NewsU.S. News

Weaponizing “School Choice” to Control ALL Education

The United Nations and Democrats across America, along with some Republicans, are working to use “school choice” tax-funding for home education and private schools to bring it all under the control of government, warned The New American magazine Senior Editor Alex Newman. Arizona, recently touted as the “model” for school choice, is exhibit A, but far from alone. Under a Democrat plan there, everyone taking government money must submit to government standards, testing, and more. The rest of the jurisdictions that adopted government funding for “choice” are likely to follow, as UNESCO called for in a report.

 

Show Comments

“We Will Not Comply,” Governors Tell Biden & World Health Organization

Republican governors are telling Joe Biden and the globalists at the United Nations to pound sand even as foreign governments move away from the U.S. dollar and Russia warns of possible World War III on American soil, reports journalist Alex Newman on today’s episode of The Sentinel Report. Also, journalist and author Troy Anderson joins the show to discuss the startling mysteries surrounding Donald Trump, an 1800s children’s book, …and Nikolai Tesla!? Plus, homeschooling is becoming a worldwide phenomenon as parents across the West seek a more traditional, Christian way of raising their kids. The founder of Transition Education, Ana Maria Bagnuoli, joins the show to reveal more. Last but not least, Sentinel Report regular Dr. Dave Janda joins Alex to talk about the alarming prospect of RUSSIAN NUCLEAR MISSLES destroying the United States. You don’t want to miss this jam-packed episode of The Sentinel Report!

 

Show Comments

Deep State War on Farmers

Farmers and ranchers around the world have a bullseye on their operations as Big Business and Big Government join forces to transform the food supply and centralize control, warns journalist Alex Newman in this episode of Behind The Deep State. From South Africa and Brazil to China and the West, the pretexts for destroying independent food producers vary. But the end goal is the same everywhere: Total control of humanity. Learn about this evil so you can sound the alarm and protect our food security before it’s too late.

 

Show Comments

SPECIAL REPORT: Open Season, Without Farmers and Ranchers, What’s Next?

Cattle rancher Debbie Bacigalupi is working overtime to protect her family’s Northern California ranch. It’s not just the government’s newly “reintroduced” wolves or the poorly managed government forests burning up that threaten to destroy it. To Bacigalupi and other embattled ranchers in the Klamath River Basin, it seems like costly new decrees, orders, laws, and regulations are lurking around every corner. It has gotten so bad that farmers and ranchers are not sure how much more they will be able to withstand. Most recently, authorities undertook the largest dam removal project in history, all but destroying a major source of water and electricity to the rural communities. Under the guise of allowing salmon to swim freely, state and federal officials are destroying the dams that in many ways make the area habitable for people and many animals. The dam removal is expected to be finished before fall. But total control of all water across the entire Klamath River Basin—home to countless farmers and ranchers—has already begun. The “full basin management” scheme now looms over the livelihood of producers in the area. Meanwhile, the California State Water Resources Control Board has repeatedly targeted the Bacigalupi ranch for so-called violations. After approving their livestock-watering pond more than 15 years ago, the state now insists the ranch must redo and resubmit the plans to be reapproved. Apparently, the water control bureaucracy was understaffed at the time of the original application—though not too understaffed to collect the yearly water permitting fees, Bacigalupi tells RANGE magazine. And so, at great expense, the family must jump through all the hoops again. Bacigalupi can barely contain her frustration. “They will probably either tell us we owe a bunch of money that we can’t afford, or that we need to destroy our pond,” she says, noting that authorities admitted to using satellite imagery to surveil her family’s private property. “We are constantly dealing with this kind of stuff. We’re just surrounded by the intensifying pressure. You keep wondering when the next shoe is going to drop. You can never just enjoy the scenery, the warm wind blowing in your hair, because you’re always wondering what these agencies are going to do next—what is the next trick up their sleeves? The reality is they want your land and they want your water.”

