Author: Papa Giorgio

S-o-o… It’s Not A Vaccine? (95% Effective?)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Originally posted Mar 13, 2021

UPDATE!

Big Pharma’s Infomercial Star Peter Hotez Is a Total Idiot

The 1st update [a while ago now] is a “jump” to the bottom of the page to hear the “Prager Update”. However, this is a new update that wraps up the main thought of this dated post… enjoy:

The Unseen Crisis: Vaccine Stories You Were Never Told | excerpt. A must see documentary:

See also:

THE DAILY MAIL has something that crossed my path that I needed to comment on a bit:

  • Dr Anthony Fauci cautioned that early COVID-19 vaccines are aimed at preventing symptoms during Yahoo Finance’s All Markets Summit on Monday
  • ‘If the vaccine allows you to prevent initial infection, that would be great,’ he said. ‘[But] the primary endpoint [is] to prevent clinically recognizable disease’  
  • At least four vaccine candidates are currently in late-stage clinical trials  
  • Fauci has said he is cautiously optimistic that a vaccine will arrive by year end
  • But he warned that early vaccines may only be 50 to 60 percent effective

[….]

While the end goal of the vaccines will be to eradicate the virus, Fauci noted that developers are aiming for a simpler goal in the first round of jabs.  

‘The primary thing you want to do is that if people get infected, prevent them from getting sick, and if you prevent them from getting sick, you will ultimately prevent them from getting seriously ill,’ Fauci said at Yahoo Finance’s All Markets Summit. 

‘If the vaccine also allows you to prevent initial infection, that would be great. [But] what I would settle for, and all of my colleagues would settle for, is the primary endpoint to prevent clinically recognizable disease.’ 

THE NEW YORK POST also discusses the issue:

…“The chances of it being 98 percent effective is not great,” Fauci, a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, said at a Q&A with the Brown University School of Public Health in Rhode Island, according to CNBC.

Instead, Fauci said, scientists are hoping for a vaccine that is 75 percent effective — but even a 50 or 60 percent success rate would be considered a win.

“Which means you must never abandon the public health approach,” explained Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Meanwhile, a Gallup poll released on Friday found that more than a third of Americans wouldn’t take a vaccine if it were available today….

GATEWAY PUNDIT then rightfully notes from the above:

  • Crazy Dr. Fauci warned in October that early COVID-19 vaccines will only prevent symptoms from arising – not block infection. Then the early vaccines are NOT vaccines. [GP continues with his thoughts] It also means the “vaccine” is just a scheme by Big Pharma, and the globalist investors, to scam trillions out of the frightened peasants and the states.

So, my thoughts are this… it is literally just another flu-like-shot. Check.

While I have issues with how the high percentages of effectiveness were reached….

…Ninety-five people in the study developed Covid-19 with symptoms; of those, 90 had received a placebo and only five Moderna’s vaccine. The findings, from a 30,000-subject trial that is still under way, move the vaccine closer to wide use, because they indicate it is effective at preventing disease that causes symptoms, including severe cases….(WALL STREET JOURNAL)

The only way you could reeaally say 95% effective rate is to have [for example] 200 people, 100 of them got the real vaccine, the other 100 the placebo. All 200 were exposed equally to “The Vid” and then a result is tabulated from that. 

(RPT)

…let us assume for a moment the numbers touted early.

QUESTIONS:

  • Is it 95% effective on 50%?
  • What percentage of the 95% is effective on which part?
  • Eradicating it? or lessening symptoms, but you still get it?
  • Since it is NOT a vaccine, should restrictions (coming at some point considering the crazy level of society) on travel and work be in place?

