This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Twice-failed Democrat White House hopeful Hillary Clinton first demanded that Democrats have control of the press.

Now she's added social media to her demand list.

Or she warns "we" will "lose control."

WND reported only days ago her demands that Democrats must control the press.

She said, "Well I do think that, uhm, the, the press needs a consistent narr … I mean the, the press is not supporting Trump, blatantly, very persistently. The press is trying to be the press, be objective, reporting the facts… uhm. The press needs a consistent narrative about the danger that Trump poses, because you know people may still look at the dangers and say 'I don't care, doesn't you know doesn't affect me I'm going to vote for him, for X Y or Z' but ok … But at least people need to be woken up and given the facts about what he has done, is saying and would do."

Now the Daily Mail reports she wants control of social media, too.

She said in an interview on CNN that "we" could "lose control" if they don't do enough to censor digital content.

Her agenda drew a backlash online, in fact.

"Democrats see the internet as a propaganda tool rather than a medium for the open exchange of information!!" warned Tom Callahan on social media.

The report explained, "Clinton called for the federal government to imitate states like California and New York to place more controls on social media."

She charged, "We need national action and sadly our Congress has been dysfunctional when it comes to addressing these threats to our children."

She continued, "[I]f the platforms, whether it's Facebook or Twitter/X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don't moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control.:"

Another social media participate said, "Who is 'we'?"

And Keth Outen said, "They're all telling us what their goal is. Only totalitarian governments use the phrase we must ban free speech or we lose control."

Clinton advocated removing protections for social media companies regarding what others post on their platforms, as a way to establish "guardrails … regulation."

The report elaborated on Clinton's agenda: "Since she first lost her life-long dream of becoming the first female president of the United States to former President Donald Trump in the 2016 election, Clinton has blamed the rise of 'misinformation' and 'fake news' for convincing voters not to trust her."

In September, Clinton called for more controls on online activity, specifically against Americans who were paid by foreign countries to spread online propaganda."

Her earlier comments about control of the press pointed out she believes, "This is dangerous stuff! It starts online often on the dark web. It migrates. It's picked up by the pro-Trump media. It's then reported on by everybody which makes sure it has about 100% coverage and people believe it! So I don't know what it's going to be but it will be something and we will have to work very hard to make sure that it is exposed as the lie that it is.""

Of course, what Clinton and other leftists repeatedly have claimed is misinformation, disinformation and malinformation – with their demands that it be suppressed, is nothing more than a political opinion that contradicts her own political opinion.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Colorado's anti-family ideologues – those in governmental positions from which they have been trying to dictate residents' faith beliefs – are costing the state $1.5 million.

That's the settlement amount reached for the lawyers who defended Lori Smith's religious rights – and won at the Supreme Court where the justices again scolded the state for its anti-Christian bigotry, policies orchestrated under a homosexual Gov. Jared Polis.

A report from Complete Colorado explains the legal fees were awarded to Smith's lawyers for their victory over the state.

Smith, a web designer, had been ordered by the state to violate her Christian beliefs and promote same-sex weddings if she was going to do any business regarding weddings in the state.

She challenged the religious dictate in court and ultimately won at the Supreme Court, which ruled 6-3 in her favor, finding that the First Amendment protected her Christian beliefs from the anti-Christian mandates espoused by the discriminatory Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act.

The report explained, "That law prohibits businesses open to the public from discriminating against members of protected classes, which includes sexual orientation. However, Smith successfully argued that since her Christian beliefs say marriage is only between one man and one woman, the state could not force her to use her creative skills to produce websites for same-sex weddings, which she successfully argued amounts to government-compelled speech."

The report said state officials refused to comment on the massive costs of pursuing their anti-faith agenda.

Smith was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom.

"Our clients Lorie Smith and her design studio, 303 Creative, prevailed at the US Supreme Court and achieved a landmark victory — a victory that helps to protect all Americans' freedom of speech from government censorship and coercion," ADF lawyer Bryan Neihart has explained.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion in the case, stating, "The First Amendment envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands."

The leftists on the court claimed they wanted the right for government to dictate the beliefs of Christians in order to promote LGBT ideologies.

It was the second such catastrophic loss for Colorado at the Supreme Court on the same topic.