Bacigalupi is just one of countless ranchers in Northern California and around the world who feel like they are under siege. Of course, they are. All over the planet, those who feed humanity are under attack, literally. Under various pretexts, governments and international organizations such as the United Nations and the World Economic Forum are waging a full-blown war on farmers and ranchers—especially small-scale and independent producers. Different tools, policies, and excuses are being used depending on the country. From pursuing “racial justice” and “environmental justice” to protecting “endangered species” or the “climate,” not to mention “economic efficiency,” the guises employed by governments vary widely. But the goal is the same everywhere: Destroy independent food producers and centralize control of all agriculture, land, and energy—and ultimately, political and economic power with them.

This writer first noticed something sinister was going on with respect to farmers in 2012 upon hearing then-South African President Jacob Zuma singing, “Bring me my machine gun, we are going to shoot the Boer.” The Boers, of course, are a specific ethnic group descended mostly from the Dutch. But Boer in Dutch means farmer. And plenty of leaders such as Julius Malema, then leader of the ruling party’s youth league, regularly chanted songs such as “Kill the farmer.” Even as Zuma and other senior leaders were singing about slaughtering Boers, South African farmers, among the most productive in the world, were being massacred in unbelievable numbers and in the most horrific ways. Analysts estimate that as many as 10 percent of the nation’s commercial farmers have been murdered (and often tortured) as the government and even the foreign media ignore it. The situation got so bad that the world’s top expert on genocide, Gregory Stanton of Genocide Watch, warned that genocidal forces were at stage six of eight on the genocide scale. Stage seven is slaughter and stage eight is denial after the fact. “There is direct evidence of SA [South African] government incitement to genocide,” Stanton said after a fact-finding mission.

The next year, authorities in Brazil began displacing entire farming villages across some of its most productive agricultural areas. Brazilian troops, some of them wearing U.N. insignia, ordered the residents—at gunpoint—to dismantle their ramshackle homes and load everything into trucks. No compensation was offered to property owners as multiple towns were wiped off the map. Officially, the far-left government’s operation was designed to return lands to native tribes that supposedly lived on or at least passed through it centuries ago. Ironically, leaders of the Xavante tribe who were supposed to be the beneficiaries of the landgrab denounced it, saying their ancestors had never lived on that land or even in that ecosystem. Around half a million acres of prime farmland were taken out of production—a precursor to similar schemes that would be pursued later. In Communist China, meanwhile, government officials are already moving peasants off their ancestral lands and farms at gunpoint. Dubbed the “National New-type Urbanization Plan (2014-2020),” the scheme aims to move 250 million people into tightly controlled cities by 2026. Countless villages have already been razed as the regime promises that government-controlled corporate megafarms will be more productive. Starting more recently, the socialist regime ruling Sri Lanka, acting on U.N. instructions, banned chemical fertilizers and modern agricultural technologies under the guise of “sustainability.” “This has created opportunities for innovation and investment into organic agriculture that will be healthier and more sustainable in the future,” declared now-deposed “president” Gotabaya Rajapaksa at a 2021 U.N. climate summit. In reality, food production collapsed, along with the nation’s economy, as the government was overthrown amid mass hunger.

Even more recently, Western governments from Canada and Holland to Germany and beyond have declared war on their food producers. In the Netherlands, one of the top agricultural exporters in the world, authorities decided to slash “nitrogen emissions” to supposedly save the environment. To accomplish that, authorities are working to expropriate a third or more of the nation’s farms, many of which have been handed down in families for centuries. “The expropriation plans of the cabinet are a downright declaration of war on the agricultural sector,” says Dutch member of Parliament Gideon van Meijeren with the Forum for Democracy party. “Under false pretenses, farmers are being robbed of their land, centuries-old farms are being demolished and farmers’ families are being totally destroyed.” While the Dutch election secured a new ruling coalition that vowed to roll back many of the attacks on farmers and “green” climate schemes of the last few years, European farmers are hardly in the clear yet.