While the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights may end up preventing government from mandating vaccines for the American people, every day we get more signs that businesses across the country and the world have no such intentions, with CBS 4 in Boston reporting a ‘Covid-19 vaccine passport’ may be required to travel in 2021 just one of the latest stories warning of what awaits us in the year ahead. Spain to keep a registry of ‘vaccine refusers’, sharing it (Italian newspaper) with other EU countries, another indication of what the ‘travel ban’ ahead might look like overseas, we learn that here in America, music venues, sporting events and theaters might soon be ‘off limits’ (Rolling Stone magazine) to those who don’t get the vaccine. And with many employers also requiring ‘the jab’ for their employees (New York Times) hinting at how bad it might soon get for people who work for someone else but don’t want to subjugate themselves to an unproven shot.

I personally think the media and Fauci and other cogs and gears need to be held in contempt of societal norms in using fake stats and fear tactics to strip people of their livelihood and rights. (DOWLOADABLE PDF: “A Scientist’s Plea: The World is Not a Safe Space” via AIER)

UPDATE via PRAGER

PART 1 (3-1-2021)

New Ivermectin Studies Confirm What Is Known

Rumble — Firstly, the best site for this is here (links at top for Hydroxychloroquine as well as Ivermectin): https://c19early.com

Dennis Prager discusses an article in Israel Times about a study regarding Ivermectin …. QUOTE PRAGER REFERRED TO:

….In Germany, apparently Ivermectin use has grown, reports Halgas. He was in touch with a physician group there that treated the elderly at a nursing home.

The mortality rate in nursing homes in that European country (Germany) is about 25% to 30%. After treating about 100 residents with Ivermectin, that rate in one case series apparently went down to about 5%—a huge difference. Of course, this isn’t the result of a formal study but nonetheless represents more real world data points….

  • Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Trial at Sheba Medical Center: Ivermectin Materially Reduces COVID-19 Viral Shedding (TRIAL SITE NEWS)
  • Sheba Researcher: Antiparasitic Drug Reduces Length of COVID-19 Infection (JERUSALEM POST)

PART 2 (3-8-2021)

Fauci and Walensky Say “Vaccine” Does Not Work

Rumble — Dennis Prager Notes that the two leading media acolytes/revered specialists the Left follows have essentially admitted the vaccines do not work. They are essentially “prophylactics,” that do not work as well as ivermectin does (https://c19ivermectin.com). Rochelle Walensky (CDC Head) and Anthony Fauci basically have admitted this conundrum.

Rubin Report: Gamergate, Feminism, Regressive Left | Sargon of Akkad

Published by Papa Giorgio

Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report talks to Sargon of Akkad (YouTube creator) about Gamergate, feminism, the Regressive Left, and much more.

A SARGON OF AKKAD FLASHBACK!

The reason that slavery isn’t acceptable anywhere in the modern world is because of the British people’s 60-year crusade against it.

  • “The spirit of liberty is so deeply ingrained in our constitution that a slave, the moment he lands in England, is free.” — Sir William Blackstone
  • “As soon as a person set foot on English soil, he or she becomes free.” — Lord Henley
  • “As soon as a negro comes to England he is free.” — Judge Holt

Thomas Sowell and Carol Swain Slinging Red-Pills

Published by Papa Giorgio

This was my YouTube “rabbit hole” yesterday…. and I feel like this is a much better challenge than the cinnamon or Tide Pods type challenges.

Carol Swain get’s tagged in and does some suplexes of truth! My lingering thought is that our graceful God is opening up some young minds to the common grace of truth about history to a young generation as a “parting gift” to a man who has defended truth his whole life. The man is 92… I hope he lives more, but I surely hope after all these years, more and more young black men get red-pilled. I pray so.

These are the main videos watched below…. there are others, but these are the biggies:

  1. Facts About Slavery Never Mentioned In School | Thomas Sowell
  2. The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party | Carol Swain
  3. The Inconvenient Truth About the Republican Party | Carol Swain
  4. The British Crusade Against Slavery | Sargon of Akkad
  5. What Most ‘Experts’ Aren’t Telling You During Black History Month | Larry Elder Show
  6. The Hidden Truth Behind The End Of Slavery | Thomas Sowell
  7. The Bitter Truth About The Arab Slave Trade In Africa | Thomas Sowell
  8. TRUTH about the White Slave Trade | Forgotten History
  9. Thomas Sowell on the Current Black Culture | Thomas Sowell

I do these from oldest to newest  because in some cases, as you go through these people’s YouTube Channels, you can find the 1st time they see one of these… and then follow through their “evolution in thought” [so-to-speak] to inviting others to experience the mind opening they encountered.

