This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Americans' options for digital money, cryptocurrencies, abound these days. But there's not one that has been set up and mandated by the government for them to use yet.
But a key legal organization that has fought for the civil and religious rights of Americans over and over now is warning that could happen.
Even before Joe Biden leaves office in January.
It is Liberty Counsel, which has won multiple fights at the U.S. Supreme Court, that is warning Americans about the possibility their paychecks could be controlled by Washington bureaucrats.
The organization notes that while the Constitution allows Congress to "coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin…," the Federal Reserve has created a "Doomsday Book" for extreme circumstances that claims anything "offered" by the Federal Reserve is legal tender.
"Theoretically, the Federal Reserve could use that reasoning to issue a CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency) without congressional approval," the report warned, citing agreement from Financial Times analyst Izabella Kaminsky, who said, "[N]ew monetary systems risk being swept in without any democratic oversight at all."
Liberty Counsel explained, "The Federal Reserve believes it has 'discretionary powers' to enact policies that neither Congress nor the White House have approved. And that belief could allow Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to force their Marxist Money Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) on Americans before Biden is out of office."
Emre Kuyyet, Nova Southeastern University finance professor, said, "Instead of adhering strictly to clear legislative boundaries to justify its actions during financial crises, the central bank appears to ground many of its decisions in the New York Fed's belief in the Fed's discretionary authority,"
Kuyyet said the Doomsday Book "outlines the powers the America's central bank believes it has."
He said the Federal Reserve's contingency plans include taking steps for which Congress has provided no authority.
"Based on Mr. Kuvvet's findings, Congress shouldn't wait to establish clear and enforceable boundaries," says Nicholas Anthony, a financial policy analyst at the Cato Institute, said in the Liberty Counsel report.
Biden's executive orders so far only have called for the Fed to "investigate" the industry.
But bureaucrats there, "went right ahead and created their own CBDC, testing the new, programmable, digital funny money's power in collaboration with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology" the report said.
The change in Americans' lives could be massive.
"CBDCs have the power to radically change our entire economy, giving broad powers to unelected Federal Reserve central bankers. Whether by design or default, those broad powers are designed to control your money, and therefore your freedom," the report said.
"CBDC smart wallets could be used to promote national policies that help meet sustainability objectives, e.g., by issuing a 'green' wallet. This would act as an incentive for consumers to buy environmentally friendly products and services," charged Raoul Herborg, of G+D, a company that creates electronic currencies.
"Central banks would be able to define policy rules that apply to all wallets — and cannot be changed … including the fact that the central banks can limit the amount that can be held in any single wallet."
Further, companies could program what of their employees' pay must be used "for the purchase of healthy foods."
"In other words, CBDCs could be programmed to force you to only buy Bill Gates' cricket meal protein while preventing you from buying beef, chicken, and eggs," Liberty Counsel warned.
Biden, in ordering the review of options, confirmed he wants to use the currency to campaign for him regarding "human rights; financial inclusion and equity; and climate change and pollution."
The report warned that Congress needs to act now to stop that agenda from advancing further.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Greenpeace is one of most visible environmental groups in the world.
It was launched more than 50 years ago in Canada and has been active in its chosen wars against global warming, deforestation, fishing, whaling and more.
But its American division now it is facing an existential threat in the form of a lawsuit over its work with others, including Indian tribes, to attack the Dakota Access Pipeline, a 1,200-mile pipeline project to move crude oil from the Bakken Shale field to Illinois.
The Wall Street Journal, in fact, said it appears fossil-fuel billionaire Kelcy Warren is about to land "a knockout punch" on the organization.
His company, Energy Transfer, was behind the pipeline, and his lawsuit is over the Greenpeace group's obstruction.
He's seeking $300 million in damages over the project that eventually was completed.
The confrontations developed starting in 2016 when Greenpeace, Indian tribes and others literally camped out in North Dakota to impede the work on the project.
"Warren sees green activists, who he once said should be 'removed from the gene pool,' as a serious threat to the industry. Starting with protests of Keystone XL, which successfully derailed that project, activists have targeted pipelines across the country," the report explained.