Earlier Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips won a similar war with the state, which tried to force him to repudiate his Christian faith and promote same-sex weddings, a case during which the Supreme Court also scolded Colorado for its "intolerance" for Christianity.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A school principal in Washington state has been placed on leave after she made comments that the swastika, a Nazi symbol that in today's world is totally banned in Germany, actually sometimes is a symbol of "peace."

A report by the KIRO7 broadcast outlet explained the Bellevue school district also was apologizing for the comments.

The situation developed when one of the symbols was found on a wall of a playground.

The report explained that Principal Heather Skookal, of Phantom Lake Elementary, responded with several comments. One was that there were "multiple perspectives" about the image, and that it was a symbol of peace for some.

She's now on administrative leave pending an investigation.

The report said one parent defended the principal, explaining, "She is not erasing what happened to the Jewish community whatsoever. Because you know we all know about it. We all know what happened. But like she said, many symbols do mean different things for different cultures, so we cannot disassociate what one person did and forget what this symbol means to everyone else."

An official district statement charged, "Bellevue, like other districts, has seen a rise in antisemitic incidents, particularly this past year, and we are taking actions to address it. There is absolutely no place for hate in the Bellevue School District. In a time where words and symbols are used to divide us, we are working with administrators, staff and students to call our community in for courageous conversations to affirm each other's cultures, beliefs and identities."

A report at the Blaze said the principal's first comments were condemnation for the symbol of "hate."

Then she elaborated that it represents, to some, "peace."

She had said such "symbols of hate" have started appearing in her school, and they have been removed.

The report explained, "Hours later, parents shared with KOMO an email from the principal with the subject line: 'Follow-up on recent incident and cultural awareness.' The station said the principal in the email apologized for not acknowledging in her initial text alert that while a swastika is often associated with hate and intolerance, it's important to acknowledge the swastika also has deep historical and cultural significance in other parts of the world. She also thanked members of the community for bringing it to her attention, the station added."

The principal explained, "In Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and other ancient cultures, the swastika is a symbol of peace, prosperity, and good fortune. We recognize that for many of our families, this symbol has a positive and spiritual meaning, completely unrelated to the hateful associations it took on in more recent history."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

JERUSALEM — Israel's first, and second-longest serving, prime minister, David Ben-Gurion famously said, "In Israel, in order to be a realist, you must believe in miracles," and the year from Oct. 7, 2023, to Oct. 7, 2024 has certainly been an example of this. The story, whose end is unknown, has a very Jewish patina to it; from the depths of despair at 6:29 on that Sabbath/Simchat Torah morning as the paragliders flew over the Nova music festival and the Hamas paratroopers stormed over the border killing everything in their way, backed by a cacophony of rocket-fire; to a place today, which despite the difficulties and challenges of the knowledge of the hard road ahead, might even border on hope.

In every generation there are disputes and temptations, which threaten to rip the Jewish people asunder. In 2005, it was the disengagement from Gaza, pulled off by practically the only politician – Ariel Sharon – who had the fortitude and authority to pull it off. Many people on the right warned of the national implications of that fateful decision, but their concerns were dismissed for the perceived greater good of living in peace with our neighbors. Some hope.

In the months leading up to Oct. 7, 2023, Israel's civil society seemed fatally weakened, a hint, which Hamas' barbaric terrorist leader Yahya Sinwar, certainly did not miss. Despite the fact, protesters against the government's proposed judicial reform, and those in favor would all be waving Israeli flags at their demonstrations, as they yelled epithets at each other from point-blank range. Sinwar thought he knew Israel and Israelis, having learned the language and immersed himself in its newspapers over his extended stay in prison, which was so catastrophically cut short in the deal which released kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit in 2011. He assumed Israel was on the precipice of collapse; however, he misinterpreted what was underneath all the noise. Israel is a very noisy society, but underneath it there is an almost unspoken acknowledgment that Jews, whatever their political, spiritual or religious affiliations, are responsible for one another in times of great peril. And make no mistake, Oct. 7, 2023 was a moment of catastrophic danger.

Sinwar's actions led us to this point, and if one was to think back to Oct. 6, 2023, it would be impossible to contemplate that one year and one day later, they would lead us to a place where the future of the entire Middle East – of Israel's relationships with its Arab neighbors, and if the evil Islamist regime were to fall in Tehran, of Iran too – could be redrawn. It is a tantalizing moment – an inflection point – full of potential… and jeopardy.