Of course, the war is in America too. One man who has been on the front line of the battle is Brett Kenzy, a South Dakota rancher and president of Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA). As the leader of the nation’s largest producer-only membership association for independent cattle and sheep producers, Kenzy has been sounding the alarm about what is going on for years. “America must realize that we became a net food importer in 2019,” Kenzy tells RANGE. “We’ve lost half our cow-calf producers, 70 percent of independent feeders like me in the last generation, 106,000 cattle producers in the last five years alone. These have not been ‘screw it, I’m cashing in and buying a house on the lake’ sales. These have been tearful dispersions of the end of often multigenerational American dreams.” Kenzy, who warns that America must kick out “the U.N. and its cronies” from U.S. food production, also explains that totalitarians such as Stalin and Mao already tried to seize control of food production—with horrific results. And yet today the effort to try it again is gaining steam. “The war on farming and ranching,” he says, “could be described as ‘farming the farmers and ranching the ranchers’ through centralized global control.”

In America, as in other parts of the world, the war on farmers and ranchers has been multifaceted. It is being waged through government policy, anticompetitive behavior by establishment-backed megacorporations, and other means. And the assaults just keep coming. The latest shoe to drop: “disease traceback,” which R-CALF describes as a “pretext to strip away freedoms, liberties, and property.” Before that, there was the Endangered Species Act. The infamous Bundy Ranch showdown actually had its origins in 1989 when U.S. authorities claimed the desert tortoise was endangered, effectively putting a giant target on the backs of local ranchers. At the time of the designation, there were more than 50 cattle ranches in the southern Nevada county where the Bundy ranch operated. Ranchers were ordered to limit their cattle grazing on lands many of them had used since the 1800s. By the time of the showdown, the Bundy ranch was the last cattle ranch in the area. The only reason it survived is because of a massive outcry that saw heavily armed volunteers from across the nation descend on the area to stand up to federal bullies determined to drive the family off its land. Similar persecution was used against the Hammonds in Oregon, though the pretext there was “protecting” a wildlife refuge.

More recently, the Biden administration sought to impose “climate” regulations on public companies that would have effectively required farmers and ranchers to “disclose” their “emissions” or be shut out of the market. The Clean Water Act has also become a weapon in the hands of federal bureaucrats waging war on producers. And more tools to wield against rural America are being dreamed up and manufactured even now. All this has contributed to the fact that the number of farms in the United States is plummeting. From a peak of almost seven million in 1935, there are now well under two million farms left, with government regulations and heavily subsidized corporate megafarms increasingly displacing those still standing. The decline also seems to be accelerating. The most recent data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture show that from 2017 to 2022, the number of farms fell by around seven percent. That is approximately the number of farms lost during the preceding 20 years. The number of acres in agricultural production also declined by about 20 million over the five-year period starting in 2017, even as the American population continued growing rapidly due to immigration.

Similar trends are occurring globally. According to a study published last year in the journal Nature Sustainability, the number of farms around the world will decrease from 616 million in 2020 to just 272 million by the end of this century if current trends continue. “We see a turning point from widespread farm creation to widespread consolidation on a global level, and that’s the future trajectory that humanity is currently on,” says study author Zia Mehrabi, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, Boulder. He warned that this posed significant risks to humanity. The official narrative is that nebulous “market forces” are largely driving these changes. There may be some truth to that, if the current government-dominated agricultural sector can even be considered a market anymore. But the reality is far more sinister. There is, in fact, a global effort to “transform food systems” and centralize control in the hands of Big Business and Big Government. Much of this is taking place under the guise of sustainable development, as RANGE documented in the Summer 2024 issue under the headline “In the Crosshairs.” Indeed, virtually every element of the global war on farmers can be linked back to one of the U.N.’s 17 “Sustainable Development Goals,” frequently referred to as “Agenda 2030.” Celebrated as the “master plan for humanity” by top U.N. officials when it was adopted by U.N. member governments in 2015, the plan seeks to “transform our world,” with a special emphasis on agriculture, lands, and related fields. The global plan seeks everything from global wealth redistribution (Goal 10) to education that gets children to promote controversial U.N.-backed ideologies such as sustainable development (Goal 4).