FIRST, here is an OG on this topic… a red-pill passed out over a years ago:

Now This Youngster:

(3-WEEKS AGO)

He gets red-pilled at the 11:00 minute mark.

(2 WEEKS AGO)

OTHERS

From Oldest To Latest:

(1-YEAR AGO)

This beautiful young lady is red-pilled at the 8:40 mark where she mentions that “everything we been reacting to…” [all their previous channels videos] …”[this] is [her] wake-up call.”

(8-MONTHS AGO)

(7-MONTHS AGO)

(4-MONTHS AGO)

(4-MONTHS AGO)

(3-MONTHS AGO)

(3-MONTHS AGO)

(3-MONTHS AGO)

(2-MONTHS AGO)

LMAO… at the 14:20 mark the “George Washington” comment is funny!

The 26:00 minute mark is precious to me. These young men, starting out in life talking about — just finding out about “So-Well,” and asking if he has a book. Lol. I love it!

(2-MONTHS AGO)

(2-MONTHS AGO)

(2-MONTHS AGO)

(2-MONTHS AGO)

(2-MONTHS AGO)

(1-MONTH AGO)

(1-MONTH AGO)

(1-MONTH AGO)

(1-MONTH AGO)

(3-WEEKS AGO)

(2-WEEKS AGO)

(5-DAYS AGO)

(2-DAYS AGO)

(1-DAY AGO)

Thomas Sowell Goes Through The History of Slavery

Published by Papa Giorgio

(ORIGINALLY POSTED ON JAN 18, 2015)

  • “…virtually every significant racist in American political history was a Democrat.”

Bruce Bartlett, Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past (New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008), ix;

  • “…not every Democrat was a KKK’er, but every KKK’er was a Democrat.”

Ann Coulter, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama (New York, NY: Sentinel [Penguin], 2012), 19.

Thomas Sowell’S Full Chapter on the “Real History of Slavery”

ISOLATED and ART ADDED OF THE ABOVE:

History of Slavery, Dixie Crats,
Southern Strategy, Party Switch, etc.

Slavery

The Third Force Act, also known as the KKK or the Civil Rights Act of 1871, empowered President Ulysses S. Grant to use the armed forces to combat those who conspired to deny equal protection of the laws and, if necessary, to suspend habeas corpus to enforce the act. Grant signed the legislation on this day in 1871. After the act’s passage, the president for the first time had the power to suppress state disorders on his own initiative and suspend the right of habeas corpus. Grant did not hesitate to use this authority. (POLITICO)

Terrorist Arm of the Democrats

Southern Strategy/Dixiecrats Switch

1) The Southern Strategy Revisited: Republican Top-Down Advancement in the South, by Joseph A. Aistrup.
2) The Rise of Southern Republicans, by Earl Black and Merle Black.
3) From George Wallace to Newt Gingrich: Race in the Conservative Counterrevolution, 1963-1994, by Dan T. Carter.
4) A Stone of Hope: Prophetic Religion and the Death of Jim Crow, by David L. Chappell.
5) The Emerging Republican Majority, by Kevin Phillips.

A Brief History of the Irish | Thomas Sowell (and More)

Published by Papa Giorgio

(Originally posted on May 2, 2017)

Excerpt from Thomas Sowell “The Economics and Politics of Race: An International Perspective“

UPDATED WITH THESE VIDEOS:

Were Irish People the “First Slaves in America”?

