“Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses.” - Plato
Seeking Truth in a World of Propaganda. Links do not necessarily indicate agreement with stories or perspectives.
It’s New Year’s Eve again, and with that our time-honoured tradition of looking back at the most conspiratorial events of the past year.
It goes without saying that 2022 has seemed like an extended nightmare for many, but it has also served as a reoccurring revelation too. Still, many are glad to see the back of it, while cautiously optimistic that this next year ‘couldn’t get any worse.’ That remains to be seen, and more insights on that front are available in our other annual opus, Trends and Predictions for 2023.
Another important truism: the tin foil hat conspiracy theorists continue to be vindicated as significant events unfold. So much so, that we can now lay the common trope, “Oh, it’s just a coincidence” – safely to rest. Henceforth, those who still insist on referring to bona fide conspiracies as mere coincidences, shall be dubbed as coincidence theorists.
Before we get to the top ten list, here are some of the honourable mentions from the past year…
Here are some of this past year’s standout stories which didn’t make the top tier. We should first mention that the ongoing fallout from the experimental mRNA ‘vaccine’ roll-out and the vaccine passport/digital ID could easily be at the top of any list of conspiracies and scandals, and will unfortunately remain as a looming threat to the lives of billions of people for many years, if not decades to come. That said, some other controversial events of note from this past year include the incredible Canadian Truckers Protest against a vaccine-obsessed Trudeau regime and its unprecedented draconian attack on Canadian citizens demanding a restoration of their basic human rights. We also saw the mysterious demolition of the infamous Georgia Guide Stones monument to Malthusian eugenics, the precarious trial of Jeffrey Epstein’s partner in crime Ghislane Maxwell which somehow netted no VIP client names (and amazingly, she’s still alive in one piece), and also the bizarre political tale of Nancy Pelosi’s husband Pauli P. supposedly getting mauled with a hammer by a known local personality in their San Francisco mansion – a story promptly buried my the MSM right before the election. On the tech front, we should point to the ominous unleashing by Google’s OpenAI of their new ChatGPT artificial intelligence bot. It was a moderate year for false flags and mass shootings, with a few heavily politicized high-profile anomalous events like the Uvalde School Shooting in Texas and the Club Q Shooting in Colorado Springs. In Europe, the Dutch Farmers Revolt exposing a pernicious anti-farming and GMO food agenda by the World Economic Forum and Bill Gates networks, along with meat shortages and continued supply chain disruptions – all converging to form the perfect financial storm which now threatens to ravage an already weak and unstable global economy. Later in the year came a real blast from the past, reports of an imminent document release which contains some evidence of the CIA’s role in the JFK Assassination. Granted, these are just a few in a long list of major events which didn’t make our final cut.
So without further ado, here are the top ten conspiracies of 2022...
Considering all that is going on in the US and internationally at this time, most Americans would agree that the 2022 Midterm Election was one of the most important and consequential elections of their lifetime. Both the House of Representatives and US Senate were up for grabs, and there was a real opportunity to correct a serious imbalance of power in Washington. However, before Nov. 8th there was a real air of trepidation, as the shadow of the controversial 2020 Election still loomed large, with accusations of widespread and systemic election fraud still unresolved. The sum of all fears became real again in the key swing state of Arizona: on election morning most of the voting machines in the state’s largest population center, Maricopa County, just happened to malfunction. Officials claimed it was just an unfortunate coincidence. That was only the beginning, as boxes with thousands of ballots continued to mysteriously turn up after election day. In short, the Arizona election became a national and international embarrassment. As it goes, the state’s election and processes were being controlled by Democratic Party operatives – who then slow-walked the vote counting for two weeks after the election was meant to be over. Not surprisingly, the favorite in the governor’s race, Republican, Kari Lake (image, above) barely lost to an unremarkable Democrat candidate Katie Hobbs (if you believe the final contested result), and to add insult to injury, the person in charge of the state’s election debacle… was Katie Hobbs, who happened to also be serving as Arizona’s Secretary of State. Kari Lake sued the state to demand a recount and a run-off, but political and media pressure on the courts prompted the judge to dismiss her challenge – despite having truckloads of evidence proving foul play. Lake has appealed the decision. What’s important is that this time the world saw what happened, and the state and Democratic Party machine was widely exposed – effectively vindicating millions of Americans who still hold well-founded suspicions about the infamous 2020 Election which managed to install the corrupt, deep state candidate Joe Biden into power. Similar anomalies were observed in 2022 – in states like Nevada and Pennsylvania. In the end, the Republicans still managed to flip the House of Representatives by a slim margin, while losing the US Senate by an even slimmer margin. In a country where half the population still do not trust the democratic process, civility and stability are now teetering on borrowed time.
As the Covid gravy train began to break down, the globalists’ Government-Media-Pharma Complex grew desperate for a new ‘pandemic’ to maintain the structures of control and human surveillance which they erected during the contrived Covid-19 ‘state of emergency’. Enter a relatively unknown and exotically-titled alleged pathogen, Monkeypox. Attempts were made to portray this mythical epidemic as some sort of universal threat, and when that failed, the Establishment then pivoted to try and promote it as a new “gay disease” in an attempt to emulate a familiar template used to reproduce the perennial (and highly questionable) HIV crisis. In the end, their fear campaign never really took off, but not before a brand-new vaccine was created to “protect the public from another potentially deadly epidemic.” And after all that failed, efforts were then made to use it in order to harvest some political capital – by sacrificing this brand at the altar of political correctness, as social justice clerics demanded the mythical virus be rebranded due to fears that name “Monkeypox” was somehow racist…? But how? Against primates? No one was quite sure what they meant. Oh well. Introducing “MPOX”. Rinse, and repeat. Welcome to the world of Modern Virology (aka Big Pharma’s main meal ticket). Meanwhile, we’re all waiting with bated breath for Bill Gates’ self-confessed “next pandemic.”