He said, in a previous interview, "Everybody is afraid of these environmental groups and the fear that it may look wrong if you fight back with these people. But what they did to us is wrong, and they're gonna pay for it."
He's worth an estimated $7 billion, and his lawsuit charges that Greenpeace groups incited the Dakota Access protests, "funded attacks to damage the pipeline, and spread misinformation about the company and its project," the report said.
It is going to trial in February in the fossil fuel-friendly North Dakota.
Greenpeace has claimed it played a limited role in the protests, but leaders acknowledge that the threat of massive damages makes the case an existential threat.
"Greenpeace says losing its affiliate—and influence—in the U.S. would have a profound impact on the group's ability to address climate change," the report said.
Indian tribes claimed the pipeline threatened sacred sites and drinking water.
The report noted, "In Warren's view, Greenpeace was largely to blame for a construction delay he said cost the company millions of dollars, and Energy Transfer sued the group for $300 million under a law created to prosecute the mafia that could allow the company to claim triple that amount. When a federal judge dismissed the suit, the company filed a new one in a North Dakota state court."
A Greenpeace official said a negative outcome for the environmental group would set a "really dangerous precedent."
Greenpeace, which has admitted it could lose the case, has prepared contingencies, including bankruptcy.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A university abruptly has deleted its commitment, posted online, to constitutional free speech after some students insulted police officers filling out arrest paperwork, and the officers demanded they be cited for "interference."
The situation developed at the University of Dayton, according to a report from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
The organization contacted the school about its online commitment that students enjoy "the full expression of their thoughts, positions, and opinions on all contemporary and intellectual issues," because school officers "subjected students to interrogation in direct retaliation for the students' criticism of police."
That activity, of course, is protected by the First Amendment, FIRE reported.
"And when UD police officers engage in law enforcement, the First Amendment restricts their actions just like any other law enforcement official. What's more, at the time of the incident, UD maintained clear speech promises – freely available to read on its website – that prohibited it from imposing punishment for protected speech," the free speech organization documented.
But when contacted about the officers' retaliation for protected speech the school repudiated its commitment to rights, calling the online posting an outdated policy that only remained on the site because of a "clerical error."
The FIRE explained, "On Sept. 2, 2023, students in a house just off campus saw UD officers on their block filling out post–arrest paperwork and started shouting at the officers from their window with (admittedly crude) criticisms of the police. Rather than continue their work, two of the officers walked up to the house, knocked on the students' door, and demanded the students in the house produce their identification, saying they would refer them for university discipline for 'interference.'"
The fact that such criticism is constitutionally protected "did not matter to the officers…," the report said.
The report noted that when confronted, one student pushed an officer, which is not acceptable.
"But the entire encounter never should have happened at all. First Amendment and free speech principles leave no room for police to originate a confrontation with students over wholly protected expression," the group said.
The school ignored concerns about the officers' retaliation to speech "and ignored that the First Amendment applies to all police officers acting under color of state law, even at private institutions."
The report said students there should "beware" of the school's anti-speech ideology.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Kamala Harris largely has been silent on her plans, should she be elected in November, for America.
She's accepted only one interview so far, and her campaign site as recently as days ago essentially was void of plans.
Her one economic policy announced was a set of price controls for what she called "price gouging," after she adopted the ideology of a trick often used by repressive governments to make their economies look better than they are.
She might be asked about her plans during a presidential debate scheduled Tuesday; she might even answer.
But there's not a lot of reason to wonder, according to an expert: Her agenda will be just what America has seen over the last four years under a Biden-Harris administration, massive government spending, surging inflation (20% so far) that pushes the costs of food, housing and such into the stratosphere and more.
Paul Mueller, a senior research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, said during an interview of "Washington Watch" that, "Harris is running a giveaway campaign."
According to a Washington Stand report, that would be more of what the nation has seen under the Biden-Harris regime.
"Of course, the Biden administration has been trying to cancel various forms of student debt for years now. And her approach, I think, to stimulating the economy is more of what we've seen over the past four years, which is extensive government involvement, huge amounts of spending. It's not really an organic growth within the economy," he explained.
