Censorship during the COVID era has included banning certain claims made on major social media if they <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-will-ban-anything-against-who-guidance-2020-4">contradicted the official health policy</a>. Doctors who spoke out have had their <a href="https://thedcpatriot.com/linkedin-deletes-account-of-mrna-vaccines-inventor-for-warning-about-the-risks-of-covid-19-shots/">accounts closed</a>, and organizations, including America’s Frontline Doctors, even had their <a href="https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/06/amazon-deletes-americas-frontline-doctors-website-internet-doctors-scramble-salvage-site/">websites taken offline</a> for challenging parts of the mainstream COVID narrative.That was then, and while the censorship continues, it was largely done by private companies. Recently, governments themselves are getting more directly involved in the suppression of content they don’t like. &nbsp;Last summer, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/psaki-white-house-flagging-covid-disinformation-for-social-media-companies/">said</a> that Facebook has an obligation to use its power to promote quality information sources in their feed algorithm and that the White House itself was working with the company and even flagging “problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation”.&nbsp;Just last week, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, took matters a step further and demanded that private tech companies submit to the government “exactly how many users saw or may have been exposed to instances of COVID19 misinformation, as well as aggregate data on demographics that may have been disproportionately exposed to or affected by the misinformation,” <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220303131035/https:/www.nytimes.com/2022/03/03/technology/surgeon-general-covid-misinformation.html">as reported</a> in the New York Times. &nbsp;&nbsp;In addition, the Surgeon General “demanded information from the platforms about the major sources of COVID-19 misinformation, including those that engaged in the sale of unproven COVID-19 products, services, and treatments.”The government is now taking an active role in determining what is “misinformation” and demanding that private companies hand over user information of those who challenge the government’s idea of what is true or false.&nbsp;Just a few weeks ago the Department of Homeland Security, in their <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/ntas/advisory/national-terrorism-advisory-system-bulletin-february-07-2022">National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin,</a> said that “The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of&nbsp;mis- dis- and mal-information&nbsp;(MDM).”And how are these ideas a threat to national security? The bulletin continues, “... the proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions...”So, information that undermines trust in the government, is considered a security threat. It can be removed at the government’s request, and those who share it need to be reported to the authorities. All this because of a difference of opinion on what is true and false regarding how to treat and prevent a virus. None of this was done in the past for other viruses. Even during the riots in the summer of 2020 when there was a clear security threat, with leaders openly <a href="https://nypost.com/2021/11/11/blm-leader-hawk-newsome-threatens-riots-after-sit-down-with-eric-adams/">calling for violence</a> the government didn’t call on big tech to report on their communications. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<h3>&nbsp;</h3><h4>Censorship at the state level</h4>At the state level, California is taking the lead with two pieces of legislation. Last month, <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVersionsCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1018">Bill 1018</a>&nbsp;was introduced in the state senate that would “require online platforms like Facebook and Google to disclose the algorithms that determine which content users see… The platforms would also need to share their data with researchers,” as reported in the <a href="https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article258414743.html">Sacramento Bee</a>.State Senator Richard Pan said that these disclosures would provide information that would allow lawmakers to better understand why COVID misinformation is so prevalent and how to prevent its spread.&nbsp;If passed, the government would be receiving information about how private citizens are communicating with each other on topics the government considers false, for the expressed purpose of suppressing those communications. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Earlier in the government’s crackdown on dissenting views, doctors were a primary target, and so it continues with a new bill introduced in California’s state assembly, &nbsp;<a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2098">Bill 2098</a>.Section 2 states that “It shall constitute unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to disseminate or promote misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”While the public deserves to have accurate information from their doctors, and on social media, these new government initiatives aimed at reducing misinformation, make the government the arbiter of what’s true and empower it to enforce that truth.By any measure, these developments present a significant departure from the liberal-democratic principles of free expression.&nbsp;<h3>&nbsp;</h3><h4>Speaking out against censorship</h4>“No matter which party is in power, the government cannot be trusted to label 'truth' or 'fiction' any more than Facebook or Twitter can,” <a href="https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1417632367200673794?s=20&amp;t=EBbocPKmotUYB_gR44IOWw">tweeted</a> the ACLU last July, when governments were merely working with tech companies to censor and not yet demanding.Amnesty International complied a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/10/covid-19-global-attack-on-freedom-of-expression-is-having-a-dangerous-impact-on-public-health-crisis/">40-page report</a> documenting how governments across the world were using censorship and punishment, and how it has reduced the quality of information reaching people. While the report focused on the developing world, the principles apply universally. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;“Winning the battle against the virus includes not just government-led actions, but also bottom-up approaches which can only come about if freedom of expression and access to information are enabled,” the report stated in its executive summary.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h4>The dangers of censorship</h4>Indeed, free expression has been at the core not only of free societies but of scientific progress. Scientific inquiry includes the questioning of current assumptions and understandings. There was a time when <a href="https://www.history.com/news/cigarette-ads-doctors-smoking-endorsement">cigarettes were considered to be healthy</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/beyond-silent-spring-an-alternate-history-of-ddt">DDT was safe</a>. These facts were challenged, perhaps were considered misinformation at first, but later accepted as scientific fact.&nbsp;<blockquote>“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge”&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -Daniel Boorstin</blockquote>The same is true in the COVID-era. Scientists, including the WHO, believed that the virus <a href="https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/332197/WHO-2019-nCoV-FAQ-Virus_origin-2020.1-eng.pdf">originated naturally</a> and were so <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext">sure of their assertion</a> that they labeled opposing theories “misinformation”. &nbsp;These alternate theories were condemned and bans were <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9612833/How-Facebook-bans-users-saying-Covid-man-made.html">put in place</a>. Despite the bans, <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins">scientists communicated</a> under the radar to investigate and find new evidence showing that the virus more likely originated in a lab. Eventually, the lab-leak theory proved to be a legitimate and plausible explanation, and the original scientists' <a href="https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/lancet-editor-comes-clean-admits-he-knew-peter-daszak-had-significant-regrettable" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">conflicts of interest</a> were revealed. &nbsp;&nbsp;Nation-wide lockdowns were not considered to be an effective way of controlling respiratory illnesses and such policies were not included in pre-COVID <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/national-strategy/index.html">national pandemic planning</a>. One <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17238820/">study</a> considered the concept and concluded, “The negative consequences… are so extreme” that this measure “should be eliminated from serious consideration.”&nbsp;With the emergence of COVID, the WHO and many other groups of scientists challenged that assertion and led the world to months of lockdowns and social restrictions. “Stay at home to save lives” was asserted as a scientific truth that <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/02/15/lockdown-debate-skewed-sceptical-scientists-shunned-social-media/">should not be challenged</a>. After enough scientists began challenging that notion, more <a href="https://brownstone.org/articles/more-than-400-studies-on-the-failure-of-compulsory-covid-interventions/">research was done</a> that showed lockdowns were indeed harmful and ineffective.If the government’s censorship criteria were applied uniformly, both sets of scientists arguing for and against COVID’s origins, and the effectiveness of lockdowns, would be guilty of spreading “misinformation”.&nbsp;<h3>&nbsp;</h3><h4>In personal health, can differing opinions coexist?</h4>Individual health decisions, perhaps even more than public health, allowed for differences of opinion in treatment and prevention of illness – at least before COVID. Doctors and patients used to be allowed to communicate regarding what seemed to be effective, and what was not.&nbsp;With the government’s new war on “misinformation”, those discussions could be a thing of the past. &nbsp;To treat COVID or other illnesses, some might recommend chicken soup, others vitamins and still others may choose a range of other “alternative therapies”. While any of these may be supported by some medical research, it's reasonable to say that the government should not determine which ones are “true” and prohibit discussion of the ones that are “false”.&nbsp;Can differing opinions coexist? There are differences of opinion even among policymakers and qualified scientists, including on the very current issue of COVID vaccination for children.&nbsp;The U.K.’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation's <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/jcvi-update-on-advice-for-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-and-young-people/jcvi-statement-on-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-and-young-people-22-december-2021">initial recommendation</a>, Israel’s Public Emergency Council for the COVID-19 Crisis’ <a href="https://pecc-il.org/pdf-doc/position-paper-covid-19-vaccine-for-children/">position</a>, Florida’s <a href="https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2022/03/07/healthy-children-shouldnt-get-coronavirus-vaccine-florida-health-department-says/">surgeon general</a>, and <a href="https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/koronavaksinasjon-av-barn-og-unge/id2895513/">Norway’s</a> official recommendation – all recommend against COVID shots for healthy children. According to the new legislation these doctors would be accused of “professional misconduct” and be subject to online monitoring by the government since their opinion differs from <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/children-teens.html">CDC</a> and most other mainstream policymakers.Another example is the use of ivermectin to treat COVID. While the National Institute of Health <a href="https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/">does not recommend</a> “either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19,” numerous <a href="https://ivmmeta.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">medical studies</a> found it to be an effective treatment.&nbsp; Nevertheless, <a href="https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/medical-misinformation-policy">Twitter</a> and other social media platforms have restricted sharing even <a href="https://ground.news/article/rss_1654_1609452612976_4">published articles</a> that support its use.&nbsp;Censorship has its place to prevent clear direct and imminent harm or for other such unusual situations. The new government initiatives would stifle debate on the everyday issue of how to best prevent and treat a respiratory virus. While governments may believe they have all the truths about the origins, prevention, and treatments of COVID – the evidence shows they don’t.&nbsp;Professor, writer, and constitutional expert, Alan Dershowitz, warned against censorship even for noble causes, saying, “... censorship laws are blunt instruments, not sharp scalpels. Once enacted, they are easily misapplied to merely unpopular or only marginally dangerous speech.” &nbsp;&nbsp;