Just when the Chinese were beginning to get a taste of freedom again, the Central Party decide to fire-up the pandemic control grid again. In February 2022, an alleged COVID-19 ‘outbreak’ was announced in the city of Shanghai. Central Party claimed that the alleged ‘outbreak’ was caused by the Omicron variant. The state then proceeded to decree a new “Zero Covid” policy, before locking-down more cities, and dragging the country back into the authoritarian hell of February 2020. As it turned out, the real reason this new ‘Covid wave’ materialized was because of nondiagnostic PCR testing ‘case’ data generated through more meaningless mass COVID-19 testing. Finally, after 8 months of Covid madness, foreign investment began drying up, and China’s already fragile economy was destabilizing. The state’s overzealousness then triggered mass protests against Orwellian government restrictions, with millions of Chinese taking to the streets across the country to demand their basic freedom. This prompted Central Party to quickly abandon its failing social control program, and not surprisingly their economy began to rebound as people and business got back to work. Rather interestingly, the US government seemed unhappy that China was taking its foot off the authoritarian pedal, and so Biden then levied an administrative punishment against China by slapping a new mandatory Covid test travel restriction on any Chinese travelers arriving in the USA. It really seems that as the world’s most populous nation, without China’s total compliance the globalists’ New Normal agenda will quickly fall apart. This incident should tell us all we need to know about the so-called ‘global pandemic.’
On March 17, 2022, Lia Thomas (formerly named William Thomas), 22, became the first openly transgender athlete to win America’s top college sports title – following a cringe worthy victory in the women’s 500 yard freestyle. Let us explain: because Thomas believes he is now a woman, some institutions like the NCAA – who have come under political pressure from the radical leftist wing of the political machine – now feel obligated to allow a biological male like Thomas to compete against physically inferior biological females (aka real women). The victory was short-lived though, as the woke bombast of the Thomas debacle quickly became a lightning rod in the debate about so-called “trans women” in sports – triggering a massive backlash against this extreme ideological invasion of womens’ competitive sports. Not long after, international sporting organizations ruled that biological male athletes like Thomas can no longer compete in top races. FINA, the world swimming’s governing body, also announced plans to create a new “open” category of competition to include “transgender women” (aka men who believe they are female). Now that the debate has been blown wide open, expect further course corrections as people gradually return to their senses on the issue. But do not expect radical leftists to surrender just yet, as the culture wars will continue to rage on.
Like the S&L scandal of the 1980’s, and the Eron and Bernie Madoff financial scams – this latest iteration of the classic Ponzi Scheme managed to destabilize markets and rob countless investors of their life savings. Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), a 30-year-old crypto celebrity icon and celebrated savant, founded what he claimed were two separate companies: a hedge fund called Alameda Research and FTX cryptocurrency exchange, before going the whole hog by hyping his own fiat crypto token and then used it as collateral to create hundreds of millions of loans for himself, before robbing his depositors to embezzle and gamble away untold fortunes on the markets. And that’s just the beginning. It turns out that SBF was the number two political donor to the Democratic Party, and used his laundered proceeds to bankroll a sizeable portion of the Democrats’ 2020 Midterm Election campaigns, not to mention his mother just happening to be a chief organizer for the Democratic Party as well. Not surprisingly, the Biden Administration waited until after the Midterm Election to begin an investigation into the floppy haired SBF and his FTX ponzi empire. SBF was eventually arrested in the Bahamas and awaits federal trial in the Southern District of New York. The trial is sure to be both shocking and entertaining in equal measure. But the real question remains: how will this drama effect the government’s role in the world of cryptocurrency? More crucially: is the FTX takedown really a controlled demolition of crypto designed to pave the way for an oppressive Central Bank Digital Currency global ‘cashless’ takeover? We shall see…
2022 was the year the CBDC has made landfall, and is currently waiting in the wings of the halls of power. For the last few years, elites have been gathering at globalist confabs like Bilderberg and the World Economic Forum in Davos to wax lyrical about the need to abolish the ‘old money’, or ‘dirty cash’ – and to make way for the central bankers’ new Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) – turning the planet into a full-blown cashless society. In the US, this technocratic overhaul is being hatched under the guise of “Project Hamilton” as a joint effort between the Boston Federal Reserve Bank and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to design and plan the release of a “digital dollar” – which will destroy the value of old dollar in order to force people onto the new monetary matrix. As cash disappears from the economy, so does privacy. Essentially, CBDCs are meant to be an electronic form of fiat money in a particular country or region, but unlike Bitcoin, this digital coin is centralized and regulated by the governments and their central banks. Without ever putting this matter to a public vote, elites and technocrats have simply been moving ahead to implement this authoritarian monetary system. While the mainstream media and globalist think tanks claim that the CBDC is designed to reign in crypto currencies, and supposedly tackle crimes like money laundering, and tax avoidance (something which elites partake in daily), the reality of the CBDC is something altogether different. They plan to issue a programmable currency whereby the bank can control where and what you are allowed to spend your CBDC’s on. They can also shut your money off. Imagine this digital money system combined with a Chinese-style social credit score, or a vaccine passport/digital ID. This dystopian digital control grid will transform commerce and human society in ways we can possibly imagine. For these reasons, many rightly believe that this is the road to digital slavery. The window of opportunity to push back against this massive authoritarian assault is now closing.
This is the biggest tech scandal in modern history – and it’s gone mostly unreported by 90% of the mainstream media because of the partisan nature of its revelations. The Twitter Files have provided an unprecedented look behind the dirty inner workings of the firm’s opaque censorship regime, and exposes an openly fascist merger of Silicon Valley’s ‘Big Tech’ companies and the bloated National Security State. In early December, under new management of owner and CEO Elon Musk, Twitter HQ began disseminating a massive trove of internal documents revealing the direct collusion between former CEO Jack Dorsey’s corporate regime and the US Federal Government – to censor and cancel users from the platform for speech or political views which went against globalist or government policies. This included copious evidence of election interference. It seems that in their desperation to conjure up proof of alleged “foreign influence” on Twitter, FBI and other federal government officials doubled-down to try and save their sinking Russiagate narrative, and creating a monster in the process. New revelations also exposed the FBI’s role in leaning on Twitter to expedite illegal censorship operations, and how so-called ‘public health’ officials strong-armed Twitter into sanitizing all speech relating to COVID-19 and the experimental mRNA ‘vaccine’ injections. The FBI were also drawing-up shadowbanning and censorship blacklists in an attempt to cleanse the platform of effective opposition to the Biden campaign in 2020 and later into his first term. Under Dorsey, the platform became an open cesspool for spooks and government operatives – many of whom appeared to be allowed to spy on users’ DMs, and to dictate terms of censorship on the platform. Watch this space. This is only the beginning.
