1

Efforts to Stop UN World “Health” Power Grab Accelerate

Amid a major power grab by the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) seeking to further empower the global agency, lawmakers and leaders across the United States are stepping up efforts to protect self-government, national sovereignty and the rights of all Americans. In fact, many in Congress and beyond say it is time for the U.S. government to defund and even withdraw from the WHO once again.

Last week, governments from around the world sent delegates to the annual World Health Assembly in Geneva. They will be meeting until May 30. The main objective of this year’s confab is to radically extend the organization’s power over healthcare and citizens under the guise of improving “health” and fighting future disease outbreaks in a coordinated global fashion. Critics say it is a dangerous plan to centralize power in a corrupt agency controlled by Beijing.

There are two primary methods of attack. First, using COVID and possible future pandemics as a pretext, the WHO is pushing for a new “International Pandemic Accord.” The scheme was being called a treaty until it became obvious to all involved it would never get two-thirds support in the U.S. Senate, as required for ratification of all treaties. The WHO hopes to have the details worked out by next year’s World Health Assembly.

The second prong in the attack involves amendments to the so-called International Health Regulations, or IHR. Because these are considered mere changes to an existing treaty, globalists at the WHO and in the Biden administration — not to mention the Communist Party of China lurking behind the scenes — also see this as a vehicle for empowering the global “health” apparatus without pesky interference from Congress.

But critics are working on ways to fight back. The Sovereignty Coalition, formed to fight the WHO assault on self-government, brings together a broad alliance of conservative leaders, organizations, and lawmakers united in the effort to preserve and restore national sovereignty. In fact, the coalition is calling for an American exit from the WHO entirely.

Signatories include hundreds of America’s most prominent conservative leaders as well as doctors and other medical professionals. Leading organizations in the medical freedom movement and the broader conservative movement also signed on including Daily Clout, Eagle Forum, Liberty Counsel Action, Tea Party Patriots Action, Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, ConservativeHQ, Act for America, and more.

Last week around 20 lawmakers and leaders held a press conference outside Capitol Hill calling for an end to the WHO’s scheming. Illinois’ own U.S. Representative Mary Miller, a Republican, was among those speaking out. “Our hard-earned taxpayer dollars should not support a globalist organization that is controlled by China, undermines our national sovereignty, and threatens our rights,” Rep. Miller said, echoing the concerns of many of her colleagues and constituents.

“President Trump made the right decision to cut all funding and participation in this organization, and it is foolish for the Biden Administration to place trust in an institution that repeated China’s deceptive narratives regarding the origins of the pandemic in Wuhan,” she added. “I stand proudly with my colleagues in calling for the United States to withdraw from the corrupt WHO. In Congress, I will always work to protect our nation’s sovereignty, preserve our rights and freedoms, and ensure the responsible use of taxpayer dollars.”

Other lawmakers who spoke at the press conference and denounced the WHO and Biden’s support for the power grab included U.S. Representatives Ralph Norman (SC-05), Ronny Jackson (TX-13), Chris Smith (NJ-04), Harriet Hageman (WY), Tim Burchett (TN-02), Brian Babin (TX-36), Andy Biggs (AZ-05) (sponsor of H.R. 79), Kevin Hern (OK-01), Thomas Tiffany (WI-07), Chip Roy (TX-21), Eli Crane (AZ-02),  Paul Gosar (AZ-09),  Lauren Boebert (CO-03), Eric Burlison (MO-07),  Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13) Rep. Dan Bishop (NC-08), Glenn Grothman (WI-06), Clay Higgins (LA-03), and more.

Watch the press conference here:

Sovereignty Coalition co-founders Reggie LittleJohn and Frank Gaffney were there, too. In a statement posted on their website, the leaders and the signatories noted that the WHO was effectively under CCP control and was being used to advance a “post-Constitutional-America and ‘global governance’ dominated by the Party.” “The CCP’s hegemonic ambitions have no place for a powerful United States of America, human freedom or personal sovereignty,” the group explained. The WHO is also doing the bidding of Big Pharma and billionaire population-control zealot Bill Gates, one of the outfits top financiers, the coalition said.

Speaking at the start of the WHO’s annual meeting, former communist terrorist and current WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus insisted that the organization needed even more power. “We cannot simply carry on as we did before,” said Ghebreyesus, who was installed with strongarm tactics by the CCP. “The pandemic accord that member states are now negotiating must be a historic agreement to make a paradigm shift in global health security, recognizing that our fates are interwoven.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, former leader of the Socialist International global alliance of communist and socialist political parties, echoed the call for a stronger globalist regime. “I hope the current negotiations on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response result in a strong multilateral approach that saves lives,” said Guterres, who has also been a vocal advocate of the World Economic Forum-led “Great Reset” being opposed by countless millions around the world.

Blasting the WHO’s response to COVID, the Sovereignty Coalition said it was “outrageous” that the Biden administration was scheming to hand over even more power—without even Senate approval. “These accords would effectively repose in Dr. Tedros the authority unilaterally to dictate what constitutes an actual or potential Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and to order how affected nations must respond,” the coalition said in a statement, noting that these authorities would purport to allow America’s enemies to deprive Americans of their rights.

In light of all the problems with the schemes being negotiated as well as the systemic issues plaguing WHO, the Sovereignty Coalition said enough was enough. “The United States must end its membership in, cease funding of and submitting to the World Health Organization before the WHO is granted the authority effectively to compel compliance with the public health dictates of Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus or any other unelected, unaccountable international bureaucrat,” the alliance declared.

At the state level, efforts to stop the WHO are gaining steam as well. A new bill in the South Carolina legislature, H.4246, would nullify the power grab by banning any state or local cooperation with the effort. “This is the rightful remedy,” SC Representative Josiah Magnuson told me, blasting the fact that Biden was not even planning to seek the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate as required by the Constitution of all treaties. “If this does go into effect, we’re going to have the framework here to resist.”

Former President Donald Trump removed the U.S. government from the WHO, but Joe Biden promptly rejoined when taking power. Republicans in the U.S. House, though, have the opportunity to defund the global body in the upcoming budget. With outrage surrounding the WHO and its leadership growing rapidly amid the attempted power grab, it may be tough for elected officials in the United States to continue supporting it. The next year will be critical in that battle.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to encourage them to support legislative actions to withdrawal the U.S. from the The World Health Organization (WHO). This U.N. agency is effectively controlled by Communist Chinese Party and other subversive globalist interests, but it is actively seeking greater, totalitarian control over its member nations. This is a serious threat to our national sovereignty and our individual liberty.

Ask them to co-sponsor H.R. 79, the “WHO Withdrawal Act,” H.R. 343, the “No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act,” and S. 444, the “No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act,” to stop the implementation and/or enforcement of the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty.





Global ‘Spirituality’ via ‘Education’ and SEL

There is an enormous threat to children from Social-Emotional Learning (SEL), and there is also a grave danger to the independence of private schools and homeschooling that comes from accepting government funding, warns education researcher Lisa Logan in this explosive interview. It is all part of a global agenda being pushed by the United Nations and UNESCO in particular.

First, Logan explains how SEL is being used to manipulate children into radical political, cultural and even spiritual beliefs by hiding behind terms that are not threatening. Next she explains the dangerous spiritual and religious agenda behind this agenda that requires the transformation of children and then society.

In the second segment, Logan breaks down how UNESCO and those who want to control all education are using tax funding as bait to get private schools and homeschoolers sucked into the public regulatory system. “Any time you have public money going to private things, it comes with strings,” she said.

Please watch/listen and share!





John Kerry and WEF Argue U.S. Must Pay “Reparations”

As “climate” dignitaries and world leaders prepare to converge on the Egyptian resort town of Sharm-El-Sheikh in mid November to solve the alleged “climate crisis,” the biggest issues to be decided will involve money — lots of it. Specifically, the questions to be resolved surround how much money governments must extract from the struggling middle classes of the “developed” world to bribe “developing country” governments and kleptocrats into keeping their populations in perpetual poverty and bondage. As “climate” becomes the new COVID, though, freedom is in danger, too.

Under the guise of what is called “loss and damage,” taxpayers in advanced nations such as the United States are expected to pay massive reparations to Third World governments. Relying on the increasingly dubious hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing catastrophic global warming, the argument is that advanced economies emitted more carbon dioxide as they became prosperous over the last century, and as such, they must compensate poorer, undeveloped nations for alleged climate damages. Everything from storms to droughts is being blamed on Western CO2 emissions. Those advanced economies get no credit for inventing the technologies that make the modern world possible.

The World Economic Forum, the fascistic and globalist Big Business alliance behind the Great Reset agenda, is publicly arguing that “climate reparations” must be “top of the agenda at COP27.” And governments of the world are taking note. Globalists and the Third World regimes demanding more money are calling for trillions of dollars in “reparations” for everything from floods to droughts. “By 2050, the economic cost of loss and damage in developing countries is estimated to be between $1-1.8 trillion,” WEF “expert” and propagandist Abhinav Chugh wrote on the increasingly controversial organization’s website.

A group of largely corrupt governments styling itself the “Alliance of Small Island States” (AOSIS) is demanding that taxpayers in wealthier countries hand over huge sums for a “response fund” that will help “climate victims recover from the loss and damage caused by present and future climate shocks,” according to the WEF. This “Alliance” will be backed by the largest group of governments and dictatorships within the UN system. Known as the G77 + China, the alliance represents about two thirds of the UN’s member governments. And it is openly seeking to turn the UN into an “emblem of global sovereignty.”

Speaking at the globalist Council on Foreign Relations, which basically serves as Deep State headquarters in the United States, Biden administration “climate” Czar John Kerry indicated a willingness to fork over huge sums of American tax dollars to the UN and its member governments, though he did not offer a specific figure. “We’re very concerned about the impacts of climate on all of these countries,” Special Climate Envoy Kerry explained at the globalist institution, pointing to nations dealing with natural disasters while pretending that these were caused by Americans’ SUVs and power plants.

Former Obama Secretary of State Kerry, who famously flew on a private jet to pick up his “climate” award in Iceland, did caution that there are political realities that must be considered, too. In particular, the prospect of a GOP takeover of Congress next month might mean that all of the administration’s promises are dead on arrival. “We’re all determined to come up with progress, but something real that we can begin to define for everybody,” Kerry added. “You’ve got to make things happen that can work, that can be functional in your own political system.”

While Republicans in Congress may be able to limit the amount that can be extracted from U.S. taxpayers, Kerry made clear that he wants the mega-banks to help, too. “For every $1 invested in low-carbon energy supply, $1.10 is invested in fossil fuels,” Kerry complained, a barely veiled swipe at investors and banks that continue financing critical companies and industries that the UN and the globalist establishment want to destroy. “The math and the science unequivocally make clear, we cannot hit our targets unless we dramatically change that ratio.”

