PP NewsBrief: 2021-02-19

We need to begin to reclaim control over the institutions which have such oversized roles in our lives. As you read this people work tirelessly to see to it that you are dumb and docile. Let's stop them.

========

Far-Left Teachers Accuse Shakespeare of Perpetuating ‘White Supremacy’

"A coalition of far-left teachers are advocating for the removal of works by William Shakespeare from school curriculum, accusing the iconic playwright of being a symbol of “White supremacy,” as reported by the Washington Times.

The demands come from a far-left group called “#DisruptTexts,” a group of teachers who declared that “this is about White supremacy and colonization,” demanding that Shakespeare and other iconic figures in Western literature either be removed from schools altogether or face mandated criticism in the course of teaching about their works."

Having a common foundation is necessary for creating a society. Without it we become disconnected tribes exploitable by the actually organized few.

========

5 questions to ask your friends who plan to get the Covid vaccine

1. "Did you know that we have NEVER successfully vaccinated against ANY coronavirus?
2. Did you know it usually takes 5-10 years to fully develop a vaccine?
3. Did you know that the Covid “vaccine” is based on new technology, which has never been approved for use on humans before?
4. Did you know that the pharmaceutical companies can’t be sued if the vaccine hurts or kills someone?
5. Did you know 99.8% of people survive Covid19?"

========

Who Is Behind the Shadow Campaign “Fortifying” Our Elections?

"Catalist was founded in 2006 under the name Data Warehouse LLC by Clinton family operatives Laura Quinn and Harold Ickes. The company has worked hand-in-hand with the Democratic political movement and data collection since the first election of Obama. According to reports, Catalist allowed liberal donors, including George Soros, to contribute to left-of-center voter turnout, modeling, and activation efforts without violating Federal Election Commission limits that go along with contributions to the Democratic National Committee.

Once collected, Catalist sells its data to progressive organizations and labor unions. Catalist’s contracts concerning data usage reportedly expect its customers to contribute all voter information collected in areas such as issue interests into the company’s database for ultimate use by the broader movement, thus creating well-rounded individual representations of political behavior. Essentially, Catalist operates a comprehensive national voter database that contains close to every registered voter in the country and virtually every voting-age individual who is not registered to vote. And thanks to the far-reaching efforts to gather all possible data, each entry includes hundreds of additional pieces of information, from race to the likelihood of owning a SUV.

The “What We Do” section of Catalist’s website states the company “compiles, enhances, stores, and dynamically updates on 256 million unique voting-age individuals across 50 states and the District of Columbia.” The short description continues, adding, “Catalist can help you build membership, target persuasive messaging, engage activists, drive an issue agenda, and register or mobilize voters.”

The “Who We Are” page on Catalist’s website notes that Board Chair Patricia Bauman “is active as a donor to Democratic candidates.” In fact, Patricia Bauman and the Bauman Family Foundation, which she heads, are significant leaders of the American Left. The web page reveals that over half of the members of the company’s Leadership Team list direct ties to the Democratic party in their bio. The CEO of Catalist not only has a connection to the DNC, but also to Homeland Security. And these individuals were “targeting” supposed “disinformation” agents online rather than engaging with them and bringing attention to them, while prodding the legacy media to “expose” people."

========

US Election 2020: From Conspiracy Theory to Conspiracy Fact

"The Democrats made a deliberate decision to have one of their most prominent mouthpieces so proudly brag about the self-described “conspiracy” that a “well-connected cabal of powerful people” pulled off against Trump.

This was done to humiliate and demoralize their political opponents, as well as likely provoke the most unstable and at-risk ones such as the most radical QAnon cultists into overreacting by committing acts of violence that could then be exploited as the justification for next phase of their “conspiracy”.

The messages being sent are several: the Democrats have successfully captured control of all institutions and are now weaponizing them to politically suppress their opponents on the basis of double standards; this revelation was widely known long ago by all sides but only publicly acknowledged by the culprits at this point due to its strategic timing; and nobody can ever take the Democrats’ and their proxies’ (including institutions’) statements at face value any more. In truth, while one Hybrid War on America just ended, another has only begun."

========

Republicans Acquit Trump, But Leave His Supporters Defenseless

"For years we have heard from Democrats about the obligation of Republicans to “stand up to Trump.” These lamentations have taken on new fervor since the GOP denied Democrats their latest wish, by voting to acquit Donald Trump of inciting “insurrection.”

Democrats tell us this acquittal was merely the latest attack on democracy by the Republican Party which, we are to believe, has totally devolved into QAnon-inspired “domestic extremism.”

What the Democrats desire is a GOP that is “principled and strong,” as Joe Biden put it.