Back in late September, the world woke up to truly horrific news – both the Nordstream 1 and 2 pipelines were reported to be leaking gas into the Baltic Sea and into the atmosphere – after what looked like a deliberate act of sabotage. While the media played dumb, pretending not to know who carried out this attack, sane onlookers were well aware of the only entity who had the motives, means and opportunity to carry out this state-sponsored act of terror – namely the United States and its NATO partners. Incredibly, the entire western media quickly began blaming Russia for blowing up its most important energy infrastructure project. The result of this attack was a further devastation of Europe’s energy supplies and hyperinflationary EU and UK consumer prices for the fall and winter – not to mention the millions of cubic meters of methane which were released into the Earth’s atmosphere. Despite all the vacant US denials, the facts are clear as day: Joe Biden and Victoria Nuland were both on record beforehand promising they would “end the Nordstream pipeline.” Of course, this is a hugely dangerous red line which the US and its allies have crosses: by declaring a no-holds-barred geopolitical energy war, the gates are now open for further escalations – which may lead to WWIII. History has shown this can happen. Consider the Anglo-American energy embargo and strong-arming of Japan which led up to the Attack on Pearl Harbor which opened the door for the US to enter WWII. Think of the Nordstream attack as just that, but worse – as it was also direct attack on the day-to-day energy and finances of people living in the EU and the collective West. Indeed, the West is playing an extremely dangerous game, which is really the Great Game 2.0.
In the future, we will look back at 2022 as one of the most consequential years of young 21st century history. If you live in the collective West or the EU, you know that the energy crisis is now a reality. The real question is: is all of this by simply by happenstance, or is it being done by design? And can it be traced back to a much older global agenda, and forward through to the WEF’s Great Reset? The answer to all those questions is course, yes. But this is only the surface of this issue. For Brussels and Berlin, this ‘green’ road to energy scarcity pure economic suicide. Rather than change this policy course and work to stabilise global energy and agricultural markets – the gallant virtue-signalling West has opted instead to double-down on their precarious stance by further tightening anti-Russian sanctions, as well as pursue even deeper commitments towards de-nulearisation and the not-so-green ‘Net Zero’ carbon reduction agenda. The cancelation of Russia, coupled with the disastrous ‘green’ energy policies are only accelerating inflationary cycles globally. All of this is a recipe for disaster – all due to policies directly created by western governments. By blocking inbound energy supplies from the Nordstream and other Russian pipelines which supplied them with affordable and reliable gas and oil into the EU, Europe has painted itself into a very perilous corner. Behind the energy wars and even beyond Klaus Schwab’s globalist facade – you will find hardcore geopolitics at play. The main Anglo-American objective: the deindustrialization of Germany and EU, the separation of Russian resources and political leadership from western markets. We live in truly perilous times.
In late February 2022, the unthinkable happened: Russia launched its military intervention into neighboring Ukraine. War is hell, and while Russia seems intent on seeing its “Special Military Operation” through, the US and its allies are going to have to decide just how long they plan to fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian. How many dead Ukrainian soldiers and lost territory will it take for the West to instruct Ukraine’s President Zelensky to finally sue for peace? Welcome to NATO’s ultimate proxy war of attrition in Ukraine, driven by the greatest western media propaganda campaign of all-time. Suffice to say that Russia, Ukraine, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) alliance are now at war – with each party firmly in the belief that they are fighting an existential war, not over any particular political or territorial dispute, but for the future existence of their countries, or in the case of NATO, over their ability to maintain regional hegemony for the Atlanticist power bloc. Will this near frozen conflict escalate to a WWIII situation, or a thermo-nuclear exchange between the great powers? The US and British invasion of Iraq nearly two decades ago is a particularly pertinent and telling counterpoint to events in Ukraine. Then, as now, the ‘free and democratic Western World’ was supposedly faced with a dangerous, unhinged despot in Saddam Hussein, who, like Putin is said to be unwilling to compromise. It’s a well-worn script for the West, and will likely remain the justification of another endless war. Of course, Zelensky could end it all tomorrow if he declared his intentions to disavow any NATO aspirations, demilitarize the country, and declare Ukraine a neutral state. Such a declaration would certainly be welcome by Russia today, but the West are determined to keep this proxy war going, and cancel Russia from the global economic system. Besides, business is just too good for Ukraine who have managed scrape more than $100 billion from the US and EU treasuries so far, not to mention the billions in profits for shareholders in the US defense industry. Oh, and on the backend of this war, the WEF and BlackRock are eyeing Ukraine’s remaining assets, as private oligarchs hatch their plan to carve up and reshape the post-war landscape there. The future world order is at stake.
What an unbelievable year. Expect some seriously impactful moments in 2023.
HAPPY NEW YEAR.
* * *
SEE PREVIOUS TOP TEN CONSPIRACIES:
2021 Top Ten Conspiracies
2020 Top Ten Conspiracies
2019 Top Ten Conspiracies
2018 Top Ten Conspiracies
2017 Top Ten Conspiracies
2016 Top Ten Conspiracies
2015 Top Ten Conspiracies
2014 Top Ten Conspiracies
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT 21ST CENTURY WIRE'S WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE
The people’s president Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil
The Brazilian Federal Police has just concluded a survey that investigates the actions of Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro regarding the concern about Covid-19 vaccines. According to the police, his speech constituted “fake news” and “crime”.
The report concluded, that “given the gathered evidences, the Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has committed, willfully, according to the felony laid down in 41st article of the Misdemeanor Law, the actions of ‘spreading alarming speech about an unreal danger’ though a live aired on October 21st, 2021”.
At the referred live, the president suggested that vaccinated individuals against Covid-19 could be developing acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) faster than usual. According to Bolsonaro, this information was drawn from United Kingdom’s government reports.
The text also states that the Head of the Executive would have committed crime for encouraging the population to “disobey the sanitary standards established by the federal government itself, which involve the compulsory use of facemasks”.
“[The president] spreaded the misinformation that Spanish influenza victims would have actually died of Brazilian pneumonia, caused by the use of facemasks, discouraging the viewers to use them in order to fight Covid-19”, added the report.
The document was dispatched to the Supreme Court last Thursday (27). The inquiry’s rapporteur is Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who determined the deadline of 15 days for Bolsonaro to be summoned. The president may be represented by the Federal Attorney General’s Office within 5 days.
Jair Bolsonaro was a strong advocate of the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin to treat covid-19. He was against making the vaccines mandatory because he understood it to be an experimental treatment that could cause harm to people, especially those who are in good health.
President Bolsonaro took hydroxychloroquine and promoted this effective drug to Brazilians.
For this reason, he was persecuted by opponents and by big businessmen of the pharmaceutical sector in Brazil who wanted to sell vaccines.
Yesterday President Bolsonaro conceded electoral defeat to socialist Lula da Silva and left the country bound for Orlando, FL.
The Brazilian president fears being arrested for political persecution of his opponents in Brazil.