Such artificial influences, he explained, cost consumers.
"When you subsidize people's ability to buy things — whether that's higher education or health care — and we give people money in the form of loans or grants or scholarships to do that, what it does is boosts demand. And so what we see over time in both of those areas is rising costs. The cost of higher education has grown much faster than everything else in the economy. The rate of increase for health care has increased very rapidly."
He specifically cited the Harris scheme to give a $25,000 credit for first-time home buyers, which is just going to "put upward pressure on the price of housing."
Even her idea to give small businesses a tax credit could end up backfiring on the nation.
"There are a lot of small business owners who maybe will close down their existing business and start a new one just to get the tax credit," he warned.
And some of the Harris plans simply were stolen by her campaign, from President Donald Trump. One, for example, is her sudden appreciation for the idea of not taxing tips, after Trump already had proposed that.
The report said only one of the economic plans from the two candidates could lead to "robust economic growth."
And it's not from Harris, who would take a hatchet to American families with price controls of food, eliminating tax cuts from 2017, raising the top tax rate to nearly 40%, surging corporate and capital gains taxes, and spending more money on Obamacare.
The report explained, "In a speech at the Economic Club of New York last Thursday, former President Trump proposed unleashing the power of the free market by maintaining the 2017 tax cuts and further slashing the corporate tax from 21% to 15%, cutting red tape, protecting U.S. manufacturing by raising tariffs on imported goods, clawing back all unspent funds from the Biden-Harris administration's Inflation Reduction Act, and making more jobs available to U.S. citizens by deporting illegal immigrants who lower wages and compete for jobs."
Mueller explained Trump's plans have the potential to spur "robust economic growth."
He also pointed out the national debt, some $32 trillion, which has exploded under Biden and Harris.
"So far, we are not seeing a lot of politicians raise their hand and say, 'I'm the guy that's going to give you less so we can save the future.' I think that might be what we need. We're not getting that from anybody at this point," he noted.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – Overnight Sunday Israel Air Force jets conducted a series of airstrikes in northwestern Syria, targeting sites assessed to be used by Iranian or Iranian-backed forces, which were thought to produce chemical weapons.
According to Syrian state media, at least 14 people were killed in the strikes – thought to be some of the heaviest and widest-scale in years – with dozens more wounded. Reports suggest at least 10 sites were hit in Masyaf, in the Hama region. There were additional claims that there were attacks in Hama, Homs, Tartus, and Damascus, although later transpired impacts in the latter three locations were caused by falling Syrian interceptor missiles.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a U.K.-based war monitor aligned with the Syrian opposition, said there were four attacks in less than three hours, targeting military sites west of Hama where "where Iranian militias and experts are stationed to develop weapons in Syria," and a floating object off the coast of Baniyas, according to the Jewish Chronicle.
Among the sites hit was the so-called Scientific Studies and Research Center, known as CERS or SSRC, a major military research laboratory for chemical weapons. The center is thought to house a team of Iranian military experts – in other words members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – who according to Israel are involved in the production of precision surface-to-surface missiles.
Even before the Swords of Iron war, which Hamas started with Iranian backing on Oct. 7, Israel has consistently targeted weapons shipments from Iran, as well as men and materiel in situ in Syria. The Islamic Republic has used its leverage over President Bashar al-Assad's government, which it helped remain in power during the bitter fighting of the Syrian Civil War, to help create its land bridge to move weapons and men closer to Israel.
Jerusalem has neither officially confirmed nor denied reports about IAF planes striking targets in Syria, although it rarely broadcasts when it has done so. However, in February Jerusalem revealed it had attacked more than 50 targets belonging to Hezbollah and other Iran-backed terrorist groups in Syria since Oct. 7.
Almost 17 years to the day, on Sept. 6, 2007, Israel conducted "Operation Orchard," which destroyed Syria's heretofore secret nuclear program in the Deir ez-Zor (or Dair Alzour according to the International Atomic Energy Agency) region of Syria. That attack followed the even more daring "Operation Opera," the 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor in Osirak, Iraq.
What it does show is a clear pattern of Israel following the so-called "Begin Doctrine," which stipulates that Israel would not tolerate the attainment of nuclear weapons by their implacable enemies and would do whatever possible to prevent this eventuality.
Shifting focus to the north?
These strikes come amid increasing calls – including from former IDF Chief of Staff and former Prime Minister Benny Gantz no less – for Israel to turn its attention with both urgency and seriousness to the northern arena. In particular the ongoing simmering war with Hezbollah shows no sign of abating, if anything it seems to be ratcheting up on a daily basis.
Israel's preemptive strike against hundreds of Hezbollah missile launchers in the early hours of Aug. 25 may have offset what was assumed to be a massive retaliatory attack for the killing of the Iranian proxy's CEO, Fuad Shukr, the threat still remains. And on the sidelines, Iran is still suggesting it is winning the psychological battle, boasting its response to the elimination of Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in an IRGC compound has yet to be avenged.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – A new report into the BBC's coverage of the Israel-Hamas war revealed Britain's flagship news service broke its own reporting guidelines on more than 1,500 occasions since Hamas' Oct. 7 onslaught.
The research revealed a "deeply worrying pattern of bias" against Israel, according to its authors who analyzed four months of the BBC's output across television, radio, online news, podcasts and social media, according to the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph newspaper.
British-Israeli lawyer Trevor Asserson – a long-term BBC critic – led the research, which used artificial intelligence to analyze a breakdown of certain terms – including "genocide" – over the first four months of the Israel-Hamas war, which produced alarming statistics.
Asserson's team included some 20 researchers and 20 data scientists who, using artificial intelligence, trawled through some nine million words of coverage across several languages and various platforms. The Spectator will release the report – which runs to some 100 pages – on Monday.
Indeed, the analysis showed Israel was linked to the term "genocide" more than 14 times the number Hamas was, despite the fact the Gazan terrorists entered southern Israel on Oct. 7 with the intention – by its own admission – of slaughtering as many Jews as they could get their hands on.
Jewish Chronicle editor Jake Wallis Simons lamented the bare statistics, which he said "appears to be an extraordinary indictment of BBC reporting, which seems to be working to project Hamas propaganda."
The report found that in BBC coverage, Israel was associated with war crimes, genocide, and international law violations far more often than Hamas was. It also claimed that the BBC downplayed Hamas terrorism, and asserted the BBC's Arabic service was among the most biased global media outlets in covering the Israel-Hamas conflict.
While its charter claims it strives for objectivity and balance, this more usually relates to the U.K.'s political scene where it is felt it'd be more problematic if there was an obvious editorial stance. However, over the years its staff has shown a clear bias for Democrats over and above Republican politicians – especially former President Donald Trump – and it has frequently been accused of anti-Israel bias too.
The BBC seems to wear as a badge of pride, instances of pro-Arab and pro-Palestinian voices claiming the corporation favors Israel, which it says is proof of its balanced reporting. However, this damning new report shows how far the broadcaster has fallen from its lofty ideals.
In the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attacks, the BBC was widely criticized for failing to call Hamas "terrorists" and to add insult to injury, it only mentioned the fact the Gazan Islamist group is a proscribed or banned terrorist group on some 400 out of almost 12,500 mentions.
A BBC spokesman said the network had "serious questions about the methodology of this report, particularly its heavy reliance on AI to analyze impartiality, and its interpretation of the BBC's editorial guidelines. It was not yet clear why a reliance on AI to quickly assess patterns of reporting and use of phrases or words should be seen as inherently prejudicial.
"We don't think coverage can be assessed solely by counting particular words divorced from context. We are required to achieve due impartiality, rather than the 'balance of sympathy' proposed in the report, and we believe our knowledgeable and dedicated correspondents are achieving this," the spokesman added, while pledging to study the report and respond directly to its authors.
The BBC's senior Middle Eastern correspondent Jeremy Bowen is presumably one of those "knowledgeable and dedicated correspondents," yet his reporting is often tinged with ill-concealed contempt for the Jewish state, a remnant of the PTSD he suffered following the death of a Lebanese friend after the IDF exploded his car with an artillery shell – an event he witnessed – on the last day of Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000. He has compared Israel with Putin's Russia.