One of the critical elements of the plan is bringing about “fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services.” Nowhere are those changes more dramatic than in agriculture and food production. Goal 12, for example, demands “sustainable consumption and production patterns,” especially in agriculture, and “sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources.” The U.N. plan also commits governments to “environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks.” Goal 14 addresses “marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including…nutrient pollution.” In other words, agriculture is a threat to the ocean, the climate, natural resources, and more. The U.N. Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO), led by a member of the Chinese Communist Party, outlined its vision right before Agenda 2030 was adopted in its 2014 report, “Building a Common Vision for Sustainable Food and Agriculture: Principles and Approaches.” The document demands drastic restrictions on the use of fertilizers, pesticides, emissions, and water across the agricultural value chain. As an example of how agriculture must be reformed to be considered sustainable by the United Nations, the FAO report declares that “excessive use of nitrogen fertilizer is a major cause of water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.” With that in mind, Goal 2 demands “sustainable agriculture” and “sustainable food production.” On a related effort, Goal 6 requires “sustainable management of water”—especially in agriculture.

Big Business is firmly onboard. In 2019, the World Economic Forum signed a “strategic partnership” with the United Nations to bring the global business world onboard in promoting Agenda 2030. And through initiatives such as its Food Innovation Hubs and the Food Action Alliance, it is working fiendishly on a global transformation of agriculture toward a system controlled by Big Government and Big Business. Bill Gates, the Rockefeller dynasty, and other major elitists, mostly operating through tax-exempt foundations, are also at the center of the global transformation. Genetic modification of everything so that DNA of crops, livestock, and more can be owned by megacorporations is at the center of the centralization process being pushed by the constellation of billionaire-controlled “nonprofit” organizations. But the sustainability agenda goes back half a century. Among the first official gatherings on the subject was the U.N. Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) that adopted the Vancouver Declaration. The agreement stated that “land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset controlled by individuals.”

Perhaps even more alarming, the controversial U.N. agreement argued that private land ownership is “a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” As such, the declaration continued, “public control of land use is therefore indispensable,” an ominous foreshadowing of the World Economic Forum’s now famous “prediction” that by 2030, “You’ll own nothing.” Then U.S. National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger contemplated in the early 1970s using food as a weapon of foreign policy to get governments to limit population. It seems the tactic remains in vogue among the would-be ruling class. In addition to food, a similar war on energy exploration and production is being waged by the United Nations, the U.S. government, and other nefarious forces—and despite claims about “protecting the climate,” it appears to be aimed at the same goal.

While U.N. and U.S. government officials whine about what percentage of global emissions supposedly come from agriculture, they fail to even acknowledge that agriculture produces the food that keeps humanity going. This is an existential threat to America, freedom, and even to mankind. Experts and advocates told RANGE that this battle is critical. There are many ways to resist the global effort to undermine independent agricultural producers. When asked by RANGE how people could push back, R-CALF president Kenzy suggested getting started by educating consumers and the general public about the plight of farmers and ranchers. Then consumers should be encouraged to shop as locally as possible, to buy American, and to demand competitive markets rather than cronyism. The first step in addressing the crisis is raising public awareness about the threat. If Americans understood what was happening, they would demand action from their elected representatives at the state and federal levels. They would also make different purchasing decisions. This is not just about steak, though. The future of humanity and freedom are literally at stake.


This was a collaboration with RANGE Magazine, check them out by clicking below!

Removing the bells from the heifer cows after bringing them down to the lower foothills from the Sierra high country grazing allotments at the Busi family’s Stony Creek barn, Amador County, Calif.

Show Comments

Wisconsin Voters Dismantle Our Republic

On August 13, 2024 Wisconsin primary voters had the choice to either adopt or reject two constitutional amendments. Question 1 would prohibit the legislature from delegating their power of appropriating money, and question two would require approval of the legislature to spend federal funds. The legislature placed them on the ballot after large amounts of waste were found in how the pandemic relief funds from the federal government were spent.

The State of Wisconsin Legislative Audit Bureau issued a report in December 2022 in which they said, “Federal law provides the State with the discretion to spend $4.5 billion of the $5.7 billion in supplemental federal funds, but federal law requires that $1.1 billion be spent for specified purposes, such as on particular programs that state agencies administer…Statutes provide the Governor with the authority to decide how to spend discretionary federal funds provided to the State. As of June 30, 2022, $1.8 billion in discretionary funds were remaining. In December 2022, DOA indicated it had plans for using most of these funds. Federal law permits some supplemental federal funds to be spent through December 2026. We recommend that DOA increase the transparency and clarity of the State’s use of supplemental federal funds, including by documenting how decisions were made to use discretionary funds for particular state programs. DOA should also include on its website additional information about supplemental federal funds, including plans for spending the remaining funds and how such plans change over time. Providing clear and comprehensive information will allow legislators and the public to more readily identify how these funds are spent in the future.”

