Climate “warriors” and animal rights activists are out in far-left field on cows and livestock farming. The attacks against cows and agriculture have become so ubiquitous that a nearly universal brainwashing has succeeded in conditioning consumers and academics to simply believe cows are bad for the planet—all cows, all the time. But this is the exact opposite of the truth and indeed pushes humanity toward great peril: There is a reason European farmers are rising up in revolt. Ultimately, these activists are clamoring for their own destruction through totalitarianism and starvation. What’s needed is a recovery of actual farming.

I am not defending industrial farming. For a century, America has watched academics, government agencies, and corporations shrink family farms in the name of progress. Ignoring soil experts like Aldo Leopold and Wendell Berry, the technocrats pushed for consolidation of farms, destroying waterways, pushing small families into poverty, and packing more and more animals into tighter and tighter spaces for “productivity” and “progress.”

As the animals sickened under such conditions, the same groups peddled antibiotics, hormones, and other chemical “solutions” to maintain profit margins. The activists who claim humanity must now abandon all animal consumption are non-farmers who have fallen for a triple scam against cows and small farms:

1) They make it sound as if all cows were raised industrially. This enables animal rights activists to use the most egregious animal treatment to slander all farming. It also allows climate alarmists to condemn all livestock because industrial ag concentrates plumes of water, air, and soil pollution into crises not present with traditional regenerative agriculture.

2) Activists also claim livestock is a human health problem. This, too, is built on decades of carb-pushing propaganda that falsely claimed eggs and milk were evil and that red meat causes cancer. Increasingly, it appears that the surfeit of carbohydrates is the culprit and that grass-fed meats are much healthier than grain-fed. A much greater health threat is presented by glyphosate, atrazine, and a plethora of toxic food (and packaging) contaminants, but corporate America would much prefer to target and scapegoat cows.

3) Both groups join together in the simplistic claim that the only solution to the problems technocrats and corporations created by consolidating natural agricultural systems into artificial, industrial death camps is for the exact same groups of technocrats and corporations to rescue humanity using GMO cropping in lieu of cows and other livestock.

One quite typical and typically absurd article recently called to “recogniz[e] the reality that stopping consuming animals and animal byproducts greatly benefits animals as well as the planet.” Both claims are dubious, yet this article touts the usual talking points:

More people eating vegan diets is backed by research confirming the significant impact it would have on planetary health just as much as consumer health, per the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.

From the risk reduction of certain cancers, dire diseases, and chronic conditions to the compassionate sense in knowing that a vegan diet does not involve the suffering or use of animals for human consumption, the vegan diet is the clear standout amongst a crowded and muddled field of modern diets.

Related criticisms of cows for their flatulence display either utter ignorance or a deliberate scheme. Cow burps are accompanied by cow manure, which is a vital fertilizer that, when properly fed to soil, causes more methane and carbon dioxide to be sequestered than the cow ever created. The alternative crops we are told we will eat are to be raised using GMOs (saturating the soil with more glyphosate and other toxic chemicals) and synthetic fertilizers that release nitrous oxide and other pollutants (urea is manufactured from methane!).

The technocratic math doesn’t add up. Small wonder the genuine farmers of the world are standing up in droves in Europe: they see the destruction of their livelihoods and the ecosystem by those feigning its rescue to seize yet more power.

If humanity keeps following misinformed (or duplicitous) people into the ignorant dependency and environmental destruction of this faux eco-cause, perhaps it is well deserved—one ignores one’s food at one’s peril. But this ignorance threatens to sweep all before it aside, not just through totalitarianism (to “save the planet” we must sacrifice all individual liberties) but because expanding humanity’s industrial ag diet will drench the land in neonicotinoids which will kill the bees, atrazine which will kill fish and saturate groundwater, and a host of other chemicals yet to be created to fix the problems these and other man-made disasters cause.

If raising cows humanely is good for people and the land, it’s also good for the cows. Not all industrial livestock practices are as inhumane as the activist agitators claim. It is unpleasant for humans to imagine being housed in a crate, but farrowing pens save piglets’ lives—even veterinarians support them. But not the activists, who believe (as with hunting rights and wildlife management by biologists) that their moral claims are superior to what farmers or hunters, or veterinarians or wildlife biologists, know about animals.

