The Connection between Mass Shootings and Psychiatric Drugs

http://www.governmentpropaganda.net/the-connection-between-mass-shootings-and-psychiatric-drugs/

 https://youtu.be/8GjmOemFYxo

on Rappoport – I’ve been tracking the connection since 1999, when I wrote a long white paper, for the Truth Seeker Foundation, on school shootings and psychiatric drugs. The paper was titled: “Why Do They Do It? School shootings Across America.”

The drugs aren’t the only causative factor, but they produce what I call the Johnny Appleseed effect throughout society. Sprinkle enough of the drugs among enough people and you get otherwise unexplainable violence popping up—in schools, in workplaces. The psychiatric plague eats out the country from the inside.

Here are excerpts from my 1999 report—

The massacre at Columbine High School took place on April 20, 1999. Astonishingly, for eight days after the tragedy, during thousands of hours of prime-time television coverage, virtually no one mentioned the word “drugs.” Then the issue was opened. Eric Harris, one of the shooters at Columbine, was on at least one drug.

The NY Times of April 29, 1999, and other papers reported that Harris was rejected from enlisting in the Marines for medical reasons. A friend of the family told the Times that Harris was being treated by a psychiatrist. And then several sources told the Washington Post that the drug prescribed as treatment was Luvox, manufactured by Solvay.

In two more days, the “drug-issue” was gone.

Luvox is of the same class as Prozac and Zoloft and Paxil. They are labeled SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). They attempt to alleviate depression by changing brain-levels of the natural substance serotonin. Luvox has a slightly different chemical configuration from Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft, and it was approved by the FDA for obsessive-compulsive disorder, although many doctors apparently prescribe it for depression.

Prozac is the wildly popular Eli Lilly antidepressant which has been linked to suicidal and homicidal actions. It is now given to young children. Again, its chemical composition is very close to Luvox, the drug that Harris took.

Dr. Peter Breggin, the eminent psychiatrist and author (Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Prozac, Talking Back to Ritalin), told me, “With Luvox there is some evidence of a four-percent rate for mania in adolescents. Mania, for certain individuals, could be a component in grandiose plans to destroy large numbers of other people. Mania can go over the hill to psychosis.”

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo is a psychiatrist in private practice in Washington DC. He is the president of the Washington chapter of the American Society of Psychoanalytic Physicians. Tarantolo states that “all the SSRIs [including Prozac and Luvox] relieve the patient of feeling. He becomes less empathic, as in `I don’t care as much,’ which means `It’s easier for me to harm you.’ If a doctor treats someone who needs a great deal of strength just to think straight, and gives him one of these drugs, that could push him over the edge into violent behavior.”

In Arianna Huffington’s syndicated newspaper column of July 9, 1998, Dr. Breggin states, “I have no doubt that Prozac can cause or contribute to violence and suicide. I’ve seen many cases. In a recent clinical trial, 6 percent of the children became psychotic on Prozac. And manic psychosis can lead to violence.”

A study from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that in five examined cases people on Prozac developed what is called akathesia. Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the “jerking of extremities,” and “bicycling in bed or just turning around and around.” Dr. Breggin comments that akathesia “may also contribute to the drug’s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies … Akathesia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior … The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, ‘Akathesia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.’”

Other studies:

“Emergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment,” published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al. It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.

July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: “full of energy,” “hyperactive,” “clown-like.” All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were “totally unlike him.”

September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor. The boy is then “hyperactive, agitated … irritable.” He makes a “somewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.” Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.

The well-known Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a strange fact. It states that Ritalin [given for ADHD] is “structurally related to amphetamines … Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.” In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman’s terms, are obvious. You take speed and, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.

In his book, Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: “Combining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox, Paxil] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.” Children are frequently medicated with this combination, and when we highlight such effects as aggression, psychosis, and emotional instability, it is obvious that the result is pointing toward the very real possibility of violence.