Attorneys general from 19 states are currently investigating the mega-banks for their ties to UN “climate” schemes. That has caused several to scale back their scheming. But while American banks get cold feet about colluding with the UN to destroy America’s energy infrastructure, UN boss António Guterres offered another idea. The well-known socialist who led a global alliance of socialist and communist parties (many with the blood of millions on their hands) recently proposed a massive tax on oil and gas companies to fund the “reparations” slush fund. After all, bankrolling the ongoing controlled demolition of freedom, prosperity, and civilization is expensive.

As Europeans face the prospect of energy blackouts, food shortages, and industrial collapse amid severe energy shortages, tone-deaf European Union bigwigs are promising to double down on the policies that led to the escalating crisis. Other EU policy items on the agenda include implementing “climate action in the agricultural sector,” which is code for stepping up the war on small- and medium-sized farms to pave the way for a fascistic farming sector dominated by mega-corporations in bed with Big Government. Also on the list of EU goals was “address the gender dimension,” without elaboration.

One of the key figures helping to lead the EU delegation, Czech Minister of the Environment Anna Hubáčková, promised that the increasingly totalitarian superstate would further undermine the prosperity of the peoples it rules under the guise of saving the climate. “All eyes will be on us in Sharm El-Sheikh,” she said. “The EU has always been at the forefront of climate action and we will continue to lead by example. Protecting our planet for future generations requires a strong common global action. I am glad the EU has proved today that it is serious in its ambitions.”

Numerous European governments have already pledged to seize enormous sums from their people to shower on Third World regimes. For instance, following floods in Pakistan — a region that has dealt with floods for millennia — Danish authorities vowed to hand over almost $15 million in tax money for “loss and damage” schemes. The German government has also publicly expressed support for putting climate “reparations” at the top of the agenda for the COP27 in Egypt. Ironically, it is sending an environmental extremist, former Greenpeace boss Jennifer Morgan, as its “climate envoy.”

The Communist Chinese regime, meanwhile, is laughing all the way to the bank. As it builds more coal-fired power plants to ensure cheap and reliable energy for the factories and industries fleeing America and Europe to set up shop in China, the dictatorship in Beijing is calling on Western nations to continue committing economic suicide. The regime, which has very close ties with the World Economic Forum and its chief Klaus Schwab, vowed to continue increasing its CO2 emissions until at least 2030. China already releases more CO2 into the atmosphere than any other nation.

As much as the climate-industrial complex tries to make its victory appear inevitable, there are growing signs that it is in trouble. With Europe facing catastrophic energy shortages due to self-imposed “green” policies such as shutting down power plants, European voters are becoming increasingly skeptical. In Sweden, known worldwide as perhaps the leading proponent of climate hysteria, the new right-wing government just axed its 35-year-old “Environment and Climate” Ministry, sparking howls of protests from alarmists. In the United Kingdom, the pressure to resume exploration and use of hydrocarbon energy is growing rapidly, too, as the prospect of deadly blackouts ahead of winter becomes more acute.

Meanwhile, taxpayer-funded rent-a-mob activists deployed by the climate-industrial complex to provide the appearance of public support for the agenda are expressing concerns about whether they will be allowed to make a spectacle of themselves in Egypt. Considering the nature of the Egyptian government and restrictions placed on public demonstrations in the highly controlled town of Sharm-El-Sheik, there is a very real chance that the usual “climate” antics will at the very least be toned down.

As the evidence underpinning the pseudo-scientific catastrophism continues to be exposed as fraudulent, the hysteria is getting louder and louder. At this point, the global predatory class, including the UN and the Biden administration, are simply working to silence all those who expose the facts using internet censorship and other totalitarian tactics. How the COP27 will turn out remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: Middle-class taxpayers across the developed world better hang on to their wallets, because the predatory elites are scheming to loot them blind.


This article was originally published at TheNewAmerican.com.




Amid Scandal and CCP Influence, US Considers Rejoining UN Education Arm

After rejoining a number of controversial United Nations agencies and agreements over the last year, the Biden administration and its allies in Congress are quietly trying to figure out how to bypass federal laws to rejoin a UN agency that has been clouded in scandal and allegations of extremism for decades.

Four years ago, the Trump administration and the Israeli government both announced they would be exiting the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Accusations of anti-Semitism and widespread corruption were among the many concerns cited.

But now, despite what critics describe as continued extremism and ongoing corruption issues, as well as significant communist Chinese influence over the UN’s education agency, there are growing signs that the Biden administration and Israeli authorities are getting ready to overlook all that.

At the Biden administration’s request, lawmakers have even quietly introduced legislation that would allow Washington to sidestep U.S. laws prohibiting funds for the controversial UN agency.

The price tag in terms of tax dollars would be enormous. But critics, analysts, and former senior officials warned that even more significant than the financial cost would be legitimizing the agency and even Beijing’s influence within it.

“I don’t think UNESCO is fixable,” explained Kevin Moley, who served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs during the previous administration.

Moley, who also worked as U.S. Ambassador to UN organizations in Geneva during the Bush administration, pointed to overwhelming communist Chinese influence in UNESCO and its long track record of undermining American principles as key reasons for concern.

“In the Trump administration, it was Make America Great Again,” Moley told The Epoch Times in a phone interview. “In the Biden administration, it’s HAA—Humiliate America Again.”

“Re-joining UN institutions that habitually take Israel and America to task for unfounded allegations of human rights abuses while condoning the human rights abuses of UN Human Rights Council members such as Russia, Venezuela, China, and Cuba, is the ultimate manifestation of what the late great Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick called the ‘blame America first’ crowd,” the former assistant secretary of state explained. “This crowd has now taken over the U.S. State Department lock, stock, and barrel.”

At least one UNESCO insider argued that a thorough investigation of the UN agency and its leaders by U.S. authorities would be a more sensible plan than sending more than half a billion tax dollars to pay “arrears” to an organization that he said was dominated by ideologues and plagued by never-ending scandals.

Even powerful voices within the foreign-policy establishment have warned against a return to the agency without at least securing some major concessions and reforms. So far, though, it does not appear that any significant concessions are even being sought.

The Backstory

In October of 2017, following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan, the Trump administration gave UNESCO its one-year notification that the U.S. government would be leaving the organization.

Among other concerns, the State Department pointed to the growing amount of taxpayer money supposedly owed to the agency by the United States since the U.S. government stopped paying dues in 2011, as required by statutes passed by Congress and signed by former presidents Bush and Clinton.

The funding was stopped during the Obama administration as a result of federal laws banning U.S. funding for international organizations that accept the “State of Palestine” as a member state prior to a negotiated settlement with Israel.

Current federal law still prohibits U.S. funding for UNESCO. But the Senate Appropriations Committee just introduced legislation that would allow the Biden administration to waive that prohibition if it believes re-joining would promote U.S. interests.

Also behind the U.S. government’s decision to withdraw was what authorities said was the UN agency’s systemic bias against Israel, as well as what the State Department described as the “need for fundamental reform.”

Pointing to murderous dictatorships on the agency’s “human rights” committee and other policies, then-UN Ambassador Nikki Haley at the time said the “extreme politicization” of UNESCO had “become a chronic embarrassment.”

“Just as we said in 1984 when President Reagan withdrew from UNESCO, U.S. taxpayers should no longer be on the hook to pay for policies that are hostile to our values and make a mockery of justice and common sense,” Haley said.

But that was just the tip of the iceberg, insiders and analysts say.

At the time, the UN agency was being led by longtime Communist Party apparatchik Irina Bokova of Bulgaria. Her deep ties to the former Communist regime in Bulgaria, combined with serious allegations of corruption and intrigue during and after her tenure, led to major questions among Western governments about the UN agency’s leadership.

Responding to the U.S. withdrawal, Bokova expressed “profound regret,” calling it a “loss for multilateralism.”

Leading the UN agency alongside Bokova was the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) official Qian Tang, who served as assistant director-general of the agency.

Separately, China’s then-Ambassador to Belgium, Qu Xing, was appointed deputy director-general by Bokova’s successor, French Socialist Party figure Audrey Azoulay.

Their influence over the UN organization—particularly in the field of education—has been immense.

On the heels of the U.S. notice to UNESCO, Israeli authorities followed suit. Blasting UNESCO as “the theater of the absurd,” then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the Trump administration for its “brave and moral decision.”

The Israeli Foreign Ministry announced that government’s withdrawal shortly after Washington, and both governments officially exited at the end of 2018.

With the U.S. and Israeli governments gone, UNESCO continued in its ways under the leadership of French Director General Azoulay, a former culture minister whose tenure at the UN has also been marked by allegations of impropriety.

Diplomats have noticed problems.

Last summer, for example, U.K. Ambassador to UNESCO Matthew Lodge sent a scathing letter to top UNESCO officials expressing concern over “confirmed financial fraud.” Lodge also highlighted efforts by the agency’s leaders to cover up the fraud and avoid informing member states.

Efforts to Rejoin

A number of sources told The Epoch Times that after the Biden administration re-joined several other UN organizations and instruments such as the World Health Organization, the UN Human Rights Council, and the Paris Agreement on climate, it had its eyes on rejoining UNESCO.

A spokesman for the State Department responded to phone calls and e-mails from The Epoch Times with a brief note: “We don’t have anything to announce on UNESCO at this time.”

However, it appears that there are serious efforts behind the scenes to rejoin and pay arrears, complicated by the federal laws banning U.S. funding for organizations that admit the “State of Palestine.”

A statement released by UNESCO said the agency saw “real hope” for a U.S. return, but “the timing and modalities … have yet to be defined.”

UNESCO chief Azoulay was also reportedly in Washington lobbying Biden’s wife and U.S. lawmakers, according to media reports based on an anonymous diplomatic source.

And officials such as former USAID chief and Clinton-era Undersecretary of State J. Brian Atwood are publicly lobbying for the U.S. government re-join.

“Much has changed under UNESCO’s Director General Audrey Azoulay,” Atwood argued in an opinion piece for The Hill last month. “It is long past time for Congress to recognize that the national interests of the United States are best served by participation in international organizations like UNESCO.”

In Israel, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid asked officials to review the issue. In fact, according to media reports citing Israeli officials, Lapid believes leaving UNESCO and other international organizations made Israeli foreign policy less effective.

But critics have expressed grave concerns over ongoing efforts to rejoin the UN agency.

Speaking to The Epoch Times, former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Moley blasted the Biden administration’s State Department and its efforts to re-engage in what he described as out-of-control UN organs such as UNESCO. In fact, he argued that this behavior undermined U.S. interests.

UNESCO is too far gone and cannot be fixed anyway, he added, pointing to large swaths of its policy-making that “have largely been taken over by the CCP and its allies.” These concerns have existed for decades.