What they mean by “strong” is a party that does their bidding and, instead of opposing Democrats, stands up against you.

Opposition is an intolerable burden to this Democratic Party. The rest of the country is supposed to understand that the things Democrats want are what everyone should want. This understanding is supposed to be so well-established that only traitors would dare withhold gratification for whatever impulse is moving them at the moment.

Reasons are never supplied, only threats, all amounting to some variation on, “Hey racist dumb people who we hate, do this thing for us right now, or else.” Are we ever allowed to say “no”?

Why should Americans desire uncontrolled mass migration? Who decided that was an incontestable fact of American life?

Why should Trump supporters, whom the Left openly despises and now readily describes as “domestic extremists” deserving to be fired from their jobs, censored, spied on and destroyed by the force of the security state, be upset that Trump was acquitted?  

Why should Trump supporters join the Left in grieving an “insurrection” that the Left is using to disingenuously target them?

Why are conservatives required to welcome their persecution?"

========

Biden signals green light for reparations study as Congress press bill to examine slavery & discrimination from 1619 to present

"But even if the study bill is passed and signed by Biden, the reparations movement may be a long way from making slavery-compensation payments a reality. Among other issues, the government would have to decide whether payments would go to all black Americans, all blacks in America, or only descendants of slavery. Congress also would need to define who is considered black, or how a person would prove his or her qualifications for payment. Then there would be the question of how to pay for reparations, which would essentially mean penalizing non-black taxpayers for their skin color.

Or perhaps reparations would need to go further. Writer Tiffany Elliott argued that reparations represent a necessary “repentance of our national sin” and should be extended to “all undesirables,” including women, homosexuals, transgender people and HIV victims. In her view, apparently, only heterosexual and able-bodied white and Hispanic males would need to fund payments to virtually everyone else. Most wouldn't be descendants of slaveholders, and some would be migrants to the country."

If you let the elites divide you over something as trivial as your skin color they will win big.

========

UK Government Misinformation on Gene Editing. Johnson Government’s Plan to “Deregulate Gene Editing”

• "Gene editing does not mimic natural breeding. It is an artificial laboratory-based technique in which genetic engineers directly intervene in the genome to alter the DNA.
• Gene editing is a genetic modification technique and gives rise to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), as confirmed by the European Court of Justice ruling of 2018.
• Gene editing can be used to deliberately introduce foreign DNA or whole genes – and sometimes foreign DNA is introduced into the genome by accident during gene-editing procedures.
• Even where no foreign DNA has been inserted, the process of gene editing remains inherently risky. It has been found to result in major genetic errors (mutations), which could lead to alterations in the plant’s protein and biochemical composition, potentially including the production of toxins or allergens.
• Weakening the GMO regulations to exempt gene editing will not benefit research, which can already be done. But it will pose risks to England’s food and farming standards, as gene-edited organisms will be allowed onto our dinner plates and into our fields without safety checks, traceability, or GMO labelling.
• If the UK goes ahead with its planned deregulation of gene editing, the EU may ban or restrict food imports from the UK, since without labelling of gene-edited foods it will not be able to tell which foods meet its current safety standards and can legally be sold there.
• No gene-edited crop has been shown to be resistant to diseases. Meanwhile there are many conventionally bred crops that do have such resistance.
• No gene-edited crop has been shown to reduce pesticide use. The first gene-edited crop to be commercialised is a herbicide-tolerant canola, which will enable more herbicide to be sprayed without killing the crop.
• Resistance to disease and pests are genetically complex traits. Gene editing can only manipulate one or a few genes at a time and is not well suited for developing crops with desirable complex traits.
• Animal gene editing raises serious ethical and welfare issues because significant numbers of non-viable and deformed animals result from these programmes.
• The best way to reduce pesticide use and keep crops and livestock animals healthy is to choose from the many available high-performing, disease-resistant, and climate-adapted crops and livestock breeds – and adopt proven successful agroecological farming methods that work with nature rather than against it.
• Gene editing technologies and their products are patented, with the patents already largely controlled by the big agrochemical companies, led by Corteva (part of DowDuPont) and Bayer (which took over Monsanto). So gene editing will not democratise agricultural innovation but is a way for the big companies to further consolidate their power over agricultural seeds, crops, and livestock animals."

GMOs benefit corporations, not people.

========

‘We the People’ gone and no one noticed: Biden removes Obama-era petition tool to thunderous media silence

"This total lack of interest in the petition site stands out in comparison to the media reaction when the Trump administration took it offline in December 2017. One report after another suggested this was done because the three most popular petitions on the site demanded Trump release his tax returns, divest of his business holdings, or resign outright – all initiatives launched by Democrats and the anti-Trump “resistance.”