The post PERSECUTION: Socialists Intend to Arrest Brazilian President for Warning about the Covid-19 Vaccine Risks – AFTER BOLSONARO WARNED OF DANGERS OF VACCINE! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Elon Musk has criticized mainstream media outlets over their coverage of the so-called “Twitter Files.”
“Why is corporate journalism rushing to defend the state instead of the people?” Musk wrote on Twitter on Dec. 27, in response to a tweet from journalist and documentary filmmaker Leighton Woodhouse. The latter was sharing his new Substack post about how corporate media rushed to defend the FBI and the state instead of exposing them.
“The Hunter Biden laptop story shows the extent to which the corporate media has become the propaganda arm of the state,” Woodhouse wrote in his Substack, pointing to the recent release of the seventh installment of Twitter’s internal documents.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk smiles as he addresses guests at the Offshore Northern Seas 2022 (ONS) meeting in Stavanger, Norway, on Aug. 29, 2022. (Carina Johansen/NTB/AFP via Getty Images)
Independent author Michael Shellenberger published the seventh installment on Dec. 19, revealing how there was an “organized effort” by federal law enforcement agents to discredit the 2020 Hunter Biden laptop report, by targeting social media and news companies.
Other installments of Twitter’s internal communications have shown how the media giant placed certain individuals on “secret blacklists,” debates over how to handle former President Donald Trump’s account before it was suspended in January 2021, and how the FBI allegedly flagged accounts and tweets for Twitter to take action against.
The FBI has dismissed the “Twitter Files,” alleging that “conspiracy theorists” are attempting to discredit the bureau.
A Twitter user responded to Musk’s question by writing, “Simple… it’s Corporate Journalism… Not Journalism.”
To which Musk replied: “Exactly. Why would anyone trust corpo journalism?”
In the same thread, Musk also said that he was “open to the idea” of buying the Substack platform, while responding to a tweet from Wall Street Silver.
The latter wrote, “Twitter plus Substack creates instantly massive competition for obsolete legacy corporate media.”
Substack allows independent writers and podcasters to publish directly to their audiences and get paid through subscriptions, the platform’s website says.
Tuesday was not the first time that Musk has expressed an interest in buying Substack.
On Dec. 8, conservative commentator Dave Rubin started a thread by alleging that Google and YouTube’s “manipulation for political purposes is FAR worse than Twitter’s.”
A Twitter user continued the thread and recommended Musk buy Substack.
The Twitter user wrote: “You would have the information layer with Twitter and the narrative layer. Corporate media would then have [to] specialize on reporting government leaks, from ‘people familiar with the matter.'”
“I’m open to the idea,” Musk wrote in response to the recommendation.
On Dec. 28, Musk responded to a Twitter clip posted by CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” during which Axios reporter Hope King said the new Twitter chief’s reputation was “in danger.”
“All of the macro conditions are against his favor. Market-share for $TSLA is down year-over-year. His reputation with Twitter is impacting his reputation when it comes to all of his companies,” she said.
In response, Musk wrote: “The legacy media should worry about its reputation. We have only just begun.”
Musk has promised to promote free speech after acquiring Twitter and his decision to release the company’s internal documents is tied to his promise.
“The Twitter Files on free speech suppression soon to be published on Twitter itself. The public deserves to know what really happened,” Musk wrote on Twitter on Dec. 28, just days before the first batch of the “Twitter Files” was released by independent journalist Matt Taibbi.
The first installment exposed how the social media giant’s efforts to suppress the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story published just weeks before the 2020 presidential election.
Emails from the laptop’s hard drive and Treasury records revealed how then-Vice President Joe Biden, his brother James, and Hunter Biden were involved in various foreign business ventures, in countries such as Ukraine, Russia, and China. At the time, many media outlets discredited the revelations as “Russian disinformation” and the news was blocked by social media platforms.
Hunter Biden recently hired high-profile defense lawyer Abbe Lowell to his legal team, as House Republicans plan to launch probes into his overseas business interests.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, said Congress needs to probe “Big Tech” companies, following the revelations made by the “Twitter Files.”
“These explosive revelations show the enormous power that a handful of liberal tech executives have over our public discourse,” Wicker wrote in his weekly report published on Dec. 26.
“We should be grateful that new leadership is lifting the hood on Twitter, but Congress needs to follow up with wider investigations into Big Tech companies, including Facebook and Google,” he said.
Read more here...
Arizona House Member-Elect Liz Harris is well-known throughout Arizona and the United States after her bold and unprecedented move during the aftermath of the 2020 election: canvass the people who (allegedly) voted.
Harris and her team of everyday citizens spent almost two years canvassing Maricopa county and updating their findings as they went. Originally, there were rumblings that a canvass would be included in the 2021 Maricopa County Audit that was ordered by the state senate. Harris’s team would have been the likely executors of such a canvass, however, under mounting pressure from the DOJ, the canvass was put on hold indefinitely by senate president, Karen Fann. Perhaps it should have been conducted.
Among other key components of an “audit” that were missing was any ability to question or investigate Runbeck, the Phoenix based printer of the county’s ballots who also was contracted for the storage and scanning of returned mail-in ballots.
Auditors were also denied any substantive access to the splunk logs and routers that could have shown undue accessing of election infrastructure. They were also not given deleted “archived” files that were deleted “archived” just before the audit took place. In fact, it wasn’t until the testimony before the US Congress that it was discovered these files were “archived” prior to the audit and therefore not handed over. Try to delete files before an ordered audit and let us know what happens when the IRS or auditing agencies catches you doing that.
Arizonans are facing the same situation here in 2022 and Liz Harris, who is now an incoming member of the Arizona House, is being vociferous about what she believes to be true based on hard evidence from her canvass results:
What judge will stand up to and accept her challenge? Last week, evidence was offered to a Maricopa court showing that chain of custody was significantly violated in the mail in ballots that were picked up on election day. Over 260,000 of them.
Signatures would prove that the chain of custody violations were exploited, but signature examination was not permitted by Judge Peter Thompson despite the chain of custody being broken.
While election integrity activists finally got a day in court, the case itself was throttled down from ten counts to just two with a very limited window of discovery, only five and a half hours to argue the case, and an almost impossible burden of proof: not only did they have to prove the election outcomes would have been different with a precise number of impacted votes, they had to prove it was done with malicious intent and, strangely, who exactly it was that caused it. Was that a criminal trial or a civil lawsuit?