One of the groups that advocated against passage of the amendments was The Nature Conservancy, with their Protect Wisconsin’s Constitution-Vote No campaign. They sent text messages that said the following: VOTE NO to MAGA Politicians. VOTE NO on Question 1. VOTE NO ON QUESTION 2. VOTE TODAY ON THE BACK OF YOUR BALOT. Their website states the following, “TNC’s work depends on support from federal grants and partnerships. In 2023 alone, TNC partners and conservation initiatives received more than $20 million from federal sources now at risk:

$11 million in 2023 for the Pelican River Forest Project, protecting 56,911 acres of land

$11 million for National Fish and Wildlife Foundation projects in 2023.

As a science-based, community-centered and nonpartisan organization, speaking up on a statewide ballot initiative like this is somewhat rare for us. We are proud of our track record of working with leaders on both sides of the political aisle—we’ve been doing it for over 64 years—but we feel we can’t stay quiet on this issue given the potential impacts to our work and to the work of our many conservation partners across the state. There is a lot on the line on August 13th.”

Wisconsin Democracy Campaign also advocated against the passage of both questions. According to their website, their mission statement is the following:

“We are dedicated to clean and open government and a full democracy, where everyone has an equal voice. Who We Are and What We Do: We’re a nonprofit, nonpartisan watchdog that tracks and exposes money in politics in Wisconsin. We provide the premier searchable database of campaign donations in the state. We are the only group that systematically tracks election spending by outside groups. We post original stories on money and politics on our website, and work with the media to convey our information and educate the public. We advocate for transparency and for reforms that level the electoral playing field. We defend our civil rights and liberties. We offer a vision of a democracy with equal participation, racial equity, and economic justice.”

It’s funny that they claim to “advocate for transparency” and track and expose money in politics in Wisconsin, and at the same time urged people to vote no to supposedly protect separation of powers, given that they were advocating against amendments that would have required federal funds received by the state to go through the normal appropriations process, which requires a public hearing and a vote by the representatives of the people! This is likely because of the partisan makeup of the Governor’s office. If the opposite party occupied the governor’s mansion, the narrative may have been completely different!

After the election, they posted the following message on their website:

“Wisconsin Democracy Campaign is proud to join the Wisconsin Fair Maps Coalition in fighting back against the conservative power grab on our rights–ultimately leading our efforts to safeguard our constitution.

“On behalf of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and the Fair Maps Coalition, we extend our deepest gratitude to every voter who participated in yesterday’s critical election and especially to those who voted “No” on the proposed constitutional amendments. Your voice and your vote have helped to safeguard the principles that form the foundation of our democracy,” said Nick Ramos, Executive Director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.

Wisconsin Democracy Campaign played a pivotal role in deploying resources and executive programs to help educate voters on the constitutional amendments. Wisconsin Democracy Campaign’s Commitment to the August Vote No Effort:

Deployed a six figure text message campaign that resulted in over 1.6 million texts sent to Wisconsinites all across our state. Engaged over 200 volunteers who mailed 25,000 handwritten postcards to voters. Deployed a relational organizing program that resulted in over 2,500 engagements. Nearly 1,000 handwritten letters by volunteers. Organized educational events.

As we move forward, we remain committed to upholding the values that we believe in and ensuring that Wisconsin continues to be a place where democracy thrives. This victory is a testament to what can be achieved when we come together for a common purpose.”

Their website further states, “The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, with an annual budget of $566,000, is currently funded by grants from: The Brico Fund, The Brookby Foundation, The Brown Family Foundation, Center for Artistic Activism, The Evjue Foundation, The Joyce Foundation, The Hopewell Fund, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin, Movement Voter Project, The Proteus Fund, SEIU Wisconsin State Council, State Voices, along with tax-deductible gifts from individual donors.”