In addition to being bad for America, Ambassador Moley also argued that re-joining the UN agency would be “another slap in the face to our only democratic ally in the Middle East.”

One key problem, he argued, is that the State Department is under the “complete control” of officials whose “first response to virtually anything is to apologize for America instead of standing up for our values, our Constitution, and our people.”

The Biden administration is a representation of this, and is “full of the most anti-American, socialist” forces, he added.

Another one of Moley’s major concerns is the attitude from Obama and Biden on down regarding the threat from the CCP.

Biden has even joked about it recently. “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man,” he said in May 2019 on the campaign trail, ridiculing the idea that the CCP poses a serious threat to the United States.

Moley’s Obama-era predecessor as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, Bathsheba Crocker, was even quoted in the state-run newspaper China Daily saying she was “particularly pleased” to see China taking more responsibility in the UN.

China’s Influence

As The Epoch Times reported in May of 2020, the CCP now dominates large segments of the UN and its specialized agencies, with the CCP-dominated G77 (Group of 77) Plus China alliance holding a super-majority in the General Assembly.

UNESCO is no exception, and in fact, may be worse, critics say.

CCP agent and Deputy Director General Qu, who was appointed with no public “recruitment process” to speak of as required under the agency’s rules, is now leading the “Strategic Transformation” of UNESCO, according to the agency.

An insider at UNESCO who cannot be named due to the threat of repercussions for speaking frankly told The Epoch Times that Qu is working on the “most sensitive part” of Azoulay’s mandate. This allows the CCP to craft the UN agency in its own mold in a way that will endure for many years to come, the insider said.

“Today UNESCO is a lawless organization, a toxic political arena, with reduced to the minimum activities that should normally be at the heart of its action,” the source told The Epoch Times on condition of anonymity. “Incompetent leaders sold out to China.”

This is not a new phenomenon. During the previous administration of Bokova, who was trained in Moscow during the Soviet era and served as a senior official in the former Communist regime in Bulgaria, the UN agency was also closely connected to Beijing and other communist power centers—even while the U.S. government was a member.

The CCP now has the second-highest number of world heritage sites, and it is seeking to move key UNESCO education offices to China.

In 2017, long before the U.S. left, the CCP also signed a “Memorandum of Understanding” with UNESCO agreeing to increase cooperation on Beijing’s controversial “Belt and Road” project. Bokova praised the CCP for its initiatives that have “set good examples for the international community,” CCP media reported.

Under Bokova’s administration, CCP member Qian Ting—a former official with the CCP’s “Education Ministry”—served as assistant director-general for UNESCO.

Qian was even made “officer-in-charge” of the Bureau of Strategic Planning, giving the CCP wide influence in the path charted by the UN agency.

Perhaps even more significantly, Qian also led the UN’s “Education 2030” agenda, a critical component of the UN “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) also known as Agenda 2030.

Top UN officials have described the global agenda as the “master plan for humanity” and even the global “Declaration of Interdependence.”

As she was seeking to become Secretary General of the broader UN, Bokova rewarded Xi Jinping’s wife with the title “Special Envoy” for female education.

“You are an immense role model for millions of young girls in China and beyond,” Bokova declared when giving the CCP dictator’s wife the prestigious title.

On her way out from UNESCO, it was common knowledge among senior officials there that Bokova was hoping Qian would take her place. The CCP member was formally nominated for the top UNESCO post by the CCP, which is hoping to secure the agency’s director-general position when Azoulay’s term ends.

Unlike diplomats from other countries, who promise to work on behalf of international organizations rather than national interests while in UN agencies, CCP leaders have publicly declared that Chinese nationals in the UN must obey party orders. Former Interpol chief Meng Hongwei was even arrested by the CCP for, among other crimes, disobeying party orders while at the helm of the global policing agency.

Countering CCP, or Legitimizing and Funding its Agenda?

A number of influential voices from the foreign-policy establishment have proposed that the U.S. government rejoin UNESCO if only to counter CCP influence, which was well-established in the agency long before the Trump administration’s exit.

Kristen Cordell of the Council on Foreign Relations, an internationalist powerhouse, for example, cited the CCP’s influence in UNESCO as a key reason for Biden to rejoin in exchange for some concessions.

Critics ridiculed the idea, however.

Ambassador Moley, for instance, lambasted the notion that U.S. membership would rein in the CCP there as “wishful thinking.”

“As we have experienced in engaging with UN organizations—people think we have a veto—we are simply one of 193 members,” Moley said. “China has its useful idiots, including among the more than 130 governments in the G77 Plus China who make up most of the UN’s members.”

“As long as bribery, coercion, and blackmail are predominant tools of Chinese foreign policy, it is very unlikely that we can prevail in a UN forum such as UNESCO with our one vote,” he added.

Emphasizing the seriousness of the matter, Moley called the CCP “our enemy” and “the greatest existential threat to our republic since 1860.”

The insider from UNESCO similarly balked at the idea that re-joining the UN agency would give the U.S. government the ability to counter the CCP.

“If President Biden decides to return to UNESCO, it will be a good gesture towards China, which will please Beijing a lot, since it would legitimize its hold on the agency,” the source said. “It will also please all the leftist globalists and will bring nothing but costly nuisance to the U.S. and Israel.”

“In fact, Joe Biden would have more leverage to exert reform pressure at UNESCO by keeping the U.S. out,” the Paris-based diplomatic source added.

The conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation’s International Regulatory Affairs Fellow Brett Schaefer echoed concerns about CCP influence within the UN and its specialized agencies, saying it would be a “mistake” for the U.S. government to rejoin.

“Obviously, everybody should be concerned about Chinese influence in international organizations,” he told The Epoch Times in a phone interview.

“The question I have on this, though, is whether UNESCO is even central to U.S. interests,” Schaefer continued. “The U.S. did not participate and U.S. interests were minimally affected.”

In addition, even when Washington was a member, “UNESCO was pursuing policies that the U.S. did not support and frankly were embarrassments to the organization and its mission and mandate,” added Schaefer.

While countering the CCP is a worthy objective, he also expressed concerns about the large sum American taxpayers would have to hand over to rejoin UNESCO—more than $500 million just in arrears that would then be spent however the agency and its other member states wanted.

Pointing to the United States re-joining under Bush, the Heritage expert said there was already an established precedent for paying arrears in full.

“It’s a windfall that they can use however they want to,” Schaefer said.

That is almost certainly what would happen. “The new administration has made a practice of rejoining organizations such as the World Health Organization and the Human Rights Council without any conditions, so that would be the expectation of other member states, knowing that this administration would like to rejoin,” he added.

UNESCO: Corrupt to the Core?

Aside from the allegations of anti-Semitism and extremism, UNESCO has long been plagued by corruption and politicization scandals at the highest levels.

Leaked minutes from the UNESCO Executive Board revealed that then-U.K. Ambassador to UNESCO Matthew Sudders slammed Bokova for alleged corruption in appointing cronies to aid her ambitions to rise further in the UN.

“As a U.K. civil servant, I have a duty to report all cases of possible or suspected fraud to our investigations department,” Sudders declared. The comments were reportedly made with the full support of his government, which concluded that a “comprehensive external review” was needed.

More recently, under the current UNESCO administration, U.K. Ambassador to UNESCO Matthew Lodge demanded to know why member states were being kept in the dark about “confirmed financial fraud,” unsanctioned misappropriation of funds, and more by top UNESCO leadership.

Even more bizarre were news reports suggesting there may be a link between Azoulay’s troubles and an almost unprecedented late-night intrusion into UNESCO headquarters and IT systems by French government agents.

Reports also suggested that international civil servants in UNESCO chief Azoulay’s office were improperly lobbying for the elimination of a second candidate for director-general of the agency.

UNESCO’s Secretariat, which is overseen by Azoulay, did not acknowledge multiple requests for comment.

But in an e-mail to The Epoch Times, UNESCO General Conference President Altay Cengizer said the allegations of financial fraud raised by Western diplomats should be addressed but were beyond his competence.

Cengizer said he had “no idea” whether French authorities “played a part or not, in securing Member States’ silence about the alleged disregard of the Secretariat of financial and accountability regulations since 2017.”

“When allegations persist for such a long time, I think a clarification by the Secretariat, to set things straight, is the best way to deal with questions of financial irregularity,” Cengizer said.

So far there has been no clarification.

Because UNESCO is hosted in France, he said the “somewhat entangled relationship” between Azoulay and French authorities was to be expected.

“In such cases, one hopes that it would not exceed a certain limit and not endanger several other balances that are innate to an international and intergovernmental organization,” he said, noting that there were “strong reactions” to the “Spying Scandal” involving French officials being allowed into UNESCO headquarters at odd hours.

In the e-mail, Cengizer expressed concern—and has publicly in the past—about the “active lobbying by international civil servants for securing support for the re-election of the incumbent Director General.”

The UNESCO General Conference chief said he did not have details surrounding the mysterious elimination of Azoulay’s rival for leadership at the UN agency, a process that critics said was clouded by corruption.

“However, I think that the Member States should have been informed of such a development,” he added.

While supporters of rejoining UNESCO argue that the corruption and extremism have been cleaned up since the U.S. departure, critics and even people closely associated with the agency say that is not the case.

A Difficult Road Ahead

On both sides of the debate about whether the U.S. government should rejoin UNESCO, there is agreement on one point: If it happens, it will be a complex process.

Writing in the New York Daily News this summer, former National Security Advisor and UN Ambassador John Bolton said it was “incomprehensible” why Biden would seek to resurrect the UNESCO issue—especially since Congress will “certainly reject” funding it.

“Biden would face a massive political struggle without the prospect of any substantive accomplishment,” added Bolton.

In any case, any attempt to rejoin UNESCO would be a “significant mistake,” he said.

“UNESCO has long been among the most politicized UN organizations,” continued Bolton, saying it was an “error” to believe the agency was capable of reform.

Throwing fuel on the fire, UNESCO adopted two resolutions in October blasting Israel and calling on the international community to pressure Jerusalem to stop its “illegal” actions.

Pervasive corruption allegations and CCP influence surrounding UNESCO come amid an escalating scandal over Beijing’s subversion at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which further complicates Biden administration efforts to expand multilateralism.

An independent investigation recently found that IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva, also a Bulgarian with links to Bokova, improperly applied “undue pressure” on World Bank officials to manipulate data. The goal was to put the CCP in a good light in its official report on business climate, the probe concluded.

Top Biden officials including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen publicly expressed concern and vowed to “monitor” the organization. But Georgieva, with ties to Communist forces in Bulgaria and beyond like Bokova, remains at the helm of the IMF.

UNESCO did not respond to phone calls and emails seeking comment.