iStock-1297054517.jpg

Federal and state governments battle free speech in an attempt to promote ‘truth’

Governments leading new censorship initiatives on COVID ‘misinformation’

<h2>Technology harms children's development</h2><h3>Technology not a substitute for in-person teachers&nbsp;</h3>Anna Brambila, a therapist and parent, recently expressed concern that the use of Chromebooks by children during COVID-19 school closures has led to their developing ADHD and autism-like symptoms. She had hoped that when they went back to school the use of Chromebooks would be discontinued. &nbsp;She soon found, however, that they were here to stay.&nbsp;Brambila made the below TikTok clip to explain the tremendous disservice this is to children who, from elementary through middle school, as research has shown, do not learn nearly as well through a screen as they do from an in-person teacher. Children who are using screens too much, she said, &nbsp;develop ADHD and autism-like symptoms:<blockquote>&nbsp;. . . so much research . . &nbsp;shows that kids, so like elementary schoolup through about half of middle school just do not learn through a screen anywhere close to the same way that they do with an in person teacher. . . .There's so much research that shows that kids who spend more time in front of portable devices with things like ipads and Chromebooks, there are impacts to the way that their brains are developing. So things like ADHD and autism and symptoms that look like ADHD and autism, those things can be incredibly exacerbated with too much screen time. &nbsp;. .&nbsp;</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="tiktok-embed" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@brambila_bits/video/7342227288425106734" data-video-id="7342227288425106734" style="max-width: 605px;min-width: 325px;"> <section> <a target="_blank" title="@brambila_bits" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@brambila_bits?refer=embed">@brambila_bits</a> Anyone else finding themselves tempted to start using the school issued portable devices as frisbees? Just me? <a title="motherhood" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/motherhood?refer=embed">#motherhood</a> <a title="momlife" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/momlife?refer=embed">#momlife</a> <a title="millenialmom" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/millenialmom?refer=embed">#millenialmom</a> <a title="technology" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/technology?refer=embed">#technology</a> <a target="_blank" title="♬ original sound - Andrea Brambila" href="https://www.tiktok.com/music/original-sound-7342227437553552170?refer=embed">♬ original sound - Andrea Brambila</a> </section> </blockquote> <script async="" src="https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js"></script></div><h3>“Impoverished stimulation of the developing brain”</h3>Before COVID-19 hit, research was already being compiled about the effects of technology use on children.&nbsp;“Screen time and the brain,” a June 2019 article by Harvard Medical School researcher Debra Bradley Ruder, <a href="https://hms.harvard.edu/news/screen-time-brain" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">quotes</a> Pediatrician Dr. Michael Rich who is concerned with the negative effect of technology on the developing brain referring to the stimulation provided on the screen as “impoverished.”&nbsp;<blockquote>The growing human brain is constantly building neural connections while pruning away less-used ones, and digital media use plays an active role in that process, according to Rich. Much of what happens on screen provides “impoverished” stimulation of the developing brain compared to reality, he says. Children need a diverse menu of online and offline experiences, including the chance to let their minds wander.“Boredom is the space in which creativity and imagination happen,” he says.&nbsp;</blockquote><h3>Cleveland Clinic — too much screen time elicits ADHD-like behaviors</h3>The Cleveland Clinic <a href="https://health.clevelandclinic.org/screen-time-and-adhd" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">raised</a> similar concerns about ADHD-like symptoms as Brambila did. In an article entitled: “Does Heightened Screen Time Cause Attention-Deficit Disorder (ADHD) In Children?” the Clinic referred to a 2018 study of 2,587 high school children who had not been diagnosed with ADHD and found that those who had more screen time exhibited behaviors similar to ADHD:<blockquote><ul><li>Inattention, such as difficulty organizing and completing tasks.</li><li>Hyperactivity-impulsivity, such as having trouble sitting still.</li></ul>. . . “Does this mean that too much time gaming or commenting on Facebook can give kids ADHD? Absolutely not. But these activities may cause symptoms that are similar to ADHD, even though they can’t cause ADHD itself,” [pediatric behavioral health specialist Michael Manos, PhD] says.</blockquote>Attention span and development were affected as well:&nbsp;<blockquote>So, while social media and device use may not directly cause ADHD, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have an effect on your child’s attention span and overall development. And, as Dr. Manos points out, our attention span is greatly tied to how we relate and socialize with others.</blockquote>The technology was also found to inhibit the development of social skills:<blockquote>“As children increasingly relate to each other through digital media, including social media and video games, it calls into question how we communicate on a human level,” he adds.He also notes that while things like video games do help with team building and problem-solving, they shouldn’t be the only kind of interaction kids are having. Too much time on devices means less time having real face-to-face communication, where facial expression, voice and body language all come into play.“These are the nuances of understanding relationships,” Dr. Manos says.</blockquote><figure class="image image_resized" style="width:75%;"><img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/aflds/image/upload/v1714059797/three_teenagers_on_smarthphones_d657f7996a.jpg"></figure>&nbsp;<h3>“Students need explicit instruction on how to interact with others in person”</h3>A June 2020 EdWeek article <a href="https://www.edweek.org/technology/why-principals-worry-about-how-mobile-devices-affect-students-social-skills-attention-spans/2020/06" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reviewed</a> the results of the EdWeek Research Center's February 2020 survey of principals regarding students and technology. They found that students had a hard time interacting personally with others - they did not know how:<blockquote>Prior to the pandemic, in February, the EdWeek Research Center surveyed 965 principals and teachers on a host of questions related to the use of digital devices by K-12 students in, and outside of, school. The nationally representative survey shows, for instance, that more than half of educators said their students are less skilled at in-person interactions than they and their peers were at the same age, because they are so accustomed to interacting via devices. And about 40 percent said students need explicit instruction on how to interact with others in person because so much of their experience with human interaction comes from devices.