Israelis, Diaspora Jews, U.S. politicians commemorate first anniversary of Hamas attacks, which left some 1,200 people dead

A somber mood – which to be sure has hung like a pall over the Jewish state for the last 366 days – descended a little further Monday, as Israelis came together – many of them at 6:29 a.m. – to commemorate the events of Oct. 7, 2023. Impromptu, unofficial gatherings paired with much larger events put on by various municipalities across the country, as long as the security situation would permit it. Hamas even fired a few rockets, some of which impacted in Tel Aviv and further to its south, in Holon.

Against which targets in the Islamic Republic of Iran might Israel retaliate?

Iran launched nearly 200 ballistic missiles at Israel on Oct. 1; Israel has still to respond. The timing of the response is unknown, although Iran was on high alert overnight Sunday. The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies provides maps with a key of the significance of the targets Israel might strike.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Homeschool moms in Arizona are suing the state over pencils, and books, and flashcards, and erasers.

They are just some of the standard classroom materials needed – that the state suddenly and arbitrarily banned them from purchasing with their state-allotted Empowerment Scholarship Account funds.

It is the Goldwater Institute that is helping them.

"ESAs allow parents to use a portion of their children's allotted state funding to purchase books, school supplies, and other curriculum materials that they can use to educate their children. Under the law, parents can then submit their expenses to the state for reimbursement. But over the summer, AG [Kris] Mayes conjured up an illegal new rule requiring that to qualify for reimbursement, each of those purchases must be explicitly called for in a curriculum," the legal team said.

For homeschool moms Velia Aguirre and Rosemary McAfee "that meant no pencils, no erasers, no poster of the periodic table of elements, no flashcards, and no classic educational books like 'Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See?'—unless they could sink hours into tracking down or coming up with various 'curricula' that explicitly call for each and every book title or material's use."

The charges include that Mayes "twisted the law to change the rules of the program, imposing an absurd new burden on ESA parents blocking their purchases of everything from kids' books to the Constitution," the institute reported.

"The law is clear: ESA families have the right to use these educational materials without being forced to justify to the attorney general or state bureaucrats why they're buying pencils or picking individual books for their children," explained Goldwater Institute lawyer John Thorpe.

Aguirre noted, "The government is changing the rules and putting impossible burdens on me." She said she is "individualizing" her children's school days, meaning her curriculum is constantly changing.

"All of a sudden, we have a government telling us, 'Here's one more thing for the list,'" said McAfee.

She has nine children, seven in the program.

"I feel like the AG clearly doesn't have any interest in what an education looks like for a homeschool child."

The legal team pointed out that public and private schools don't list "pencils" or "erasers" in their curriculum, either.

Further, the institute noted, "the AG's new mandate simply ignores state law and violates the Department of Education's own handbook, which safeguards the ESA program by requiring documentation for unusual purchases, but not for common-sense purchases of items that are 'generally known to be educational.'"

The lawsuit challenges the "wrong-headed" demands and seeks a court order to allow parents to run homeschool classes without undue paperwork.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Russia and China have announced they will cooperate to carry out joint patrols in the Arctic Sea, marking the first time the Chinese have entered the area.

The Chinese Ministry of Defense released a statement this week, stating the joint venture will expand the Chinese Coast Guard's operational range significantly, and "bolstered" its international and regional maritime governance.

"On September 21, Chinese and Russian coast guard vessels began joint patrols in the North Pacific. The coast guards conducted law enforcement inspections on fishing vessels operating in the region, in accordance with the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/215 and the Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fisheries Resources in the North Pacific Ocean," the ministry said.

It further states the operation was aimed at "maintaining order in high-seas fisheries" and joint exercises were conducted in search and rescue, locating illegal vessels, and damage control.

China is currently mapping out alternative sea routes, and has used the new route through the Arctic Sea as an alternative trade route between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. The routes are largely being used by Russia to deliver oil to China, while avoiding sanctions from Western nations, according to Reuters.

Mercy Kuo, executive vice president of Pamir Consulting, a global risk intelligence firm in Washington, D.C., told the Diplomat in December 2023, that China's ambitions are pushing it to make its presence known in one of the world's most untapped places.