The international agency is best known for its world heritage site designations, but also plays a major role in the UN’s global education, culture, and science policy.




UN Big Wig Claims Homeschooling Might Harm Children

As Brazilian lawmakers worked to recognize and legitimize home education, which has been wildly successful in the United States for decades, senior United Nations “education” bureaucrat Italo Dutra warned that homeschooling threatens “harm to children and adolescents.”

The UN hack’s reasoning behind the bizarre screed is that school is supposedly “fundamental to guaranteeing the right to learning, socialization, and a plurality of ideas, in addition to being an essential space for the protection of girls and boys against violence.” By “plurality of ideas,” he no doubt includes the grotesque UN sex-ed standards that would shock any normal person.

Dutra, who serves as UNICEF’s top education official, did not make clear where he got the idea that children have a “right” to such things, or where he got the idea that schools rather than family protect children from violence. Similar arguments have been made by UN bureaucrats and anti-family totalitarians around the world for decades.

Ironically, though, the UN’s own key documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) actually protect the right of parents — not government — to direct the education and upbringing of their children. In fact the UN declaration states that parents have a “prior right” to choose the education of their offspring.

Those measures protecting parental rights and educational liberty were enshrined in UN agreements after mass-murdering National Socialist (Nazi) dictator Adolf Hitler undermined parental rights, criminalized homeschooling, and used indoctrination posing as “education” to weaponize German children for his “Reich.” The result was catastrophe.

At the time, following the defeat of Hitler, humanity said “never again.” But with World Word II so far in the rearview mirror, and with generations of children indoctrinated by governments to believe in statism, those lessons on the extreme danger of allowing government to sideline parents have been obscured in many places.

While homeschooling has been taking place successfully in Brazil for decades, it has so far existed in a kind of legal limbo. The nation’s Supreme Court called on lawmakers in 2018 to enshrine the practice, ostensibly protected under the Brazilian Constitution, in federal law. And President Jair Bolsonaro, sometimes known as “Tropical Trump,” has been a vocal supporter.

However, totalitarian forces including UN operatives, communist politicians, and even well-known “Christian” charities such as World Vision have sought to demonize and restrict the rights of parents to educate their own children. Regimes and governments including those in North Korea, China, Cuba, Germany, and Sweden have made similar arguments to justify persecuting homeschooling families.

The UN has become increasingly vociferous in its efforts to restrict the fundamental human rights of parents to direct the education of children. In fact, the dictator-dominated UN “Human Rights Council” passed a measure in 2015 calling on governments to regulate private schools, as well — supposedly to protect “human rights.”

Meanwhile, leading UN officials, including a top UNICEF “child rights” campaigner, have been repeatedly caught raping and sexually assaulting children. Estimates by former officials suggest some 60,000 women and children have been raped by UN “aid” workers and “peace” troops in the last decade.

The UN should have no say in nation’s policies on education or anything else. The fact that an unelected agent of the dictators’ club is lobbying against fundamental human rights offers more proof that this rogue collection of tyrants, perverts, and kleptocrats must be not just reined in, but abolished, for the benefit of mankind.


This article was originally published at FreedomProject.com




The Totalitarian Agenda Behind LGBTQ Sex-Ed Revolution at School

Extreme sexualization and LGBTQ+ indoctrination of children at younger and younger ages in public schools is now ubiquitous nationwide—and it’s part of a much broader agenda that goes well beyond just encouraging confusion and promiscuity for its own sake.

The real goal is ultimately to destroy the nuclear family as the foundation of civilization, experts say. As Karl Marx and countless other totalitarians understood, the state will step in to fill the void left by the family unit. In short, sex-ed is aimed at undermining the very building blocks of society.

In the not-too-distant past, so-called sex-education for young children and normalizing gender confusion in tax-funded schools would have been unthinkable and even criminal.

Today, the most extreme forms of sex education imaginable—including encouraging young children to engage in fornication, sodomy, group sex, abortions, and even “sex-change” surgeries—is a reality in the United States and beyond.

If it were not for exceptions offered to school employees in state obscenity laws, it would still literally be a crime to give children much of the material being used in classrooms nationwide under the guise of “sex education.”

But the worst is yet to come. If the well-funded sex-education behemoth gets its way, sexualization of children in schools masquerading as “health” and “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” (CSE) will undermine the final restraints on unchecked government control over the individual.

Liberty, family, and civilization are all in the cross-hairs now. The stakes could not be higher.

What It Looks Like in School

Virtually all of the curricula being used to teach sex to children are deeply problematic to anyone with a shred of decency, modesty, or common sense.

In many states and districts, the sexualization starts as early as kindergarten, with children being introduced to homosexuality, gender fluidity, homosexual parenting, “anatomy” that includes graphic images of genitalia, and more. Oftentimes, the sexualization and LGBT material is mandated under state law.

One of the most frequently used resources in public schools across America that has been endorsed by state and local officials nationwide as “compliant” with state mandates is known as “Rights, Respect, Responsibility” (3Rs).

Created by sexual revolutionaries at Advocates for Youth, a partner of tax-funded abortion giant Planned Parenthood, the program has shocked parents from across the political spectrum—for good reason.

Starting as young as kindergarten or first and second grade, children learn (pdf) that girls can supposedly have male genitalia and vice-versa. This self-evidently fraudulent claim is emphasized over and over again throughout the child’s younger years, causing widespread confusion among impressionable youngsters.

When they become teens, the program teaches them about “pansexuality,” among other absurdities and perversions.

Throughout elementary school, children are exposed to obscene images that have been widely condemned as pornographic, including “cartoons” in books such as “It’s Perfectly Normal.” The book features cartoon images of naked children, sexual intercourse, children masturbating, and more.

Under 3Rs, by the time the children are around 11, they are taught how to seek out information about sex on the internet. The children are constantly taught to rely on Planned Parenthood for information and “services,” too.

Before becoming teens, they learn about “making changes in the world” through “LGBT advocacy.”

At around age 12, abortion is introduced as an “option” to deal with unwanted pregnancies. And by age 13, years before they reach the legal age of consent, the children are taught how to obtain various forms of contraception and birth control.

Gender Confusion

Throughout the curriculum, which is aligned with the National Sex Education Standards (pdf) developed by Advocates for Youth and other advocates of sexualizing children, young people are led to believe that they can choose their gender and that they may have been born in the wrong body.

Worse, they are taught how to act on it, putting them at risk of seeking out dangerous hormonal and surgical “treatments” with lifelong consequences. Studies show most children confused about their gender end up growing out of it by adulthood.

This indoctrination is despite the fact that the American College of Pediatricians (pdf) argues it’s “child abuse” for adults to try to convince children that a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal or healthy.

Another frequently used resource is “Teaching Tolerance” (now known as “Learning for Justice”) created by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

As part of promoting “tolerance” to children, the SPLC recommends the highly controversial book “10,000 Dresses” by Marcus Ewert for students in kindergarten through second grade.

Among other lessons, the book teaches the children, typically aged 5 through 8, to ignore their parents and impersonate the opposite sex if they feel they were born in the “wrong” body.

Numerous state education bureaucracies and officials have endorsed the extreme SPLC program despite the objections of parents.

Making matters worse, those officials sometimes act on it, too. From California to Florida, school districts are using “Gender Transition Plans” to help students start “transitioning” to a new gender, even without the consent of parents.

Public-school efforts to confuse children have been so successful that a 2017 UCLA study found more than one in four California children ages 12 through 17 are now “gender non-conforming.”

Even in ultra-conservative Utah, state prescription data show that the number of minor girls undergoing “gender transition” processes increased by about 10,000 percent from 2015 to 2020.

Dangerous Lies and Propaganda

While the creators of the 3Rs program claim it is “medically accurate” to comply with state law, that is objectively false.

On a worksheet for 7th graders purporting to outline the risks of various sex acts, for example, children ages 11 and 12 are taught “anal sex using a condom correctly” is a “low risk” activity.

In reality, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that they are only 60 to 70 percent effective in preventing HIV even with perfect and consistent use. The Food and Drug Administration has never approved condoms for anal sex.

In other words, children who believe the sex-ed lies being taught in government schools are at serious risk of becoming infected with deadly venereal diseases.

Similarly, consider Planned Parenthood’s “Healthy, Happy and Hot“ booklet (pdf), which tells youth infected with HIV that they do not have to inform their partners about their infection. In fact, the document even claims that laws requiring disclosure “violate the rights of people living with HIV.”

Another Planned Parenthood sex-ed document (pdf) recommends teaching children 10 and under that “sexual activity” can be part of “commercial sex work,” and that they have a “right” to “decide when to have sex.”

The same toolkit encourages teaching children under 10 about homosexuality, masturbation, gender fluidity, and more. It also teaches them that they have a “right” to abort their unborn child.

Planned Parenthood, funded by the American taxpayer, is one of the world’s largest peddlers of sex-ed resources. Its materials are used and promoted in government schools worldwide.

Incredibly, despite the group’s rhetoric about “choice,” women’s rights advocate Reggie Littlejohn has repeatedly exposed Planned Parenthood’s cooperation with the Chinese Communist Party’s forced abortions and other brutal population-control schemes.

The Last Taboos

The pervasive sexualization of children in public schools is now pushing the boundaries against one of the last taboos: pedophilia, pederasty, and adult sex with children.

Under California’s LGBT mandate for schools, the Brea Olinda Unified School District (BOUSD) was caught including ancient Greek men’s proclivity to have sexual relations with boys—considered child rape in every state in the union—as part of teaching children LGBT history.

When confronted by outraged mother Stephanie Yates of Informed Parents of California, BOUSD Assistant Superintendent of Curricula Kerrie Torres said the children were being taught about it “because we are talking about historical perspectives of how gender relations and different types of sexual orientations have existed in history.”

Yates, the mom, sounded incredulous. “So sex between a man and a boy is a sexual orientation?” she asked.

The assistant superintendent held her ground. “It’s something that occurred in history, and so this is really important for us to include,” Torres said.

Despite there being a video of the exchange, frantic “fact checkers” tried unsuccessfully to quell the outrage, bizarrely defending the lessons.

But the truth is there for all to see. Increasingly, public schools are working to normalize sexual relationships between adults and children.

The message throughout 12 years of sexualization and indoctrination in school in essentially all the sex-ed major programs is simple: If there’s “consent,” nothing else matters, anything goes, and there are no rules when it comes to sex.

This view flies in the face of the teachings of all the world’s major religions and civilizations for thousands of years. In fact, it’s practically unprecedented in human history, with the possible exception of what the Bible records in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Outside ‘Sex Ed’ and Intersection With Critical Race Theory

Even outside of sex-ed classes, where in some states parents can technically opt their children out, the extreme sexualization and perversion has reached epidemic levels.