However, attention was not solely focused on Bowen, but rather its employment of freelance journalists who have parroted sick expressions of Jew hatred on X among other platforms.
According to the Times of Israel, the report cited Mayssaa Abdul Khalek, a Lebanon-based reporter who has contributed to broadcasts for BBC Arabic, who has called for the "death to Israel" and has tweeted: "Sir Hitler, rise, there are a few people that need to be burned."
It also cited Marie-Jose Al Azzi, another Lebanon-based contributor who described terrorists killed on Oct. 7 as "the first of the martyrs of the operation."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
No, Jim Morrison is not back from the grave, but his smash hit with his rock group The Doors, "Light My Fire," has been resurrected into a Kamala Harris spoof called "Big Fat Liar."
Parody songmaker Brian Coyne created the reworked video mixing actual footage of The Doors' 1967 appearance on "The Ed Sullivan Show" with news clips of Harris during her 2024 presidential campaign.
The 2024 lyrics state:
You always say what is untrue
You are a master falsifier
When somebody fact-checks you
Like a chameleon you change your attireKamala's a big fat liar
Kamala's a big fat liar
Liar, Liar, pants on fire!The time for cackling is through
Joe Biden's condition is dire
Now the party turns to you
It's time to claim what you desireKamala's a big fat liar
Kamala is such a liar
Liar, Liar, pants on fire!You said that you worked in fast food
And put potatoes in a fryer
I hope they have a job for you
Come November when you are FIRED!Kamala's a big fat liar
Kamala's a big fat liar
Liar, Liar, pants on fire!
"Kamala Harris has become the poster child for flip-flopping on everything from her ethnicity to policy," said Coyne.
"She steals policy ideas form her opponent, Donald Trump, while having almost no policies of her own. No wonder she avoids interviews like the plague!"
The video has been viewed more than 716,000 times on YouTube alone since it was posted Sept. 2, collecting more than 3,200 comments, including:
"Never a truer word spoken!!! MAGA."
"I'm 70 years old and a child of the 60's but I was never a Doors fan but in this case I will make an exception. BRILLIANT!"
"This track should be released as a single a guaranteed Number 1 in America and probably the rest of the world."
"Parody song is perfect, so well done! I love that Jim Morrison is setting the record straight!"
"Song of the 21st Century!! Quadruple Platinum, Gold, Plutonium!!"
"I think even Jim Morrison could appreciate this."
"Watching this actually gave me chills. The hair stood up on my arms because it was so real."
"Trump should play this at all his rallies on the big screen! LOL! OMG! EPIC! Everyone would be singing it!"
"Wow this needs to be a campaign ad running 24/7."
Watch the entire parody video:
Watch The Doors singing "Light My Fire" on "The Ed Sullivan Show" on CBS in 1967:
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Just days before his big debate with Kamala Harris, former President Trump is slamming the Democratic presidential nominee for "completely hiding from the press," and vowing to put anyone engaged in election fraud into prison should he win the election.
"Comrade Kamala Harris 'is completely hiding from the press. She's not even taking short, quick questions at the plane. It's not normal to have a candidate running for President who is hiding from the press," Trump posted on Truth Social.
"Harris is copying Biden's self-protection strategy, duck tough interviews and limit improvisational moments … The last thing we need for our Nation in Decline is another President who is not smart enough to answer reporters questions. We just went through that, and we don't want to do it again!"
Trump also posted a "cease and desist" order online, indicating: "I, together with many Attorneys and Legal Scholars, am watching the Sanctity of the 2024 Presidential Election very closely because I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election. It was a Disgrace to our Nation!
"Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again.
"We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON'T! Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials.
"Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The fight is in court now, over whether a Virginia county will be allowed to charge a Christian ministry property taxes on its building while exempting other organizations that own buildings, and represent other religious, from those costs.
