Randoctor

Jack Cashill, an investigative journalist renowned for his bold and often controversial investigations, has delved into some of the most contentious and underreported stories in recent American history. His latest book, "Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6th," continues his trend of uncovering narratives that mainstream media either ignores or distorts. Throughout his career, Cashill has positioned himself as a crucial literary custodian of these complex and often suppressed stories, earning both admiration and criticism for his relentless pursuit of the truth. The Major Media's Blind Spots Cashill argues that major media outlets frequently leave significant stories untold, a gap he has sought to fill with his work. "The major media leave all the big stories on the table. They don't report the things that they should be reporting," he asserts. This conviction drives Cashill to investigate and document events that he believes are crucial to understanding contemporary American history. His body of work includes extensive coverage of the shootdown of TWA Flight 800, the death of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, the George Zimmerman trial, and the true story behind the Trayvon Martin case. He also claims to have discovered that Bill Ayers ghostwrote Barack Obama's memoir "Dreams from My Father." The TWA Flight 800 Controversy One of Cashill's most provocative investigations centers on the crash of TWA Flight 800. He contends that the official explanation—a fuel tank explosion—was a cover-up for what was actually a missile strike by the U.S. Navy. According to Cashill, the CIA and FBI took over the investigation from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to suppress the truth. "The CIA took over the investigation from the FBI and created the animation that the FBI showed once," he explains, suggesting a coordinated effort to mislead the public. Cashill's book, co-written with James Sanders, explores this theory in depth, presenting evidence and eyewitness accounts that support the missile strike hypothesis. Despite significant pushback from government agencies and mainstream media, Cashill remains steadfast in his belief that TWA Flight 800 was brought down by friendly fire during a naval exercise gone wrong. He recounts how the media initially reported finding explosive residue on the plane, only to later attribute it to a dog training exercise—a shift he finds highly suspicious. The Death of Ron Brown Another major investigation led Cashill to scrutinize the death of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, whose plane crashed in Croatia in 1996. Cashill argues that Brown was murdered to protect the Clinton administration from scandals involving illegal fundraising activities. "The dispassionate observer looking at the evidence walks away with a firm conviction that Ron Brown was murdered," Cashill states. He bases his claim on evidence such as a circular hole found in Brown's head, which he and some experts believe was caused by a bullet. Cashill's deep dive into this case involved collaboration with Brown's confidant and co-conspirator, Nolanda Butler-Hill, who provided inside information on Brown's activities and the circumstances surrounding his death. Despite the gravity of his allegations, Cashill acknowledges that proving them conclusively remains challenging. Nonetheless, he presents a compelling case that suggests Brown's death was not an accident but a politically motivated assassination. The Zimmerman and Martin Case Cashill also played a prominent role in challenging the mainstream narrative surrounding the George Zimmerman trial and the shooting of Trayvon Martin. He argues that the case was manipulated to serve a political agenda, portraying Zimmerman as a villain and Martin as an innocent victim. "I am the principal literary custodian of the George Zimmerman trial, the true story behind the Trayvon Martin hoax," Cashill claims. In his writings, Cashill explores the inconsistencies and media biases that, in his view, distorted public perception of the case. He believes that the trial was used to stoke racial tensions and advance certain political goals, rather than to seek justice based on the facts. Cashill's friendship with Zimmerman has further fueled his commitment to defending him against what he sees as a gross miscarriage of justice. Bill Ayers and Barack Obama One of Cashill's most controversial claims is that Bill Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground, ghostwrote Barack Obama's memoir "Dreams from My Father." Cashill asserts that if this fact had been widely known before the 2008 election, it would have derailed Obama's candidacy. "I knew this six weeks before the election, right? I'm sitting with the ultimate October surprise," he recalls. Cashill bases his claim on stylistic similarities between Ayers' writings and Obama's memoir, as well as insider information from sources close to the Obamas. Despite skepticism from many quarters, Cashill remains convinced of his theory, citing numerous nautical metaphors in "Dreams from My Father" that he believes could only have come from Ayers, a former merchant seaman. "Bill Ayers had a major helping hand in the writing of 'Dreams from My Father,'" he states unequivocally. January 6th and the Death of Ashli Babbitt In his latest book, "Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6th," Cashill turns his attention to the events of January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol. He focuses particularly on the death of Ashli Babbitt, a 14-year Air Force veteran shot by Capitol Police. Cashill describes Babbitt as a patriotic and free-spirited individual who became a martyr for the cause she believed in. He contends that the media and government have distorted the facts surrounding her death to fit a particular narrative. Cashill provides a detailed account of Babbitt's final moments, arguing that her death was unjust and preventable. "On January 6th, there were four protesters who died. Three of them arguably were killed, including most famously Ashli Babbitt," he notes. He criticizes the police response and the subsequent investigation, suggesting that Babbitt's death was part of a larger effort to suppress the truth about January 6th. The Broader Implications Cashill's work often touches on broader themes of media bias, government corruption, and the struggle to uncover the truth in a complex and often deceitful world. He positions himself as a truth-seeker, committed to following the facts wherever they lead, regardless of the personal or professional consequences. "I don't, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm just a reporter. I just go where the facts lead me," he asserts. Despite facing significant criticism and opposition, Cashill continues to pursue his investigative work with tenacity and dedication. He believes that the truth is essential for a functioning democracy and that uncovering hidden narratives is crucial for informed public discourse. His investigations into events like the TWA Flight 800 crash, the death of Ron Brown, the Zimmerman trial, and the January 6th incident highlight his commitment to this mission. Conclusion Jack Cashill's body of work reflects his unwavering commitment to uncovering the truth behind some of the most controversial and underreported stories in recent American history. His investigations have often challenged mainstream narratives, revealing complex and sometimes uncomfortable truths. From the downing of TWA Flight 800 to the death of Ashli Babbitt, Cashill's work underscores the importance of rigorous, fact-based journalism in an era of widespread misinformation and media bias. As Cashill himself states, "It's not even hard to do. I don't know why more people don't do it. I just report the facts that are there." This straightforward approach to journalism has defined his career and cemented his reputation as a determined and fearless investigator, willing to take on powerful interests and uncover the stories that others might prefer to leave untold.