In English classes, for instance, children are told to read abominable “books” that feature extremely graphic descriptions of sexual acts and sexual violence.

There is also an intersection between the radical sexualization and the Critical Race Theory indoctrination exposed in part 19 of this series.

One exercise with endless variations that has been deployed in government schools nationwide has children “deconstruct” their identities and examine their “power and privilege” based on their race, gender, and sexual identity.

As part of the scheme, children are taught that being “cisgendered” (not transgender) or “heterosexual” gives them power and privilege, along with being white, while being transgender or homosexual makes them oppressed.

In such an exercise forced on 7- and 8-year-old government-school victims in Silicon Valley, the children were offered an example to drive the point home: “a white, cisgender man, who is able-bodied, heterosexual, considered handsome and speaks English has more privilege than a Black transgender woman.”

Just like Marxists have divided populations for over a century, children are classified into “oppressor” or “oppressed” categories based on whatever fault lines the subversives can concoct—with “sexuality” and “gender” now a key part of the mix.

Global Problem

This is not just happening in America. The United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (UNESCO), exposed in an earlier part of this series, is at the forefront of the effort to sexualize children worldwide, and especially in the West.

Indeed, many of the most outrageous elements of America’s most frequently used “sex-education” programs are perfectly consistent with UNESCO’s 2018 “International technical guidance on sexuality education.”

Citing Planned Parenthood’s ideologically driven “research” and “evidence” more than 20 times, the UN sex-ed standards call teaching children about “sexual pleasure” before they hit 10.

Incredibly, by age 5, children are supposed to describe how “gender and biological sex” are supposedly “different.”

By age 9, the UN guidelines teach children about masturbation and call for children to “describe male and female responses to sexual stimulation.” Children should also “demonstrate respect for diverse practices related to sexuality” and “explain how someone’s gender identity may not match their biological sex” by 9, the standards say.

By 12, children are expected to believe that “non-penetrative sexual behaviors” are “pleasurable” and less likely to result in infection than normal sex. The UN’s “learning objectives” demand that 12-year-olds “support the right for everyone” to “express their sexual feelings.”

Critics have blasted this as “grooming” children.

The UN document even includes helpful tips for educators on how to handle outraged parents and religious leaders concerned about the indoctrination.

Of course, there’s a reason the UN sex-ed document calls for sexualization of children “from the beginning of formal schooling.”

As UN LGBT czar Vitit Muntarbhorn put it in a 2017 interview with an Argentinian newspaper, to change the mentality of the population in favor of new sexual norms, “it is so important to start working with young people, the younger the better.” (Emphasis added).

Real Agenda

The focus on sex and perversion is clearly and literally ubiquitous in government schools across America and beyond. But why?

This was not seen as even acceptable until very recently—much less necessary. In fact, prior to the grotesque pseudo-science of pervert Alfred Kinsey, it would have been considered a criminal offense to subject children to these obscenities.

Advocates of sexualizing children as early as possible typically frame their arguments in terms of reducing STDs and unwanted or teen pregnancies while pursuing nebulous notions of “health” and “reproductive freedom” or “reproductive justice.”

Despite the fact that the explosion in teen pregnancies and venereal disease coincided with the sexualization of children in school by sexual revolutionaries, the tax-funded behemoths behind the push pump out endless junk studies purporting to support their fraudulent claims.

But obviously, if children were not having sex outside of marriage, the problems that “sex education” purports to solve would virtually cease to exist.

In short, there’s a much darker agenda at work. The sex “educators” themselves barely bother to hide it anymore.

Consider SIECUS, the group that grew out of Kinsey’s perverted pseudo-science. While it was once known as the Sexual Information and Education Council of the United States, now it is just SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change. And indeed, “social change” is the goal—radical, horrifying “social change.”

As far back as 1979, the CDC admitted there was an ulterior motive. In a report headlined “An Analysis of U.S. Sex Education Programs and Evaluation Methods,” researchers revealed that the “goals” of sex education in American schools had become “much more ambitious” than parents realized. Those goals included “the changing of … attitudes and behaviors.”

The government has long understood the consequences of this. Late psychoanalyst Dr. Melvin Anchell, who worked on President Lyndon Johnson’s Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, warned that these sexual indoctrination programs targeting children cause “irreparable harm” to their victims—damage that lasts their entire lives.

Among other dangers, Anchell identified severe damage to children’s future marriages, families, relationships, and lives. In some cases, it can even contribute to psychopathy, suicide, and mass murder, he warned.

Long before that, communist revolutionaries sought to demonize marriage and obliterate the family, too, producing unprecedented disaster. Consider, for example, the horrifying experience of Soviet Russia in the decade after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Sexual revolutionaries in the West have understood this for over a century, too. Atheist “psychiatrist” Dr. Wilhelm Reich, a self-styled “Freudo-Marxist” who was a Communist Party member and an associate of sex fanatic Sigmund Freud, saw what he first termed the “sexual revolution” not as an end in-and-of itself.

Instead, Reich saw it as a means to obliterate the family, and thereby facilitate the destruction of religious values. Ultimately, the hope was to achieve the breakdown of Western civilization by destroying the familial transmission belt by which values are passed on from one generation to the next.

The goal: allow Marxism to truly take root on the blank canvas created by the destruction of the old order.

To that end, Reich strongly encouraged “sex education” in school to “divest parents of their moral authority.”

As the family and the church are weakened through the unleashing of sexual anarchy via “sex education,” the government steps in and takes over in the roles formerly reserved for those two divinely ordained institutions.

The World in the Cross-hairs

Sharon Slater, president of Family Watch International and co-chair of the national Protect Child Health Coalition, told The Epoch Times that the goal is eventually to get the world onboard with this new value system.

“If they can raise up a generation indoctrinated in their harmful abortion rights, promiscuity rights, and radical transgender ideology, they will have indoctrinated the future leaders of the world,” she said.

“In fact, CSE is the number one tool of the abortion rights and LGBT rights lobby to promote their agendas worldwide by shaping the views of youth,” added Slater, who works to counter the agenda at the UN.

One of the most important tools created by her organization is a documentary called “The War on Children: The Comprehensive Sexuality Education Agenda.” It shines a light on the horrors being forced on children.

“CSE is a dangerous worldwide agenda intended to sexualize children at the youngest ages,” she explained. “I couldn’t sleep at night knowing what I knew and knowing most parents had no idea their children were being taught such harmful things.”

Sex Educators Sound the Alarm

Even former sex-ed teachers have blown the whistle on the subversive agenda behind sex ed. Monica Cline, for instance, spent a decade working as a comprehensive sex educator with Planned Parenthood before defecting and starting an organization dedicated to countering that.

“A big piece of this, which for some people, it’s something I think [is] hard for them to understand, is that there is a huge movement through socialism that really wants to do away with the nuclear family,” she explained to The Daily Signal, noting that abolishing private property is also part of the agenda.

“Sex education is a big piece of that, because when you teach children to dehumanize themselves, to take intimacy and family and marriage out of sex, even to the point of killing your own children through abortion, you are essentially killing the family,” Cline continued. “You’re destroying the family.”

Encouraging people to “read any curriculum” being used in sex-ed programs to see the tactics and graphic nature of the material, Cline noted that parents are always cut out of the picture when it comes to sex education.

“They want the children dependent on the government, or on public health, whatever it may be, but they do not want the children to be depending on the parent anymore,” she said. “And so, all of this really is to break down the family. And they’re essentially … we’re watching it happen.”

Disintegration of Family, Sterility, Slavery

In extended comments to The Epoch Times, Kimberly Ells, author of “The Invincible Family” and a longtime researcher and activist against the global sexualization of children, warned that the radical CSE programs have dangerous objectives that must be resisted.

“He who wins the youth wins the future,” she explained, echoing a common axiom. “So if government schools shape children’s views on sex, gender and family formation—and if those views reject the family as the core of civilization—then the core of civilization is up for grabs, and the government intends to grab it.”

Among other concerns, Ells warned that these programs are undermining parental authority, family values, and even family formation by encouraging children to reject their parents’ teachings and view sex as merely a pleasurable “right,” rather than part of a stable marriage.

The results of undermining family and marriage were predictable: over 40 percent of American children are now born out of wedlock (pdf), with almost one in four American children now living in a single-parent household.

The consequences of this family disintegration are horrific—and the problem is getting worse. But even beyond the crime, dependence, and poverty is the danger of tyranny stepping in to fill the void left by parents and families.

“Children who become slaves to the sexual appetites of their bodies early are more likely to become slaves in other areas of their lives,” added Ells, who has spoken at the UN.

Teaching children to reject biological sex as a relevant characteristic of one’s identity is even more nefarious. “At its core, this two-pronged ideology rejects the biological family—based on physiologically oppositional sex—as the fundamental unit of society,” she said.

“The T in LGBT is by far the most problematic,” Ells warned. “Same-sex marriage annihilates the idea that men and women are complementary. But transgenderism annihilates the idea that men and women inherently exist at all.”

Already, she said, legal movements around transgenderism are setting the stage for the “marginalization” of mothers, fathers, and families by law.

“When parents’ ties to their children are obscured or weakened it creates an environment hospitable to government intervention and socialist-communist revolution,” Ells continued. “That is why Marx’s Communist Manifesto openly called for the ‘abolition of the family.’”

“Dethroning the family creates a void that can and must be filled—though it is impossible to adequately fill it,” she said. “If we are to avoid the disembowelment of the family and the domination of the state that follows its disembowelment, we must resist efforts to cancel biological sex.”

Ells called on parents and policymakers to resist the erasing of male and female and end funding for UN agencies peddling the dangerous agenda. She also urged the removal of “sexual rights” advocates such as Planned Parenthood from schools and an end to CSE programming at all levels.

Protecting Children

Governments and school boards all across America have failed in their duty to protect children from the ubiquitous evils that now pervade the so-called “public education” system masquerading as “health” and “tolerance.”

In an earlier part of this series, the gut-wrenching history of this abusive sexualization of children in school was exposed featuring extensive interviews with Dr. Judith Reisman, who recently passed away. It literally goes back to perverts who sexually molested large numbers of children under the guise of “science.”

Americans are now confronted with a tax-funded monster that threatens not just the innocence of their children, but their liberties, families, and even the very future of their civilization.

Obviously, government at all levels has failed to protect children from the dangerous agenda they themselves unleashed. That leaves parents as the last barrier.

If the grotesque sex-ed extremism destroying America and her youth is going to be stopped, it will be up to loving moms and dads to lead the fight.


This article as originally published by The Epoch Times, and is one report in a series of articles examining the origins of government education in the United States.


More information:

Reasons to Exit Illinois Government Schools

Illinois School Proficiency FAILURE

Did You Know?

