
You can’t have it both ways…


In 2009, then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was a cause for “biological weapons proliferation concern.”
The leaked State Department cable, obtained by Wikileaks, was sent from in June 2009, ahead of the Australia Group plenary session in Paris, September 21-25 of that year. According to Human Events, The Australia Group is “an international export control forum with the goal of preventing the spread of research and technology that could be used in biological and chemical weapons.”
The cable was sent to embassies in all member nations of the group including, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, the European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The cable, signed CLINTON at the bottom stated, “We believe it is important to focus on emerging chemical and biological technologies, trends in the trade of CBW-related goods and threats.”
A new Florida law that prevents companies and organizations operating there from requiring “vaccine passports,” that documentation that purports to prove an individual has been vaccinated for COVID-19, also has a stinger: a provision allowing the government to force vaccinations on people.
The paragraph in the state’s 2nd engrossed version of SB 2006, an “act relating to emergency management” and more, states: “If the individual poses a danger to the public health, the State Health Officer may subject the individual to isolation or quarantine. If there is no practical method to isolate or quarantine the individual, the State Health Officer may use any means necessary to vaccinate or treat the individual.”
The fight over mandatory vaccinations still is developing in the U.S., following the pandemic that apparently got its start in Wuhan, China, and flooded the world, killing some 600,000 people in just the United States.
Some private organizations have demanded employees be vaccinated, and fired those refusing, and a number of legal cases have developed from those demands. Governments to this point have been encouraging – even bribing – citizens to take vaccines, but have not yet been to the point of forcing them.

President Joe Biden faced continued backlash for controversial remarks that he made on Wednesday about Americans who purchase firearms as a safeguard against a tyrannical government, with critics noting that Biden’s remarks counter the narrative that Democrats and the media have pushed about the riot at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6.
“The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own,” Biden said. “You couldn’t buy a cannon. [Those who] say the blood of the, the blood of patriots, you know, and all this stuff about how we’re going to have to move against the government.”
“Well, the tree of liberty is not [watered with] the blood of patriots, what’s happened is that there never been, if you want, if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons,” Biden continued. “The point is that there’s always been the ability to limit, rationally limit, the type of weapon that can be owned, and who can own it.”
Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald responded to a tweet that showed Biden’s remarks from Wednesday next to remarks that he made earlier this year when responding to the riot. Biden said regarding the riot, “Our democracy is under unprecedented assault.”
“You cannot believe both of these things to be true simultaneously,” journalist Drew Holden wrote.
“Precisely,” Greenwald responded. “Biden’s mockery of the citizenry – you think you can threaten the US Govt with guns? You need F-15s and nukes for that – shows how moronic is the depiction of a few hundred MAGA protesters as a threat to the stability of history’s most militarized and armed government.”
Editor’s note: You could absolutely buy a cannon in that day and age. Biden is, again, a liar.
A liberal arts college in Massachusetts has warned its students and faculty against using ‘violent language’ – even banning the phrase ‘trigger warning’ for its association with guns.
Brandeis University in Waltham has created an anti-violence resource called the Prevention, Advocacy & Resource Center which provides information and advice to students and staff.
It lists words and idioms, including ‘picnic’ and ‘rule of thumb,’ which it claims are ‘violent’ and suggests dreary alternatives such as ‘outdoor eating’ for the former and ‘general rule’ for the latter.
The college claims that ‘picnic is often associated with lynchings of black people in the United States, during which white spectators were said to have watched while eating, referring to them as picnics or other terms involving racial slurs against black people.’
Picnic is derived from the French ‘pique-nique,’ originally used to describe the taking of one’s own wine to a meal, which later evolved to encompass the sharing of food outdoors and started being used in England in the 18th century.
Lynchings were often public spectacles and could be described as taking place in a picnic-like setting. A project by the Equal Justice Initiative entitled ‘Lynching in America’ notes that during the late 1800s and early 1900s, ‘white men, women, and children present watched the horrific murders while enjoying deviled eggs, lemonade, and whiskey in a picnic-like atmosphere.’
However, the word picnic itself is not derogatory and has no intrinsic links to slavery, lynchings or racism.
Brandeis also disagrees with ‘rule of thumb’ which it claims ‘comes from an old British law allowing men to beat their wives with sticks no wider than their thumb.’
But this is another spurious etymological interpretation which has been wrongly attached to the phrase by myth and rumour.
The precise origins of the phrase are unclear but it is meant in the sense of approximating something using the thumb rather than a specific tool – there is no evidence of a legal application to wife beating.
On a press call a few years ago, I asked Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy, Nathaniel Gleicher, if the company would treat a misinformation campaign orchestrated by the US government the same as it would as one from a foreign adversary.