In a landscape where scientific inquiry meets societal norms, Nathan Cofnas stands at a controversial crossroad. His examination of genetics and intelligence sparks a vital conversation on the inherent tensions between scientific discoveries and societal values. Cofnas, a philosopher at Oxford, navigates the precarious balance between freedom of speech and academic orthodoxy. His discourse, rooted in the principles of evolutionary biology, probes deep into what constitutes our moral fabric. “Morality is the alleged fact that you ought to do something or you ought not to do something,” Cofnas begins, challenging the universality of moral imperatives. He suggests that what we consider moral truths might merely be evolutionary adaptations—biological functions serving adaptive purposes. "Is morality just a figment of our imagination? Just a biological function that serves some adaptive purpose?" Cofnas posits, pushing the envelope on how we understand the foundation of human ethics. This line of questioning leads him into the tangled interplay of genetics and societal structures, where he boldly addresses the differences in intelligence test scores among various populations. “Different populations have different distributions of scores on intelligence tests,” he states, a fact that ignites debates across academic and social spheres. Cofnas doesn’t shy away from the implications of these differences. “A very substantial part of these differences, at least in the American context, could be due to genetic differences,” he asserts, drawing a line directly connecting genetics to cognitive abilities. This acknowledgment is not intended to stigmatize or elevate one group over another but to highlight a fundamental aspect of human diversity. The cultural impact, Cofnas argues, is also shaped by genetics. “The culture is itself influenced by the genetic potential of the population, the genetic dispositions of the population,” he explains, suggesting that cultural formations are not merely social constructs but are underpinned by biological realities. In tackling the sensitive issue of hereditarianism, Cofnas clarifies, “Hereditarianism doesn't mean that all populations have a special connection between skin color and intelligence.” This statement seeks to dissociate race from inherent intelligence, focusing instead on broader genetic variances that might influence cognitive traits without making deterministic claims based on race. The fluidity of morality and its evolutionary roots lead Cofnas to a striking conclusion about the nature of moral systems. “There is no truth about morality, and as conditions change, people's values can change,” he remarks, driving home the notion that moral structures are susceptible to shifts in societal conditions. This fluidity culminates in his assertion that “The fact that there is no objective truth about morality means that any moral system could potentially be overturned.” Through his exploration, Cofnas exemplifies the role of a thinker unafraid to traverse the minefield of controversial topics. His engagement with Harvard’s study on racial admissions underscores the complexity of integrating genetic understanding into social policies. He uses this data not as a cudgel but as a lens to scrutinize how institutions handle diversity and meritocracy. Cofnas’s narrative is compelling, not just for its intellectual bravery but for its capacity to invite us to reconsider the foundations upon which we build our understanding of human potential. His work is a call to the intellectual world to remain open to hypotheses that challenge conventional wisdom, fostering a scientific and cultural environment where inquiry is not stifled by orthodoxy. In a society quick to silence dissent, Nathan Cofnas’s voice is an essential beacon in the ongoing debate about freedom of expression, scientific truth, and the diverse tapestry of human capability. His insights encourage a more nuanced appreciation of humanity, pushing us to think critically about the genetic and cultural factors that shape our world.