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was titled, “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate”) [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed over a hundred adverse affects of Ritalin and indexed published journal articles for each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects then, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions
• Paranoid psychosis
• Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
• Activation of psychotic symptoms
• Toxic psychosis
• Visual hallucinations
• Auditory hallucinations
• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
• Effects pathological thought processes
• Extreme withdrawal
• Terrified affect
• Started screaming
• Aggressiveness
• Insomnia
• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphatamine-like effects
• psychic dependence
• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
• Decreased REM sleep
• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
• Convulsions
• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Other ADHD medications, which also have a chemical profile similar to amphetamines, would be expected to produce some of the same effects listed above.

The ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News publishes the following warning in bold letters: “Do Not Try to Abruptly Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs. When trying to withdraw from many psychiatric drugs, patients can develop serious and even life-threatening emotional and physical reactions…Therefore, withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done under clinical supervision…”

—end of excerpts from my 1999 white paper on school shootings and psychiatric drugs—

There is a problem. It is chilling. Pharmaceutical companies, which manufacture drug after drug for “mental disorders,” are doing everything they can to cover up the drugs’ connection to violence.

They use their lawyers and PR people—and their influence over the press—to scrub the connection.

And now, one typical, disturbing, official reaction to every new mass shooting is: build more community mental health facilities. Obama was prominent in this regard, after Sandy Hook in 2012. The implication? More drug prescriptions for more people; thus, more violent consequences.

I’ll close with another excerpt from my 1999 report. It is the tragic account of Julie Marie Meade (one account of many you can find at ssristories.org):

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo has written about Julie Marie Meade. In a column for the ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News, “Children and Prozac: First Do No Harm,” Tarantolo describes how Julie Meade, in November of 1996, called 911, “begging the cops to come and shoot her. And if they didn’t do it quickly, she would do it to herself. There was also the threat that she would shoot them as well.”

The police came within a few minutes, “5 of them to be exact, pumping at least 10 bullets into her head and torso,” as she waved a gun around.

Tarantolo remarks that a friend of Julie said Julie “had plans to make the honor roll and go to college. He [the friend] had also observed her taking all those pills.” What pills? Tarantolo called the Baltimore medical examiner, and spoke with Dr. Martin Bullock, who was on a fellowship at that office. Bullock said, “She had been taking Prozac for four years.”

Tarantolo asked Bullock, “Did you know that Prozac has been implicated in impulsive de novo violence and suicidalness?” Bullock said he was not aware of this.

Tarantolo is careful to point out, “Violent and suicidal behavior have been observed both early (a few weeks) and late (many months) in treatment with Prozac.”

The November 23rd, 1996, Washington Post reported the Julie Meade death by police shooting. The paper mentioned nothing about Prozac.

Therefore, readers were left in the dark. What could explain this girl’s bizarre and horrendous behavior?

The answer was there in plain sight. But the Post refused to make it known.

This article first appeared at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

 

http://www.governmentpropaganda.net/the-connection-between-mass-shootings-and-psychiatric-drugs/

The Mythology Behind “Eaters of Children” by Johnny Cirucci

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lk86pF13QXI

click to watch video

Eaters of Children: The Pedocracy Exposed https://www.amazon.com/Eaters-Childre… We’re all familiar with the crazy images of the world’s most powerful people dawning druidic robes and turning back the clock thousands of years to “worship” evil right out of the pages of the Old Testament; whether “leaked footage” from Bohemian Grove or mirrored in modern entertainment from movies like Eyes Wide Shut to serials like House of Cards. Shockingly, there is far more “truth” in it than “fiction”. Author, speaker and activist Giovanni “Johnny” Cirucci joins with Glyph Studios to take you behind the scenes of his latest book Eaters of Children. * Why are so many of the world’s Elite implicated in sex abuse scandals—often victimizing children? * Why are those accused never arrested and prosecuted by the institutions sworn to protect us and uphold justice? * Is this the conspiracy to top all conspiracies? Join Johnny as he explains the ancient beliefs behind the Eaters of Children.

 

 

 

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME WHAT IN THE WORLD I AM LOOKING AT? (STYLE FASHION 2018)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix1u9MSaF_g

 

Heads were rolling at the Gucci Fall/Winter 2018 show in Milan!

Designer Alessandro Michele sent models down the catwalk toting decapitated mannequin heads, designed to look just like the models’ own.

The set, according to the Italian label’s Instagram, was meant to reflect “the work of a designer — the act of cutting, slicing, reconstructing materials and fabrics to create a new personality and identity with them.”

Guillotining certainly counts as cutting and slicing. Hats and heads off to Gucci!

https://nypost.com/2018/02/21/models-carry-heads-down-the-runway/

 

 

Trudeau Exposed: A Leader Who Embraces Islamic Supremacists and Khalistani Terrorists

Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau is now making quite the impression in India — and globally — as he continues to parrot his commitment to “diversity.” To his detriment, it never seems to occur to him that diversity, like any other concept, needs to be scrutinized and tested. To Trudeau, diversity has no definable boundaries, and to this end, he has been making merry with Islamic supremacists, jihadists and even terrorist Sikh separatists. The latter is getting Trudeau into hot water in India, starting with a humiliating snub by the Indian government: nowhere was Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to be found to meet Trudeau when he arrived, not even in a Twitter greeting. It didn’t help that just before Trudeau’s visit, “the magazine Outlook India published a series of articles warning that Canada was nurturing a resurgence of Khalistani terrorism.” Upon arrival, Trudeau was greeted  by a junior agriculture minister.

Trudeau’s “diversity” credo has manifested itself in a manner that has angered the Indian establishment, and for good reason. Trudeau seeks the Sikh vote “so much so that he even attended a Khalsa Day parade organized by a radical Gurudwara, or Sikh temple, in Toronto. Some Sikh Gurudwaras in Canada have also barred the entry of Indian diplomats.” Likewise, Trudeau seeks the Muslim vote so much that Canada has an “Islamic supremacist entryist problem” in government.

The icing on the cake was the invitation of criminal Jaspal Atwal at a formal dinner reception with Trudeau in India hosted by the Canadian High Commissioner, which heightened the spectacle of Trudeau’s visit. Atwal was sentenced to 20 years in a Canadian court for his part in the attempted murder of a visiting Indian state minister. Pictures of him posing with Trudeau’s wife Sophie at a banquet in Mumbai were also splashed across media outlets, and it emerged that his name made the guest list through the machinations of Liberal MP Randeep Surai.

Meanwhile:

former NDP B.C. premier and Liberal federal cabinet minister Ujjal Dosanjh took to Twitter to voice his outrage. “You what? Do we have no shame?” Dosanjh tweeted. “Khalistan has seeped deep into the veins of this administration.”

The fact that is apparent about Trudeau in India is just as apparent to observant Canadians: that Trudeau is divisive — contrary to his routine mawkishness — and he shamelessly befriends even the most unsavoury “diversity” charlatans, once he thinks they can give him votes.

What will Trudeau say in India now? That its Prime Minister Modi and annoyed citizens are Sikhophobic? Trudeau has been as insulting to the citizens of India who oppose Sikh terrorism as he is insulting to Canadians who oppose Islamic supremacism. Trudeau’s indiscriminate kowtowing to whoever will give him a vote is now being paraded on the world stage in full costume, earning him unwanted attention — from mockery to anger from the Indian press.

A bright young blogger in that country summed up the problem with Trudeau:

Justin Trudeau is a mascot of everything that is wrong with the world today. From being at the forefront of encouraging every degeneracy to welcoming radicalism into his homeland, from cheap gimmicks of tokenism to attempts at creating a culture of politically correct absurdities, the stink of his leftist hypocrisy wafts far and wide. As citizen of India, I could not care less if the elected leader of Canada seeks to drive his nation to the dumps. But where it has an adverse effect on my country is where I choose to draw the line……

India is not CNN’s studio where global champions of pseudo-liberalism, pseudo-secularism and radical Islamism will find a platform to propagate their hypocrisy and watch the world burn. You might be rich, white, the offspring of royalty and the global poster-boy of liberal values, but it amounts to zilch, especially if you mess with India.

Trudeau has not learned the lesson that not all of “people-kind” are friends. The youngest child learns basic safety rules from his or her caregiver about not opening the front door to any and everyone who comes knocking, and to beware of strangers until you get to know them.

Trudeau seemingly has not grasped this primary concept about the potential bogeyman knocking at the door; nor have many other of his far-left cohorts in Europe. The difference between the hapless Trudeau and his kindred leaders is that he does not know when to shut up, and has a propensity to wander into trouble — serious trouble unbefitting to any leader — like the trouble he is in now in India.

To recap the same problems with Trudeau’s brand of “diversity” in Canada:

  • He accused the Conservative party of “Islamophobia” for inquiring about jihad terrorism;
  • He met privately with Joshua Boyle, a suspicious former Taliban captive who is also now up on 15 criminal charges;
  • He paid known jihadi murderer Omar Khadr $10,500,000 for allegedly being mistreated in Guantanamo;
  • His government has been trying to reopen relations with the Iranian Islamic regime, after the previous Conservative government shut down the Iranian embassy in Ottawa because of its clandestine operations — including espionage and infiltration. Liberal Iranian MP Majid Jowhari started a petition to reestablish diplomatic ties with Iran;
  • His Sharia-supporting MP, Omar Alghabra, represented Canada at the 44th session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. Since when is Canada an OIC state?
  • Leaked intelligence documents now reveal a much greater threat of Islamic terror in Canada than the Trudeau government will admit to.

To the people of India and every peace-loving individual in the West, Trudeau’s brand of “diversity” means to embrace jihadis and Sikh terrorists — and their partners — as equal citizens, including Islamic State militants. Trudeau’s silly antics are no joke, and his platitudes offer no cause to celebrate true harmony, diversity, pluralism and especially democracy.

“India’s message to Canadian PM Trudeau is Loud and Clear,” by Ajit Datta, Rightlog India, February 18, 2018:

Justin Trudeau is a mascot of everything that is wrong with the world today. From being at the forefront of encouraging every degeneracy to welcoming radicalism into his homeland, from cheap gimmicks of tokenism to attempts at creating a culture of politically correct absurdities, the stink of his leftist hypocrisy wafts far and wide. As citizen of India, I could not care less if the elected leader of Canada seeks to drive his nation to the dumps. But where it has an adverse effect on my country is where I choose to draw the line.

Trudeau will be in Amritsar on the 21st of February, and according to some reports, he has refused to meet the Punjab chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh. No official reason has been cited, but it is believed that this move of Trudeau’s is aimed at appeasing pro-Khalistani Sikhs in Canada. Captain Amarinder, despite belonging to the Congress Party which has a dismal record in protecting India’s sovereignty, has been a vocal critic of the Khalistan movement.

The Khalistani movement was brought to the mainstream when the then prime minister Indira Gandhi allegedly propped up secessionist Bhindrawale to curb the growing popularity of the Akalis in Punjab. It was a typical Congress Party move, sacrificing national security at the altar of short-term electoral gains. But the movement fast became Indira’s Frankenstein, and the rest, including how she lost her life, is history. Cut to the present times, and the only surviving proponents of the Khalistan movement now reside in Canada. These cowards, including one who made it to Trudeau’s cabinet, have unsuccessfully attempted to fuel the movement from the comfort of their Canadian homes….

Today’s India is no pushover. Since the advent of PM Modi, the country has consciously worked towards carving out a space for itself as a global power. Trudeau wholeheartedly embracing Khalistanis and refusing to meet an elected chief minister in India, is just a display of bad manners from an entitled brat. But this isn’t Manmohan’s India, and we don’t take such rubbish lying down.

For starters, the minister of state for agriculture was sent to receive Justin Trudeau when he landed in India. Now remember, Trudeau isn’t the insignificant head-of-state of some small third-world country. Also remember that this is an era where prime minister Modi himself receives several world leaders at the airport when they land in India. Considering the importance that the prime minister accords to a personal touch in his dealings with world leaders, sending a junior minister to receive Trudeau is slap on the latter’s face. Moreover, if reports are to be believed, the Uttar Pradesh chief minister won’t receive Trudeau on his visit to the Taj Mahal. This is against convention, and if this is indeed true, it will send out the clearest of messages…

India is not CNN’s studio where global champions of pseudo-liberalism, pseudo-secularism and radical Islamism will find a platform to propagate their hypocrisy and watch the world burn. You might be rich, white, the offspring of royalty and the global poster-boy of liberal values, but it amounts to zilch, especially if you mess with India.