</blockquote>Interviews with several principals further revealed that children were no longer conversing and can't deal with emotions:<blockquote>[The principal of Riley Elementary School in Gold Beach, Ore.,Tom] Denning recalled when he used to have to tell students to stop talking so loud on the bus ride to a field trip. Now the ride is quiet: All the students have their earbuds in or are on their cellphones.“They’ll send a text and not deal with anything face to face,” Denning said. “There’s a concern that they are not learning how to deal with people. They don’t know how to deal with emotions, and it’s not a good situation.”</blockquote><h2>Don't raise “iPad kids”</h2>The situation with Gen-Alpha kids, born from 2010 to date, is so bad, that even Gen-Z'ers, those born between 1997 and 2012, are complaining about Gen-Alpha's inability to read and bad behavior. Today author Rosie Colosi <a href="https://www.today.com/parents/family/ipad-kids-rcna142059" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">shared</a> Gen-Z's frustration, linking to the TikTok video below, in which 20-year-old Gen-Z'er Gabe Escobar exhorts his fellow Gen-Z'ers not to raise “iPad kids.” &nbsp;<blockquote>As a result of staring at screens, Gen Alpha's "iPad kids" have developed unwanted, unhealthy and downright strange behavior, say Gen Z critics (born between the late 1990s and 2010), who have been posting their thoughts about the younger generation on TikTok.Gabe Escobar (<a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@gabesco/video/7298870719755111722?q=gabe%20escobar%20ipad%20&amp;t=1710179207478">@gabesco</a>) shared a rant about "iPad kids" in November 2023. The video has 23 million views to date. He said, "I need everyone else in my generation to promise that we are not going to raise 'iPad children.' ... You've been shoving media and screens in these kids' faces since birth."Escobar said that these kids likely "can't read" and "have no imagination." Horrified by seeing kids using screens in restaurants, he asked parents, “Can you not make your child behave for more than five seconds?”</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="tiktok-embed" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@gabesco/video/7298870719755111722" data-video-id="7298870719755111722" style="max-width: 605px;min-width: 325px;"> <section> <a target="_blank" title="@gabesco" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@gabesco?refer=embed">@gabesco</a> seriously pls we cant let it happen <a title="genz" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/genz?refer=embed">#genz</a> <a title="genalpha" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/genalpha?refer=embed">#genalpha</a> <a title="ipadkid" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/ipadkid?refer=embed">#ipadkid</a> <a target="_blank" title="♬ original sound - Gabe Escobar" href="https://www.tiktok.com/music/original-sound-7298870761563917098?refer=embed">♬ original sound - Gabe Escobar</a> </section> </blockquote> <script async="" src="https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js"></script></div>Colosi also linked to TikTok'er Andra's video (below), in which she agreed with Escobar and included her own observations of Gen-Alpha kids as a nanny of eight years. Andra found that the kids who were easiest to handle were those whose parents limited screen time.<blockquote>A Gen Z creator named Andra (@hopeyoufindyourdad), who worked as a nanny for eight years, commented on Escobar's video saying that "the families that were the easiest to manage were the families that extremely controlled screen time for their kids."She added that in her experience, "if you try to take an iPad out of an iPad kid's hand, not only will they throw a tantrum so large, but they will start physically hitting you."</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="tiktok-embed" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@hopeyoufindyourdad/video/7299966592438488366" data-video-id="7299966592438488366" style="max-width: 605px;min-width: 325px;"> <section> <a target="_blank" title="@hopeyoufindyourdad" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@hopeyoufindyourdad?refer=embed">@hopeyoufindyourdad</a> @gabesco I am fully on board with what this creator is saying although kids having ipads is a bit inevitable at this point the real issue is regulation and parenting styles <a title="genz" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/genz?refer=embed">#genz</a> <a title="genalpha" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/genalpha?refer=embed">#genalpha</a> <a title="millennial" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/millennial?refer=embed">#millennial</a> <a title="parenting" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/parenting?refer=embed">#parenting</a> <a title="ipadkid" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/ipadkid?refer=embed">#ipadkid</a> <a title="greenscreenvideo" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/greenscreenvideo?refer=embed">#greenscreenvideo</a> <a title="greenscreen" target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/tag/greenscreen?refer=embed">#greenscreen</a> <a target="_blank" title="♬ original sound - Andra" href="https://www.tiktok.com/music/original-sound-7299966669533891374?refer=embed">♬ original sound - Andra</a> </section> </blockquote> <script async="" src="https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js"></script></div>As Frontline News <a href="https://frontline.news/post/mental-illness-and-suicide-in-children-and-adolescents-linked-to-smartphones" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reported</a>, the effects of excessive screen time on the social and emotional development of Gen-Z'ers are profoundly negative:&nbsp;<blockquote>It's well known that Gen Z adults have much higher rates of mental illness than other generations, and [NYU social psychologist Jonathan] Haidt pointed to data showing they are also more shy and risk-averse, more socially isolated, especially with respect to dating, less confident, less successful — the list goes on and on.&nbsp;</blockquote><h2 style="margin-left:0px;">What does the future hold?</h2>Gen-Z'ers were born before iPads were developed. The effect of technology on Gen-Alpha, who have grown up with iPads, may already be profoundly worse than the effect technology has had on Gen-Z. How will society continue to function if its children, soon-to-be adults, can't?&nbsp;Related articles:&nbsp;<ul><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/mental-illness-and-suicide-in-children-and-adolescents-linked-to-smartphones" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Mental illness and suicide in children and adolescents linked to smartphones</a></li></ul>

children learning via technology.jpg

Technology

Education

'There’s a concern that they are not learning how to deal with people; they don’t know how to deal with emotions'

IPads and Chromebooks linked to ADHD and Autism-like symptoms in children

The Supreme Court has requested a response from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to a petition from a peaceful J6 protestor who is appealing his conviction for disorderly conduct.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h3>99% rejected</h3>The High Court only agrees to grant certiorari, i.e., review a request for appeal, in about <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2020/11/24/how-the-supreme-court-decides-which-cases-to-hear" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">eighty out of seven to eight thousand </a>petitions for “a writ of certiorari” each year. Normally, the justices do not give an indication of whether they are inclined to include a particular case in the one percent that get to the next stage, which includes additional briefs and oral arguments, until after receiving a response to the petition and the petitioner's reply to the response.&nbsp;<h3>Confident feds</h3>In the case of J6 protestor Russell Alford, however, the justices may have already signaled that they are inclined to grant certiorari, a decision which would require the agreement of four of the nine justices. Alford filed his petition to cancel his conviction with SCOTUS in early April and the government had 30 days to respond. Instead of responding, however, the DOJ penned a single <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-7158/307520/20240412164019362_Waiver%20Letter%20-%2023-7158.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">sentence</a> to the High Court:<blockquote>The Government hereby waives its right to file a response to the petition in this case, unless requested to do so by the Court.</blockquote>The justices then announced that they do indeed <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-7158.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">want the DOJ to respond</a>, giving it a May 23, 2024 deadline, indicating their interest in the matter.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">As Josh Gerstein just reported at Politico, SCOTUS requested a response from DOJ in petition for writ of cert filed by Russell Alford, convicted by a DC jury of 4 misdemeanors for J6. This doesn't mean SCOTUS will take up the case but it does mean they want some answers. The… <a href="https://t.co/esI7QgEbam">pic.twitter.com/esI7QgEbam</a>— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) <a href="https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1782798939562905608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>1 act, 13 minutes, 4 convictions</h2>Most J6 defendants, facing multiple charges for the one act of trespassing, waived their right to argue that their entrance into the Capital was an unknowing trespass, <a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-pressure-jan-6-defendants-to-falsely-confess-to-knowingly-trespassing" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fearing the potential for multiple prison sentences</a>. Alford, like America's Frontline Doctors' (AFLDS) Creative Director <a href="https://frontline.news/post/bureau-of-prisons-overrides-own-scoring-system-to-incarcerate-j6-defendants-in-more-dangerous-locations" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">John Strand</a>, was one of the few J6 defendants to refuse a plea deal.Alford's trespass was <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/23-3023/23-3023-2024-01-05.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">described</a> by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.<blockquote>Alford remained inside the Capitol for approximately thirteen minutes…&nbsp;While inside, he mostly stood to the side and observed. He filmed protestors chanting “stop the steal” and pounding on a door that led to the floor of the House, behind which sheltered dozens of Congress members. [Emphasis added.]</blockquote>The court added that Alford left within three minutes of police telling the crowd to leave:<blockquote>Police arrived within about ten minutes of Alford’s entry and began physically and verbally directing the crowd back out through the Upper House Door. Alford initially moved further down the hallway before turning and making for the exit … He left once someone managed to open the second double door.&nbsp;</blockquote>For this, the trial court convicted Alford on four separate counts, all stemming from that 13-minute walk during which he did <a href="https://www.conservativenewszone.com/articles/big-supreme-court-signals-it-may-throw-out-1000-january-6-convictions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">not so much as yell</a>. He was given the maximum sentence for each charge, to be served concurrently, resulting in a 12-month sentence for:<ol style="list-style-type:decimal;"><li>Remaining in a restricted building</li><li>Disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building</li><li>Disorderly or disruptive conduct in the Capitol Building and parading</li><li>Demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol Building [Emphasis added.]</li></ol><h3>&nbsp;</h3><h3>Overcharging banned; not banned</h3>The DOJ is actually <a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-coerce-jan-6-defendants-to-waive-right-to-appeal-jail-time" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">prohibited</a> from engaging in so-called overcharging, particularly in the the District of Columbia Circuit, in which Alford's trial court sits, where the circuit's appellate court has, for more than 50 years,&nbsp;explicitly <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4792425287924462607&amp;q=Scott+v+United+States,+135+US+App+DC+377&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2003">banned the practice of overcharging defendants</a> where the intent is to coerce a guilty plea on a lesser charge:<blockquote>. . . the prosecutor&nbsp;clearly cannot have carte blanche to apply whatever&nbsp;tactics he wishes&nbsp;to induce a guilty plea.&nbsp;A policy of&nbsp;deliberately&nbsp;overcharging defendants with no intention of prosecuting on all counts simply in order to have chips at the bargaining table would, for example,&nbsp;constitute&nbsp;improper harassment&nbsp;of the defendant. [Emphasis added.]&nbsp;</blockquote>Nonetheless, J6 protestors have been uniformly subjected to multiple charges in the absence of separate actions. Technically, though, Alford's case does not fit this classic definition of overcharging, since the DOJ, perhaps sensing a jury pool antagonistic to J6 protestors, did in fact prosecute Alford on multiple charges. But it is not, in any case, overcharging that is at issue in the petition to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;<h3>Not disorderly; disorderly</h3>Alford appealed his convictions on the two charges requiring the government to prove “disorderly or disruptive conduct.” The trial court refused Alford's motion to acquit on those charges, despite the lack of any evidence of such conduct, arguing that he should be held guilty on account of the actions of (a small minority) the other protestors:<blockquote>Mr. Alford’s mere presence inside the Capitol disturbed the public peace or undermined public safety” and that “his presence was an aspect of the disorder and disruption of the Capitol.” [Emphasis added].</blockquote><h2>&nbsp;</h2><h2>“Even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly”</h2>The appellate court <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/federal-court-rules-even-passive-jan-6-protestors-who-were-inside-capitol-can-be-convicted/ar-AA1my8bN" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">agreed</a> with prosecutors and the lower court:<blockquote>The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that trespassers in the Capitol during the riot did not need to be acting "disorderly" or "disruptive" to be found guilty of disorderly conduct, because such definitions “are nebulous but time has given them concrete contours in two ways important here.”"First, it is well-established that whether conduct qualifies as disorderly depends on the surrounding circumstances," the court wrote …"Second, it is equally clear from caselaw that even passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly," the ruling continued. [Emphases added].</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">JUST IN: <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> signals it may undermine more common <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Jan6?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Jan6</a> charges as justices ask DOJ to respond to petition challenging 'disorderly or disruptive' charges v. Russell Alford. DC Cir ruled charges valid even for nonviolent protesters. Earlier: <a href="https://t.co/QMDbF9UM7z">https://t.co/QMDbF9UM7z</a>— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) <a href="https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1782793703788077417?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 23, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </div>It is this ruling, that "passive, quiet and nonviolent conduct can be disorderly,” that is at issue in Alford's appeal to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;&nbsp;<h4>High Court may help … others</h4>Should the nation's highest court rule that such peaceful behavior as Alford's cannot be the basis for a disorderly conduct conviction, it may not actually benefit Alford, as his two convictions for “remaining” and “demonstrating” in the Capital would still stand and for each he was sentenced to the maximum prison time, as mentioned above, to run concurrently.&nbsp;Since the maximum sentence for the charge of merely remaining in a restricted building is <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1752" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">one year</a>, even vacating the two disorderly charges would still leave Alford facing a year in prison, though he could argue that, without the disorderly charges, one year is excessive for trespassing.Alford is far from the only peaceful J6 protestor to be charged with disorderly conduct, however. <a href="https://www.conservativenewszone.com/articles/big-supreme-court-signals-it-may-throw-out-1000-january-6-convictions/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">According</a> to Conservative Zone, 1,156 of those protestors were charged with disorderly conduct despite their peaceful conduct.<blockquote>1,156 peaceful January 6 protesters have been charged with engaging in disorderly or disruptive conduct. 1,021 have been charged with disorderly or disruptive conduct in a Capitol building. About 1,000 of them have been hit with both misdemeanor charges. These are the most common charges that the 1,300+ total January 6 peaceful protesters have been hit with.None of the people facing these charges did anything violent or caused any property damage. They were welcomed into the building by police officers who were high-fiving them and holding doors open for them, they wandered around for a while, and they peacefully left when asked to do so.</blockquote>&nbsp;<h4>See our other coverage of Jan 6 defendants:</h4><ol><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/mr-biden-wheres-dr-golds-pardon-for-peaceful-capitol-speech">Mr Biden - Where is Dr Gold's pardon for peaceful medical speech at Capitol?</a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-coerce-jan-6-defendants-to-waive-right-to-appeal-jail-time">Feds coerce Jan 6 defendants into waiving right to appeal jail time</a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/feds-pressure-jan-6-defendants-to-falsely-confess-to-knowingly-trespassing">Feds pressure Jan 6 defendants to falsely confess to ‘knowingly’ trespassing</a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/judge-in-dr-gold-case-applauded-anti-free-speech-socialists-disrupting-scotus">Judge in Dr Gold case applauded anti-free speech socialists disrupting SCOTUS</a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/fbidojcourt-jail-dr-simone-gold-for-trespass-politicizing-medicine">Politicizing medicine: FBI/DOJ/Court jail Dr Simone Gold for trespass</a></li><li><a href="http://frontline.news/post/fbi-no-time-to-interview-rape-victims-plenty-for-jan-6-trespass">FBI - No time to interview rape victims; plenty for Jan 6 trespass</a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/aflds-founder-waives-selective-prosecution-defense-accepts-misdemeanor-plea-deal-for-delivering-medical-talk-on-govt-property">AFLDS founder waives ‘selective prosecution’ defense; accepts misdemeanor plea deal for delivering medical talk on gov’t property</a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/congressman-introduces-j6-bill-to-counter-political-prosecutions">Congressman introduces ‘J6 Bill to Counter Political Prosecutions’</a>&nbsp;</li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/judge-allows-doj-to-hide-exculpatory-evidence-from-january-6-defendants">Judge allows DOJ to withhold exculpatory evidence from J6 defendants</a></li><li><a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/j-6-prisoner-of-conscience-punished-with-isolation-after-jailhouse-interview-analysis">J6 prisoner of conscience punished with isolation after jailhouse interview - analysis</a></li></ol>

SCOTUS.jpg

US News

High Court could vacate more than one thousand sentences 

SCOTUS asks DOJ to defend disorderly conduct convictions of J6 protestors who were not disorderly

<h2>Smartphones dangerous for children</h2>A new book by NYU social psychologist Jonathan Haidt may confirm what many parents have already deduced and may be eye-opening to others — the harmful effects of smartphones on children and youth. His book, "<a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/729231/the-anxious-generation-by-jonathan-haidt/">The Anxious Generation</a>: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness," is “downright alarming” according to John Sundholm <a href="https://www.yourtango.com/self/psychologist-urges-parents-end-phone-based-childhood?utm_medium=amp-mid-recent-block" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">writing</a> for Your Tango. Haidt says that smartphones, social media, and helicopter parenting have altered childhood for Gen-Z and Gen-Alpha, resulting in greater mental illness, social ineptness, and declining academic achievement.<hr><blockquote>According to <a href="https://www.today.com/specials/generation-z/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Today</a> teens:Gen Z was born between 1997 and 2012 and is considered the first generation to have largely grown up using the internet, modern technology and social media. Members of Gen Z are sometimes known as zoomers.Alex Doyle, a 20-year-old Gen Z’er from South Carolina, says she thinks the relationship with technology is what distinguishes Gen Z from the other generations.“I feel like it’s unique how we know the world before social media but also have seen how it can be useful, whereas the generations before us are more averse to that and Gen Alpha are iPad kids and, like, can’t read,” Doyle said.Gen Alpha is the youngest generation to date, encompassing those born from 2011 to 2024. This generation is known for being digital natives, even more so than Gen Z, having been born into a world that is fully integrated with technology, social media and global connection.</blockquote><hr>Haidt's research, based on many studies and CDC statistics, showed that rates of depression and anxiety, which had been stable during the 2000s, increased by over 50% during the 2010s. Worse still are the rates of suicide which have increased by 48% for children from 10-19 years and by 131% for girls from 10-14 years of age. Haidt documented the increased loneliness and friendlessness among teens and plunging academic achievement.&nbsp;Gen-Z adults, he said, have more problems with mental illness and difficulty integrating into society than previous generations, as Sundholm reported:<blockquote>It's well known that Gen Z adults have much <a href="https://www.yourtango.com/news/study-finds-gen-z-struggles-more-mental-health-previous-generations">higher rates of mental illness</a> than other generations, and Haidt pointed&nbsp;to data showing they are also <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37104750/">more shy and&nbsp;risk-averse</a>, more socially isolated,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-08-03/young-adults-less-sex-gen-z-millennials-generations-parents-grandparents">especially with respect to dating</a>, less confident, less successful — the list goes on and on.</blockquote>In a discussion about his book on MSNBC's Morning Joe (see the video below), Haidt voiced the concerns raised by parents and teachers:<blockquote>&nbsp;What I hear from most parents and most teachers, which is, “It's a hell of a problem, it is ruining everything. We're losing control but what are you going to do? The problem is too big. We'll never solve it.” It is resignation. . . .&nbsp;</blockquote>He also offers hope:<blockquote>We parents and teachers — we can solve this if we act together. . . . &nbsp;</blockquote>&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><iframe width="964" height="542" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yrL_ksihP3w" title="How a phone-based childhood is having disastrous effects" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div>&nbsp;<h2>Not exclusive to U.S.</h2>The phenomena noted by Haidt are not exclusive to American youth but are found in countries around the world and point to two issues, he said. The first issue is the advent of smartphones and social media, “the neurological, psychological, and developmental harms of which are well established by myriad scientific studies.”The other issue he identified as “helicopter parenting,” which began in the 1980's:<blockquote>Second, the loss of independence and exploration for kids due to parenting changes since the 1980s (like so-called "helicopter parenting")."In the 1990s, American parents began pulling their children indoors or insisting that afternoons be spent in adult-run enrichment activities," he wrote in The Atlantic. "Free play, independent exploration, and teen hangout time declined."</blockquote><h2>“The entire internet in their pockets”</h2>Sundholm quoted Haidt, further, noting that the internet completely changed childhood:<blockquote>"Once young people began carrying the entire internet in their pockets, available to them day and night, it altered their daily experiences and developmental pathways across the board," he went on to say. "Friendship, dating, sexuality, exercise, sleep, academics, politics, family dynamics, identity — all were affected."</blockquote><h2>“The Great rewiring of childhood” &nbsp;&nbsp;</h2>During an interview about Gen-Alpha smartphone addiction at the ARC (Alliance for Responsible Citizenship) November 2023 conference, as seen in the video below (5:06-6:40), Haidt <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1SyCZwMqfY&amp;t=400s" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">describes</a> some of the significant changes in childhood development brought about by smartphones, particularly the end of &nbsp;in person, play-based childhood:<blockquote>Childhood is about building up your brain and you do that through play. Anyone who had a puppy knows it's all about play. So we had play-based childhoods up until around 2010. . . . Kids used to actually see each other in person and once they all got phones and loaded with social media for the girls, it's video games for the boys, childhood stops being play-based, which is what a mammal brain needs to wire up properly.&nbsp;It stops being play-based, it becomes phone-based where phone includes video game consoles all the stuff that makes your social interactions virtual, often asynchronous, disembodied, transitory. So it's a complete what I'm calling it “The Great rewiring of childhood.” &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</blockquote>&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><iframe width="964" height="542" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/k1SyCZwMqfY" title="Smartphone Addiction and Gen Alpha | Jonathan Haidt, Social Psychologist" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div>&nbsp;<h2>The remedy — smartphone-free children</h2>To combat these phenomena, Haidt makes several suggestions including giving children simple flip-phones until high school just so parents can remain in contact with their children, removing phones from school, and giving children more independence and responsibility:<blockquote><ol><li>No smartphones before high school, suggesting&nbsp;parents&nbsp;opt for simple flip phones in order to remain in contact with kids.</li><li>No social media before the age of 16.</li><li>Phone-free schools, which Haidt discussed, tend&nbsp;to have myriad positive benefits in schools, with even some students saying they prefer a phone-free experience.</li><li>More independence, free play, and responsibility in the real world. &nbsp;</li></ol></blockquote><h2>15-year-olds reading like 8-year olds &nbsp;</h2>Removing smartphones from children and adolescents may be what's needed to turn things around as the experience of this New Jersey high school teacher shows. She is considering quitting, as Lauren Reams <a href="https://www.yourtango.com/self/teacher-considers-quitting-because-high-school-students-cant-read" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reported</a> for Your Tango. Her 10th-grade students, she realized, were reading on a second to third-grade level.&nbsp;<blockquote>The teacher in New Jersey shared in a Reddit post that the past couple of years have been very stressful for her, but the straw that broke the camel's back was when she realized her 10th-grade students could not read at their grade level. In fact, they could barely read at all.She explained that instead of reading books at a high school level, these sophomores are reading 2nd and 3rd-grade books like "Charlotte's Web" and "The Bridge to Terabithia."&nbsp;</blockquote>Her experience is not unique, Reams wrote. Other teachers she turned to had the same experience:<blockquote>In absolute shock, she turned to fellow teachers in her school for advice. As it turns out, her experience wasn't limited to her classroom, but many teachers observed that students homeschooled during the pandemic, versus students exposed to the virtual classroom, were much more advanced.The parents are mad because the kids are failing, but there's not much she can do,&nbsp;especially when it comes to their behavior&nbsp;which she categorized as “rude, always on their phones, destructive.”</blockquote>

teenager with phone in bed.jpg

Technocracy

Medical

'Neurological, psychological, and developmental harms are well established by myriad scientific studies'