WHY WASN’T I TAUGHT THIS?! TRUTH about the Irish – First slaves brought to the Americas

Parents, Get Out Of California! (Scott Wilk | Dave Rubin)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” shares a clip of California’s Lori Wilson pushing to pass bill AB 957 which will mandate gender affirming care for trans kids even if it is against the parents wishes.

Scott Wilk, like Dave Rubin above, sounds a parental warning… get out of California! (THE DAILY WIRE)

A Republican California lawmaker warned families to escape from the Golden State after legislators advanced a bill on Tuesday that would accuse parents of child abuse if they refuse to “affirm” their children’s so-called gender identity.

Senator Scott Wilk (R-Antelope Valley) sounded the alarm during a hearing late Tuesday night when the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 8-1 to advance Assembly Bill 957, which rewrites much of the state’s family law and classifies “a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child.”

“In the past, when we’ve had these discussions, and I’ve seen parental rights atrophy, I’ve encouraged people to keep fighting,” Wilk said. “I’ve changed my mind on that — if you love your children, you need to flee California. You need to flee.”

The bill amends Section 3011 of the Family Code, which deals with child custody disputes, and requires that a court determining the “best interests” of the child must consider the affirmation of a so-called transgender identity. If a parent were to deny the child’s “gender identity,” it would be a violation of the child’s health, safety, and welfare — equivalent to child abuse.

Because the bill changes the definition of what constitutes the “health, safety, and welfare” of a child, any organization interacting with children — including schools, churches, and hospitals — would be required to affirm gender transitions in minors…..

The Slippery Slope of the Subjective Left | Mark Goldblatt

Published by Papa Giorgio

Glenn Loury and John McWhorter talk with Mark Goldblatt about the mistaken epistemological premises of wokeism, which prioritizes subjective experience over objective fact.

The following is with a hat-tip to and an “adding to” Mark Goldblatt’s book, “I Feel, Therefore I Am: The Triumph of Woke Subjectivism“ (New York, N.Y.: Bombardier Books, 2022), 40-43.  

I will be adding links and graphics to the post… the graphic is linked to a larger one upon clicking it.

Why then do CRT advocates simultaneously reject the real­ity of racial categories yet embrace racial essentialism (a contra­diction that would be deadly except in an avowedly postmod­ern movement)? Because they need to account for the failure of black people to measure up to non-black people in a number of statistically significant ways; they therefore need to argue that the criteria of measurement themselves reflect a bias against black people. To make that case, however, you must presup­pose that black people are in some sense essentially distinct from non-black people. You must presuppose that, on a fundamental level, black people are wired differently.

Think about it. If black people are wired differently, you have a ready-made narrative of victimization. To take the most obvious example: you have a full explanation for why the scores of black kids lag behind others on standardized tests, and you have compelling proof of how past racism–in this case, the assumption of “white wiring” as the intellectual norm—contin­ues to hold back black people.

The normalization of the way white minds work thus becomes a quintessential tool of white supremacy. That’s the premise behind the notorious “Whiteness” education portal sponsored by the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture. The original centerpiece of that portal was a chart (later withdrawn, after a public outcry) titled Aspects and Assumptions of Whiteness and White Culture. [RPT says see NATIONAL REVIEW, WASHINGTON TIMES, and the WASHINGTON EXAMINER for more.] What “aspects” and “assumptions” are we talking about? Here’s a partial list:

  • Objective, rational, linear thinking
  • Cause and effect relationships
  • Quantitative emphasis
  • Hard work is the key to success
  • Work before play
  • Heavy value on ownership of goods, space, property
  • Plan for the future
  • Delayed gratification
  • The nuclear family: father, mother, 2.3 children is the ideal social unit
  • Follow rigid time schedules
  • Decision-making
  • Written tradition
  • Be polite

VIA: Where Progressives and the Alt-Right Meet: How vicious racial stereotypes got repackaged as “anti-racism.”

These, according to the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture, are essentially white things. Black people cannot be expected to adapt to them or value them in the same way white people do; it’s not in the nature of black people to do so.