 

 

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/02/trudeau-exposed-a-leader-who-embraces-islamic-supremacists-and-sikh-terrorists

 

The Transgender Totalitarians Can Now Legally Take Your Kids

https://townhall.com/columnists/janerobbins/2018/02/21/the-transgender-totalitarians-can-now-legally-take-your-kids-n2451699

An Ohio court has removed a teenaged girl from the custody of her parents because they refused to consent to dangerous and experimental medical treatment. The teenager wants to undergo irreversible treatment (hormones and probably sex-reassignment surgery) that she hopes will alleviate the depression associated with her gender dysphoria. Based on 1) the scientific facts that such treatment will convert her into a lifelong medical patient and probably fail to alleviate her suicidal tendencies, 2) their religious belief that created reality is unalterable, and 3) their fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their minor child, the parents said no.

But the court concluded they have no right to make that decision. If they reject the radical new orthodoxy that replaces science with ideology, their authority to act for the good of their child is simply extinguished.

This shocking decision can be traced to the Obergefell case, in which the Supreme Court discovered a right to same-sex marriage. Leftists and libertarians assured us the ruling would be harmless, but the Ohio case illustrates the tragic shortsightedness of that position.

LGBT ideologues had no intention of stopping with the legal sanction of marriage. Their goal was twofold: to eradicate the significance of biological sex differences entirely, regardless of the damage done to innocents; and to silence and ultimately obliterate any dissent, if necessary by dismantling social structures and belief systems. The ideologues are winning.

With breathtaking speed, the universe of innocent people being damaged has expanded to include creative professionals who decline to participate in same-sex wedding events; girls who object to sharing shower facilities with biological boys; female athletes who can’t compete with bigger, stronger male athletes; mental-health professionals who adhere to the science about sex and gender; soldiers whose very lives depend on having emotionally and physically stable comrades; and vulnerable children who are being pushed into life-altering decisions they are incapable of making.

Innocents must suffer to achieve utopia. But utopia will remain elusive if dissenting institutions are allowed to remain. What sorts of institutions? Families and religions.

 

An early attack on families – specifically on parental authority — was the 2005 refusal of Massachusetts public-school administrators to let parents remove their children from classroom lessons equating heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Because same-sex marriage was legal in the state, the court ruled, schools could ignore parents’ wishes about their children’s education. The Ohio court has now extended that concept to denying parents’ wishes concerning the medical treatment of their child.

But it could get worse. The argument for limiting parents’ rights can be easily extended to limiting couples’ rights to be parents in the first place. Soon, couples who disagree with the LGBT agenda will be deemed unfit for adoptive or foster parenthood. This has already happened in Great Britain and Canada, where Christians have been banned from providing families to needy children.

It’s happening in this country as well. Illinois bureaucrats have imposed a policy that only couples who embrace all aspects of the LGBT creed may foster a child who identifies as L, G, B, or T. A similar view was expressed at a recent Senate hearing in Georgia, where a Methodist minister lectured that adoption agencies or prospective parents who disagree with her support of LGBT ideology shouldn’t be allowed any role in adoptions or fostering, period.

If Biblical/traditional views about sex and marriage disqualify a couple from adopting or fostering, the logical next step is to deem parents who hold such views unfit to raise their biological children. The Ohio court has taken the first step down that road, which leads to the radicals’ attack on religion as well as families.

Attempts to protect faith-based child-placement agencies from having to violate their religious principles as a requirement for state licensure have provoked outrage. (This was the context of the Methodist minister’s tirade.) The faith-based principles must be stamped out, even if needy children suffer as a result.

In this worldview, no religion should be allowed to dissent in any forum. As the Solicitor General admitted in the Obergefell argument, Christian schools will probably have to abandon the tenets of their faith in personnel and other policies. When quoting Scripture has become “hate speech,” clergy will do so at their peril. The radicals have already come for the sermons; can further persecution be ruled out?

Reasonable Americans must understand that it’s folly to try to compromise with these sexual ideologues. As long as parents are allowed to retain any authority over their children, and religions are allowed to teach anything contrary to the new orthodoxy, the revolution will be incomplete. Noncompliant individuals and institutions must therefore be destroyed.