Mental illness and suicide in children and adolescents linked to smartphones

By Alex NewmanSheriffs have the power and the duty to stand for the U.S. Constitution they swore an oath to uphold, and to protect the rights of the people in their counties, regardless of what state or federal authorities might do, explained a wide range of speakers including sheriffs, media personalities, victims of political persecution, businessmen, and military leaders.Respect for the oath of office to the U.S. Constitution was one of the clear messages from the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association’s (CSPOA) “Resist the Temptation” conference on April 17. That constitutional mandate applies to everything from elections and immigration to free speech and even the protection of order from lawlessness, the lawmen and their allies heard.The event made headlines worldwide and was broadcasted globally by FrankSpeech, reportedly being seen live by more than 50,000 people. Videos from the event continue to circulate widely on social media and beyond. &nbsp;Organized by CSPOA founder Sheriff Richard Mack and CEO Sam Bushman, a syndicated radio host, the summit brought together an impressive array of Trump insiders, lawmen, elected officials, and experts. Each had unique insights and perspectives to share. Taken together, the speakers offered a long list of action items for the law-enforcement community and for citizen activists concerned about America.Sheriff Mack, who served two terms as sheriff in Arizona, sued the Clinton administration in the ’90s over a gun-control bill that he refused to enforce. The case eventually made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of sheriffs and against the Clinton gun-control scheme.In the landmark decision,&nbsp;Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court, citing the 10th Amendment and more, ruled once again that the federal government could not “commandeer” state or local governments. Known as the “anti-commandeering doctrine,” the case upholds the Constitution’s reservation of powers not delegated to the federal government to states and the people. &nbsp;Numerous speakers at the event touted the ruling as key, not just for sheriffs but also for state and local governments. Hundreds of sheriffs nationwide are members of CSPOA and have been trained on their authority under the U.S. Constitution and common law, as well as the details of the 1997 ruling.Unsurprisingly, federal supremacists and totalitarians seeking to centralize coercive power in Washington, D.C., are on the warpath against Mack and CSPOA. And the dishonest attacks by the media offered fresh evidence that constitutional sheriffs are a major thorn in the side of those who would run roughshod over the rights of Americans. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Several sheriffs offered ideas for their colleagues in other counties. One of the lawmen who spoke at the conference, Klickitat County, Washington, Sheriff Bob Songer, explained how sheriffs across the nation could deputize citizens and form a posse. Sheriff Songer, whose posse includes some 150 carefully screened citizens, even offered his department’s policy manuals and guidelines for other sheriffs across the nation who may wish to set up their own.In an interview with&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;magazine, Sheriff Songer noted that the radical left was furious about his decision to supplement his department’s ranks with everyday citizens. However, considering the savings to taxpayers and the need for more manpower in everything from search and rescue to dealing with potential threats to the community, Songer said creating a posse could be helpful to law-enforcement nationwide.Another chief law-enforcement officer (CLEO) with experience deputizing citizens was Sheriff Glenn Hamilton of Sierra County, New Mexico, who went on stage with Pastor Caleb Cooper of New Hope Revival Church. When state authorities demanded lockdowns and claimed churches were not essential during Covid, Cooper knew he could not close his doors.The only thing worse than having somebody die from Covid because his church stayed open, Cooper told state police, would be having somebody die of Covid without having heard the Gospel and ending up in hell. “We just could not close our church,” Cooper told&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;magazine, emphasizing the importance of the Church continuing to shine the light in dark times. “We&nbsp;are&nbsp;essential.”Cooper and Sheriff Hamilton devised a plan. Because law enforcement was considered essential and was therefore not subject to the lockdown orders, Sheriff Hamilton went to New Hope Revival Church right before Resurrection Sunday and deputized the entire congregation. “I would have deputized every man, woman, and child in my county if that is what it took,” Sheriff Hamilton told&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;in an interview.The whole saga was featured prominently in the documentary&nbsp;Non-Compliant 2&nbsp;by KrisAnne Hall. It was contrasted with the outrageous behavior of an anti-constitutional sheriff in Florida, who arrested a pastor for refusing to shut his church before Governor Ron DeSantis shut down the rogue sheriff by declaring churches essential. As Sheriff Hamilton explained, almost all New Mexico sheriffs also resisted unconstitutional abuses against gun rights in the state. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;A third lawman who spoke at the summit, Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf, offered details of his ongoing investigations into irregularities in the 2020 election. Upon being given evidence of alleged criminal acts, Sheriff Leaf said he had a duty to investigate. And yet, instead of helping get to the bottom of it, state officials including the far-left attorney general responded by waging war on Sheriff Leaf and his efforts. &nbsp;“It’s been nothing but walls and having to knock down walls to get to the information that I need to get to,” Leaf told&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;in an interview before his talk. “The walls being put up are probably the most frustrating — and walls put up by people you’d think would be helping you out in an investigation, like the attorney general’s office and the secretary of state.”Considering the enormity of the crimes being alleged and the significance of them, Sheriff Leaf told&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;that there should have been a task force of local, state, and federal law enforcement investigating. “Everybody should have been involved in it,” he said. “There’s a lot to this. I think we would have had this all resolved by now if we had done that.”