<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe> <script src=””></script&gt;

Kary Mullis, the scientist, researcher and author won the Nobel Peace Prize for creating the PCR test came out against how it was used by powers-that-be to give biased results. He criticized this publicly – and Fauci – and was found dead of suspicious causes two months before the Covid plandemic roll-out session EVENT 201. READ: Was the Covid-19 Test Meant To Detect A Virus?



A high school senior of mixed race is suing a taxpayer-funded charter school in Nevada over the “coercive, ideological indoctrination” that is central to its Critical Race Theory-based curriculum that forces students to associate aspects of their identity with oppression.

In the lawsuit, Clark v. State Public Charter School Authority, filed Dec. 22 in federal court in Nevada, the young plaintiff William Clark and his mother Gabrielle Clark claim their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were being violated. Students were allegedly told that by refusing to identify with an oppressive group, they were exercising their privilege or underscoring their role as an oppressor.

The lawsuit was filed by the Illinois-based group Schoolhouse Rights, whose website describes its mission as supporting “civil rights litigation in defense of students’ freedom of conscience in public education and the rights of parents to guide and direct the upbringing of their children.”

The student at Democracy Prep in Las Vegas whose mother is black and deceased father was white, claims there was a hostile classroom environment, and that he felt discriminated against in the mandatory, year-long “Sociology of Change” course required for graduation. There is another required class, “Change the World,” in which students carry out a political or social work project.

Because the so-called civics curriculum implemented by new management carried the same name as the previous curriculum, parents like Mrs. Clark “were not aware of the turn towards coercive, ideological indoctrination until they began seeing the detrimental effects it worked upon their children,” the legal complaint states.

The new curriculum “inserted consciousness raising and conditioning exercises under the banner of ‘Intersectionality’ and ‘Critical Race Theory.’ These sessions … are not descriptive or informational in nature, but normative and prescriptive: they require pupils to ‘unlearn’ and ‘fight back’ against ‘oppressive’ structures allegedly implicit in their family arrangements, religious beliefs and practices, racial, sexual, and gender identities, all of which they are required to divulge and subject to non-private interrogation.”

William was directed “in class to ‘unlearn’ the basic Judeo-Christian principles [his mother] imparted to him, and then [the school] retaliated against [him].”

“Some racial, sexual, gender and religious identities, once revealed,” the complaint states, “are officially singled out in the programming as inherently problematic, and assigned pejorative moral attributes by Defendants.”

The school principal told Mrs. Clark “that the theoretical basis of the revamped ‘Sociology of Change’ course is known as ‘intersectionality,’ and is inspired by political activist, academic and ‘Critical Race Theory’ proponent Kimberlé Crenshaw,” the complaint states. Crenshaw is a law professor at UCLA and Columbia Law School who is regarded as a leading authority on black feminist legal theory and is said to have coined the term “intersectionality.”

William Clark was required for assignments the legal complaint says “to reveal his racial, sexual, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities and religious identities,” by his teacher who greeted the students by saying, “Hello my wonderful social justice warriors!” Clark was told the next step would be to determine if parts of his identity “have privilege or oppression attached to it.” Privilege was defined as “the inherent belief in the inferiority of the oppressed group.”

The legal argument the Clarks make is that William is being compelled “to make professions about his racial, sexual, gender and religious identities in verbal class exercises and in graded, written homework assignments which were subject to the scrutiny, interrogation and derogatory labeling of students, teachers and school administrators.” The defendants “are coercing him to accept and affirm politicized and discriminatory principles and statements that he cannot in conscience affirm.”

The school repeatedly threatened William “with material harm including a failing grade and non-graduation if he failed to comply with their requirements,” the complaint states, and refused to accommodate his requests for reasonable accommodation.


Steven Hayward lauded the lawsuit at Power Line Blog, saying it heralds the beginning of an “active resistance” and a “counterrevolution” against the far-left takeover of American institutions.

“While misguided Millennials lean heavily progressive at the moment, the next generation of young people is going to swing sharply to the right out of rebellion against the stifling conformity of the progressive left that went into hyperdrive this year,” Hayward writes.

The lawsuit comes after President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13950 on Sept. 22 prohibiting the military, federal agencies, and federal contractors from promoting the “divisive concepts” that are part of Critical Race Theory in workplace trainings.

The theory is the basis for an intellectual movement whose adherents retired federal Judge Richard Posner, dubbed “the most-cited legal scholar of the 20th century,” has described as the “lunatic core” of “radical legal egalitarianism.” The late Derrick Bell, who was one of former President Barack Obama’s professors at Harvard Law School, was the most prominent scholar to promote the theory.

While Trump has referred to Critical Race Theory by name, the executive order does not, instead describing it as a “malign ideology [that] is now migrating from the fringes of American society and threatens to infect core institutions of our country,” including in “workplace diversity trainings across the country, even in components of the Federal Government and among Federal contractors.”

It is an ideology “rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or sex, are oppressors; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our common status as human beings and Americans.”

U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman, an Obama appointee based in San Jose, California, issued a preliminary nationwide injunction against EO 13950 on Dec. 22, USA Today reported.

She agreed with an LGBT diversity training organization that argued the order violated its free speech rights. “Plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success in proving violations of their constitutional rights … the work Plaintiffs perform is extremely important to historically underserved communities,” Freeman wrote in an order.

 “RE-EDUCATION”, THEY CALL IT… These are the grounds for the Shielding Approach FEMA Camps I disclosed here in THIS ARTICLE on, Part II of the Saving Grace series – and it’s already happening, enabled by the MK Ultra mind controlled BLM – Read about the normalization of RE-EDUCATION HERE

WHO Changes Definition of “Herd Immunity” to Eliminate Pre-COVID Consensus

NWO NARRATIVE CHANGE: WHO says herd immunity can only occur via vaccination

The World Health Organization has changed the definition of “herd immunity,” eliminating the pre-COVID consensus that it could be achieved by allowing a virus to spread through a population, and insisting that herd immunity comes solely from vaccines.

The change occurred on a section of the WHO’s website entitled ‘Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Serology, antibodies and immunity’.

The WHO’s original definition (archived here) states that herd immunity “happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection. This means that even people who haven’t been infected, or in whom an infection hasn’t triggered an immune response, they are protected because people around them who are immune can act as buffers between them and an infected person.”

The original definition fails to identify the pre-COVID consensus on what is meant by “herd immunity,” which is when a population becomes protected against a virus because enough people have been infected with it to create community immunity.

However, the WHO’s updated version is even more extreme, insisting that herd immunity can only be achieved by mass vaccination programs.

“‘Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached,” states the WHO website, adding, “Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.”

“‘Herd immunity’ exists when a high percentage of the population is vaccinated,” states the website, completely omitting the original meaning of “herd immunity,” which is when a population becomes immune to a virus by being exposed to it.

By changing the definition of “herd immunity,” the WHO is literally re-writing hundreds of years of scientific understanding as to what the term truly means in an apparent effort to silence any argument that herd immunity would have been a better approach to fighting COVID-19 than lockdowns and social distancing.

William Cooper was murdered for exposing all of this this thirty years ago. In this series MYSTERY BABYLON, every single thing that is happening now is explained and predicted.


Covid-19 Non-medical masks




All thoughts matter. Share yours.

%d bloggers like this: