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.'”

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 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.”

Are students taught that gun control 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 that ruling otherwise would mean that Blacks could legally 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 illegal immigration and raised questions about legal 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, 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.”

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

Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host.

What Left-Wing Educators Don’t Teach During ‘Black History Month’ | Frontpagemag

WHO green-lights mRNA vaccine experimentation on pregnant women and newborn infants

In early January, the World Health Organization (WHO) concurred that pregnant women should not receive experimental mRNA vaccines, due to insufficient safety data. By the end of the month, WHO reversed its recommendation and joined the U.S. CDC in promoting experimental mRNA vaccines for pregnant women. Great Britain is already getting the green light to serve up pregnant women and newborn infants to the altar of vaccine science. Johnson and Johnson have already enlisted their subsidiary, Janssen, to convince pregnant women that they should sign up their body for the new mRNA vaccine studies to promote the “greater good” of future generations. According to Janssen’s Hanneke Schuitemaker, the goal is to ultimately get the shots in babies. Oxford-AstraZeneca is moving forward with their experiments and will begin jabbing children as young as six years old in the coming months.

Deadly experiment to be pushed onto pregnant women

This experiment could acutely injure up to 20 percent of pregnant women and have compounding negative effects on the woman’s child, who is connected to the mother’s blood supply via her placenta. The clinical trials for the Moderna vaccine were performed on a meager forty-five people, who were separated into three groups of fifteen people. Each group received either low dose, medium dose, or a high dose of the mRNA vaccine. Astonishingly, three people (20 percent) in the high dose group were hospitalized after the first shot. There was even an issue in the low dose group, with one person needing hospitalization after the vaccination. These problems came up in a carefully selected cohort of people who do not have any history of health problems, underlying conditions, or adverse reactions to vaccination. The clinical trials used exclusionary criteria to select the healthiest candidates, but there were still hospitalizations after the vaccine was administered!

Instead of figuring out the issue with the vaccine, the concoction was rushed into the next clinical trial and ultimately given emergency use approval for populations around the world. As the vaccine injuries are extrapolated across the population, hospitals are forced to deal with waves of vaccine injuries and vaccine-induced mortalities. Introducing these same problems into the bodies of pregnant women will ultimately cause needless miscarriages and spontaneous abortions, while adding complications to the already fragile process of pregnancy. In the UK, there are already reports of pregnant women subverting guidelines and getting the vaccine. There have been six known cases of spontaneous abortion caused by these shots.

Dangerous vaccine experiment not safe for humans, let alone humans in critical developmental stages

Millions of doses have been received in the population now and thousands of problems have already cropped up. As the vaccine is pushed forward onto pregnant women, this experiment can now be called a dangerous vaccine experiment because the risks are now recorded and known. Notwithstanding, pregnant women are physiologically different than a normal cohort of healthy people, are undergoing significant changes in their body, and are more sensitive to contraindications. Their cardiovascular system is different, as well as the hemodynamics, their nutrient absorption, their immunology and their pharmacodynamics. The mRNA technology has never officially been licensed as safe for humans, let alone humans in the most crucial developmental stages, with a low blood volume and body weight.

The push to inoculate pregnant women is unethical and scientifically absurd. Even the WHO and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recognize that the risk of severe covid-19 infection for pregnant women is low. With the proper treatment and prenatal care, pregnant women can face this potential infection as they face several other potential infections during pregnancy, with greater understanding and faith. But vaccine companies are abandoning informed consent about treatment and prenatal care, and instead, they are scaring pregnant women into thinking they need the experimental vaccines. The last time an experimental drug was used on pregnant women was during the 1950s and 1960s. During that time, thalidomide was used off label to quell morning sickness. The drug was later found to cause birth defects; some offspring were born without arms and legs.

For more on the dangers of this experiment, check out VaccineDamage.News.