Subscribe to our mailing list

The fact that Wisconsin Democracy Campaign called the ballot questions a “conservative power grab” and claimed that they were leading an effort to “safeguard our constitution” is laughable at best! They are only undermining their own credibility by saying that it is a power grab to require the governor to get approval from the people’s representatives before money is spent! In reality they are the ones working against safeguarding our constitution because the state constitution says that the legislature appropriates money. Allowing the governor to unilaterally spend money would be allowing him to act as a king and trample upon the separation of powers! When our constitution was written, it was never assumed that the state would be receiving any money from the federal government in the first place. The reason this became such a big issue is the large amounts of federal dollars that were allocated to the states during the covid pandemic, and current Wisconsin law allows for the governor to have discretion over how federal relief funds are spent, despite our constitutional requirement that the legislature appropriate money.

In reality if the state and federal constitutions were obeyed, questions 1 and 2 would not have been necessary in the first place! If the federal government were kept within its constitutional limits of the enumerated powers delegated to it by the constitution, there would not be any federal tax dollars sent back to the states at all. On top of that, Article IV Section IV of the U.S. Constitution says, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”. This means that all state governments must be in the form of a republic. In a republic, the chief executive may not spend money or enact any other law without approval from the people’s representatives in the legislature, as this would violate the separation of powers doctrine that is based on the Maxim of Montesquieu. In Federalist 47, James Madison said, “From these facts which Montesquieu was guided, it may clearly be inferred that, in saying, “There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates…When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person or body, there can be no liberty, because the apprehensions may arise lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws to execute them in a tyrannical manner.”

While defending how the state governments were currently in the form of a republic, in Federalist 48 Madison goes on to state, “It is agreed on all sides, that the powers properly belonging to one of the departments ought not to be directly and completely administered by either of the other departments… The legislative department alone has access to the pockets of the people, and has in some constitutions full discretion, and in all a prevailing influence, over the pecuniary rewards of those who fill the other departments…”

It could be argued that congress should fulfill its Article IV duty in ensuring that the states have a republican form of government by passing a law requiring that emergency funds allocated to the states, be appropriated by the legislature and not spent through a unilateral decision made by the governor!

If liberty is to be preserved, the American people must ensure not only that our federal government remains a republic, but that our state governments do as well! In a democracy, majority rules and rights and liberties can be voted away with a 50% plus 1 vote. In Federalist No. 10 James Madison said, “democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they are violent in their deaths.” John Adams had the following to say about democracy, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

John Birch Society founder Robert Welch wrote in his treatise Republics & Democracies that the Framers of the Constitution specifically wished to prevent democracy in America:

“The word democracy had not occurred in the Declaration of Independence, and does not appear in the constitution of a single one of our fifty states — which constitutions are derived mainly from the thinking of the Founding Fathers of the Republic — for the same reason. They knew all about democracies, and if they had wanted one for themselves and their posterity, they would have founded one. Look at all the elaborate system of checks and balances which they established; at the carefully worked-out protective clauses of the Constitution itself, and especially of the first ten amendments, known as the Bill of Rights; at the effort, as Jefferson put it, to “bind men down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution,” and thus to solidify the rule not of men but of laws. All of these steps were taken deliberately to avoid and to prevent a democracy, or any of the worst features of a democracy, in the United States of America.”

The dangers of democracy that we face are too great to be ignored. With proper civics education, our state would not be in this situation in the first place. Every election season we hear how someone or something is a “threat to democracy”. Groups like Wisconsin Democracy Campaign advocate to make this a “place where democracy thrives” and where “everyone has an equal voice”. If we continue to let our republic fall down the path of decay, it is a sure thing that a system of majority rule manipulated and deceived by propaganda will trample upon individual rights, and our system of checks and balances along with the separation of powers will cease to exist. So, to those who called questions 1 and 2 a threat to democracy, I say good, I’m glad! Because we’re not a democracy, we’re a republic!

Brandon is a freelance journalist based in the metro-Milwaukee area. He has worked full-time in politics for five years. This includes leading successful campaigns for legislatures at the state and congressional levels, and successful deployments to get bills passed in Kentucky and Texas. He is currently working as a carpenter. On his spare time, he enjoys weightlifting, running, hiking, and listening to classic rock.