Facebook had organized the call to tout how it had discovered and deleted dozens of Iranian accounts, groups, and pages linked to “coordinated inauthentic behavior”—the company’s term for when people and organizations create fake accounts in an attempt to mislead and manipulate other users and the broader information landscape. The conversation came at a time when Facebook was conducting a spate of such announcements and media briefings championing its work removing phony networks tied to foreign governments.Recent reporting says US operatives “engage in campaigns to influence and manipulate social media.”
Gleicher’s response to my hypothetical question about whether they would react the same way was quite clear: “Yes. Part of the key of our operations here is that we engage based on behavior—not based on content and not based on the nature of the actor. And that’s been a very intentional choice on our part.”
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) signed a bill into law Tuesday that legalizes possession of marijuana in the state and anticipates retail sales of the drug in 2022.
The new law allows people age 21 and older to possess or use marijuana up to the specified possession limit of 1.5 ounces on their person and five ounces in their home or car.
The law also establishes penalties for use by those under 21, or possession of an amount greater than permitted by the law. Additionally, it removes most cannabis sales offenses from the state’s list of serious juvenile offenses.
The bill was passed under the umbrella of “social justice,” to combat “racial disparities,” and will place with a Social Equity Council the task of how to regulate the new legal marijuana market so that it becomes “an instrument for addressing racial, social and economic injustice,” reported CT Mirror.
“Those communities were hardest hit by the war on drugs — making up for some lost time there,” Lamont said, adding he expects his state’s new law will be “viewed as a national model.”
According to newly released video footage, University of Oklahoma instructors want to punish students who defy campus orthodoxy. Their plan is to “avoid ‘a rhetoric of dysfunctional silence’ that closes ears to marginalized voices,” by — you guessed it — silencing marginalized voices.
On Tuesday, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), a nonprofit focused on protecting campus free speech, publicized video footage of an April 14 workshop on “Anti-Racist Rhetoric & Pedagogies” at the University of Oklahoma (OU). The workshop’s leaders presented slides about “systemic racism,” “white privilege,” and “subverting white institutional defensiveness.” In an attempt to teach so-called antiracism, the workshop’s leaders also promoted censorship and indoctrination.
The event was “one of nine professional development workshops for instructors and grad students” at OU. During the workshop, three faculty members taught their colleagues “how to foster an anti-racist environment in their classrooms,” brainstorming tactics for dissuading, censoring, and penalizing “problematic” speech.
Judicial Watch announced today that it received 111 pages of records from Wellesley Public Schools in Massachusetts which confirm the use of “affinity spaces” that divide students and staff based on race as a priority and objective of the school district’s “diversity, equity and inclusion” plan. The school district also admitted that between September 1, 2020 and May 17, 2021, it created “five distinct” segregated spaces.
Judicial Watch obtained the records after filing a May 17 Massachusetts Public Records Law request for records concerning the number of affinity spaces, the policies regarding their creation and use, the topics discussed, and any analysis of whether affinity spaces that exclude certain races are consistent with state and federal law, which would include the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the MA Equal Rights Amendment and/or the MA School Attendance Law.
The Wellesley Public School records include a document detailing the school district’s “Equity Strategic Plan 2020-2025” which includes a “District Equity by Design” plan with the stated goal of amplifying student voices by providing “opportunities for affinity spaces for students with shared identity.”
In a section of the document titled “Diversity Staffing,” a stated goal is to “Provide resources for affinity spaces for specialized populations within the wider Faculty/Staff (ie. ALANA, Admin Leaders of Color, LGBTQ+, White Educators for Antiracism, etc.)”
Wellesley Public Schools states in its plan for “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion:” “We will practice risk-taking and challenge one another to continuously examine systems of privilege and bias, and work collectively to disrupt and dismantle inequity in all its forms.”
In an email on March 18 to Director of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Charmie R. Curry, the day of the so-called “healing space,” a Wellesley High School fitness & health teacher writes: “I wanted to check first, is it appropriate for me to go to this healing space?” Curry responds: “This time, we want to hold the space for Asian and Asian American students and faculty/staff. I hope this makes sense.”
In an April 12 email to school district colleagues, Curry notes that “Equity Literacy” is required coursework in the district. Curry writes: “There is still plenty of time to enroll in the two required courses – ‘Understanding Equity and Inequity’ and ‘Learning to Be a Threat to Inequity.’ These courses, with a keen focus on helping us to build/sharpen our structural ideological lenses, are essential to our ability to address inequities in our community. Our students who are being impacted by inequities such as racism, homophobia, ableism, etc. need to be equipped to respond today to their needs in order to positively impact their experiences.”
In addition, the school district admitted that it does not have any records analyzing whether such segregated spaces violate the U.S. Constitution, the Massachusetts Constitution or any other law.
You must be logged in to post a comment.