Dr. Mary Talley Bowden took a stand when few dared. Facing the FDA, she challenged the false narrative that Ivermectin was just a horse dewormer—an absurd claim that cast shadows over its legitimate use in humans. "We sued [the FDA]...and the court recognized our case," she declared, marking a pivotal battle for truth in medicine. The FDA’s misleading statements did more than confuse; they misrepresented a drug that, like many others, has vital off-label uses. Without such flexibility, there'd be no Viagra for erectile dysfunction, no Propecia or Rogaine for hair loss, no aspirin for heart health. Ivermectin, an antibiotic with antiviral properties, was another such drug, wrongly stigmatized despite its FDA approval and safety record. Dr. Bowden's insistence on prescribing Ivermectin came at a time when no better alternatives were available, standing firmly within her medical rationale and rights. Her actions highlighted a critical point: "It’s about Ivermectin but it’s more about the doctor-patient relationship," emphasizing the necessity to preserve physician autonomy against regulatory overreach. The fight was uneven. Dr. Bowden, a lone physician, opposed by larger entities with deeper pockets, potentially driven by pharmaceutical interests, not public welfare. "If we don’t get our politicians involved we’re just running down a very slippery slope," she warned, pointing to the dire need for political advocacy to protect medical freedom. Her victory, forcing the FDA to retract its claims, set a precedent but also revealed the uphill battle against entrenched interests that manipulate public perception for profit. "Now it’s going to take three years to reverse propaganda...but it sets a precedent," she acknowledged, sober about the road ahead but steadfast in her commitment. Reflecting on the role of medical boards meant to shield the public from harm, she noted, "The job of the board is to protect the public from dangerous doctors. This is not anything about being a dangerous doctor." Here, Dr. Bowden’s struggle underscored a broader issue: the misuse of authority under the guise of protection. Dr. Bowden's courage to challenge the status quo, driven by her unwavering belief in doing right by her patients, stands as a beacon for all in medicine. Her story isn't just about a legal victory; it's about maintaining integrity in healthcare against overwhelming odds. In a battle where Goliath seemed invincible, this David did not back down.

Mark Changizi's insightful dialogue explores several critical dimensions of contemporary societal and academic dynamics. Changizi begins by challenging the conventional wisdom about the role of university students in political activism. He asserts, "The idea that university students have some kind of special privilege to see what's right is absurd," highlighting the often misguided fervor of youth-led movements. This leads into a deeper reflection on how historical movements are frequently misunderstood by those who claim to continue their legacies: "It's an amazing thing how narratives about historical oppressions and revolutions are co-opted by those who don't truly understand them." Changizi then turns to the persistent influence of anti-Semitic narratives within discussions about Middle Eastern politics, noting, "anti-Semitic narratives have (sadly) been with us for a couple of thousand years." This observation underscores the deep-rooted biases that can distort perceptions and fuel conflict. Addressing the polarization in contemporary politics, Changizi critiques the oversimplification and extremism prevalent in modern discourse: "For every crazy left / woke thing, there are equally misguided beliefs on the right." This comment speaks to the symmetrical radicalism that can be found across the political spectrum, emphasizing the need for a more balanced and nuanced approach. Changizi also delves into the foundations of social movements and political environments, suggesting that these phenomena can be understood through historical analysis: "The tectonics of socio-political environments and the social manias that occur have some kind of ontogeny that you can look back on." This perspective encourages a historical understanding to better grasp the present and predict future trends. Finally, he champions the essential role of free speech in a healthy society, stating, "Free expression requires misinformation coursing through it as the rungs of the ladder of truth." This metaphor highlights the importance of a vibrant public discourse where misinformation, while inevitable, contributes to the iterative process of reaching truth. This discussion provides a multifaceted examination of how historical, cultural, and political forces shape our understanding of society, offering viewers profound insights into the challenges and complexities of navigating modern ideological landscapes.