Show Comments

1 thought on “Wisconsin Voters Dismantle Our Republic”

  1. Evil BG’s is full of flatulence and fake science. His real plan; starve the masses, so he can control the globe. Luciferian worshipper.


US Governors: “We Will Not Comply” With UN WHO Power Grab

More than half of the nation’s governors declared publicly that they will not comply with the United Nations World Health Organization (UN WHO) and its attempt to usurp vast new powers, a response to enormous public pressure to protect liberty and sovereignty in the face of a historic global power grab by the organization and the forces behind it.

“The World Health Organization is attempting one world control over health policy with their new ‘Pandemic Agreement’,” declared the 26 GOP governors in a joint statement. “Put simply, Republican Governors will not comply.”

In a letter to Joe Biden, the governors blasted the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations and the International Pandemic Accord (or treaty) being negotiated by governments and the WHO.

The two instruments would purport to grant “unprecedented and unconstitutional powers over the United States and its people” to the UN agency, they explained. “These proposed changes could drastically change the role of governors in response to their charge as the state health officials.”

“The objective of these instruments is to empower the WHO, particularly its uncontrollable Director-General, with the authority to restrict the rights of U.S. citizens, including freedoms such as speech, privacy, travel, choice of medical care, and informed consent, thus violating our Constitution’s core principles,” they added.

The governors also lambasted the plot to grant broad new emergency powers to the former ethno-Marxist terror leader running the WHO as well as the surveillance regime called for under the schemes. They slammed the erosion of state and national sovereignty, too.

“As governors, we affirm that public health policy is a matter reserved for the states, not the federal government, and certainly not international bodies like the WHO,” they added. “We are committed to resisting any attempts to transfer authority to the WHO over public policy affecting our citizens
or any efforts by the WHO to assert such authority over them.”

Signatories of the letter include: Governor Kay Ivey (AL), Governor Mike Dunleavy (AK), Governor Sarah Sanders (AR), Governor Ron DeSantis (FL), Governor Brian Kemp (GA), Governor Brad Little (ID), Governor Eric Holcomb (IN), Governor Kim Reynolds (IA), Governor Jeff Landry (LA), Governor Tate Reeves (MS), Governor Mike Parson (MO), Governor Greg Gianforte (MT), Governor Jim Pillen (NE), Governor Joe Lombardo (NV), Governor Chris Sununu (NH), Governor Doug Burgum (ND), Governor Mike DeWine (OH), Governor Kevin Stitt (OK), Governor Henry McMaster (SC), Governor Kristi Noem (SD), Governor Bill Lee (TN), Governor Greg Abbott (TX), Governor Spencer Cox (UT), Governor Glenn Youngkin (VA), Governor Jim Justice (WV), and Governor Mark Gordon (WY).

Show Comments

1 thought on “US Governors: “We Will Not Comply” With UN WHO Power Grab”


Presidential Politics & Minnesota’s Marxist Teacher Licensing Rules

Child Protection League has been exposing and opposing Minnesota’s new Marxist teacher licensing standards for over two years. Our battle exploded onto the national scene last week when Joy Pullman, executive editor of The Federalist, published her article ‘Minnesota Poised To Ban Christians, Muslims, and Jews From Teaching In Public Schools.’  With Governor Walz now campaigning as the Vice-Presidential candidate beside Presidential candidate Kamela Harris, the national spotlight is suddenly shining on Minnesota. We welcome the attention and the opportunity for the whole world to learn about Tim Walz’s Marxist takeover of Minnesota’s education system. Everyone must understand that Tim Walz is a dangerous man.

Multiple major news organizations such as Judicial Watch, World Net Daily, Gateway Pundit, Infowars, Trending Politics, LifeSiteNews, and innumerable others quickly picked up the story with reprints, reposts, shares, or restatements of The Federalist information that CPL has been researching and sharing with the public since 2022. In fact, The Federalist story has gone so viral that Snopes issued their typical fake ‘fact-check’ denying what is obviously true.