"Beijing under Xi Jinping has deliberately re-envisioned China not only as an Arctic stakeholder, but a "near-Arctic" power. The CCP [Chinese Communist Party] framed China's entry into the region as mutually beneficial to the littoral Arctic states, highlighting potential commercial endeavors and (ostensibly dual-use) scientific research. Officials codified this concept in 2018 through the "Ice" or "Polar Silk Road" (PSR) – part of its globe-spanning Belt and Road Initiative," Kuo said.

Kuo added the Chinese have put more than $90 billion into the initiative, and both nations have mutually agreed to collaborate on harnessing Arctic energy and transport.

According to an op-ed published by Politico and written by Liselotte Odgaard, a senior fellow at Hudson Institute, the friendship between Russia and China is a "no-limits" partnership, allowing China to test its Arctic capabilities, while Russia's nuclear threats towards the U.S. and its NATO allies are bolstered and also keep eyes turned away from the threat in the Indo-Pacific region.

"Just how important the Arctic is to Russia in terms of maintaining its threatening nuclear posture toward the U.S. cannot be overstated. In a nuclear exchange, Moscow would likely fire long-range ballistic missiles – from ballistic missile submarine bases near the Kola Peninsula – through the poorly surveyed airspace over Greenland. And hindered by low visibility in the Arctic, U.S. forces would be ill-prepared to detect and counter the strike," Odgaard said.

A report from Bloomberg notes the U.S. and its NATO allies are now forming a security group to counter China and Russia. The security group was formed because the Arctic Council has Russia as a member, and there are no forums that allow NATO allies to discuss security concerns without the involvement of Russia, according to Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly.

Canada is currently forming an alliance with Nordic nations, as they are now all members of NATO.

"For a long time Canada, we thought we were protected by our geography. But now we need to reckon that we are a country facing Russia and because of climate change, more countries are interested in the Arctic, including China … We need to be addressing this new reality," Joly told Bloomberg.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

It's hard enough to prepare for the catastrophic results of something like Hurricane Helene, which destroyed towns, homes, bridges, roads – and lives and families.

But that task turns into, literally, the impossible when there's corruption, gross mismanagement, and politics present.

And it's becoming more and more evident that the help for southeastern states, specifically the hardest-hit regions of North Carolina, is being corrupted by near-insurmountable failings.

Already, WND has reported that the Federal Emergency Management Agency has spent billions of dollars providing benefits to illegal aliens, and now has confirmed it lacks resources for the ordinary needs of the nation's hurricane season.

Kamala Harris, according to many victims, insulted them with an offer of $750 for the most pressing needs. Joe Biden said in a comment – that was interpreted not to his benefit – the government had given all it had to the victims.

Now there's more.

 

A report at the Gateway Pundit explains multiple whistleblowers already have come forward with complaints about FEMA.

"According to a letter from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), whistleblowers allege that FEMA withheld critical pre-disaster funds and failed to issue deployment orders to first responders, leaving Americans stranded in the wake of the storm," the report said.

It described Gaetz' letter as a "bombshell" to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, for his agency's "failure to release necessary funds and provide clear orders has left 'hundreds if not thousands' of service members and first responders in limbo, as they sit idle in hotels while the southeastern U.S. suffers the devastating effects of Helene."

The report charged that FEMA's credibility is crumbling under "mounting evidence of gross mismanagement."

It was Mayorkas who confessed FEMA "does not have enough funds to make it through the hurricane season."

Whistleblowers, the report charged, have accused the agency of diverting tax funds to illegal immigrants – and "using taxpayer dollars to cover the costs of border enforcement failures," so that no funding is left for Americans hit by catastrophic conditions.

"The Gateway Pundit previously reported that over $1 billion, which should have been used for American disaster relief, has instead been redirected into resettling illegal immigrants through programs like the 'Shelter and Services Program,'" the report said.

Gaetz turned blunt:

"Yesterday, you stated that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is a part of your department, 'does not have enough funds to make it through the hurricane] season.' This news comes after FEMA has spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on migrants due to Border Czar Kamala Harris' open border instead of prioritizing funding for Americans impacted by disasters."

Then he warned that whistleblowers have documented mismanagement, wasted taxes, misappropriate funds and other problems.

Further, FEMA workers for days have been "employees deployed, on the clock, awaiting orders in hotels."