"Every other religion is allowed to share their views... But the minute a Christian does it, it's always a problem." Syntyche Djunga is a young British woman whose voice is providing a unique perspective on spirituality and societal norms. Syntyche opens up about the transformative impact of her upbringing and the eventual return to her spiritual roots, stating, "It wasn't until I went to (University) where I finally escaped the regime of my parents that I realized that my parents were right the whole time." This reflection marks a pivotal moment in her life, highlighting the contrast between societal expectations and personal fulfillment found in her faith. She further elaborates on her mission, driven by a passion to address moral and spiritual decline, "I genuinely believe that is because there is a lack of Christ in people. There's a lack of just Christian values in society." Her words underscore a deep concern for the rising mental health crises and societal issues she attributes to a void in spiritual grounding. Taking her convictions to social media, Syntyche has transformed her platform to bridge faith with contemporary issues, stating, "I just decided to do a whole 360 with my platform and speak more about God on my platform but I didn't want to do it in a preachy way." Her approach is strategic, aiming to connect with a broader audience by integrating discussions on politics, social issues, and entertainment with theological insights. Despite the resistance she faces, Syntyche remains steadfast, noting the double standards that often challenge her message, "Every other religion is allowed to share their views... But the minute a Christian does it, it's always a problem." Her observations reflect a broader critique of societal biases and the unique challenges faced by those who publicly uphold Christian beliefs. Syntyche’s narrative is not just about confronting external criticism but also about fostering internal growth and offering a counter-narrative to the prevailing cultural trends, which she believes undermine traditional values. She articulates a powerful call to action, "This is not a coincidence and these are not by accident. This is like a full-blown spiritual and very strategic attack on Christianity." Her personal story of rediscovery and commitment serves as a testament to the potential for personal transformation and societal impact through faith. As she navigates the complexities of being a young, vocal Christian in a secular world, Syntyche Djunga stands as a beacon for others who might feel isolated in their beliefs, encouraging resilience and authenticity in the pursuit of spiritual and societal well-being. Through this dialogue, her narrative weaves a compelling argument for the relevance of faith in contemporary discussions about culture, morality, and personal identity. Find her at BASEDANDBOUGIE @simply_syntyche https://twitter.com/simply_syntyche BASEDANDBOUGIE @brownandbougie1535 https://www.youtube.com/@brownandbougie1535 https://www.tiktok.com/@brownandbougie0

Wilfred Reilly begins, "I've recently decided to grow up, sort of"; maturity and self-reflection pervade his current focus. His upcoming book, "Lies Your Liberal Teacher Told You," is a critical examination of mainstream educational narratives. Reilly discusses the phenomenon of transgender mass shooters, articulating a concern that "six out of 50 is a remarkable number because only point six percent of the U.S. population is trans." This statistic serves as a springboard into a broader discussion about the unexpected consequences of societal changes on public safety and policy. Reilly challenges prevailing societal norms and medical practices related to gender dysphoria, emphasizing the biological realities that often get overshadowed in political and social discourse. He argues, "Pure testosterone is a pretty powerful drug," highlighting the complexities and potential risks involved in hormonal treatments for transgender individuals, especially teens. "The number of kids that have received these transgender treatments is very high" questions the long-term impacts of such profound medical interventions at a young age; and cultural and social ramifications of transgender identity politics, particularly how they intersect with women's rights and spaces. He reflects on the feminist movement's response to transgender issues, suggesting a deep ideological split within feminism itself, which struggles to reconcile inclusivity with the preservation of spaces designed for biological women. The 'soft bigotry of low expectations,' (policies aimed at helping disadvantaged groups) is stigmatizing rather than empowering. "Progressives ruin everything" with good intentions that often lead to poor outcomes. Reilly discusses the complex dynamics of race and identity, juxtaposing them against gender issues to draw parallels and contrasts. He points out the inconsistencies and challenges in navigating these intertwined social categories, emphasizing the need for honest and open discussion about the impacts of identity politics on various aspects of society. Wilfred Reilly calls into question the long-term consequences of societal changes that are often accepted without sufficient scrutiny of their broader implications.