An earlier January 2023 story by Pullman explaining Minnesota’s pending new standards also referenced the work of both CPL and Center of the American Experiment. This was long before anyone anticipated that Tim Walz’s education plan would become a 2024 presidential election flashpoint.

Governor Walz’s Minnesota blueprint for transforming public schools into k-12 Marxist/Maoist programing centers will remain a flash point in the national political debate in the coming months. It will not quickly fade from the public square because it reflects the Marxist indoctrination that drove stunned parents nationwide to confront their local school boards. When COVID school closures brought curriculum directly into their homes, parents were shocked to learn that Johnny was being taught to be ashamed he is white, and that “inclusion” required him to read sexually perverse books.

This issue has significant presidential campaign ramifications!

As Pullman points out, Tim Walz’s education plan mandates teachers to:

  • “affirm” and teach “white supremacy” and “systemic racism”;
  • affirm and teach “intersectionality” such as ones’ “race” and “gender identities”;
  • place each child into either an “oppressed” or “oppressor” identity group;
  • affirm social “equity” (equal outcomes) and denigrate merit; and
  • teach children to become “agents of social change to promote equity.”

The new Minnesota Marxist teacher licensing standards do in fact force Christians, Jews, and Muslims to either adopt heresies to their faith, or be denied a teaching license in Minnesota (War on Christians). They are in a lose/lose situation.

It’s not only Tim Walz’s teacher licensing requirements that demand affirmation and demonstration of Marxist ideologies in the classroom. The Professional Educators Licensing & Standards Board (PELSB), all Tim Walz appointees, also commissioned a rewrite of Minnesota history standards which embed the same radical ideologies. He also signed into law, a new PELSB-drafted Ethnic Studies requirement which Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, described as  “race based neo-Marxism.” He said the requirements are “stealth critical race theory” and the “worst” education standards in the country.

Tim Walz has saturated Minnesota schools with Marxist dogmas through licensing requirements for teachers and through curriculum content standards for students. Dr. James Lindsay describes this as the Marxification of Education.

While Tim Walz forged ahead with his Marxification of education, Minnesota’s reading and math outcomes plummeted. The dramatic declines began in 2019, long before his draconian Covid lockdowns and extended school closings…and as he was pouring buckets of money into the public education cabal.

Governor Walz wants to be seen as a regular, folksy, teacher and coach, someone you would trust to instruct your child. But he is not your average next-door neighbor. CPL has long identified him as a skilled and well-trained Marxist. But the sudden national attention has revealed even more troubling revelations about his deep fondness for Chinese Communism.

The Washington Free Beacon reports in “Walz Praised Chinese Communism as a System Where ‘Everyone Shares:

“It means that everyone is the same and everyone shares,” Walz said during a lesson on China’s communist system in November 1991. “The doctor and the construction worker make the same. The Chinese government and the place they work for provide housing and 14 kg or about 30 pounds of rice per month. They get food and housing.”

Should Walz attain the office of Vice President, America would have a Communist China sympathizer a heartbeat away from the Presidency.  South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem said during an interview last weekend that she is “100% convinced Tim Walz is a national security risk.”

U.S. Congressman James Comer, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, has launched an investigation into Tim Walz’s “possible CCP [Chinese Communist Party] influence in his decision-making as governor — and should he be elected, as Vice President.”

Tim Walz is an arrogant elitist too. He referred to areas of Minnesota outside the deep blue cities as “just rocks and cows.” In an early August interview, he dismissed criticism of his socialism with the comment, “One person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.”

Tim Walz is transforming education into something unrecognizable. Marxism is an atheistic ideology denying truth, the existence of God, and the laws of God. Marxists abhor the genuine faith, the traditional family, individual merit, and personal responsibility. Marxists do not believe our individual rights are inalienable and from God but are allocated and granted to us by the ruling elites. Marxist have always had one primary goal in mind – revolution.

Do Not Be Fooled! Marxists are experts at linguistic theft, dishonesty, and the manipulation of language. Pay attention to Minnesota, because Tim Walz’s actions speak louder than his words. His actions demonstrate what he has planned for the entire country.

Article by

Related Articles

Back to top button