I raise animals traditionally. They never miss a meal, are always with water and housing, run on green pastures, raise their own young, and are slaughtered here where they were born with zero suffering. Those who lump this form of animal husbandry together with industrial factories are either dishonest or profoundly uninformed. Farmers do not enjoy taking life in order to eat well and live: it is an ancient practice entailing humility, reverence, and gratitude.

Climate and animal rights activists may unwittingly further the aims of those who seek to seize control of all food (and its “equitable” distribution”) in the name of saving the world. The World Economic Forum, which seeks to lead the world into yet greater technocratic industrial agricultural dependency, is populated by “partners” who have been among the worst actors in destroying farming, the ecosystem, and animal welfare: Dow, Monsanto (now Bayer), Cargill, Syngenta, JBS…. The list is hundreds of consumer-poisoning corporations long.

This global coordination of corporate “stakeholders” is served by climate/vegan activists, begging Big Brother Ag to rescue them from carbon dioxide, while sparing farm animals from slaughter. But it is not the traditionally raised animals who need rescue: While the vegan/climate alliance lumps soil-building animal husbandry in with factory meat production, the industrial masters were busy at work. New “plant-based” products are highly processed, adulterated with dubious chemical additives, costly, and not very flavorful.

Most of the humans who embrace this baloney about climate-killing cows and cow-killing humans have eagerly thrust their necks into a parallel industrial dependency and blind trust as the factory animals they seek to liberate. Chomping against nature’s bit to expand industrial food production in the name of saving either animals or the planet is a fool’s mission, begging for servitude. I do not say this here to condemn but to spare these well-intentioned but misinformed people the consequences of what they are seeking.

The technocratic destruction of America’s farms (documented in Wendell Berry’s seminal work, The Unsettling of America) pushed millions of Americans into cities for work, where they are disconnected from the soil microbiome upon which the human companion (the stomach) depends. Inhaling toxic air, crammed into compact housing, feeding on plastic-wrapped factory fare trucked into the cities, drinking a long list of unpronounceable chemicals in their tap water, more and more Americans are waking up to their Orwellian enslavement and embarking on homesteading journeys, or at least trying to reclaim a responsible relationship with their food.

In the cities, the vegans and their climate warrior allies dine on styrofoam-packed vegetables raised with tasty glyphosate and atrazine (a ubiquitous endocrine disrupter that imitates estrogen). These consumers do not rebuild soils like cows, and their regenerative masters do, but they advocate for more regulations against farmers. They strive to protect bees from suffering by embracing policies that will extinguish all bees; they embrace no-animal policies that, in the name of animal welfare, will end all livestock animals being alive—and with them, the manure upon which plant agriculture has always depended will vanish.

Sickened by toxic food (and perhaps a deficiency of vital amino acids), big-ag consumers will need more medications to counter the ill effects of their unnatural diets. No worries—the same technocrats are available to proffer more drugs, just like with the CAFO cows. Drugs for obesity replace exercise; bottled water is teaming with microplastics; new antibiotics may be effective for a little while longer. Rushing to enslave themselves like animals in a cage, the animal rights and climate activists who think they are on the “right side of history” are unwittingly reinforcing their dependence on the corporations that have long damaged the ecosystem and human health.

My cows and sheep have much healthier lives and much greater freedom than these self-enslaved human consumers. My livestock do not require rescue from a generation of people so disconnected from farming that they are attacking the natural systems upon which their future health and food security depend.

My animals are that future.

The post Night Cap: In Defense of Livestock and the Errant Motives of Those Who Attack Cows…. appeared first on Granite Grok.

The cabal of US Intelligence agencies responsible for the censorship industrial complex can welcome a new member. New to us. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has been fingered in a new Congressional report alleging tens of millions were spent on AI to censor the public.

“In the name of combatting alleged misinformation regarding COVID-19 and the 2020 election, NSF has been issuing multimillion-dollar grants to university and nonprofit research teams,” reads the report by the House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

“The purpose of these taxpayer-funded projects is to develop AI-powered censorship and propaganda tools that can be used by governments and Big Tech to shape public opinion by restricting certain viewpoints or promoting others.” ..