This isn’t merely a political dispute. It’s a battle over civilization itself.

 

 

WHAT LEFT-WING EDUCATORS DON’T TEACH DURING ‘BLACK HISTORY MONTH’

When will Black History Month be … history?

Apart from the bizarre notion that educators should set aside one month to salute the historical achievements of one race apart from and above the historical achievements of other races, Black History Month appears to omit a lot of black history.

About slavery, do our mostly left-wing educators teach that slavery was not unique to America and is as old as humankind? As economist and author Thomas Sowell says: “More whites were brought as slaves to North Africa than blacks brought as slaves to the United States or to the 13 colonies from which it was formed. White slaves were still being bought and sold in the Ottoman Empire, decades after blacks were freed in the United States.”

Are students taught that “race-based preferences,” sometimes called “affirmative action,” were opposed by several civil rights leaders? While National Urban League Executive Director Whitney Young supported a type of “Marshall Plan” for a period of 10 years to make up for historical discrimination, his board of directors refused to endorse the plan. In rejecting it, the president of the Urban League in Pittsburgh said the public would ask, “What in blazes are these guys up to? They tell us for years that we must buy (nondiscrimination) and then they say, ‘It isn’t what we want.’” A member of the Urban League in New York objected to what he called “the heart of it — the business of employing Negroes (because they are Negroes).” Bayard Rustin was one of Martin Luther King Jr.’s key lieutenants and helped to plan and organize the civil rights march in D.C. that culminated in King’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech. Rustin, an openly gay black man, also opposed race-based preferences.

Do our left-wing educators, during Black History Month, note that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s celebrated New Deal actually hurt blacks? According to Cato Institute’s Jim Powell, blacks lost as many as 500,000 jobs as a result of anti-competitive, job-killing regulations of the New Deal. Powell writes: “The flagship of the New Deal was the National Industrial Recovery Act, passed in June 1933. It authorized the president to issue executive orders establishing some 700 industrial cartels, which restricted output and forced wages and prices above market levels. The minimum wage regulations made it illegal for employers to hire people who weren’t worth the minimum because they lacked skills. As a result, some 500,000 blacks, particularly in the South, were estimated to have lost their jobs. Marginal workers, like unskilled blacks, desperately needed an expanding economy to create more jobs. Yet New Deal policies made it harder for employers to hire people. FDR tripled federal taxes between 1933 and 1940. … By giving labor unions the monopoly power to exclusively represent employees in a workplace, the (1935) Wagner Act had the effect of excluding blacks, since the dominant unions discriminated against blacks.”

Are students taught that gun control, widely embraced by today’s black leadership, began as a means to deny free blacks the right to own guns? In ruling that blacks were chattel property in the Dred Scott case, Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney warned of that the consequences of ruling otherwise would mean that blacks would be able to own guns. If blacks were “entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens,” said Taney, “it would give persons of the Negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one state of the union, the right … to keep and carry arms wherever they went … endangering the peace and safety of the state.”

Are students taught that generations of civil rights leaders opposed immigration — both legal and illegal immigration? After the Civil War, black abolitionist Frederick Douglass implored employers to hire blacks over new immigrants. Twenty-five years later, Booker T. Washington pleaded with Southern industrialists to hire blacks over new immigrants: “One third of the population of the South is of the Negro race. … To those of the white race who look to the incoming of those of foreign birth and strange tongue and habits for the prosperity of the South: Cast down your bucket where you are. Cast it down among the eight millions of Negroes whose habits you know, whose fidelity and love you have tested in days when to have proved treacherous meant the ruin of your fireside.”

About illegal immigration, an issue that nearly all of the today’s so-called black leaders simply ignore, Coretta Scott King signed a letter urging Congress to retain harsh sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. The letter said: “We are concerned … that … the elimination of employer sanctions will cause another problem — the revival of the pre-1986 discrimination against black and brown U.S. and documented workers, in favor of cheap labor — the undocumented workers. This would undoubtedly exacerbate an already severe economic crisis in communities where there are large numbers of new immigrants.”

These are just a few historical and inconvenient notes left on the cutting room floor during Black History Month.

 

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/269375/what-left-wing-educators-dont-teach-during-black-larry-elder