Of course, the notion that black people are just different didn’t spontaneously evolve in the halls of the Smithsonian. It’s commonplace among critical race theorists. So, for exam­ple, we hear educational consultant and Columbia University Professor Maria Tope Akinyele explain:

Black people, we are relational people. We are people of context. Like, it’s very Western and European to dissect and analyze and take apart things, whereas [in] Afrocentric schooling or Afrocentric spirituality or African epistemology or ways of knowing, everything is connected. So this is why education is not working for so many students of color because we are context-driven people. We can’t tell a story without telling the ten things that happened that led up to that moment. There’s no such thing as like thinking in isolation—isolating yourself from nature, from your family. It’s just not part of our ways of knowing and being in the world. So when we tap into the ways that we understand the world, students are able to make wonderful connections and unleash their brilliance and their wisdom. (Black on Black Education)

Sounds like a straightforward endorsement of racial essen­tialism. Except twenty minutes later, in the same You Tube talk, she recounts a training session she held for a group of predomi­nantly white instructors at which, “….about seventy percent of them did not know that race was a made-up thing. Like did not know! And I was like, ‘Who is teaching you?’ This is disrespect!”

CRT, again, has three legs: Collective grievance. Subjective historiography. And racial essentialism. The glue that holds it together is the postmodernist rejection of rationality as an arbi­ter of truth. Postmodernism is the reason it’s fruitless to point out that Professor Akinyele is contradicting herself. What possi­ble difference would that make to her? What difference could it make within a CRT framework?

THOMAS SOWELL DEBUNKS LIES ABOUT BLACK EDUCATION

THE ORIGIN OF THE LEFT’S WAR ON WHITE PEOPLE IN AMERICA

The Law Is Clear, Life Begins In The Womb (Scott Peterson)

Published by Papa Giorgio

I saw the video [to the right] on Seth Gruber’s Rumble, and I realized I did not have a post here concerning Scott Peterson.

So I wish to fill in the gap with this posting. What follows are some pro-life apologists using Scott Peterson as an example to argue for the life, from conception. Who is Scott Peterson? — for my younger audience.

Who Is Scott Peterson?

In a case that riveted the nation, Scott Peterson was convicted of killing his eight-month pregnant wife, Laci, in 2002. With the help of his mistress, who had not previously known he was married, the FBI was able to collect evidence for the case against him. He was sentenced to death by lethal injection in 2004 for the first-degree murder of his wife and the second-degree murder of their fetus son.

(BIOGRAPHY)

In doing some searching for “stuff” for this post, I came across this blogpost by SECUALR PRO-LIFE… an atheist pro-lifer (yes, THEY EXIST, but they DO – NOT… lol). Here is a portion of that post that mentions Scott Peterson — and brought me to a video I likewise isolated, edited, and posted to my RUMBLE. Both the text and the video discuss what pro-life philosopher, Trent Horn, calls “Golden Retriever Reasoning.”

Enjoy:

Gradualism

This is the argument that pro-life philosopher Trent Horn referred to as Golden Retriever Reasoning. This position essentially states that the unborn don’t have the same value that we do, but they do have some value, just like dogs do. It would be wrong for me to kill my neighbor’s Golden Retriever, not because he’s as valuable as humans but because he belongs to my neighbor. Additionally, you shouldn’t just kill them for a trivial reason, but if circumstances get very tough, then you are justified in killing them.

But as Trent points out in the video, this doesn’t account for why we treat the unborn as no different than infants in some situations (for example, in some states if you kill a wanted unborn child you are charged with murder, not animal cruelty, such as when Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife and unborn child in California several years ago; he was charged with two counts of murder). In fact, many pro-choice people do treat the unborn as babies if they’re wanted.

We don’t become “more human” by developing further, we just develop more of the traits that humans possess. Similarly, we don’t become “more of a person” by developing further, we just develop the capacity to perform the functions that persons can perform.

So the Gradualist position just doesn’t account for why abortion should be available, especially on demand as we currently have it in the United States now.