Once the page was restored in early February 2018, and the Trump White House began responding to the petitions, the media quickly lost interest. Fast forward to January 2021 and the outright removal of the petitions page didn’t even register on their radar."

========

Science and Power as Fellow Henchmen: How the “Land of Poets and Thinkers” Sinks into the Swamp of Corruption

"Science is understood to be the totality of human knowledge, findings and experiences of an era. This is systematically expanded, collected, preserved, taught and handed down. In the case law of the German Federal Constitutional Court, the term “science” is defined as:

“Everything that, according to content and form, is to be regarded as a serious attempt to determine the truth.”

To achieve this lofty goal, science purports to recognize certain values such as:

• Unambiguity,
• transparency,
• objectivity,
• verifiability,
• reliability,
• openness and honesty, and
• novelty: the work leads to progress in knowledge (2).

...

Today’s science, however, is in a relationship of increasing interdependence with politics. Political circumstances set the respective framework conditions for scientific research and the social application of research findings.

As a result, there are hardly any independent scientists left, but only academics (with university or college education) who kowtow or hawk their knowledge and skills – and often their souls – to corrupt politicians, the military-industrial complex and Big Money. Some stray so far from their humanity that they help perfect the means for the general destruction of humanity. When the plight of the people does not touch their hearts, these so-called scientists judge themselves: All their wisdom and science are degraded to a self-indulgent game of wits that knows no obligation.

Recently, more and more examples of political and scientific corruption of previously unimaginable proportions have been coming to light. In Germany, Michael Eisfeld, professor of economic philosophy at the University of Lausanne and member of the German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina – the National Academy of Sciences – now made public his sharp criticism of the government and the scientific advisory body.

He stated that “the government currently consults mainly those scientists who are willing to say what the government wants to hear” (3). This approach would massively undermine the reputation of science and inevitably lead to a populist backlash against science as a whole."

========

Report: Military members resisting getting COVID vaccination

"“We don’t precisely know why an individual has not received a vaccine,” Maj. Gen. Jeff Taliaferro, Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Director for Operations, said. “We think it’s important that this department continues to communicate to our service members the value of the vaccine, the safety of the vaccine with continued leadership involvement to help our service members understand that.”

One commander said vaccines aren’t mandatory yet, but will likely become mandatory as soon as possible."

The smart play by the elites would be to dissipate the initial outrage over mandatory vaccination by doing it for military personnel only. They can then study the responses and hone their propaganda for the general public push.

========

Accommodating Trans Athletes Without Rejecting the Reality of Human Biology

"If the world’s sporting bodies were forced to choose between (a) the traditional differentiation of sports competitions along male-female lines, and (b) a system of unfettered gender self-identification, the choice would not be difficult: The idea that half the planet should focus on being a good loser while male bodies dominate the medal podium is preposterous and sexist.

From puberty onwards, male physiological advantages express themselves as increased muscle mass, higher lung capacity and blood flow, and increased bone strength. As recent studies have shown, these advantages generally don’t go away simply because an athlete has changed their pronouns and hormone chemistry. At the highest levels, the difference between male and female world records typically hovers around 10 percent. The men’s world record in the 100m dash, for instance, is 9.58 seconds. The record among women, by contrast, is 10.49 seconds—a time that is routinely bested by teenaged male athletes at high-school track meets. And so while the number of transgender women competing may still be small, their likelihood of out-competing biological females is high. And in sports that involve physical contact, such as rugby and boxing, ignoring the biological differences between men and women isn’t just unfair, but also dangerous.

Thankfully, lawmakers and sports officials aren’t confined to this (as the expression goes) false policy binary, because there are ways to protect the integrity of female athletics while also treating transgender individuals with dignity and respect. One promising option, for instance, would be to preserve the traditionally defined female category while also rebranding the male category as an “open” category that’s available to anyone. This would allow a biologically male trans woman, or someone who is intersex, to test their speed, skill, and strength in a fair competition, while also not forcing them to submit to a designation they may find inaccurate or demeaning. Once overwrought ideological claims about the nature of gender identity are stripped away, in fact, open athletic categories may even provide a forum for real diversity and universal inclusivity, which is the ostensible goal of those demanding that women compete against male bodies.

The two main impediments to implementing such an approach manifest at opposite ends of the ideological spectrum: conservatives who refuse to offer any nod to the reality of transgender individuals, and doctrinaire progressives who insist that all debate begins and ends with simple slogans or clever-seeming non sequiturs about hermaphroditism in clownfish and bog onions."