“You’re talking about, potentially, the greatest fraud ever committed in the world — committed on the American people,” added Sheriff Leaf. &nbsp;&nbsp;Numerous other sheriffs have also opened investigations into widespread reports of voter fraud and election crimes. In fact, at a previous CSPOA event in Las Vegas, this writer interviewed more than half-a-dozen sheriffs for&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;who were trying to get to the bottom of it all, only to be viciously attacked by the far-left media, the Democratic Party, and their allies.Other highlights of the conference included a speech by former National Security Advisor General Mike Flynn (Ret.), who also served as a top intelligence official responsible for coordinating federal, state, local, tribal, and international intelligence. Among other topics, Flynn discussed his new documentary,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Flynn-Michael/dp/B0CT9JVB4F">Flynn</a>, exposing how and why the Deep State targeted him as the first one of Trump’s key officials. In an interview with&nbsp;The New American, he noted that the DVD was number one in Amazon’s “Special Interests” category. “Remember, local action for national impact,” Flynn told the crowd. &nbsp;Pointing to the open border and the ongoing invasion of hostile military and terrorist forces, veteran Boone Cutler, an associate of Flynn’s who helped write the book on Fifth Generation Warfare, announced a new training program for law enforcement on irregular warfare. Saxon Aerospace founder John Ferguson also offered resources to help law enforcement prepare for tough times ahead, later telling&nbsp;The New American&nbsp;that the nation might already be lost. &nbsp;Also speaking was MyPillow founder Mike Lindell, a leading voice calling for election reforms to restore confidence and integrity to voting. In an interview with&nbsp;The New American, he called for citizens to sign the petition at&nbsp;<a href="https://lindelloffensefund.org/">LindellOffenseFund.org</a>&nbsp;for paper ballots and hand counting in elections. Especially urgent: getting rid of the machines that can be hacked.Popular radio host Wayne Allyn Root enthusiastically called on Americans to get involved in the freedom fight, too.Former Mesa County, Colorado, Clerk Tina Peters, who uncovered serious problems with the election and has been ruthlessly persecuted for speaking out, gave an update on her efforts. And former Arizona Representative Mark Finchem, who is running for state Senate and is endorsed by Donald Trump, also gave an update on his lawsuits against election fraud.Dr. Richard Fleming, a medical doctor, attorney, and physicist, discussed the bioweapon attack on humanity in the form of the Covid injections. He urged viewers to contact their state attorneys general with a letter demanding action.FreeAndEqual.org chief Christina Tobin, who is seeking to provide a platform for candidates outside the two-party duopoly, spoke on how the establishment seeks to keep Americans trapped in either the Republican or Democratic parties.Several victims of the January 6 persecution by the Biden Department of Justice, including Casey Cusick and Tom Hamner, spoke about the horrors they endured, and yet offered a message of hope.Also speaking were two congressmen targeted by the Deep State for speaking out, Steve Stockman of Texas and Steve King of Iowa.Former Congressman Stockman explained how the Obama administration went after him with a vengeance, squandering over $20 million in tax dollars and going through multiple grand juries until they could find one willing to help in the persecution. He was eventually jailed in federal prison and treated terribly until Trump commuted his sentence. He urged Americans to pray for and write to former Arkansas State Senator Jon Woods, who was also persecuted by the same forces and remains behind bars in atrocious conditions. &nbsp;Former Congressman King of Iowa, meanwhile, was smeared by the far-left media with fake allegations of racism until he was run out of office. During his talk, he exposed the “carbon capture” scam, the ongoing attack on private-property rights, the globalist undermining of national sovereignty, and more.South Dakota farmer Jared Bossly, a victim of the “carbon capture” scheme, shared details of what is happening in his state and beyond. &nbsp;&nbsp;Entrepreneur Patrick Byrne, former CEO of Overstock.com, gave a detailed presentation on Deep State activities and how to fight back.This writer, who served as the emcee, also spoke on the importance of the oath of office and the biblical foundations of law and resistance to tyranny.Estimates cited in news reports suggest about 10 percent of the nation’s sheriffs are members of CSPOA.As always happens when influential conservatives gather to effectively oppose tyranny and globalism, the establishment media, which was crawling all over the event, pretended to be outraged. The far-left U.K.&nbsp;Guardian, for instance, ran a propaganda piece demonizing the event before it even happened under the headline “‘Danger to our democracy’: fears over Trump allies’ summit with far-right sheriffs.”Shortly after the conference finished, fringe left-wing activist Brandy Zadrozny, who repeatedly cackled as political prisoners shared horrifying details of abuse in federal prison, ran a vicious hit piece attacking the gathering. “<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/constitutional-sheriffs-las-vegas-conference-rcna147487">A sheriff, a felon and a conspiracy theorist walk into a hotel. They’re there for the same conference</a>,” screamed the headline. “The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association is urging lawmen to form posses, seize voting machines and investigate baseless claims of voter fraud.”Virtually all of the attack pieces masquerading as journalism misrepresented the CSPOA and what it teaches its members, the public, and the nation’s sheriffs. The NBC “News” report by Zadrozny, who several attendees said has a reputation for lying and dishonesty, offered a representative example of the lie: “The group sees sheriffs as the highest authority in the U.S., more powerful than the federal government.”Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Not one person at the summit or at CSPOA has ever claimed that a sheriff has more power than the federal government. However, it is a fact that sheriffs are the chief law-enforcement officers in&nbsp;their&nbsp;jurisdiction, that they are not accountable to or employed by the federal government, and that they all have an obligation to obey their oath of office to the U.S. Constitution and their state’s constitution — not enforce federal regulations and statutes. &nbsp;Virtually all of the establishment media left before the press conference, when they would have had the opportunity to ask most of the speakers anything they wanted. Instead, they simply lied or distorted what the speakers said and what the CSPOA and its members stand for.<a href="https://libertysentinel.org/author/admin/">Alex Newman</a> is an award-winning international journalist, educator, author, and consultant who co-wrote the book “Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy America’s Children.” He writes for diverse publications in the United States and abroadRead more at <a href="https://thenewamerican.com/featured/constitutional-sheriffs-event-offers-solutions-fake-media-loses-it/">The New American.</a>

sheriff.jpg

Sheriffs not accountable to federal government; have obligation to obey oath of office to state and federal constitutions

Constitutional sheriffs event offers solutions

Governments leading new censorship initiatives on COVID ‘misinformation’

Federal and state governments battle free speech in an attempt to promote ‘truth’

Related Articles

Student suspended for asking whether 'alien' on vocabulary list means 'space aliens' or 'illegal aliens'

White House chooses Khamenei over Iranian people, again

OTC anti-depressants? Harvard Medical School professor says yes

What is synthetic biology and why should you care?

Latest Articles

IPads and Chromebooks linked to ADHD and Autism-like symptoms in children

SCOTUS asks DOJ to defend disorderly conduct convictions of J6 protestors who were not disorderly

Mental illness and suicide in children and adolescents linked to smartphones

Constitutional sheriffs event offers solutions