After the highly controversial 2020 election that, among numerous other issues, was disproportionately funded by Zuckerbucks in key Democrat strongholds, Liz Harris, who had at the time just lost in the Arizona GOP primary for a US House seat, took a step towards confirming or refuting the general election results from Nov. 3, 2020.
Liz Harris and a group of patriots took to the streets of Arizona with a map in hand, a questionnaire, and a plan for reporting and documenting what they found.
The questions were simple:
- Did you vote in the 2020 election and, if so, by what method did you vote?
- Did you receive any extra ballots and what did you do with those ballots?
- Do these people live here? (referring to other registered voters on the voter rolls)
The results were shocking. Just a couple highlights from the incredible report:
Liz Harris’s initiative in grassroots activism to canvass neighborhoods was adopted by many other organizations across the country. And unsurprisingly, they found similar results. USEIP in Colorado and AuditTheVotePA in Pennsylvania, among others from Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Nevada, New Mexico and beyond aslo found similar anomalies when they canvassed their neighborhoods en mass.
The post Arizona House Member-Elect Casts Aside Her Own Race For Election Truth appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Christina Bobb’s “Interview” in front of the unconstitutional Jan 6 committee was released yesterday along with other interviews and testimonies. The hacks in the mainstream media ignored the dynamite portions of her testimony.
Some of the media hacks were triggered by her comments.
Remarkable reading the Christian Bobb interview with the January 6th Committee–who she thinks is a mob and who she thinks is a coward. pic.twitter.com/8CakP5DkFu
— Ciara Torres-Spelliscy (@ProfCiara) December 29, 2022
Others in the media focused on the fact that she was one of many that listened in on President Trump’s calls.
What the leftists in the media missed was the last part of her interview when Bobb was very honest about what she thought of the committee.
Here are some parts of this part of her interview.
Starting on page 173 in the interview below is the best part of Bobb’s testimony.
4 Q Were you at the rally on the Ellipse when the president spoke?
5 A No. I was at the Capitol. I was reporting from Cannon.
6 Q What was happening in Cannon at that point, if anything?
7 A Absolutely nothing. It was completely dead. I had no idea what was going on because I was watching the speech on the iPhone or iPad or whatever. And as a reporter, you try to get members of Congress to give you a sound byte or something, and there weren’t even any walking the halls…
On p. 175 the questioning turns to Mike Pence and his ability to send the results back to seven states to review and decide which set of electors the state will confirm.
15 Q And when you say he can solve this now by sending it back, are you talking about the violence at the Capitol, like that would help quell the violence?
17 A No. There was no — I did not — like I saw violence. Like I said, the doors hadn’t been opened yet so there was no actual breach, but I didn’t see violence at the Capitol when I was there. I saw like holes that I thought the police would be, you know, but I didn’t — I never thought — like you can see I didn’t even tweet out anything violent at the Capitol because I didn’t think there was any violence at the Capitol. It was that small…
24 Q And we don’t have the time stamps on here, so I’m just going to ask you, do you remember sending this tweet while you were walking back or once you had already returned to the Willard?
On p. 176 the discussion continues with the Jan 6 gang attempting to tie a tweet in Greek to Bobb:
2 A Oh, that’s weird. Why aren’t there time stamps? Do you know?
3 Q I don’t know the answer to that, but do you remember whether you sent those, particularly those last two tweets we’ve been talking about, once you got back to the Willard?
6 A No. I think the ones — I mean, I don’t think I tweeted from the Willard. [I] think the ones would have been the ones at the rotunda. I don’t remember specifically, but I don’t think I tweeted at all from the Willard.
9 Q Okay. If we go to Exhibit 58. This is one of the tweets we looked at earlier that you sent out. And it looks like it’s a retweet of somebody else.
11 A Okay.
12 Q And I believe that’s an image from the movie The Patriot, with respect to the Revolution?
14 A Did I retweet that? I didn’t retweet that. Somebody else, whoever, that looks like a Cyrillic something tweeted. I didn’t tweet that out.
16 Q Okay. So you don’t remember — it’s unclear to me, because it says Christina Bobb retweet, but that’s why I’m asking the question.
18 A No.
19 Q Do you remember a retweet?
20 A I mean, that lists — I can’t read — is that Cyrillic? Or I don’t even know what language that is.
22 A [redacted] I can represent to you that it is Greek. It is an archived capture of the Twitter account from the day of.
24 Ms. Bobb. Okay.
25 Q [redacted] And my understanding of this, although you are obviously welcome to correct me if it’s inaccurate, is that this user, Dan30, posted this image, and that you retweeted it. And then that’s what the retweet symbol and then the Christina Bobb retweets.
Moving to p. 177, the Jan 6 gang continues to discuss the Patriot retweet they claim Bobb retweeted.
4 Ms. Bobb. Okay.
5 [redacted] Like at the top.
6 Ms. Bobb. It’s fuzzy on my end, but, okay, if that’s what happened. Fine.
8 Q If this is a retweet, why did you think that January 6 would be — if you did, how is this relevant, the Patriot, Revolution 1776? Why was that relevant to what was happening on January 6?
11 A Wow. Because from my perspective we had an illegal election. I believe wholeheartedly that not just Democrats, I think it was Democrats in conjunction with — I think it was the swamp. The swamp rigged and stole the election and the American people lost their voice. And so I think it’s very appropriate to hope that President Pence, Vice President Pence will send the votes back to the states, but I think as it stands I think we are in a really bad spot as a country. I do.
17 Q And I hope you can appreciate this. I mean, one of the things we are looking at is what happened in the Capitol, the violence at the Capitol. And so what you retweeted here, if that’s what this is, is an image of violence, of war, of 1776. So did you think that violence was necessary or appropriate on January 6, 2021, with respect to the joint session of Congress?
22 A I can’t believe you are honestly asking me these questions. There’s nothing about my social media account that calls for violence or that asks for violence. I’ve never done anything violent. I’ve never called for violence from anybody. So the idea that I retweet a picture from The Patriot, if that’s even in fact what happened, I don’t even remember doing that. It looks like my name is in the thing, but it doesn’t say Christina Bobb retweeted. It says re, re, re, Christina Bobb, re-retweeted. I don’t even know that’s me, but maybe it is, but — no. Absolutely not. I would never call for violence. I never expected violence and was very saddened. And I’m really, really saddened by what’s happening with our country right now. I think Democrats have completely destroyed it. It’s really, really disgusting, and I think this inquisition is disgusting. That’s what I think.
On p. 178 the inquisition continues.
8 Q Understood. And that is now on the record, Ms. Bobb. I’m just asking the questions, only because, you know, we are looking at certain images, and I’m trying to understand it. So I — and that’s why we want you to explain it?