In fact, Elon Musk on social media said he'd heard from a SpaceX engineer helping with rescue and recovery efforts in North Carolina.

That source said the feds actively were blocking help.

"Hey Elon, update here on site of Asheville, NC. We have powered up two large operating bases for choppers to deliver goods into hands. We've deployed 300+ starlinks and outpour is it has saved many lives. The big issue is FEMA is actively blocking shipments and seizing goods and services locally and locking them away to state they are their own. It's very real and scary how much they have taken control to stop people helping. We are blocked now on the shipments of new starlinks coming in until we get an escort from the fire dept. but that may not be enough."

The Gateway Punit noted there even was confirmation, from the left, of the politics influencing help efforts.

"Obama-Harris whisperer David Axelrod, host of the 'Axe Files' podcast, said the quiet part out loud as the Biden Regime blocks ongoing rescue operations in North Carolina. Axelrod said Hurricane Helene victims in North Carolina are mainly Trump voters who will find it hard to vote in the 2024 election," the report explained.

 

"David Axelrod said affected Democrats from Asheville are 'upscale liberal voters, and they're probably going to figure out a way to vote. I'm not sure a bunch of these folks who had their homes and lives destroyed elsewhere, in western North Carolina, in the mountains, there are going to be as easy to wrangle for the Trump campaign,'" Axelrod said.

Fox News host Jesse Watters blasted the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris regime for failing the hurricane victims.

"Over 200 Americans are dead after Hurricane Helene and the thousands of victims impacted have been disgracefully left behind. The Biden administration has blocked ongoing rescue operations and North Carolina is living in the dark ages because Joe Biden and Kamala Harris hate Elon Musk. FEMA is now out of money, because Joe Biden and Kamala spent over a billion dollars of FEMA cash on migrants. Illegals got luxury hotel rooms, but Kamala's just tossing Helene victims $750 and heading back on the campaign trail. This must not meet her standard for giving extra resources – she only wants to do that based on equity," he said.

Meanwhile, FEMA said the "help" it would offer would extend to "non-citizens."

 

The Gateway Pundit commented: "As Americans suffer through the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, and communities in North Carolina continue to search for over 200 missing loved ones lost in flooding, there is a glimmer of hope for non-citizens. If you are one of the millions of non-citizens that the Biden-Harris regime granted asylum to, you may qualify for FEMA aid."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The First Amendment in America right now protects a citizen's right to criticize the GOP candidate for president, President Donald Trump.

It also protects the right to criticize Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Tim Walz.

But what if the federal government suddenly said, in its opinion, criticizing Trump was fine, but no one would be allowed at any time going forward to say anything critical of the Biden-Harris-Walz triumvirate?

Not possible?

Actually, one of America's top constitutional experts says that threat is very real.

"We are living through the most dangerous anti-free speech movement in American history. We have never before faced the current alliance of government, corporate, academic and media forces aligned against free speech. A Harris-Walz administration with a supportive Congress could make this right entirely dispensable," explained Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of "The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage."

He's not only testified before Congress as an expert on the Constitution but has represented members in disputes over the Constitution in court.

His comments were triggered by "the most chilling moment from the Vance-Walz debate when the Democratic nominee showed why he is part of the dream ticket for the anti-free speech movement."

During that debate, Democrat Tim Walz responded to comments from GOP candidate JD Vance about Kamala Harris' support for censorship.

"Walz proceeded to quote the line from a 1919 case in which Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said you do not have the right to falsely yell fire in a crowded theater. It is the favorite mantra of the anti-free speech movement. It also is fundamentally wrong," Turley said.

He explained that while Walz misrepresented the opinion to affirm one can't shout fire in a crowded theater, the actual opinion included two qualifications to that, that the shout is "false" and that it triggers a panic.

Holmes said, "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic."

Turley called out Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., for being among those misunderstanding and misrepresenting the Holmes' comment.

"For example, when I testified last year before Congress against a censorship system that has been described by one federal court as 'similar to an Orwellian 'Ministry of Truth," Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., interjected with the fire-in-a-theater question to say such censorship is needed and constitutional. In other words, the internet is now a huge crowded theater and those with opposing views are shouting fire," Turley commented.

He added:

Goldman and Walz both cited a case in which socialists Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer were arrested and convicted of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. Their "crime" was to pass out flyers in opposition to the military draft during World War I.