The efforts included tracking public criticism of the foundation’s work by conservative journalists and legal scholars.

The NSF also developed a media strategy “that considered blacklisting certain American media outlets because they were scrutinizing NSF’s funding of censorship and propaganda tools,” according to the report.

NSF denies all of it while admitting that it funded Track F, which the report claims is “a systematic federal effort to replace human “disinformation” monitors with AI-driven digital systems that are capable of vastly more comprehensive monitoring and censoring.”

The Obama regime, which began in 2009, invested heavily in at least two ideas—weaponizing federal agencies and large-scale illegal surveillance (foreign and domestic). The rage campaigns against Trump have all proven to be inside smear jobs with the knowledge of high-ranking political appointees and elected officials. The Twitter files exposed the natural evolution of weaponization and surveillance in the form of deliberate Censorship. And the proposals from schools fishing for the grants might as well be NSF whistleblowers.

One illustration that the group provided to NSF in its funding pitch was its ability to “crawl” more than 750,000 blogs and media articles on a daily basis for misinformation and fact-checking on themes such as “undermining trust in mainstream media,” “fear-mongering and anti-Black narratives,” and “weakening political participation.”

“As [Scott] Hale, the director of research at Meedan, explained in an email to NSF, in his ‘dream world,’ Big Tech would collect all of the censored content to enable ‘disinformation’ researchers to use that data to create ‘automated detection’ to censor any similar speech automatically,” the report reads.

Another University “received $5.75 million in NSF funding “to develop a tool to ’empower efforts by journalists, developers, and citizens to fact-check delegitimizing information’ about ‘election integrity and vaccine efficacy’ on social media.”

The tool “would allow ‘fact-checkers to perform rapid-cycle testing of fact-checking messages and monitor their real-time performance among online communities at-risk of misinformation exposure,’” the congressional report reads.

If it walks like Censorship and talks like it,

The National Science Foundation can claim whatever it likes about its intentions. The grant winner applications outline how their AI tool can sift massive amounts of private speech in search of messaging that challenges the government’s approved narratives. Label it as misinformation or identify themes to which the state can launch counter-insurgent narrative warfare; that’s what you’re funding.

Taken as part of the ongoing mission to spy on citizens and control what they see, hear, and read, perhaps someone needs to censor their budget out of existence along with any number of other agencies whose mission creep extends to laundering tax dollars in service to an authoritarian surveillance state.

The post The Science of Censorship – NSF Spent 39 Million to Suppress Free Speech and Public Debate appeared first on Granite Grok.

“We’ve all heard the sensational stories of whistleblower retaliation in federal agencies, but I have the sense most potential whistleblowers get left in the dust of federal bureaucracy, with multiple oversight agencies passing complaints back and forth and little resolution.  My biggest fear in this process was retaliation, but I would prefer that over the feeling of alienation.”  This is an excerpt from a letter I sent to Senator Shaheen, Senator Hassan, and Congressman Pappas. I eventually had interactions with staff members from all three; mostly disappointing.

In part one of this series, I discussed the injustice I witnessed in the care of our nation’s Veterans and the malfeasance of management at the Manchester VA. In part two, I discussed the stonewalling I received from the federal oversight agencies after I worked up the courage to blow the whistle.

The only option I had left was to contact our elected representatives and inform them of the experience of a whistleblower.  Senator Hassan and Congressmen Pappas are both on their respective Veteran’s Affairs Committees.  Hassan recently asked the Secretary of the VA to address the failing infrastructure in Manchester, and Pappas has addressed issues of whistleblower retaliation within the VA and the oversight agencies.  All of New Hampshire’s congressional delegation make periodic visits to the Manchester VA to shake hands with employees, take pictures, and visit with management.  I’ll let the reader decide if these are meaningful visits or mere photo-ops.  In my opinion, this isn’t a Democrat or Republican issue but more of a dysfunction of the bureaucracy.

We want to thank Ron Fawkes for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.

My first reply was from a Veteran’s representative for Congressman Pappas.  We emailed back and forth for two months, and I was repeatedly told they were reviewing my information.  Eventually, I was told the oversight agencies have never shared information with their staff, and there is likely little they can do.  I guess whistleblowers are not the only ones whom these agencies are stonewalling.  I’m not sure how Congress can conduct oversight if the agencies refuse to share information.