How to Rescue Our Children

“Comprehensive” Sex Education

For Parents, Grandparents and Church Leaders

Overcoming Objections





Big Foundations Unleashed Collectivist ‘Revolution’ via U.S. Schools

It may seem counterintuitive, but massive tax-exempt foundations funded by some of America’s most prominent capitalists and industrialists helped foment what congressional investigators described as a collectivist “revolution” in the United States.

The goal was to “so alter life in the United States that it could be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.” Many tools were used, but the public education system was the most important and effective.

Congress Investigation

In the early 1950s, with growing concerns of subversion and communist penetration surrounding the enormous foundations, the U.S. Congress launched investigations. Investigators for Congress’s Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations, sometimes referred to as the “Reece Committee,” after the chairman, found that there was good reason to be concerned.

According to the committee’s chief investigator, some of the foundations were weaponizing the American education system to enable what was described as “oligarchical collectivism,” or collectivist rule by an oligarchy. This was done by financing the promotion of “internationalism and moral relativism,” among other dangerous “isms,” investigators found.

The chief culprits included some of the largest and most important foundations in the United States. These included the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller foundations, and the Carnegie Endowment. According to congressional investigators, they were showering money on Columbia University, Harvard, Chicago University, and the University of California to advance their objectives through education. And it worked.

Norman Dodd, the director of research for Congress’s select committee, reported that the foundations had even orchestrated a “revolution” in the United States. The revolution “could not have occurred peacefully, or with the consent of the majority, unless education in the United States had been prepared in advance to endorse it,” Dodd told lawmakers in his sworn testimony.

The committee’s final report, released in late 1954, found that “some of the larger foundations have directly supported subversion in the true meaning of that term—namely, the process of undermining some of our vitally protective concepts and principles.” Those same entities have also “actively supported attacks upon our social and governmental system and financed the promotion of socialism and collectivist ideas,” investigators concluded.

Globalism and distorting history were also major priorities. In the final report, the committee noted that the foundations had “supported a conscious distortion of history.” As part of that, they also  “propagandized blindly for the United Nations as the hope for the world,” undermining American constitutional principles and liberty.

One of the experts who testified during the hearings was attorney Aaron Sargent, whose background included special investigations, especially into education and subversion. He told lawmakers that many of the big foundations were actively promoting socialism in the United States, in violation of the law and their charters, and that education was among their key tools.

“First of all, in approaching this problem of foundation influence, the subversive-teaching problem is a foundation problem,” he said, noting that the problem began in the 1890s. “This movement is closely related to Fabian socialism.” These subversives tried to infect America, but found it more difficult than in Britain due to Americanism, a written Constitution, and federal courts capable of protecting constitutional rights.

And so, the radicals “relied upon propaganda and brainwashing,” using the school system to attack patriotism, natural law, and even real history, said Sargent, who was asked to serve as counsel to the select committee but had to decline. “They sought to create a blackout of history by slanting and distorting historical facts,” he testified. “They introduced a new and revolutionary philosophy—one based on the teachings of John Dewey.”

On the educational front, he said, the story actually begins with the Rockefeller-funded Dewey Laboratory School at the University of Chicago, a topic that has already been explored in this series. From there, Dewey “expounded a principle which has become destructive of traditions and has created the difficulties and the confusion … that we find today.” As part of that, “Professor Dewey denied that there was any such thing as absolute truth,” a concept that was “revolutionary in practice.”

Foundations’ Role

In previous articles in this series on the history of public education, the Rockefeller dynasty’s role in funding collectivist “education reformer” John Dewey, widely considered to be the “father” of America’s public school system, was documented extensively. The Rockefeller philanthropies—especially the “General Education Board”—provided millions of dollars to advance Dewey’s quackery around the end of the 19th century and into the beginning of the 20th.

But that would be just the beginning. Rockefeller money also helped resettle the communists of the Frankfurt School at prestigious U.S. academic institutions, primarily Dewey’s Columbia University. From there, their subversive poison infected all of U.S. society, mostly through the public education system.

The Rockefeller dynasty was key in shaping education policy. In 1902, facing an avalanche of bad publicity over his ruthless business practices, oil baron John D. Rockefeller created the “General Education Board.” This ostensibly “philanthropic” venture was used to help fund and eventually control education in the United States.

Rockefeller put Frederick Gates in charge of his “charitable” schemes. And Gates was honest about the agenda. “In our dream we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand,” Gates wrote in “The Country School of To-morrow, Occasional Papers Number 1.”

“The present educational conventions fade from our minds; and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk.”

He was clear that the goal was not to raise up philosophers, scientists, authors, poets, musicians, artists, lawyers, doctors, preachers, or statesmen. There was already an “ample supply” of those, he said. Instead, the goal was to create docile and largely unthinking workers who could be used and controlled by the elites.

The ultimate goal of all this subversion from the mega-foundations, though, was even more horrifying.

Dodd Interview

In an interview with G. Edward Griffin in 1982, chief investigator Dodd dropped a bombshell that should have, and would have, shocked America to the core—at least if it had been more widely known. The goal of the foundations’ scheming in education and beyond was to crush individualism, promote collectivism, and prepare the way for the United States to be merged with the totalitarian Soviet Union.

While investigating, Dodd was contacted by Ford Foundation President Alan Gaither and asked to come to the foundation’s offices in New York. “On arrival, after a few amenities, Mr. Gaither said, ‘Mr. Dodd, we have asked you to come up here today because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as ourselves,’” Dodd recalled in the interview.

Dodd continued: “Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on voluntarily and stated: ‘Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here have had experience … operating under directives … the substance of which is, that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.’”

In short, the head of the Ford Foundation, one of the most influential in the world, told the chief congressional investigator of a committee investigating foundations that the foundations were helping to pave the way to a merger of the free world with the slave world. And Americans remained blissfully unaware, as the cancer crept in quietly through the school system over a period of generations.

According to Dodd and the congressional investigation, the Carnegie foundations decided after World War I that gaining control of education would be crucial. The leadership’s goal at that time, Dodd said, was to prevent “a reversion of life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914.” But the task was so enormous that it would require help. And so, while the Carnegie Endowment would focus on international education matters, the Rockefeller foundations were put in charge of domestic initiatives, according to documents uncovered by investigators in the Carnegie Endowment’s archives.

“The effect was to orient our educational system away from support of the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence, and implemented in the Constitution, and educate them over to the idea that the task now was, as a result of the orientation of education, away from these briefly stated principles and self-evident truths,” Dodd said in the interview.

“What we had uncovered was the determination of these large endowed foundations, through their trustees, to actually get control over the content of American education.”

Investigations also found that since at least the 1930s, Moscow decided to infiltrate educational and large foundations in the United States. Following their orders from the Soviet Union, American communists even created a commission focused on infiltrating and taking over foundations.

One of the major successes identified by the congressional investigators was Soviet agent Alger Hiss, who became president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace after playing a starring role in creating the United Nations. He was later exposed as a spy for Joseph Stalin’s mass-murdering regime.

Current State

This work of the major foundations continues to this day. Consider, for example, Microsoft founder Bill Gates pouring billions of dollars into “education reform” and into supporting the collectivist agenda of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). In fact, Gates’s foundation was, aside from U.S. taxpayers, the single largest financier of Common Core, the universally reviled national (and internationally aligned) “standards” imposed on the United States by the Obama administration. More on that in a future piece of this education series.

The Rockefeller foundations also continue to be deeply involved in “education.” And key Rockefeller bigwigs have become increasingly open about their real agenda. In his autobiography, for instance, the late dynasty patriarch David Rockefeller dropped a bombshell.

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure–one world, if you will,” he wrote on page 405. “If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

When examining these facts, it seems perplexing that the wealth of some of America’s most important super-capitalists would be put to use advancing collectivism, subversion, and even socialism. And yet, it was hardly a new phenomenon. In his important book “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution,” Stanford historian Anthony Sutton meticulously documented the role of major bankers and financiers from New York City in financing the communist enslavement of the Russian people.

It is time for Americans to completely rethink education or be destroyed. That rethink must involve discarding all of the quackery and subversive influences brought about by collectivists such as Dewey, and the out-of-control foundations that funded and helped them. The future of United States and liberty literally depend on sorting out this mess.


This article was originally published by The Epoch Times, and is one report in a series of articles examining the origins of government education in the United States.




Imagine A Revision of Greta Thunberg’s Screed

Buzzfeed has an article about social media attacks on the tweens and teens whom Leftist adults are exploiting as shields by allowing these children to lead the climate change charge.

Since every adult knows what a poisonous and malevolent force social media is, why are these kids’ parents allowing them to be exploited by Leftists, thereby becoming social media targets? If Silicon Valley parents and conservative parents can keep their kids from having smart phones, iPads, and social media accounts, can’t Greta Thunberg’s parents keep her from traveling across the ocean to thunder at adults at the U.N.?

The article quotes a climate scientist from Texas Tech University who claims these kids—who have been unjustifiably terrified by Leftist doomsday prognostications—are being attacked because they’re “effective.” Nope. These kids are being attacked because they’re kids sanctimoniously lecturing adults. Of course, not even presumptuous words from children justify malignant social media attacks, but it’s not the kids’ effectiveness that grates on adults.

Here’s a little thought experiment. Imagine how “progressives” would respond if a weeping conservative teen were to deliver this revision of Greta Thunberg’s screed:

My message is that we’ll be watching you.

This is all wrong. I shouldn’t be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean. Yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you!

You have stolen our dreams and our childhood with your false and destructive words about sexuality. And yet I’m one of the lucky ones. People are suffering. People are dying. The bodies, hearts, and minds of thousands of children in developed countries are being destroyed. We are in the beginning of a mass delusion, and all you can talk about is fairy tales about the existence of 100 genders and if it feels good, do it. How dare you!

For more than 50 years, the hard science has been crystal clear about the reality of biological sex, the health risks of sexual promiscuity, and that the product of conception between two humans is a human being. And social science has been crystal clear about the good effects on children of being raised by their biological parents in an intact family. How dare you continue to look away from both science and morality! You’re doing nothing when the politics and solutions needed are still nowhere in sight.

You say you hear us and that you understand the urgency. But no matter how sad and angry I am, I do not want to believe that. Because if you really understood the situation and still kept failing to act, then you would be evil. And that I refuse to believe.

Children are being commodified, with their genetic material bought and sold like meat on a commodities exchange. They are being deliberately denied mothers or fathers. They’re growing up in a world awash in sexually transmitted infections and pornography. They’re being taught in schools about anal sex and homosexuality. They’re being sterilized and mutilated by doctors at the behest of parents. And at the behest of their own mothers, they’re being exterminated before they breathe their first breath.

You are failing us. But the young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us, I say: We will never forgive you.