11 A [Bobb responds] So let me ask you this, because you are investigating the violence — supposed violence at the Capitol, right? Right? That’s what you guys are supposed to be doing. This is what this committee is for.
14 Q That’s precisely right. We are looking into the events of the attack at the Capitol?
16 A Then why aren’t you looking into the police officers, and why aren’t you looking into the fact that they did not use the proper protocol for the use of force, the escalation of force? Why aren’t you looking into the fact that they opened the gates, that they removed the barricades? Why aren’t you looking into the fact that the FBI had an informant and they are instigating? Why aren’t you looking into the fact who were those FBI informants and what was federal law enforcement doing trying to instigate people to go into the Capitol?
23 Why aren’t you looking at that? You are looking at my Twitter account that maybe or I may or may not have retweeted some guy who writes in Greek.
25 Look at the actual facts of what happened. What happened was really dangerous. Why is it the Democrats refused the assistance that President Trump offered to reinforce with either National Guard or additional troops from DOD? Those offers were turned down. Why? Why?
Continuing on p. 179.
4 Like the — it makes no sense. The stuff that happened at the Capitol could easily be investigated, but like why are you only investigating conservatives? It’s like why aren’t you looking into how did the violence of 2020 lead up to it. This is a completely one-sided partisan investigation. It’s disgusting. And there are people sitting in jail who do not deserve to be in jail because this is a political witch hunt.
9 Q Ms. Bobb, that’s your perspective. We are just asking questions. We are trying to get to the bottom of it, and you’ll see what the committee did when all the information comes out from the commit eventually but, you know, you are a witness, a fact witness to certain events. And I’ve appreciated your time in answering our questions here today, but that’s why we ask the questions is to get an understanding of what they are.
15 A You didn’t ask me what I saw at the Capitol. I just told you I was at the Cannon rotunda and I went out onto the grass and I saw what was out there. And I saw that the police were not using the proper protocols, and they were not preparing the people that the amount of people were actually trying to get the bad actors to stop. That’s what I saw. And why aren’t you asking more about that, but you want to hear about some retweet from who knows. I can’t even read the guy’s name.
22 Q I think you have said all of that earlier today. And I appreciate your perspective that you offered on what you saw and heard at the Capitol and elsewhere on January 6.
On p. 180 they give Bobb one more opportunity to share her thoughts – big mistake.
10 Is there anything else that you would like to add before we end today’s session?
11 Ms. Bobb. I think you need to be looking into the real facts of January 6. I think you need to be looking into the real facts of the election. I think you need to stop using your political authority against your political opponents. You have turned the government against the people, and I think it’s disgusting.
Bobb shared her experience with The Gateway Pundit shortly after it occurred.
See the entire interview text below:
Christina Bobb Interview by Jim Hoft on Scribd
The post “You Have Turned the Government Against the People, and I Think it’s Disgusting.” Christina Bobb to the “Inquisition” in Her Jan 6 Interview appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,
So…it turns out we crazy conspiracy theorists aren’t so crazy after all. In fact, we can knock “crazy” right off that moniker. Again. Elon Musk has allowed the curtain to be pulled back on Twitter to reveal corruption, collusion, and straight-up propaganda that have changed the course of American history. Musk is catching all sorts of flack for the Twitter Files from the mainstream media, who are somehow trying to defend the indefensible actions that have taken place behind the scenes and paint Musk as the bad guy for exposing it.
Many things that non-liberals have been saying for years have been shown to be true. There was indeed collusion between the Biden campaign and Twitter, conservatives were absolutely shadowbanned, the FBI is involved in social media, and points-of-view that were not in line with the narrative were suppressed by the social media giant.
Elon Musk has provided journalists like Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Lee Fang, and Michael Schellenberger access to years of internal documents and chat logs showing the trend of biased moderation behind the scenes. (You can sift through Musk’s own Twitter account to read these reveals yourself.
It’s a story of censorship cloaked as moderation and political bias cloaked as safety. Favors were done, and stories were either suppressed or allowed to trend based on the whims of a handful of people behind the scenes. Regardless of how many times the MSM says “alleged” in conjunction with these revelations, it’s very clear that there’s a real problem.
And keep in mind this is only the tip of the iceberg. I’d be willing to bet everything I have that similar conversations have gone on behind the scenes at Google and Facebook too. That means that Big Tech has been responsible for illicitly influencing the course of history, something we here at The Organic Prepper have been saying for a decade. While you personally may not have been influenced by things on social media, the people around you have been and the consensuses that were formed in America were based on biased information.
That’s a real problem. Propaganda works and the position our country is in shows the heinous aftermath of it.
The best synopsis I’ve seen of the Twitter Files comes from the account of journalist Benjamin Carlson. Carlson wrote, “No agency should be unaccountable. No institution is indispensable.”
What is the real story of the Twitter Files? It’s a much bigger deal than many realize.
I’ve spent hours reading the great reporting (now thousands of words in 7+ parts) by
@mtaibbi, @bariweiss, and @ShellenbergerMDHere are 7 crucial takeaways everyone needs to know:
1. History changed because of this:
Hunter Biden’s alleged corruption censored
Covid 19 lockdown debate stifled
Trump silenced
You may agree with each decision. But there is no denying that halting information flow and free debate had real consequences.
2. Many things called conspiracy theories were true:
FBI was working w Twitter and paid TW $ millions
Blacklists & shadow bans were real
US intel lobbied to censor accounts
Covid-19 convo heavily manipulated
Twitter rules changed & enforced by whim
3. Censorship is being cloaked in the language of safety:
‘Safety, harm, violence’ redefined to apply to ideas
Opinions & info deemed ‘unsafe’ subject to silencing
Jokes, memes, questions about origin of covid off limits
4. The government is policing opinion:
FBI has 80 staff monitoring speech
Small accounts on left and right flagged
FBI held frequent meetings w TW
Facebook, Youtube, and Instagram = similar?
Private censors & police control what you say to whom.
5. Social media executives lie freely:
Twitter execs repeatedly and publicly denied shadow bans
In reality, bans were in place as “visibility filtering”
Ultimately, no accountability to public
6. Free speech is controlled by a small group:
Biggest decisions in Twitter Files made by 3-4 individuals
Despite misgivings and doubts, once made, decisions stuck
Now it’s Musk.
One difference: his embrace of public polls to set policy.
7. The slippery slope is real:
Staff rebellion led to Trump ban
Staff called for more covid-19 censorship
2021-22 saw increase of bans and ‘one-offs’
This is how you get Billy Baldwin in the crosshairs.