Worse was the phone call from Senator Shaheen’s staff member, who rushed me off the phone after he independently determined my mistreatment was due to my choosing to be anonymous.  He informed me he would call the VA New England Director to inquire about my case, but he never called me back and did not return my call when I attempted to follow up.

Eventually, I did receive some hope from the staff of Senator Hassan.  I spent time talking on the phone with one person and emailing back and forth with another.  For the first time in eight months, someone spoke to me and listened to what I had to say.  I was told my case was used to inform meetings where communication among the agencies was discussed, and they reached out to the Office of Inspector General (OIG) and received a response to my concerns.

The response from OIG was a disturbing act of gaslighting and excuses of why they didn’t address my concerns, which included not having evidence of harm, too much time passing, and “Covid.”  Most disturbing was only one of my issues was forwarded to VA New England “for awareness,” meaning none of the other issues were forwarded as I was led to believe that nothing was investigated, and there was no follow-up or actual oversight.  This is why I’d asked to speak with a human being to ensure all information was being communicated by all involved agencies.  Additionally, they suggested I should have kept better records to determine if harm occurred to Veterans.  This would not only violate VA policy but also patient privacy laws.  It seems the oversight and investigation agency was suggesting I do my own oversight and investigation.  Of course, I was still not given a point of contact at OIG, so my reply was to Hassan’s staff asking they send it to OIG (talk about a bureaucratic nightmare).

It’s been over a year since I started this journey, and I have yet to speak with anyone at OIG or VA New England Headquarters about these issues.

I want to take a minute and say that most of the Veterans at Manchester VA are receiving good medical care.  There are good people working at the VA, many who are true advocates of the community, but when there are issues that need to be addressed, management fails almost every time.  When I think about the staggering number of managers walking around the Manchester VA on any given day, this is just not acceptable.  The common mantras “we’ve always done it that way” and “look where you work” wouldn’t be a reasonable excuse in any other Manchester Hospital, and it shouldn’t be at the VA either.

This three-part series demonstrated not only a failure of VA management but also a failure of oversight on a staggering scale.

I will supplement this series with commentary and opinion pieces in the future.

The post Manchester VA Whistleblower Part 3: Contact with Hassan, Shaheen, Pappas appeared first on Granite Grok.

The New tact for the Democrats is rude, insulting, and degrading. Four women sat on the opinion desk of MSNBC on Super Tuesday and had a good laugh at and insulted every Republican in this country. These people were thrilled that Joe Biden was elected and pledged to be the great unifier.

He failed miserably, and the legacy media is falling into the pit of despair with him. Nothing is funny about Joe Biden’s America, and these people insulting us like we are meaningless individuals is disgusting.



Jen Psaki, Joy Reid, Rachel Maddow, and a no-name to balance the set laughed at Republicans in an attempt to minimize the Party and its supporters. Maybe this is the reason that nobody watches this network. They started with the polling data indicating that immigration was the number one concern for Republicans. Psaki had a good chuckle over Virginians who were concerned about immigration. Maddow quickly pointed out that Virginia has a border with West Virginia. This line got a chuckle, but why? It was insensitive to the good folks of West Virginia.

Joy Reid then went into a monologue, with the other three nodding in agreement, that Republicans are a one-issue Party. That one issue is Race. What an overpaid, undereducated Harvard Ass. Joy Reid is the next generation Al Sharpton, who can twist any topic to Race. Reid is an example of wasting good money on an Ivy League education because, in the end, it is useless for most people. She went on to claim that all Republicans are obsessed with a flow of “brown people” crossing our border. Republicans are concerned about people of any color coming from over 150 countries to break into America. We Republicans will debate any Radical Leftist at any time on any topic. The dim Karine Jean-Pierre can say daily that Joe Biden has done more in his three years than any President has done in two terms in 50 years. She can say it, but no one believes it, and by the polls, that includes Democrats.