Schenck and Baer called on their fellow citizens not to "submit to intimidation" and to "assert your rights." They argued, "If you do not assert and support your rights, you are helping to deny or disparage rights which it is the solemn duty of all citizens and residents of the United States to retain." They also described the military draft as "involuntary servitude."

Holmes used his "fire in a theater" line to justify the abusive conviction and incarceration. At the House hearing, when I was trying to explain that the justice later walked away from the line and Schenck was effectively overturned in 1969 in Brandenburg v. Ohio, Goldman cut me off and said, "We don't need a law class here."

But, he said, the debate showed Walz revealed that and he and other Democrats "most certainly do need a class in First Amendment law."

He cited Harris as a "champion of censorship in an administration that supports targeting disinformation, misinformation and 'malinformation.'"

And Walz has made clear his opposition to others' free speech to MSNBC, where he said, "There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy."

That, of course, was the point of the First Amendment, to protect objectionable speech, as there are no disputes over speech everyone wants.

Turley called out Walz, explaining his statement is "entirely untrue and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the right called 'indispensable' by the Supreme Court. Even after some of us condemned his claim as ironically dangerous disinformation, Walz continues to repeat it."

Turley warned, "Where President Joe Biden was viewed as supporting censorship out of political opportunism, Harris and Walz are viewed as true believers."

He cited the movement already under way to destroy speech.

"University of Michigan Law School professor and MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade has said that free speech 'can also be our Achilles' heel.' Columbia law professor Tim Wu, a former Biden White House aide, wrote a New York Times op-ed with the headline, 'The First Amendment Is Out of Control.'"

There already have been instances of government speech control that creates great damage. For example, the FBI's election interference during the 2020 election including falsely claiming that the Biden family scandals detailed in Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop were "disinformation." Feds told media and tech corporations to suppress that and they did.

But the scandals were true, and later polling showed had that information been reported in an ordinary way to Americans, Joe Biden almost certainly would have lost the election, and his promotions of abortion and transgenderism, the more than 21% inflation Americans have endured, the world conflicts that erupted because of a weak American policy, may not have happened in exactly the same way.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

In a revealing 5,400-word report dubbed "The Remdesivir Papers" just published today, a military whistleblower has come forward to offer evidence that 64% of service members and veterans whose deaths were attributed to COVID-19 were also administered remdesivir – a drug with a known lethal past.

According to the report, first published by the Gateway Pundit, "the data clearly depict the liberal usage of remdesivir in military treatment facilities (MTF) and other civilian facilities, as well as its potential contribution to, at minimum, hundreds of untimely deaths" between 2020 and 2024.

WorldNetDaily spoke to Bradley Miller, a former U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, about the stunning news. In October 2021, Miller was relieved of his battalion command within the 101st Airborne Division for refusing the COVID "vaccine" under the unlawful direction of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's now-rescinded August 2021 shot mandate.

 

Knowing the number of deaths, Miller said he continues to be "appalled by the behavior of the government, and more specifically, the behavior of the DOD." For Miller, a disconcerting question looms large: "Did the government, to include DOD, knowingly administer a pharmaceutical to people that they knew was clearly more lethal than other available therapeutics?" Drawing from data included in the report, including the Ebola trial which showed the highest mortality rate among participants in a trial of four investigational therapies resulted from the use of remdesivir, he answered, "It appears so."

"The added dimension to this, which is particularly scary, is that 'The Remdesivir Papers' has revealed a significant number of deaths within the military that appear to be attributed to the use of remdesivir," Miller said. "Were service members put at risk of death, because they were being unnecessarily offered this therapeutic?"

With what he acknowledges is an "anecdotal" example, Miller noted that he had lost a civilian friend who was unvaccinated and died in the hospital after being administered remdesivir for treatment. Knowing what he's learned about the lethality of remdesivir, he said, "I think it's a legitimate question to ask whether he was targeted with remdesivir to make his death look like an unvaccinated individual was particularly susceptible to COVID?" While he hopes the answer would be "no," he admitted, "some of the evidence points in that direction."

"We've seen behavior like this from the government before, a government administering a therapeutic they know can be quite harmful and perhaps unnecessary," Miller pointed out, referring to the unlawfully administered and harmful anthrax vaccine, and more recently, the so-called COVID-19 vaccine which has resulted in death, myocarditis and other serious adverse effects.