We will not let you get away with this. Right here, right now is where we draw the line. The world is waking up. And change is coming, whether you like it or not.

I’m sure inclusive, compassionate, equitable “progressives” fully committed to diversity would welcome such a speech with the tolerance to which we conservatives have become accustomed.

Listen to this article read by Laurie:

https://staging.illinoisfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta-thunberg-parody_mixdown1.mp3



IFI depends on the support of concerned-citizens like you. Donate now

-and, please-




Battle for the Children: The Parental Rights Amendment Versus the United Nations

The U.S. Supreme Court of the United States has consistently upheld the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children within the guarantee of liberty found in the U.S. Constitution. A subversive movement emanating from the United Nations, however, is seeking to undermine parental authority by, in effect, making children wards of the State. Under the guise of protecting children, globalists are pushing a draconian agenda known as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which if ratified will overrule the authority of parents to act in the best interests of their children.

Standing between American families and the all-consuming power of the State is the Parental Rights Amendment to the United States constitution. This constitutional amendment will protect parents and their offspring from an overreaching bureaucracy that promotes unbiblical practices that harm children and also punishes households that seek to maintain Christian values.

Only two countries, the United States and Somalia, have not approved the UNCRC. According to Article VI of the United States Constitution, all treaties entered into by America “shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” Ratification of the UNCRC would, therefore, limit American sovereignty and supersede all federal or state laws. But the endorsement of any treaty requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate to pass, which the Senate has thus far failed to achieve.

At first glance the UNCRC sounds both appropriate and needed. After all, few would disagree that children should have human rights as well as adults. But, as they say, the devil is in the details, and the UNCRC truly emanates from the Pit. It would sweep aside all restrictions on abortion and contraception under the rubric of providing “health care services” to children–without the consent of their parents.

Moreover, children will be indoctrinated with values and views that many parents will find objectionable. The UNCRC mandates that underaged youth be exposed to “information and material from a diversity of national and international sources,” including a variety of viewpoints related to their “spiritual and moral well-being,”–once again, values and views that many parents will find offensive.

Relegating the instruction of moral and religious beliefs to a host of questionable sources will have predictably  deleterious consequences. The United Kingdom is a prime example of what happens when the State becomes the instructor of ethics. A government-issued pamphlet entitled “Talking to Your Teenager about Sex and Relationships” advises children to choose their own morals regarding sexuality and instructs parents to keep silent lest they discourage their children from exploring any and all views on sexuality and relationships.

The World Policy Analysis Center at UCLA’s Fielding School of Public Health noted a number of areas of progress regarding children’s rights since the introduction of the UNCRC. However, the Center also noted that “Global challenges still remain in the area of child marriage.” Despite all the rhetoric about “children’s rights,” the proponents of the UNCRC still cannot face up to the massive inconsistencies of their position.  If they are fighting for “children’s rights,” should that not include the right to marry?

Far from evincing concern about this worldwide scourge, the UNCRC apparently approves of the “right” of children to be forcibly married at young ages.  Michael P. Farris, is a constitutional lawyer and president of ParentalRights.org, an organization that has been campaigning against U.S. ratification of “dangerous U.N conventions that “threaten parental rights” such as the UNCRC.   Farris notes:

“The United States demonstrates its commitment to human rights whenever it follows and enforces the Constitution of the United States, which is the greatest human rights instrument in all history.”

The Washington Post predictably rails against Farris and ParentalRights.org, claiming:

The group fears that ratifying the treaty would mean children could choose their own religion, that children would have a legally enforceable right to leisure, that nations would have to spend more on children’s welfare than national defense, and that a child’s ‘right to be heard’ could trigger a governmental review of any decision a parent made that a child didn’t like.  

The Post is apparently oblivious to the fact that children have few if any of these “rights” in the vast majority of countries that so eagerly climbed aboard the bandwagon of the UNCRC. According to The Post,

The United States can learn from other member nations on how to reduce poverty, ensure women’s rights, improve education and educational access, and healthy living conditions, for starters.  

Such facetious claims are the epitome of hypocrisy when hundreds of thousands of migrants from Central America have either arrived or are at this very moment making the arduous thousand-mile journey on foot to have the opportunity to cross the border and enjoy lavish government benefits that are unknown in much of the world.

The Migrant Policy Institute confirms that the United States is by far the preeminent destination country for migrants seeking a better life–with more than four times the number of immigrants seeking asylum than in the second-place country: Saudi Arabia. Accounts of the horrific abuse suffered by those who are forced out of necessity to work in the desert kingdom are well-known, but lie beyond the scope of this article.

Contradicting the implications of the UNCRC charter, another United Nations organization, UNICEF, states unambiguously:

Marriage before the age of 18 is a fundamental violation of human rights…. Child marriage often compromises a girl’s development by resulting in early pregnancy and social isolation, interrupting her schooling, limiting her opportunities for career and vocational advancement and placing her at increased risk of domestic violence. Child marriage also affects boys, but to a lesser degree than girls.

Yet today dozens of countries openly allow child marriages below the age of fifteen. While the United Nations is quick to condemn the United States for its alleged failures, nary a peep is heard concerning the travesty of child marriages primarily in South America and the Arab world, which have the highest rates of child marriages.

Hope is on the way: the Parental Rights Amendment to the United States constitution is gaining momentum.  Introduced this week by U.S. Representative Jim Banks (R-IN).  The Amendment already has fifteen cosponsors, six more than when it was introduced last year.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Congressional representative to urge him/her to become a cosponsor of the Parental Rights Amendment (H.J. Res. 36).  The Parental Rights Amendment will ensure that the next generation of children will be raised and guided by their loving parents, not by an impersonal government bureaucracy pushing an agenda inimical to the values of American families.


Christian Life in Exile
On February 22nd, IFI is hosting a special forum with Dr. Erwin Lutzer as he teaches from his latest book, “The Church in Babylon,” answering the question, “How do we live faithfully in a culture that perceives our light as darkness?” This event is free and open to the public, and will be held at Jubilee Church in Medinah, Illinois.

Click HERE for more info…




Identity Politics: Is America and the World Running Out of Patience with LGBTQIA Activism?

The topic of identity politics and the widening opportunity it presents to conservatives continues to be a hot topic. Here are just three examples from recent op eds.

First up is Glenn Stanton writing at Public Discourse:

Is America Running Out of Patience with LGBT Activism?

From surprisingly fast and unexpected victory can come great hubris and the desire to utterly crush one’s opponents.

GLAAD, a leading gay advocacy outfit, released a new report showing that positive attitudes toward homosexuality and people who identify as LGBT have decreased a bit over the last few years. They sum up their findings rather starkly: “This year’s survey reflects a decline with people’s comfort year-over-year in every LGBTQ situation…”

The organization shows great concern over what they describe as the “significant decline in overall comfort and acceptance of LGBTQ people… This year the acceptance pendulum abruptly stopped and swung in the opposite direction.”

Why? Glenn Stanton answers by asking, “Could it be the LGBT community’s post-Obergefell actions and attitudes have not rested well with mainstream America?” Obergefell was the U.S. Supreme Court’s marriage decision.

This is not an outlandish hypothesis. Even some major leaders in the LGBT community have suggested it. Andrew Sullivan, writing about the GLAAD report in New York magazine, warns that no one “seems to notice the profound shift in the tone and substance of advocacy for gay equality in recent years, and the radicalization of the movement’s ideology and rhetoric.” This aggressive radicalization “is surely having an impact,” he holds. How could it not, Sullivan asks, when his movement’s public rhetoric shifted from “live and let live” to the thunderously demonizing “agree with us in every regard or be a bigot”?

In typical fashion, unfortunately, too few social conservatives in political office or on the campaign trail seem to have the intellectual or moral wherewithal to take advantage of this development.

Stanton concludes his article with this:

Perhaps GLAAD and its allies should learn to practice what they preach: tolerance of other people’s beliefs and practices, even if they don’t fully understand them.

Writing at The Federalist, Chad Felix Greene wrote about the same GLAAD report:

Why Americans’ ‘Comfort Levels’ With LGBT People Dropped Last Year

LGBT organizations’ efforts to coerce, impose, and enforce their ideas appear to be resulting in the exact opposite of what they wish to achieve.

Greene writes that the context of the shift in opinion coincides with the LGBT focus on transgender advocacy, and that it “may have an impact on how average Americans view LGBT as a whole.”

The left has a strange sense of entitlement to not only acceptance from the larger society, but also a universal embrace of their ideology. It is not enough to hold legal and civil equality — society must celebrate them as well. As a result, their rhetoric and activism become ever more petty and vindictive and naturally, the majority they accuse becomes more resentful.

. . .

The LGBT movement is deeply reliant on social acceptance and approval and wishes to micromanage how we perceive them. But their efforts to coerce, impose and enforce radical policy and ideas onto the culture appear to be resulting in the exact opposite of what they wish to achieve.

Evidently it extends beyond American sentiment and the GLAAD report — here is Stefano Gennarini also writing at The Federalist:

How Their Refusal To Tolerate Dissent Is Creating A Global Backlash Against LGBT People

Promoting LGBT preferences abroad is more likely to cause backlash against the very people it is intended to help, besides harming our standing in the world, as recent events show.

Last December, Politico published a leaked memo by State Department senior aide Brian Hook, on the importance of realism in U.S. foreign policy… Hook argues that instead of seeking to impose human rights, democracy, and liberal values, the United States should lead by example and incentivize good behavior.

This return to pragmatism breaks with the Obama years’ rigid ideological dogmatism about human rights and clearly rattled the bureaucrats who leaked the memo. But his arguments cannot be easily shoved aside. Promoting a rigid leftist agenda internationally is a form of social engineering.

“Nowhere is the obtuseness of this idealistic approach more evident,” Greene writes, “than in U.S. promotion of LGBT policies abroad.”

Without applying any moral calculus, a realist approach to foreign affairs requires accepting that LGBT rights likely will never be accepted by all the people of the world, no matter how many millions of dollars we pour into foreign LGBT organizations.

“Sadly, extreme LGBT ideologues do not accept reality,” Greene writes, citing the Masterpiece Cakeshop Supreme Court case. Their goal, he writes, “domestically and globally, is to impose social acceptance of homosexuality and transgenderism even on those unwilling to celebrate it.”

Greene notes that United Nations Delegates “routinely complained about the relentless LGBT pressure from the Obama administration,” and concludes:

The State Department should not be peddling LGBT fantasies as legitimate foreign policy. It should severely dial back the LGBT pressure and reset on more attainable and less controversial goals. All-out LGBT diplomacy was always a losing proposition. It should have never happened. Cleaning up this mess will require significant changes.