This quick video clip highlights a significant difference between Democrats and Republicans. We, on the Right, respect life, whether it is an unborn fetus or Laken Hope Riley. We do not laugh at the plight of Americans in this new Biden America. We pledge to make sure Biden does not have another four years to further destroy our once great country. It must have taken a lot of effort to get four ignorant, callous, and offensive women on the same panel at MSNBC, or maybe I am wrong, and they could have pulled any four people out of their cesspool of talking heads and had the same results.

Rachel Maddow explained on Tuesday night that MSNBC has a policy of not showing any speeches by former President Donald Trump, saying the network opts not to give lies a platform. We can assume, then, that the network will not cover the State of the Union

The post Everything Is A Laughing Matter For Libs appeared first on Granite Grok.

We’ve had a warm winter where I live. A statist stooge in neighboring Vermont said it’s the warmest winter on record. Oh yeah, since when? The correct answer is since the last time they had a warmer winter because that would mess with the narrative.

Our New England winter was warm, no doubt about it. And they are on their CO2 high horse shouting about how the emissions are coming (the emissions are coming). But none of that is delivered in any context, certainly not historically, and that’s the first of two Achilles heels on the climate cult. Yeah, they’ve got two.

The first is that they’ve been manipulating or ignoring data to keep a political agenda alive (as you well know, the warming narrative has nothing to do with temperature or the health of you or the planet).

The second is that there is net-zero evidence that even if the earth did warm a few degrees, any of their cataclysmic predictions would occur (none have to date) or that warming would not be good for everyone.

Historically, great civilizations have risen during more significant warming than any we’ve experienced (depending on when you start) – because we’ve actually been cooling. A few warm winters do not make global warming. Likewise, a few cold ones do not mean the opposite. You need unmanipulated a-political historical data to make any comparison, so the yahoo claiming Vermont just had its warmest winter needs to be asked … since when?

Feel free to ponder why. They might be on the dole from the grant machine or just another useful idiot—the sort who still wear masks in their car alone or acted as pro-bono sales reps for Pfizer and Moderna’s safe and effective marketing campaign.

All of that is fine until it starts to affect the lives of others, as both the Climate and COVID Cults did and do. There’s no ramp if you think they are cherry-picking the details. But Australian geologist Prof. Ian Plimer is back to help.

Professor Pilmer’s words have made a few appearances on our pages, most recently last November when we shared his observations and evidence regarding CO2.

“[Six of the six] great ice ages started when we had more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than now. We have 0.04% of that gas in the atmosphere… Well that means nothing to me, because the atmosphere has changed in its carbon dioxide content from over 20% to now, which is really low in geological time. If we halved it, all plant life would die, and animals would die.”

He’s back—or at least we’re noticing something he’s said is back—with another bit of wisdom regarding the notion of warming, which the headline gives away. Warming…since when?

Australian geologist, Prof. Ian Plimer: “We have been cooling down for the last 4000 years… It’s all about when you start the measurements.”

“If you take measurements from the Medieval Warming, we’ve cooled about five degrees since then. If you take measurements from the… pic.twitter.com/Y1YU8kGaIo

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) February 27, 2024

The post The Earth is Warming … Since When? appeared first on Granite Grok.

After investing billions of taxpayer dollars in electric vehicles (EVs), the Biden administration is making a sharp dogleg on ambitious targets for implementation. In an effort to court United Auto Workers (UAW) ahead of the 2024 election, President Joe Biden is now seeking a bevy of delays in his climate change plans.

From delaying planned EPA climate rules for tailpipe emissions to reevaluating planned dates for EV ownership levels, EV carmakers are swallowing massive losses, autoworkers are deprived of jobs, and consumers remain unconvinced to drive electric cars despite incentives and climate marketing, which were apparently not part of the Biden plan.

President Biden has made EV cars and other renewable energy products a top plank of his administration, announcing grand plans for the nation’s transportation and electric grid infrastructure as the cure for climate change, the foundation of a strong economy, and the source of “thousands of high-paying union jobs.” The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was substantially focused on these projects. An August 16, 2023, White House Fact Sheet states:

“The Inflation Reduction Act is the most ambitious investment in combating the climate crisis in world history. … The Inflation Reduction Act is accelerating progress to meet America’s climate goals, build a clean energy economy, and strengthen energy security…. EV sales have tripled since President Biden took office, spurred in part by investments in the Inflation Reduction Act to boost clean energy manufacturing and lower EV costs for American families.”