(I also add a clip from Seth Gruber)

Much more can be found at my Roe v. Wade post: SCOTUS Overturns Roe/Casey!

SEA TURTLES VS. HUMANS

Bill Maher: Kathy, why do you oppose a women’s right to choose

Kathy Ireland: Bill, when my husband was going to medical school I underwent a transformation.  Because I used to be in favor of abortion.  But I noticed when I was reading through some of his medical teaching books, that according to a law in science known as the law of biogenesis, every living thing reproduces after it own kind.  That means dog produce dogs, cats produce cats, humans produce humans.  If we want to know what something is we simply ask what are its parents. If we know what the parents are, we know what the thing in question is.  And I reasoned from that because human parents can only produce human offspring, unborn human fetuses could be nothing but human beings, because the law of biogenesis rules out every other alternative.  And I concluded therefore that because human fetuses were part of our family, we should not harm them without justification.

Mr. B responds to the claim that “life begins at conception” is only a religious belief.

This is an excerpt from Randy Alcorn’s book (older edition), “Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments Expanded & Updated“

It is uncertain when human life begins; that’s a religious question that cannot be answered by science.

An article printed and distributed by the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL [the original, and still largest pro-choice organization]) describes as anti-choice the position that human life begins at conception. It says the pro-choice position is, Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact.

Bill O’Reilly of Fox News said on July 3, 2000, “No one knows when human life begins.” He made no distinction between biological life and any other kind of life. Mr. OReilly then went on to ask a guest if “is an embryo in a [petri] dish a human life”? Sen. Hatch’s claim that “an embryo in a petri dish is not a human life”?

1a.  If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life.

[One of the reasons the Supreme Court allowed the legalization of abortion is that they werent sure of when life began.] Suppose there is uncertainty about when human life begins. If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty lead him to fire or not to fire? If youre driving at night and you think the dark figure ahead on the road may be a child, but it may be just a shadow of a tree, do you drive into it or do you put on the brakes? If we find someone who may be dead or alive, but were not sure, what is the best policy? To assume he is alive and try to save him, or to assume he is dead and walk away?

Shouldn’t we give the benefit of the doubt to life? Otherwise we are saying, This may or may not be a child, therefore it’s all right to destroy it.

1b. Medical Textbooks and scientific reference works constantly agree that human life begins at conception.

Many people have been told that there is no medical or scientific consensus as to when human life begins. This is simply untrue. Among those scientists who have no vested (monetary) in the abortion issue, there is an overwhelming consensus that human life begins at conception. (Conception is the moment when the egg is fertilized by the sperm, bringing into existence the zygote, which is a genetically distinct individual.)

Dr. Bradley M. Pattens textbook, Human Embryology, states:

  • It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of a new individual.

Dr. Keith L. Moores text on embryology, referring to the single cell zygote, says:

  • The cell results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being. He also states, Each of us started life as a cell called a zygote.

Doctors J. P. Greenhill and E. A. Friedman, in their work on biology and obstetrics, state:

  • The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.

Dr. Louis Fridhandler, in the medical textbook Biology of Gestation, refers to fertilization as:

  • that wondrous moment that marks the beginning of life for a new unique individual.

Doctors E. L. Potter and J. M. Craig write in Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant:

  • Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.

Popular scientific reference works reflect this same understanding of when human life begins. Time and Rand McNallys Atlas of the Human Body states:

  • In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.

In an article on pregnancy, the Encyclopedia Britannica says:

  • A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg.

These sources confidently affirm, with no hint of uncertainty that life begins at conception. They state not a theory or hypothesis and certainly not a religious belief every one is a secular source. Their conclusion is squarely based on the scientific and medical facts.

1c. Some of the worlds most prominent scientist and physicians testified to a U. S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception.

In 1981, a United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. Al of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:

  • I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of a human life.

I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty is not a human being. This is human life at every stage.

