mailhot (@ButchMailhot) <a href="https://twitter.com/ButchMailhot/status/871024582140076032?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 3, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><p>The word has caused a problems for others as well, despite both its meaning and its use having nothing to do with race. The word is thought to have developed in northern Europe in a <a href="https://www.etymonline.com/word/niggardly" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">homogeneous</a> racial environment with reference <a href="https://twitter.com/mikacooper/status/1105964911618912259" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">only</a> to the use of money.</p><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Niggardly<br>As in the manner many people are paid. <a href="https://t.co/t03L7AvF9x">pic.twitter.com/t03L7AvF9x</a></p>— Джим Робинсон (@528i) <a href="https://twitter.com/528i/status/1780737096334119359?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 17, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><p>And in 2002, an elementary school teacher from the same state as Christian wound up with a <a href="https://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Culture/niggardly.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reprimand </a>and mandatory retraining after a parent complained about her use of the word to <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20120117090222/https://www.starnewsonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article/?ArtNo=209040302&amp;Category=NEWS&amp;Date=20020904&amp;Profile=1004&amp;Ref=AR&amp;Site=WM&amp;template=printart" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">describe </a>a literary character:</p><blockquote><p>Stephanie Bell, a fourth-grade teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina, has been <strong>reprimanded </strong>for using that word in a classroom discussion about literary characters. A parent, one Akwana Walker, declared herself offended by the usage. Ms. Bell has been hustled off to <strong>“sensitivity training”</strong>… [Emphasis added].</p></blockquote><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>Pushback</h2><p>Not all such “infractions” have ended in punishment, however. A University of Wisconsin professor guilty of using the same word in 1999 escaped punitive action and even inspired <a href="https://www.badgerinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Still8.1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">resistance</a> to the attempt to censor him:</p><blockquote><p>A junior enrolled in Professor Standish Henning’s class on English literature, [Amelia] Rideau came to the Faculty Senate to complain of his use of the word “niggardly” — which means stingy or miserly — in a classroom discussion about Geoffrey Chaucer’s medieval classic, “The Canterbury Tales…</p><p>Rather than chalk it up as a lesson in<strong> mistaken homophony (also not an offensive term, by the way)</strong>, Rideau took the classroom incident to another level. She brought three black friends to her next class with Henning for “support,” and then cited her experience to the Faculty Senate … [Emphasis added].</p></blockquote><p>A backlash ensued that included editorials in local papers supporting the professor:</p><blockquote><p>“So, what other words are to be purged from our vocabulary because they sound like words that may offend?” wrote history professor John Sharpless in a Wisconsin State Journal “guest column” a few days later. “Thespian? Philatelist? Tips? Peanuts? Homogenous?”</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><h4>You knew, and you're still offended?</h4><p>&nbsp;</p><p>It didn't help Rideau's case that she informed the Faculty Senate that she knew what the word meant.</p><blockquote><p>But wait, it got better: <strong>Rideau said she knew what niggardly means but was upset </strong>that too many people associate that word with the slur. She did not claim ignorance as a defense. Rather, she was upset that some classmates spelled the word as “niggerly” in their notes. In the real world outside the Madison campus, this produced a curious reaction.&nbsp;</p><p>Shouldn’t taxpayers be upset that students in a fairly sophisticated UW-Madison class on English literature have never heard the word “niggardly” or, at least, cannot spell it? &nbsp;… [Emphasis added].</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><h4>Victory</h4><p>Rideau had hoped to use the incident to make the university's existing faculty speech code more stringent so that it would cover even unintentional offenses. Instead, the university cancelled the speech code altogether:</p><blockquote><p>In a matter of days, <strong>protectors of the code were in a retreat that would lead to its virtual repeal</strong> within a month. The same university that had been the first in the nation to adopt a faculty speech code in 1981 would soon become the first to abandon it — <strong>a remarkable step away from the “politics of identity” that threatens to ruin some of America’s finest colleges </strong>and universities.</p><p>Whatever may be the limitations which trammel inquiry elsewhere, we believe that <strong>the great state University of Wisconsin should encourage that continual and fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone the truth can be found.</strong> [Emphasis added].</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><h4>Related Article:</h4><ol><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/homeschoolers-top-government-schooled-children-in-everything"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Homeschoolers top government-schooled children in … everything</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/reagan-and-trumps-vows-to-defund-government-education"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Reagan's and Trump’s vows to defund government education . . .</u></span></a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/pay-twice-to-escape-government-education"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Pay twice to escape government education?</u></span></a></li><li><a href="http://frontline.news/post/fox-censoring-tucker"><span style="background-color:transparent;color:#1155cc;"><u>Who's behind Fox censoring Tucker? Third rail issues blocked</u></span></a></li></ol>

'Serious violations and manipulations of trial protocol': How Pfizer obtained FDA emergency authorization for children

Related Articles

White House chooses Khamenei over Iranian people, again

OTC anti-depressants? Harvard Medical School professor says yes

What is synthetic biology and why should you care?

'Nutritional dark matter' in Bored Cow's synbio milk - 92 unknown compounds

Latest Articles

SCOTUS asks DOJ to defend disorderly conduct convictions of J6 protestors who were not disorderly

Mental illness and suicide in children and adolescents linked to smartphones

Constitutional sheriffs event offers solutions

Student suspended for asking whether 'alien' on vocabulary list means 'space aliens' or 'illegal aliens'