The same document claimed that the IRA’s “clean energy and climate provisions have already created more than 170,000 jobs and could create 1.5 million additional jobs over the next decade.” EV car sales are not comporting with this plan.

The best-intentioned technocratic plans mostly pave roads to economic Hell. EV car sales are stagnating over high prices for dubious performance (especially in the cold), growing awareness of environmental pollution in manufacturing and disposal (especially of batteries), and complaints of regressive subsidization. The EV car industry failed with a solid “thunk” in the 1990s due to a lack of reliability, high cost, and weak consumer demand.

Consumers are not buying EVs despite Biden’s marketing. Car dealers are losing profits; manufacturers and their supply chains are cutting production; auto workers are rebelling against Biden EPA rules and subsidies for snazzy EVs. Leasing companies are asking for refunds from Tesla and other manufacturers as EV resale prices plummet and rental fleets are downsized due to a lack of customer interest.  The market once again prevails over the planners: None of the various forces of economics demand what Biden plans.

Perhaps one of the greatest market failures in product history will prove to be synthetic meats, where intense marketing of futuristic technological possibilities ran aground on impossibilities of production at cost or scale. But this is a free market failure – voluntarily undertaken by risk-taking venture capitalists, who will take their losses while the industry consolidates (if it survives).

In contrast, partisan regulatory edicts and lavish subsidies favoring EVs using taxpayer dollars for political pageantry are not corrective to their own failures. Indeed, the announcements of delayed implementation of EPA tailpipe emission rules were accompanied by a reaffirmation by the Biden administration that these rules remain the end goal. Mr. Biden will continue pressing destructive economic policies and poor allocation of resources on EVs, squandering good money after bad.

The Biden-Harris administration has pledged to incentivize 67% of cars driven by 2030 to be EVs – but President Biden cannot dictate what cars Americans drive any more than he can control what lever they pull in November 2024. Wooing the UAW may not appease its membership.

Using government regulations and money-printing to force Americans to buy cars they don’t want in the name of saving money is disingenuous. Fox News recently reported that even after lavish federal and state subsidies, “the average cost of an EV is about $52,000, according to the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, while the average subcompact car costs $24,000.” The more government policies warp markets to compel EV ownership, the more low-income and middle-class Americans are coerced into bigger loans for a depreciable asset. All auto prices will rise as increased demand for new and used gasoline-powered cars steadily escalates under EPA rules.

President Biden has temporarily paused his efforts to control economic reality in the EV industry to curry favor with union workers and soften a potential rout in the EV market. If being re-elected is more important to Joe Biden than meeting his own emissions goals claimed to be necessary to save the planet, skepticism about the urgency of national EV conversion will increase. Blue-collar Americans won’t be fooled again by promises of great jobs to build pointless products that cost twice as much.

The post Biden Winning in 2024 is More Urgent Than … Climate Change. appeared first on Granite Grok.

January Littlejohn is a Licensed Mental Health Counselor whose story, though shocking, has become virtually commonplace in America.  Mother of a socially awkward thirteen-year-old daughter who likely is “one the spectrum,” Littlejohn shares her heartbreaking and enraging story of a school captured by trans-activists who would lead her daughter into a transition behind her back.

Littlejohn’s daughter is described as having “ADHD, and she’s gifted,” indicating a high IQ. with relatively love emotional intelligence.  The problem with this combination is her ability to grasp intellectual concepts like trans-identity with a low ability to discern the emotional ramifications of the cost of transitioning.

The social grooming of children to these cult-like teachings is nearing epidemic levels in places like California and other hyper-liberal regions where even legislators are codifying apparent child abuse.  What makes Littlejohn’s story even scarier?  She lives in Florida where the governor and the citizens combined to push back against the ideology.  Despite its reputation, Florida has statewide power centers set up to not only push the trans agenda but protect them as well.