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Downs syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee that:

  • after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. He stated that this is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, and not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence. He added, Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic:

  • By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.

Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School:

  • It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.

Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School:

  • The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view as simple and straightforward matter the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological [familial, age, or medical advances], political [pro-choice], or economic goals [cannot finish school].

A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who could specifically testify that life begins at any other point other than conception or implantation.

1d. Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception.

Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the pro-life cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, The basic fact is simple: Life begins not at birth, but conception.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was co-founder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL [Dr. Nathanson help start the entire pro-choice movement]). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the Western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.

Dr. Nathansons study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60, 000 deaths.

In his film, The Silent Scream, Dr. Nathanson later stated, Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from us. Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader. At the time Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.

Dr. Lundrum Shettles was for twenty-seven years attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female- producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles staes:

  • I oppose abortion, I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest that human life commences at the same time of conception and, secondly, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.

The official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the Human Life Bill, summarized the issue this way:

  • Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a humans being a being that is and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.

Does It Matter?

In a statement form the The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, Director of Media and Policy Daniel McConchie said:

  • “Stem cell lines are quickly becoming marketable items. Once some integral human parts can be bought and sold, we run the risk that democratic societies will decide that other weak and defenseless members of the human race in those societies can be utilized for profits as well.”

Jews and Blacks were once said by the courts to be less than human, I wonder if we are headed down that path again?

Democrats Don’t Actually Want To Debate Abortion (Matt Walsh)

Every Generation Explained | Karen Morgan

Published by Papa Giorgio

Every generation explained by Karen Morgan explores the generations of the world from the silent generation all the way down to Gen-z. In this clip from here second Dry Bar Comedy special Karen Morgan breaks down the generations and why they don’t get along with each other. Whether you’re someone who is a boomer, or you’re someone who grew up in Gen-x this clip from Karen Morgan is sure to have you laughing from start to finish.

Helen Joyce w/Jordan Peterson (YouTube Banned This Interview)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality | Helen Joyce | Podcast #287

The Trans movement surges across western civilization, necessitating the ego-centric fantasies of gender-dysphoric youths over what once was known commonly as indisputable reality. Helen Joyce and Dr Jordan B Peterson discuss the depths of this truly cultural battle, the dangers of a quickly growing transhumanist ideology, and the unbridled narcissism lurking at the heart of the conflict.

Helen Joyce is an Irish novelist and journalist, acting as the executive editor for events and business at the Economist in London. Before this, she trained as a mathematician, graduating from the Trinity College in Dublin, before attending Cambridge. She then acquired a PHD in geometric measure theory at the University College London. She has held many roles as a journalist, working for PLUS Magazine and Significance Magazine, both of which have an emphasis on communicating complex math and statistics to the everyday reader. Later, she would spend three years as the Economist’s foreign correspondent to Brazil, living in São Paulo. In 2018, Joyce curated a series of articles on transgender identity, which lead her to author the Sunday Times bestselling book, “Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality.”

Here is a bit more at THE DAILY WIRE:

DailyWire+ contributor Dr. Jordan B. Peterson revealed on Saturday that YouTube had removed a video — in which he and author Helen Joyce discuss gender ideology — for allegedly violating the platform’s “hate speech policy.”

In a tweet posted early Saturday, Peterson shared the message he received from YouTube informing him that a video titled “Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality” was removed due to an alleged “violation”: “Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our hate speech policy. … We know that this might be disappointing, but it’s important to us that YouTube is a safe place for all.”

Under the “How your content violated the policy” section, YouTube stated in part: “Content glorifying or inciting violence against another person or group of people is not allowed on YouTube. We also don’t allow any content that encourages hatred of another person or group of people based on their membership in a protected group.”

Tagging YouTube, Peterson responded on Twitter: “I have now officially been accused of hate speech by YouTube, Let’s be clear about this: that is a direct accusation [of] conduct deemed criminal in many jurisdictions. This is absolutely not OK, @YouTube. Not OK.”…..