To no avail, the author made multiple email inquiries to the military treatment facilities involved, as well as a FOIA request to the United States Army Medical Research and Development Command, or USAMRDC, on Sept. 24. Coincidently, on the same day, the Joint Trauma Service System was inaccessible to the whistleblower.

On Sept. 27, a congressional inquiry from Rep. Clay Higgins, R.-Louisiana, was also sent to Defense Secretary Austin, copying the U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner, USAMRDC Commanding General Maj. Gen. Paula C. Lodi and others.

Miller remarked, "What we see is that the Department of Defense seems to be untouchable, and this is a scary phenomenon," as questions surrounding the use of remdesivir to treat service members and veterans remain unanswered. "It seems to go above and beyond the military officer ranks, knowing that the military is supposed to answer to the civilian authorities, to include the service secretaries and secretary of Defense," he told WND, suggesting, "they all seem to be involved in ensuring that the DOD remains untouchable."

According to Miller, "They can violate the law with impunity, because we've seen that happen over the last couple of years, over and over again." With that, he added, "Whether they're military officers, or the civilian authorities within the Department of Defense, they have all taken oaths to support and defend the Constitution, yet we see them operating in ways that appear to be in wanton violation of that very oath."

"To clean up the government and the military, the American people have to become comfortable asking the uncomfortable questions," Miller argues. "While there are obvious exceptions, we have largely become hesitant to do that because we're afraid of what the answers might be, or we fear the backlash," he offered. Citing "The Remdesivir Papers" as an example, he concluded, "I think we're getting to the point where more people are starting to realize we have to be bold and ask these questions exactly because of what the answers might be."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A prominent publisher of science research is being challenged in court after moving to suppress science-based details about the dangers of abortion, according to a new report at the Federalist.

The fight now in Superior Court in Ventura, California, is over a decision by Sage Publications to move to retract three key studies "exposing the dangers of the nation's most popular abortion drug regiment," the report explained.

It's happening just as the U.S. Supreme Court is approaching a case involving the drug, mifepristone.

The report explained 10 of the researchers who delivered in three scientific papers their conclusions about the threat to lives have now filed a petition to compel arbitration.

They accuse the publisher of "pretextual and discriminatory" comments that were created to support retracting the findings on the abortion pill. The authors provided science to back their original writings, but Sage ignored it.

"One of the studies in question, which the lawsuit notes is 'the second most-read article' in the journal's history, specifically determined mifepristone is responsible for a 500 percent increase in abortion-related emergency room visits," the Federalist reported.

The censorship campaign is suspect for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact the papers were done in 2019, 2021 and 2022 and "originally passed peer review for publication without a hitch."

In fact, Sage emailed Dr. James Studnicki, who headed the 2021 and 2022 projects, and commended him for his "fine contributions."

But this year, amid a re-election year that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris both have participated in, with their extreme pro-abortion positions, the publisher suddenly claimed that it was acting on a "reader's concern" that the authors had a conflict of interest over some "pro-life organizations."

"Abortion activist researchers publish plenty of papers on the topic without scrutiny. Yet Sage, after what it called an 'independent review,' ultimately followed through with the retractions," the report said.

The challenge, now in court, charges, "Sage's wrongdoing has been causing enormous and incalculable harm to the Authors' professional reputations, as Sage intended. Because of Sage's retractions, the Authors and their research have been attacked by the media and by other authors, and the Authors have had new research proposals inexplicably turned away by other publications that now fear associating with them. The Authors have years — even decades — of fruitful research ahead of them, but they are now being treated as pariahs."

The Charlotte Lozier Institute found that Sage's claims provided "no evidence" of any major "errors, miscalculations or falsehoods" in the reports.

Further, the authors "fully complied" with the publications "conflict disclosure requirements."

The researchers had called for arbitration on the disagreement but the report said Sage delayed the process by making demands that were unrelated to the issue at hand.

"Even more concerning, Sage has used its intransigence as a weapon to try to pressure the Authors into unilaterally surrendering their discovery rights. Sage's egregious actions require this Court's intervention to compel arbitration," the lawsuit charges.

Patriot News Alerts delivers timely news and analysis on U.S. politics, government, and current events, helping readers stay informed with clear reporting and principled commentary.
© 2026 - Patriot News Alerts