Once you silence a president, who has a right to speak?
8. Musk has made enemies:
Leaking to indy media
Expressing opinions on Fauci
Suspending journalist accounts
I expect his businesses will see counterattacks. Now is a good time to refocus—and let the users decide how to uphold free speech.
TLDR
History changed
Conspiracy theories true
‘Safety’ = censorship
Government policed ideas
Executives lied
Speech controlled by small group
Slippery slope is real
Musk must watch out
Unsurprisingly, those who have been shown to be biased and corrupt are displeased and the MSM is leaping to their defense and attacking Musk for using his platform to expose it.
Tech Crunch said breathlessly:
Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, is feverishly promoting his “Twitter Files”: selected internal communications from the company, laboriously tweeted out by sympathetic amanuenses. But Musk’s obvious conviction that he has released some partisan kraken is mistaken — far from conspiracy or systemic abuse, the files are a valuable peek behind the curtain of moderation at scale, hinting at the Sisyphean labors undertaken by every social media platform.
Vanity Fair dismisses the claims in the Twitter Files and focuses its wrath on Musk.
Right-wingers are reveling in the latest batch of Elon Musk’s Twitter Files, which Republicans continue to dubiously frame as bombshell revelations into the platform’s squelching of far-right accounts. But amid all the brouhaha, a simple question remains: What new information has actually emerged from these splashy document dumps?
…All that can be gleaned from the latest Twitter Files release is this: Musk, likely under pressure from spooked advertisers to justify his conservative rebrand of the company, wants everyone to know that at least a few right-wing users were sent to varying degrees of Twitter time-out.
The Intelligencer is equally dismissive and but far more sarcastic as they strive to discredit Musk.
..the Twitter Files are best understood as an egregious example of the very phenomenon it purports to condemn — that of social-media managers leveraging their platforms for partisan ends…
…The Constitution does not give you an inalienable right to retweet Hunter Biden’s genitals…
…The Twitter Files provide limited evidence that the social-media platform’s former management sometimes enforced its terms of service in inconsistent and politically biased ways. The project offers overwhelming evidence that Twitter’s current management is using the platform to promote tendentious, partisan narratives and conservative misinformation. In that sense, Taibbi and Weiss have performed revelatory journalism.
NPR suggests that Musk is a big, mean bully.
Musk’s conspiracy-baiting has quickly turned ugly, as he uses a project that purports to be about transparency to discredit Twitter’s former leadership and harass people he disagrees with. That’s giving his 120 million Twitter followers easy targets…
…many tech journalists, social media experts and former Twitter employees say Musk’s claims are over-hyped, given that the documents shared so far largely corroborate what is already known about the messy business of policing a large social network.
“What is really coming through in the Twitter Files for me is: people who are confronting high-stakes, unanticipated events and trying to figure out what policies apply and how,” said Renée DiResta, research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory, who studies how narratives spread on social networks…
…But with his drumbeat of Twitter Files releases and gleeful tweets dunking on the company’s former employees, Musk has successfully hijacked the conversation.
“It is being processed as punitive and sort of owning the last regime, as opposed to saying, ‘Here are things that we can see in these files and here is how it’s going to be done differently under our watch,'” DiResta said.
I suppose the bottom line here is that when faced with one set of facts, people with different philosophies will always draw diverse and strongly held conclusions.
Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times,
New Olympic guidelines emphasize the “inclusion” of transgender athletes, disqualifying them only after finding proof of “an unfair and disproportionate advantage,” which officials in each sport will define.
“Athletes should be allowed to compete in the category that best aligns with their self-determined gender identity,” the International Olympic Committee (IOC) declares in its Dec. 16 position paper.
Published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, the statement represents the most recent step in a decades-long evolution of policies affecting female athletes.
The effects could be far-reaching because the IOC sets the tone for sports in community groups, high schools, and universities across the globe.
With the latest update, the IOC was trying to further explain the controversial transgender-related principles that the organization issued in November 2021. That document declared “no presumption of advantage” for male-to-female competitors, triggering a backlash.
Instead of clarifying the situation, the IOC appears to have sparked more confusion and resentment among some prominent female athletes.
Ex-Olympians fear that, by clearing the path for biological males to infiltrate women’s categories further, the IOC could cause women’s sports to deteriorate and eventually die. Faced with seemingly unbeatable biological male competitors, fewer girls and women are likely to participate, drying up the talent pool.
Mara Yamauchi, a two-time Olympic marathoner for the United Kingdom, reacted on Twitter to the IOC’s latest statement. She wrote: “Its total disregard for women and girls made me so angry I was shaking.”
Former Olympians Sharron Davies (R) and Mara Yamauchi (L), outspoken advocates for women’s sports, spoke at a women’s conference in Edinburgh, Scotland, on June 16, 2022. (Andrew Milligan/PA)
Yamauchi interpreted the IOC’s update this way: “We will destroy your sports, Ladies, but you are so totally worthless we won’t bother asking your views.”
However, the IOC said the guidelines included input from “all athletes, including trans athletes and athletes with sex variations, as well as human rights, legal, scientific and medical experts.”
Transgender activists applauded the IOC for its transgender-friendly stance; several Twitter users repeated the phrase: “All kids deserve to have access to sport.”
Last year’s IOC guidelines stirred controversy, mainly because of the “no-presumption-of-advantage” declaration for male-to-female transgender athletes.
The guidelines stated: No athlete should be excluded from competition based on “an unverified, alleged or perceived unfair competitive advantage” arising from transgender status or physical appearance. “Sex variations,” apparently referring to genetic or physiological differences, also should not be factors.
Ex-Olympians protested, pointing to several well-recognized studies showing that, when compared to biological females, biological males tend to possess superior speed, strength, and stamina–just a few of the advantages that can enhance sports performance.
In 2017, researchers in Israel reported finding more than 3,500 genetic-encoded differences between males and females.
Some people say they don’t need a study to tell them what they see in daily life: observable performance contrasts between males and females.
That’s why much public debate has swirled around biological males who identify as transgender and compete in women’s sports.
Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas (2L) of Penn University and transgender swimmer Iszac Henig (L) of Yale pose with their medals after placing first and second in the 100-yard freestyle swimming race at the 2022 Ivy League Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., on Feb. 19, 2022. (Joseph Prezioso/Getty Images)
In recent months, such athletes drew international attention, including U.S. swimmer Lia Thomas, British bicyclist Emily Bridges and New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard. Some people celebrated these athletes as pioneers. Others cried foul.