Professor Blanco, with his keen insights, sheds light on the increasing isolation of Venezuelan President Maduro from his ideological allies due to questionable electoral practices. He notes, "Some of the ideological friends of Maduro in Venezuela are taking distance from him due to the electoral conditions, the rigged elections that Maduro wants to have this July." As tensions mount, international voices like Petro and Lula call for democratic integrity, highlighting the urgency of the situation. Professor Blanco captures this sentiment, saying, "Petro declared that it was an undemocratic coup to stop participating in the elections." This reflects a growing disenchantment with Maduro's governance, not just domestically but internationally. Amidst these political shifts, there's a discernible fracture in the once solid leftist coalition in Latin America that was tightly knit during Chavez's presidency. "The coalition, the leftist coalition in Latin America that was very, very tight with Chavez, under Chavez presidency in Venezuela, is now getting a lot of (division)," Blanco explains. This fragmentation is significant, signaling a possible realignment of political forces across the region. Professor Blanco points out a crucial difference in how these leftist governments manage their authority compared to Venezuela. He remarks, "Although some of these leftist governments in Latin America are in the way of a kind of authoritarian rule like the Mexican president, they keep institutions and the institutions of those countries are independent." This independence of institutions marks a stark contrast to the manipulation seen in Venezuela, where the judiciary, controlled by Maduro, actively suppresses opposition, as seen in the disqualification of Maria Corina Machado. "Maduro disqualified, through the general comptroller and the judiciary, her participation... and the Supreme Court, controlled by Maduro, said that the disqualification was right," Blanco recounts, highlighting the lack of judicial independence in Venezuela. The international community's response has been marked by sanctions led by the United States and the European Union, aiming to pressure the Venezuelan government towards democratic norms. "The United States imposed sanctions, and also Europe, the European Union imposed two types of sanctions," notes Blanco. These sanctions underscore the global stakes involved and the international push for a resolution to the Venezuelan crisis. The dire situation in Venezuela is not just a political crisis but a humanitarian one, with significant portions of the country under the control of criminal gangs and guerrillas. "Venezuela at this moment, is a devastated nation. Most of its territory is occupied by criminal gangs, guerrillas from Colombia, illegal groups that try to take the minerals of the south portion of Venezuela," explains Blanco. This chaos has led to a massive exodus of Venezuelans seeking refuge and stability elsewhere. Despite these overwhelming challenges, there remains a beacon of hope in the form of opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, who garners significant popular support, much to the chagrin of Maduro. "Every time Maria Corina goes to a town, a city, there are hundreds and thousands of people with her. That's a situation that is unbearable for Maduro," says Blanco. Her presence and popularity underscore the desire among Venezuelans for change and a return to democratic norms.

Potkin Azarmehr, an expert on Iranian affairs, provides an enlightening overview of Iran's extensive network of influence in the UK; and reveals startling admissions about how Britain has handled Iranian agents, granting them entry and even residency under religious pretenses. Azarmehr expresses astonishment and frustration over the UK's immigration policies, especially towards individuals linked to significant positions within Iran's political hierarchy, such as members of the “Assembly of Experts”. He critically examines the potential risks and oversights of the British establishment, raising concerns about possible infiltration and the lack of effective implementation of new national security measures intended to combat foreign influence. His narrative blends a detailed critique with personal exasperation at the ongoing policy failures. "It's mind-blowing, even for someone like me who's investigated a lot of these things." - Azarmehr expresses his astonishment at the depth of Iran’s infiltration. "The paper makes a recommendation to the MI5 about bringing back the subversion operation, it's referring to something called Operation Foot." - He highlights recommendations for counteractions similar to historical precedents. "In the last 20 years, Britain has given at least 100 visas for Iranian agents to come over as ministers of religion or as religious workers." - Azarmehr on the surprising number of visas granted to potential Iranian agents. "You're talking about a hostile state that chants death to England every Friday...it's just like a, you know, free for all." - Critique of the UK’s lax policies towards a recognized hostile state. "Is it stupidity? Is it madness? Or have they been bribed?" - Questions the rationale behind Britain's security policies. "There is a network of an Islamic network within the Home Office...working hard to employ and recruit more Muslims into the Home Office and issue more visas for Muslims." - Allegations of infiltration within the UK Home Office. "Forget bringing legislation. You've got all the legislations that you need. You just can't implement it." - Criticism of the UK government's failure to enforce existing laws. "Where is this being implemented? Because there's clearly people here that are acting on behalf of the Iranian regime." - Concerns over the lack of enforcement of the Foreign Influence Register Scheme. "As you can see, because, you know, five hours before, we knew that drones and missiles were on their way to Israel." - Discussing the predictability of Iran’s military strategies. "It looked like it was more of a propaganda exercise for its own supporters to save face." - Analysis of Iran’s military actions as largely symbolic.

John Beaudoin of "The Real CDC,"delves into the alarming shifts in death patterns that starkly contrast the years 2020 and 2021, spotlighting a transformative period marked by the onset of COVID-19 and the subsequent rollout of what he terms "COVID immunization gene drug therapy injections." The essence of his book’s thesis emerges through a meticulous examination of three distinct profiles. "The symptom spectrum profile, the age spectrum profile, and the seasonality profile of excess deaths, deaths more than normal, changed starkly". This shift—from respiratory issues in 2020 to circulatory and blood-related causes in 2021—paints a grim picture. Moreover, the age spectrum profile saw a dramatic shift, with the average age of excess deaths dropping from 81 years in 2020 to about 65 in 2021. This change underscores not only a broadening of the demographic impact but also the profound effect of 2021s new therapy(!). Seasonality, typically observed in patterns of winter peaks corresponding with flu and pneumonia, underwent a radical change. As he notes, "The seasonality went from winter and then it turned off in the summer." The persistent, all-year-round pattern of deaths in 2021, deviating from the historical norm, suggests an unusual persistence of lethal threats beyond the cold months, challenging the conventional understanding of seasonal health trends. Rooted in detailed analysis and personal inquiry, John Beaudoin not only charts the statistical changes but also challenges the audience to confront the possible underlying causes—related to the medical treatments employed during the pandemic.. "The definition of the word vaccine was changed in all dictionaries in 2020 for this to be fit into that category. And the reason is the word vaccine was already an accepted word and an accepted medical treatment within the public. They use the word "booster" to fool people into thinking that they're getting their immune system boosted."