• Part of vulnerable cohort
• Peer influencers
• Online and other influences

Websites Scratch & Deviant Art, Anime, Music (Capetown – trans singer)

Training in the late 90s/2000s, Jittlejohn had no clients presenting as trans or non-binary, and nor were those terms or others like “gender fluid” even in the literature.  As she looked into the treatment options, she found only one type of care – affirming.  Trained as a clinician, Littlejohn understands differential diagnosis, which allows the practitioner treatment options per the client’s needs.  Gender dysphoria, she states, looks remarkably similar to anorexia in its battery of symptoms. Finding only one for this obvious mental illness that calls to affirm it was a red flag. “Intuitively we (she and her husband) did not feel affirming this false identity that came along so suddenly was the right choice for our daughter.”

They found their daughter lacked any real understanding of the things she was requesting.  Things like HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy), puberty blockers, and top surgery were concepts with no understanding of methods or consequences.  She also couldn’t answer basic questions such as “What do you mean you don’t feel like a girl?”

Over the summer, things got worse to the point of hiring a mental health counselor.

The Littlejohns would find the real threat came from their daughter’s school.  Despite being Volunteer of the Year and a substitute teacher at her daughter’s school, she was stunned to discover that the faculty she trusted would, in fact, undermine her as a parent.  The first teacher she reached out to was the LGBTQ advocate for the school.  Rather than respond to Littlejohn’s concerns, the teacher ignored them while leading the daughter further into the process of transition behind the parent’s backs.

Secret meetings took place in violation of the daughter’s 504 plan which states parents are to be notified and involved in any changes to the plan.  A series of phone calls and emails with counselors, the assistant principal, the principal, and the assistant superintendent finally revealed these surreptitious meetings were somehow protected by non-discrimination laws, essentially usurping her parental rights and conferring them to the state.  Superseding the 504 was now a “gender support plan” that was filled out by their daughter, unbeknownst to them, in the presence of the principal, school counselor, and a social worker they had never met.  If this sounds like state-sanctioned child grooming, it is.

The questions in the six-page document effectively guide the confused and ill-equipped child to divest from the bonds with their parents while pretending to “support the child.” Rather than being protected by her parents, their girl was told she needed to be protected from them. If you’re wondering how anyone could come up with these methods, Mrs. Littlejohn detects it clearly—activism.

If you’re still unconvinced, this is sexual grooming,Littlejohn removes all doubt.  The document asks children, “Which restrooms and showers would you like to use on campus?” and “Which sex would you prefer to room with on overnight field trips?”  Again, this is cloaked as supportive of the child feeling safe at school.  Littlejohn notes there were no questions about self-harm, suicidal ideation or potential abuse in the home.  Furthermore, the accompanying guide, when asked if parents or guardians should be notified, warns, “No. Outing a student, especially to parents, can be very dangerous….” claiming some 40% of LGBTQ youth end up homeless (no citation is given).  Parents and guardians are the real danger, really.

Researching the guides, she found the authors are Equality Florida, who have mapped the entire state for safety plans they deem sufficient in green while marking counties with poor or no plans yellow and red.  Ironically, these are the same colors used by Stranger Danger to warn children of potential predators, only this map inverts them.  Of the sixty-seven counties in Florida, only four had not been infiltrated to the level desired by Equality Florida.

The guides found in the various counties are able to circumvent both parental and school board approval by virtue of being guides, however they are used as policy rather than guidelines. Rather than simple literature these guides are used as training manuals for faculty and staff with the putative weight of law despite being mere guides, anchoring themselves to the weight of anti-discrimination law that ultimately removes parental rights.

Having no choice but to fight the system, the Littlejohns filed a federal lawsuit. The judge dismissed it for “not rising to the level of shocking the conscience,” which begs the question: Who’s conscience? They are now appealing to the 11th Court of Circuit Appeals.

In the meantime, the Littlejohn’s have implemented their own strategy for walking their child through this process.  It is a menagerie of approaches, including finding answers, resetting their relationship and environment, reframing the issue, restoring trust, and practicing patience.

Among the many cult grooming tactics used to disorient their daughter was the use of love-bombing, which is an affirmation on emotional steroids.  This false inclusion technique is what deceives the child into believing the guides are more loving than the non-affirming parents who resist the irreversible transition of the child.  Yet another irony she detected was the love-bombing is really an affirmation of the child’s apparent self-hatred of their natural identity, which, when coupled with a low emotional intelligence, leads the “empowered” child to make harmful decisions they are incapable of understanding.