It is the chief of the Rutherford Institute, John W. Whitehead, who explained, "The First Amendment not only affirms the right to religious freedom for people of all faiths, but it also requires that the government treat all faiths equally and not favor or disfavor one over the other."
He continued, "This is the slippery slope that affects us all, whether you're talking about religious freedom, free speech, or privacy: if the government is allowed to deny freedom to one segment of the citizenry, it will eventually extend that tyranny to all citizens."
The fight is over a decision in Blacksburg, Virginia, where officials decided to refuse the Bradley Study Center, a nonprofit Christian Scholars Network site that ministers to Virginia Tech community members with worship services, prayer meetings and Bible Studies, a tax exempt status.
The Rutherford Institute said it has "challenged a local government's refusal to recognize CSN as a religious association that uses its property exclusively for charitable, religious, or educational purposes, which would thereby qualify CSN for a property tax exemption under the Virginia Constitution and state laws."
The lawsuit in Montgomery County Circuit Court is against the county and the town of Blacksburg after the board and the commissioner of the revenue refused the allow an exemption, "even though the county provides a property tax exemption to a similar organization for college students of another religion."
The legal team reported, "At trial, Institute attorneys argued that the government is failing to comply with the will of the people as set forth in the Virginia Constitution and laws, and that the government's narrow interpretation of certain statutory terms violates church autonomy and favors more formal religious practices and hierarchical denominations in violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause."
The report said CSN is a "nonprofit ministry which has been exempt from federal income tax by the IRS under section 501(c)(3). In 2019, CSN purchased real estate near the Virginia Tech campus and opened the Bradley Study Center to cultivate a thoughtful exploration of the Christian faith and how one's faith connects to their studies, work, and life."
Contrary to the judgment of local officials, witnesses at a trial described the benefits the center profits to the community.
A court ruling on the dispute is expected in months.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Education bureaucrats in the leftist enclave of Colorado have decided that students in the Jefferson County school district will be subjected to housing rules, on school trips, based on "gender identity."
And their action has gotten them named in a federal lawsuit.
It is the Alliance Defending Freedom that says it has filed a case against the school district for "violating parents' fundamental right to make decisions about the upbringing and education of their children."
The district's policy demands that students are assigned to share overnight accommodations based on "gender identity."
That means girls could be forced to share intimate areas, even beds, with a boy who simply says he's a girl.
Problematic is the decision by school officials to refuse to tell parents that while "girls" will be housed on one floor and "boys" on another, they have "redefined the words 'girl' and 'boy' to mean a student's self-asserted 'gender identity' rather than sex."
Further, the district "refuses to give parents truthful, pertinent information about their children's overnight accommodations, thus hampering parents' ability to make informed decisions about their children's education and privacy," the legal team said.
"Parents, not the government, have the right and duty to direct the upbringing and education of their children, and that includes making informed decisions to protect their child's privacy," ADF Senior Counsel Kate Anderson said in a prepared statement.
"This fundamental right is especially vital for parents to protect their children from violations of bodily privacy by exposure to the opposite sex in intimate settings, like sleeping arrangements or shower facilities. If Jefferson County Public Schools is going to continue placing students of the opposite sex in the same room on overnight trips—as it confirmed it would—the district must let parents be the ones to make decisions about their children's privacy. And they must provide the information necessary and inform parents about the policy so parents can make the best decisions for their children. The district must grant our clients' reasonable request for accommodations that can be accomplished in a number of confidential ways that protect the privacy of all students."
The lawsuit is on behalf of multiple parents including Bret and Susanne Wailes.
They "allowed their 11-year-old daughter to attend a district-sponsored trip to Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.," and "were told their daughter would be rooming with three other fifth-grade girls. It wasn't until their daughter was in her room getting ready for bed on the first night of the trip that she discovered she was to share a bed with a boy who identified as a girl."
When they asked for "reasonable accommodations—asking the school district to allow parents to opt their children out of any policy, prior to an overnight trip, that rooms children by gender identity rather than sex," school officials refused.
The truth, which was concealed by the district, is that the "counselor" was a "non-binary" female. That person's responsibilities included supervising boys' showers.