The speaker provides a scathing review of the UK’s political landscape, describing the current Conservative government as the worst in living memory and expressing concern over the prospect of an even less competent government potentially coming to power. He compares the situation to what might be seen as an extremely unfavorable scenario in the U.S., akin to having a leader worse than Joe Biden. With the upcoming elections on May 2nd, there's a faint hope for improvement, but the outlook remains grim. The discussion also critiques the London mayor's efforts as merely adding to the nation's embarrassment. The speaker addresses issues impacting various sectors including agriculture, education, and healthcare, where he describes the National Health Service (NHS) as fundamentally flawed and financially unsustainable: "The NHS is fundamentally flawed in every way; it’s billions of pounds in debt." On social issues, the speaker is critical of the transgender movement and the Black Lives Matter movement, accusing them of exacerbating social divides without genuine bases for their activism: "These protests are funded by people like George Soros and are not genuine." He observes that many involved in these movements cherry-pick data to justify their existence, contributing little to genuine societal improvement. The influence of the Socialist Workers Party, particularly in organizing protests without a true understanding among participants, is highlighted. The speaker notes that many protestors seem disconnected from the realities they protest against, merely following a trend of government dissatisfaction: "Majority of people at these protests don’t know what they are protesting for." The speaker passionately argues for the need to critique Islam as openly as Christianity, highlighting a disparity in societal standards: "Why is it that Christians and Catholics can be mocked... but yet the moment you decide that you want to mock or criticize Islam, all hell breaks loose?" This call for an equal footing in religious critique underscores a broader plea for fairness in public discourse. Furthermore, he predicts dire consequences if the Socialist Workers Party were to gain significant power, suggesting it could lead to the destruction of foundational capitalist principles: "If the Socialist Workers Party got enough support to influence the government, it would mean destruction." He also voices concern that the Labour Party, which traditionally should represent labor interests, has drifted and might exacerbate the nation's woes if they come to power: "Our government isn’t conservative; their policies post-2019 are very liberal." Lastly, the entrenched bureaucracy of the civil service is criticized for stalling significant changes and reforms needed to address ongoing crises: "The civil service has too much power and it hinders any significant political change." This bureaucracy is seen as a major barrier to effective governance, holding back necessary political and social reforms.

Retsef Levi's Strategic Oversight: Pandemic Policy and Academic Standards

Steve Milloy passionately critiques the misuse of science, specifically epidemiology and risk assessment, to advance agendas under the guise of public health and environmental protection. Steve passionately critiques the misuse of science, particularly epidemiology and risk assessment, to forward agendas under the pretense of public health and environmental protection. With a foundation in science, statistics, and law, he has spent over three decades exposing what he terms "junk science"—scientific research and conclusions he views as manipulated or flawed, used to support harmful or misleading policies. Mr. Milloy illuminates issues in epidemiology, environmental regulation, and public health crises, arguing that often, fear and regulatory actions significantly outweigh the actual risks. Key topics include his criticism of linear no-threshold models for radiation exposure, the challenges in nuclear energy development due to regulatory overreach, and the misrepresentation of environmental and health risks such as radon exposure and asbestos. We also delve into broader themes of scientific integrity, regulatory overreach, and the impact of misinformation on public policy and perception. Top 10 Quotes: Junk Science Definition: "Junk science is bad science used to advance a special agenda." Personal Background: "I have... background in science and statistics. I'm also a lawyer." Epidemiology Critique: "The vast majority of epidemiology is just junk science(s)." EPA Risk Assessments: "I learned very quickly from EPA that epidemiology was just being completely abused." Radon Misinformation: "The scare is largely based on the epidemiologic study of underground uranium miners...and then the EPA just extrapolated that." Linear No Threshold Model: "The linear no-threshold model...assumes that if something causes cancer at very high doses, then any exposure can cause cancer." Radiation Risks Misunderstood: "There has never been any science to it [linear no-threshold model]. It's just an assumption." Fukushima Misinterpretation: "A thousand people died not because of the radiation but because of the panic induced by the evacuation." Asbestos Misconceptions: "Asbestos was a huge issue...the asbestos was perfectly safe (undisturbed) in the schools." Scientific Misinformation and Fear: "People are just terrified about radiation and they think that it's going to cause mutations and cancer."