They removed their daughter from the public school.

Here are some academic resources for concerned parents and guardians:

“The Queering of the American Child” by Logan Lancing and James Lindsay

Abigail Schrier’s books “Irreversible Damage” and “Bad Therapy.”

(Littlejohn includes a lengthy list of resources at the 25:38 section of her YouTube presentation)

Do No Harm website

The post Warning to Moms – Part 1 appeared first on Granite Grok.

There are easily a thousand other things about which I might fill this particular space at this time, on this day, but for reasons we may never know, I’m wondering about death—specifically, the sudden demise at the age of 33 of another loudmouth media public health fascist.

It has been three months since jabvocate Ian Vandaelle was pronounced neurologically dead. Having reviewed at least a few of his musings and public comments on pandemic politics and policy, it is my opinion this “diagnosis” arrived a few years late. Ian’s body may have been walking him around the world, masked and distanced, but his brain was not working properly – and it killed him.

Vandaelle, a vocal advocate for mandates, passports, and the like, had a visceral hatred of those who dared question his science. How sad he did not live to see that we were right, though I can’t see him taking it well. Being wrong about the outcome of a sporting event or the weather is one thing, but this?

It was a hill he was prepared to die on, and then he did.

The wave of quiet that followed his passing, specifically what killed Ian Vandaelle, was not unlike the wakes of many anti-science conspiracies proven right. The magic medicine neither prevented infection nor transmission (they are still clinging to  “prevents severe disease,” but there’s no proof of that either). Masking, which for decades before COVID was incapable of preventing viral spread, does not prevent it after. Distancing was a prank. The list of COVID Cult false truths, since proven so, is longer than Vandaelle’s obituary. Related: Another Militant Pro-Vaxx Journalist Dies … at the Age of 33

Each is followed by an undying moment of silence like the one that follows the shuffling off of nearly every young loudmouth who bragged about getting jabbed and boosted and boosted again: Sans mortal coil and yet no publicly acknowledged cause of death.

Abdiel Leroy asks, “In a society that denies justice to those who have been medically maimed, mutilated, or murdered, would you permit some celebration that, finally, a glimmer of poetic justice, or even divine justice, has pierced through the darkness of tyrants…”

They rejoiced in our death during COVID, including some who got their magic juice (it makes your immune system disappear), then advocated for individual rights, bodily autonomy, and medical freedom. Infidels!

I’m not inclined to express joy at anyone’s passing, even when the weight of irony has piled so high it obscures anything else they’ve ever done. But we write about it, and more often than not, the cause of death is undisclosed or sounds contrived. I’ve looked. I can’t find a cause of death for Ian Vandaelle, just that before it came, the previously healthy young man and vociferous COVID Policy advocate suffered from a sudden chronic illness, and unlike child advocates arrested for laptops filled with kiddie porn, Jabernaughts, who exit the material realm before “their time” are not painted as antagonists in their own tragic comedy.

If it’s out there, his cause of death, the odds are excellent that the root of his demise has been papered over so as not to conflict with his advocacy. He has been allowed to slip – if not quietly – then mysteriously into that goodnight juxtaposed to the cacophony of pandemic passings that by default were blamed on COVID (or the unjabbed) so that people like Ian would not just line up but provide unlimited fear-marketing for Big Pharma and the depopulation uniparty globalists.

I’m not saying Ian was clever enough to connect those dots or any others, but whatever he might have been remembered for, that has been eclipsed by this. He is one of many, deprived of life in the wake of a campaign whose malfeasance continues to unravel before those still living, many of whom ignored Ian’s advice. The medical and journalistic malpractice. The science of censorship by the government through proxies. That we were right about most everything and Ian was wrong. And in the end, COVID did kill Ian. Not SARS CoV2, but the illusions crafted around it by a culture he advocated and defended. That he, as a journalist, never questioned.

I’m sure someone misses him, and to them, our condolences; he was how he was, and that was likely not your fault. But hiding how he died is, and they are still pushing what may have killed him.

The post We Still Don’t Know Jab-Nazi Ian Vandaelle’s Cause of Death appeared first on Granite Grok.