The IOC’s new statement concedes that restrictions or exclusion may be appropriate for some transgender athletes. Noting that the impact of biological differences may differ from one sport to another, the IOC is allowing each sport’s governing body to put together its own rules.
The IOC says those officials should work with experts “in identifying the metrics and data that may be relevant to defining fair and proportionate advantage in competition.”
Since the modern Olympic era began in 1896, Olympic authorities have acknowledged sex-based differences among competitors.
In 1900, the first female athletes competed in the Olympic Games in Paris, France. Ironically, that’s the same location where the 2024 Summer Olympics will be held with the new transgender guidelines in effect, possibly to the detriment of many female sports, critics say.
Since at least the 1930s, people periodically complained about males possibly posing as females in Olympic competitions. As a result, mandatory sex-related tests for female Olympic competitors began in 1968.
The chromosome-based tests were denounced as degrading and sometimes inaccurate. Further, some critics viewed them as harmful to women’s sports.
“Testing evolved into a tool to identify—and eliminate—athletes the IOC deemed too strong, too fast, or too successful,” according to a summary of a 2016 book by author Lindsay Parks Pieper.
In this Aug. 9, 2008, file photo, China’s Chen Xiexia holds up 90kg in the snatch of the women’s 48kg weightlifting competition at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, China. In 2017, she and other athletes from that Olympiad tested positive for banned substances and were stripped of their medals. (AP Photo/Andres Leighton)
The IOC voted in 1999 to discontinue mandatory sex tests for females. Some people reasoned that anti-doping regulations, which led to blood or urine screens for banned “performance-enhancing drugs,” would reduce the chances that an athlete could get away with posing as the opposite gender.
Starting with the 2004 Olympics, however, the IOC declared that transsexuals should be allowed to compete in female sports two years after completing sex-reassignment surgeries.
These athletes also needed female hormone therapy long enough to minimize “gender-related advantages,” the IOC wrote at the time. Each transgender athlete would face “a confidential, case-by-case evaluation.”
For the 2012 Olympics, female athletes of questionable biological sex were required to undergo testosterone tests. The athletes were disqualified if their levels of that masculinizing hormone exceeded a certain level—a requirement some people saw as unfair to athletes with high naturally occurring testosterone levels.
Four years later, the IOC made another change affecting female sports: no reassignment surgery needed for male-to-female competitors. Testosterone limits still applied.
Transgender rights group members protest against an “Our Bodies, Our Sports” rally at the Freedom Plaza in Washington on June 23, 2022. (Terri Wu/The Epoch Times)
Now the situation is less clear-cut.
The new IOC document acknowledges that testosterone level “may be an important factor” in some sports. But testosterone tests alone shouldn’t drive decisions on whether to disqualify or limit an athlete, the IOC says.
In a “frequently asked questions” section of its website, the IOC points out that some biological males have become elite athletes despite testosterone levels that were so low, they were considered to be in the “normal” range for biological females.
Therefore, “athletic performance varies independently of an individual athlete’s testosterone levels,” the IOC said. “There is thus no scientific consensus on how testosterone levels can be used across sports to define unfair and disproportionate advantage.”
Cathy Devine, a British researcher specializing in sports policy, wrote on Twitter about the latest update: “The IOC has been forced into making some concessions: damage limitation.”
But Devine wrote, “IOC is still ignoring the human rights of female athletes.”
She added: “Female categories should be for females only. This upholds the international human rights framework which protects equality and non-discrimination against females on the basis of sex (means as compared with males).”
The Olympic Charter says that engaging in sports is a human right.
But transgender athletes must overcome barriers and often face “harassment, violence, and even sexual assault,” the IOC says, suggesting that may be why few transgender people participate in sports at all levels.
Against that backdrop, the IOC recommends that youth and community-level sports prioritize “inclusion.” Restrictions or exclusions of transgender athletes should be reserved for elite-level competitions, the IOC said.
Inga Thompson, a cyclist who represented the United States in three Olympiads, said the IOC’s statement is written in hard-to-decipher jargon, but this is her best interpretation of it: “They are acknowledging that women need a sex-separated category, and at the same time, they’re very much advocating for the inclusion of a transgender athlete into the women’s category.”
Thompson made that statement during a Dec. 19 Fox News interview.
“I’m discouraged,” she said. “It’s heartbreaking.”
Riley Gaines Barker, a former University of Kentucky swimmer who tied for fifth place against transgender swimmer Lia Thomas at the NCAA Championships in March 2022, speaks at the “Our Bodies, Our Sports” rally at Freedom Plaza in Washington on June 23, 2022. (Terri Wu/The Epoch Times)
It is particularly troubling that the IOC’s position paper calls for integrating transgender athletes in community-level sports and shying away from restrictions at the non-elite level, Thompson said.
She said multiple studies show that “young women, if not given a sex-separated sport, get discouraged” when they face off against competitors who possess advantages because they are biologically male.
The girls and women “end up walking away from the sport,” she said.
There’s also a safety concern. In some instances, female athletes have been overpowered and badly injured by males who identify as transgender females, so it’s no wonder that biological females will be intimidated and drop out, Thompson said.
That’s why she considers the IOC’s policy to be “suppressing all of the development of our next generation.” As a result, the future of women’s sports is imperiled, Thompson said.
Women protest as Pennsylvania transgender athlete Lia Thomas competes in the women’s 200 freestyle final at the NCAA swimming and diving championships at Georgia Tech in Atlanta, Ga., on March 18, 2022. (John Bazemore/AP Photo)
Many sports organizations follow the IOC’s lead, Thompson said. But she urges parents: “You can advocate at your school level, at the state level, to try to keep fairness for these young girls.”
In a separate interview with NewsNation network, Thompson called the new guidelines “beyond unfair.”
“They have sold out women in favor of having more opportunities for more males,” she said.
Selina Soule (L) and Alanna Smith, student-athletes in Connecticut, were plaintiffs in a 2020 lawsuit alleging they faced unfair competition from biological males who identified as transgender females. (Alliance Defending Freedom)
Thompson pointed out that the Olympics have separate categories for athletes with physical disabilities or mental impairments, along with those based on age, sex, and weight. Yet the IOC advocates putting transgender athletes into the women’s category “at the exclusion of women,” Thompson said.
“If you really want to have true inclusion, you need to start another category” for transgender athletes, she said.
Because each sport must interpret and implement the guidelines, the effects of the IOC’s position on the next Summer Olympics, set for 2024 in Paris, France, remain unclear.