The post-World War II transformation of national identity, marked by Marxist influence in education that demonized nationalism created a social divide. This division contrasts the globalist inclinations of the elite with the working class' attachment to traditional values. There's a nostalgia for the unity and patriotism of the 1980s-1990s America, presented as a counterpoint to current progressive and elitist policies. Concerns are raised over the shift from working-class issues to identity politics and environmental activism has led to the converse support for political figures and movements that embody nationalist sentiments, such as Trump and Brexit. Scott and Daniel advocates for a cultural and political revival that challenges progressive dominance. Selected Quotes: from Daniel: National Unity and Misinterpretation: "National identity is a unifier. But what we let happen since World War Two is that we let nationalism be speared with Nazism." Marxist Influence on Education: "And it was Marxist historians doing this and they controlled the narrative. And they were writing the school textbooks, you know, and the people writing our school textbooks were Marxists." Historical Distortion: "In Britain, one of the most influential was a guy called Hobsbawm... The school textbooks were written by self-declared Marxists." Casualties for Ideology: "It happened with Hobsbawm about once I ever saw in an interview where he was asked about the number of people who had been killed in communist slaughters around the world. And his reply was that essentially you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs." Unlimited Casualties for a Utopia: "So what that essentially means is that people who were writing our school textbooks thought that any number of deaths would be okay to create a socialist utopia." Redefining Grievances: "They then co-opted race as a shortcut to grievance because class wasn't working for them." Working Class Abandonment: "So what we saw then is that the left abandoned the working class and didn't want to represent them anymore." Class Division and Perception: "And if you look at it on a class basis, the higher you get up the social scale, the more these insane academic ideas of self-hatred are prevalent." Global Citizenship vs. National Loyalty: "The higher you get on the social scale, the more likely you are to consider yourself a citizen of the world with no loyalty to your particular place and people." Dichotomy of Values: "The higher up you are, the more you want to destroy all those things and create something better. And the lower down you are, the more you want to preserve what little you’ve got." Historical and Academic Control: "And they were writing the school textbooks... the people writing our school textbooks were Marxists." Normalization of Extreme Ideologies: "And they took this idea that nationalism is Nazism and they pressed it into every school they could, every college, every university." Misrepresentation of Nationalism: "But what we let happen since World War Two is that we let nationalism be speared with Nazism." Class and Political Preferences: "Voting for Trump or something like voting for Brexit in the UK, it’s class divided." Disconnect from Traditional Values: "The higher you get on the social scale, the more likely you are to... have no loyalty to your particular place and people." from Scott: Critique of the Status Quo: "I don't want to conserve much of anything because I think the status quo sucks." Idealization of the Past: "Like in the United States, we're talking about the 1980s-1990s, which, you know, when I grew up, you had a much more unified, much more patriotic, much more free society." Elitism and Socialism: "It's a great irony that the people who think they're socialist and the people who think that they're going to be levelling things are the worst elitists on the planet." Criticism of Mao Zedong: "Mao Zedong hated the Chinese people with a colossal passion. The guy was a pure psychopath." Skepticism Towards Environmental Policies: "None of the assumptions that you claim to justify all of this behavior and these policies and these not best practices, none of these assumptions actually hold water, right?" Denial of Sea Level Rise: "Sea levels are pretty much what they were in 1800. It's not that the waters are rising, the waters are the same." Reflection on Reagan's Legacy: "The problem with the sort of revival of the 1980s, at least on this side of the pond, I think, was that Ronald Reagan was not able to build a train behind him." Critique of Current Political Leadership: "Part of this is you need politicians who are not the namby-pamby, weak-kneed, conservatives that don't want to do anything to actually fight the left on their own turf."

Scott McKay “Racism, Revenge and Ruin: It's All Obama"