The moment we are in presents a great chance to win back some cultural ground. Will more social conservative elected officials and candidates find the courage to speak more boldly in defense of common sense and in opposition to the radical left-wing LGBT(etc.) agenda? The Leftist agenda could be imploding — now is the time for our leaders to lead on all the issues — including the social issues.

Read more:  Series: Identity Politics & Paraphilias


RESCHEDULED: IFI Worldview Conference May 5th

We have rescheduled our annual Worldview Conference featuring well-know apologist John Stonestreet for Saturday, May 5th at Medinah Baptist Church. Mr. Stonestreet is s a dynamic speaker and the award-winning author of “Making Sense of Your World” and his newest offer: “A Practical Guide to Culture.”

Join us for a wonderful opportunity to take enhance your biblical worldview and equip you to more effectively engage the culture.

Click HERE to learn more or to register!




Baby Blood in the Water Tastes Like Money

The pro-child-death regime seems to be kicking into high gear. It’s unclear whether they fear a rising tide of opposition to womb-killing or if they smell the blood swirling in the miasmic waters that envelop the world.

Laurie's Chinwags_thumbnailChildren, always easy prey for uncivilized peoples, are perhaps at greater risk and more devalued than at any time in modern life. Homosexuals who choose sterile sex and yet believe they are entitled to children are acquiring them like chattel to be raised without mothers or fathers and in the midst of soul-killing sexual perversion masquerading as “love.” The Internet devours children in its black hole of child porn sewage. Muslim extremists starve, kidnap, sell, rape, and murder children. And baby-killing profiteers can taste the blood of children, and it tastes like money.

Let’s take a metaphorical boat-ride around these bloody waters.

The United Nations

On August 17, 2016, 435 baby-killing enthusiasts sent an open letter to United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and heads of all UN agencies announcing that they “support the proposal of the International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion that you declare 28 September, International Safe Abortion Day, an official international UN Day.” Yes, nothing says “safety” quite like being slaughtered in utero.

One of the reasons feticide enthusiasts cite for an official International Safe Abortion Day is the increase in the number of annual abortions worldwide from 50.4 million every year between the years of 1990-94 to 56.3 million every year between the years 2010-14. Feticide enthusiasts want to ensure that the ghastly number of baby-killings each year won’t adversely affect the health of the babies’ mothers.

Planned Parenthood

Here in the Land of Lincoln, the baby-killing machine, euphemistically named Planned Parenthood, colludes with the perverse “Shout Your Abortion” (#SYA773) crowd to celebrate the so-called “right” of mothers to kill their unborn babies—oh, and to profit from the bodies of the dead.

Evidently, the $300 million Planned Parenthood gets from the government isn’t sufficient to sustain their “charitable” work, so there are several frolicsome fundraising events planned at the Empty Bottle in Chicago to make money for Planned Parenthood. The “Shout Your Abortion” peeps describe the collusion thusly:

The Chicago chapter of #ShoutYourAbortion (SYA773) and the Empty Bottle team up to raise money for Planned Parenthood, a vital American nonprofit.” [emphasis mine]

Just think, on November 4, 2016 at the Empty Bottle, you can enjoy an evening listening to the band Natural Child who are “Hellbent on finding the next beer, bong or girl to suck on” and make money for Planned Parenthood!

Or if you’re busy on November 4, on November 9, you can go hear MELKBELLY who “always turn that sh*t up to 11 whenever they hit the stage and we can’t wait to see how they kick this sh*tstorm into high gear tonight.” And in the midst of the “sh*tstorm,” you can help support the Planned Parenthood death squad. Sounds like a win-win to me.

“Catholics for Choice”

In case you missed it, on September 12, 2016, apostate Catholics spent a boatload of money for full-page ads in major cities across the country to promote the peculiar view that slaughtering babies in utero comports with Catholicism and with justice.

The ad read, “Public funding for abortion is a Catholic social justice value.” Such a claim reveals the organization’s profound ignorance. Social means, “pertaining to, devoted to, or characterized by friendly relations” or more generally, “living together in communities.” There’s nothing less likely to foster good relations in a community than forcing community members to be complicit in killing developing humans in the womb.

Justice means “the principle of moral rightness; conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness.” I can think of few things less “righteous” than requiring citizens to fund feticide—well, except for feticide itself.

And since the Catholic Church opposes abortion, the claim of Catholics for Choice that public funding for abortion is a Catholic value is a bald-faced lie. But hey, if men can call themselves women, why can’t Catholic apostates call themselves Catholics?

“Luke, I am your…grandchild”: The myth of choice

An unsavory family drama is unfolding in Luke Skywalker’s family. The New York Post first reported that now-former girlfriend of Nathan Hamill, Mark Hamill’s son, has been pressured by Nathan and his parents to abort her and Nathan’s baby who is due in October.

After a failed attempt at a chemical abortion, the mother, Maegen Chen decided not to go through with another attempt, and the coercive efforts of the Hamills to have their first grandchild killed intensified, with Nathan’s mother Marilou telling Maegen that her relationship with Nathan would end if she didn’t kill Marilou’s grandchild: “With baby, you won’t see him; without baby, you will.”

As virtually everyone knows the word “choice” is a politically strategic euphemism exploited to conceal and sanitize what is being chosen: the unjust slaughter of a tiny human in the womb. Why not just say it.

The Hamill story exposes the myth that women are freely choosing to kill their offspring. The truth is that often parents, boyfriends, and husbands pressure women to kill their children.

Quite obviously the product of conception between two humans is a human, and no human has a moral right to end the life of another. Lack of full physical maturation on the part of one human doesn’t give other more developed humans the right to kill him or her. Neither does a human’s imperfections, geographic location, dependency status, nor “unwantedness” grant more developed humans a right to kill him or her.

Jeh Johnson’s family legacy

In researching the barbarous activities of the pseudo-civilized personalities stumping for baby-killing, I learned the sordid story of Dr. Kenneth Edelin, who died in 2014 and was the uncle of Jeh Johnson, President Barack Obama’s secretary of Homeland Security. Johnson, it turns out, comes from a line of  feticide-supporters and practitioners.

Johnson’s mother, Norma (Edelin) Johnson, was an associate director of a Planned Parenthood facility in Poughkeepsie, New York, and his uncle was the infamous Dr. Kenneth Edelin who was at the center of a famous court case over his gruesome 1973 (legal) slaughter of a baby boy during his 24th week of development.

During  Edelin’s trial, it was revealed that the 17-year-old mother’s womb had been injected with a saline solution which ordinarily burns and poisons the baby and initiates uterine contractions that lead to the expulsion of the baby. The injections were unsuccessful, so Edelin performed a “hysterotomy” in which he made an incision in the womb (as in a caesarean section), reached in, and by hand separated the baby from the placental wall.

According to Edelin’s obituary in the Washington Post, “A doctor who witnessed the operation testified that Dr. Edelin had watched a clock for at least three minutes while holding the fetus inside the womb in order to ensure that the fetus had died before it was removed.”

Edelin disputed that claim and said that if the baby had been born alive, he “would have taken steps to get it to the nursery.”

Wow. Such compassion to be willing to take a baby whom he hadn’t successfully slaughtered to a nursery.

Edelin’s compassionate side was demonstrated again in 1975 when he told  the New York Times that “Nobody likes to do abortions…but the least we can do is make it safe and humane.”

Safe and humane for whom? For the baby boy pulled from the womb and suffocated?

Edelin, who became a hero to feticide fanatics, was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to a year’s probation. Unfortunately, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court later overturned his conviction, arguing that “only when a fetus had been born alive outside its mother could it become a ‘person’ within the meaning of the statute.”

Edelin went on to become chairman of the board at Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

So, parents, teach your children well.


Please Prayerfully consider how you can support
the work and ministry of IFI through a donation.

Donate-now-button1




U.S. Senate Committee to Hold Hearing on Dangerous UN Treaty

Taken from a HSLDA alert:

The U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations is scheduled to hold a hearing on the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) on Thursday, July 12. Phone calls and emails are needed to our two U.S. senators to urge them to oppose this dangerous treaty.

HSLDA Founder and constitutional attorney Mike Farris has written a short memo on the dangers to U.S. sovereignty, family freedom, and homeschooling if the U.S. Senate votes to ratify the CRPD. You can read his memo online.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send an email to U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Mark Kirk asking them to oppose CRPD.  You can also call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121.  Your message can be as simple as the following:

“Please oppose ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. As our nation gathers to celebrate Independence Day, it is outrageous that U.S. senators would support a treaty that surrenders U.S. sovereignty to unelected UN bureaucrats. Our nation already has laws to protect disabled Americans. This treaty is unnecessary and will hurt families.”

The Americans with Disabilities Act was passed by Congress to specifically protect disabled Americans. There is no need for the U.S. Senate to ratify the CRPD, as our nation’s state and federal laws already protect these precious citizens. Sadly, this treaty — if ratified by the U.S. Senate — would do great harm to disabled children and adults by subjecting parents, families, and caregivers to UN oversight, regulation, and control. 

In addition to calling your two U.S. Senators, we urge you to visit their Facebook pages and leave your comments about this treaty. Please also forward this information to your family and friends and encourage them to oppose this treaty. Families, not the United Nations, are best suited to care for their loved ones with disabilities. We don’t need unelected international bureaucrats to tell us how to do that.




Free Families to Serve God and One Another

In his famous letter from a Birmingham jail Martin Luther King Jr. observed, “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” Senator Kimberly Lightford (D-Westchester area) has introduced a very troubling anti-family, big government resolution.

Senator Lightford’s resolution calls for the support of a radical United Nations treaty that would usurp parental authority to oversee their own children. If this treaty is officially ratified by the United States Senate, it would become legally enforcible throughout our country. The Lightford resolution, if passed by the Illinois General Assembly, will put Illinois on record in support of the horrible United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

The adoption of this evil globalist resolution will force the government into the sacred parent-child relationship. CRC supporters want the government to have a say in what church your children attend, how much time they spend on chores, what websites and books they read, whether they should be homeschooled, and who they choose for friends.

According to the Homeschool Legal Defense Association Senator Lightford’s legislation will “enable state agencies and judges to begin implementing aspects of the CRC in the state of Illinois, even if the U.S. Senate never ratifies it.”

To preserve freedom, families in Illinois must demand the rejection of the Lightford resolution, and instead ask their representative to endorse the important Parental Rights Amendment, which is being introduced in state legislatures all over America. (Watch for more information on this in the near future!)

Remember, Christian families must diligently and vigorously defend freedom. Dr. King’s observation above reminds us of the fact that our godless government is not just going to give it to us.

Take ACTION: Send an email or a fax to your representative. Urge them to reject the Lightford resolution — SR 92 –.

You can also call the Capitol switchboard at 217-782-2000.

It is vital that you voice your concerns to your your elected officials in Springfield regarding SR 92.