Jonathan Leaf's Making Philosophy Vividly Accessible

Professor Rob Jenkins, an English professor with a rich 38-year tenure in academia at Georgia State University, shares insights shaped by his experiences across various roles in higher education, including as an administrator and college basketball coach. Jenkins's journey reflects a critical engagement with the challenges and transformations within academia and society, especially in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic and the evolving landscape of higher education. Jenkins articulated a nuanced skepticism about the pandemic's governmental responses, suggesting an overblown reaction that spurred him to advocate for the reopening of society. He critically observes, "from the very beginning seemed to me to be overblown... I began advocating for reopening society, reopening schools, reopening universities." Reflecting on the broader implications of administrative dominance in academia, Jenkins laments the erosion of professorial influence, highlighting the shift towards a bureaucratic model that prioritizes administrative objectives over educational and academic values. He critiques the rise of credentialism, noting, "the administrative class... run things. The professors are no longer in charge," pointing out the imbalance this creates within the academic institutions. Jenkins's discourse extends to the societal penchant for security over liberty, warning against the historical and ongoing use of fear by governments to control populations. He draws parallels with his observations on COVID-19, stating, "governments have to control their population. And the easiest way to control people is through fear." Moreover, Jenkins's dedication to fostering critical discourse led him to contribute to the Brownstone Institute, emphasizing the importance of platforms that challenge prevailing narratives. This reflects his commitment to truth, stating, "I really wanted to write for Brownstone... I admired the people who were writing for them." His critique of politicized science, particularly around pandemic policies, underscores a broader concern with the selective use of scientific evidence for political ends. Jenkins contends, "closing the schools is another issue. It was obvious to me that that wasn't necessary. So why were we doing it? Because we were playing politics with this virus." Addressing the consequences of lockdown measures, Jenkins highlights the disproportionate impact on students and young people, acknowledging the "real loss" and challenges faced by this demographic, thereby emphasizing the need for a balanced approach to public health crises. Jenkins also reflects on the personal and professional growth prompted by the pandemic, including the forced adaptation to online teaching. He notes a shift in his stance towards online education, recognizing its potential benefits and applicability under certain conditions. In discussing the trajectory of political systems towards authoritarian models, Jenkins posits, "all modern political systems basically devolve into fascism," warning of the dangers inherent in unchecked governmental power and the erosion of individual freedoms. Finally, Jenkins's thoughts on the enduring struggle between individual liberty and societal security resonate as a call to critically evaluate the trade-offs inherent in governance and policy-making. He asserts the importance of maintaining a vigilant stance against the encroachment of authoritarian tendencies, underscoring the value of freedom and the role of education in cultivating a society capable of navigating these complex dynamics. Professor Robin Jenkins' reflections offer a critical lens on the interplay between politics, education, and societal values. His experiences and writings advocate for a society that values truth, liberty, and the importance of challenging authority for the betterment of all.

Dr. James A. Thorp, who practices maternal-fetal medicine and is a prominent medical researcher, has recently made significant and alarming discoveries related to COVID-19 vaccines and their impact on pregnancy outcomes and menstrual function. In his groundbreaking study titled "COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function," Dr. Thorp reveals that COVID-19 vaccinations are associated with a substantial increase in adverse effects. These effects include menstrual abnormalities, miscarriages, fetal chromosomal abnormalities, fetal malformations, cystic hygroma, cardiac disorders, arrhythmias, cardiac arrest, vascular malperfusion, and growth abnormalities. The speed at which the COVID-19 vaccines were developed and rolled out to the general population was unprecedented, thanks to Operation Warp Speed. However, historically, vaccines undergo an average of 10-12 years of rigorous clinical trials before being authorized for widespread administration. Dr. Thorp's research highlights the potential risks of deploying these novel SARS-CoV-2 vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) within just 10 months of their development. At the onset of the pandemic, these vaccines were hailed as the primary solution to the crisis, as early treatment strategies for COVID-19 were (WRONGLY!?) deemed ineffective. In the wake of his groundbreaking findings and the public's growing concern about the potential negative effects of COVID-19 vaccines, Dr. James A. Thorp faced unexpected repercussions. Despite the scientific importance and relevance of his research, he was surprisingly fired from his position. This decision seems odd in light of a Project Veritas video featuring Pfizer director Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker in which he openly admitted that there was something unusual about the impact of the COVID-19 shots, especially in relation to women's reproductive health. He revealed that Pfizer was well aware of the alterations in menstruation associated with the administration of their mRNA-based vaccine. However, they appeared to downplay the significance of these findings and did not express much concern about this particular aspect. Despite being a pharmaceutical giant that had administered its product to billions of people worldwide, Pfizer seemingly had limited understanding of the exact mechanisms causing these changes in women's reproductive health. Dr. Walker mentioned that the company was uncertain about the reasons behind these effects and expressed doubt if they would ever fully comprehend them. The firing of Dr. Thorp and the revelations in the Project Veritas video stirred controversy and raised questions about the transparency of pharmaceutical companies, the dissemination of vital research, and the ethical considerations surrounding the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. The situation underscored the importance of open dialogue, scientific integrity, and the need for further investigation into the potential long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccines on various populations, particularly pregnant individuals and women's health. Dr. Thorp's research serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of evidence-based decision-making and the continuous pursuit of knowledge in the field of medicine.

Kevin McKernan conducted a study that raises questions about the impurity content of mRNA vaccine, suggesting it may contain fragments of DNA.

a cancer veteran speaks. Learn how to navigate cancer.

a veteran of multiple cancer-experiences speaks.