Jerome Corsi, Deep State Conspiracy Theorist, Set to Release New Book

The new book, set to be released March 13, 2018, is already an Amazon Bestseller in the categories Political Corruption & Misconduct, Intelligence & Espionage and Commentary & Opinion.

Courtesy Amazon:

Donald Trump beat 16 Republican challengers and Hillary Rodham Clinton to win the presidency. Now he must beat the Deep State to keep his presidency. Here’s how!

#1 New York Times bestselling author of UNFIT FOR COMMAND and THE OBAMA NATION Jerome Corsi uncovers the secret conspiracy to destroy the Trump presidency and what Trump must do now to prevail.

The truth behind how well-funded hard-left extremists, the mainstream media, and Obama/Clinton holdovers in the government bureaucracy have combined with clandestine forces within the US intelligence apparatus – the “Deep State” — to block and undermine Trump’s every move. At 2:45 a.m. ET on Nov. 8, 2016, television networks announced to a stunned nation that Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral had gone for Donald Trump, making him the president-elect of the United States, defying all odds in a surreal victory that sent the Deep State into an immediate sense of panic.

By dawn on Nov. 9, 2016, the Deep State forces that expected Hillary Clinton to continue the leftist politics of Barack Obama were already planning Donald Trump’s demise.

What emerged from the hard left was a political strategy calculated to block Donald Trump from being inaugurated, and if that failed, to make sure Donald Trump would not long serve out his term as 45th President of the United States.

Investigative journalist and conspiracy expert Jerome Corsi goes into shocking detail about how this Deep State or Shadow Government secretly wields power in Washington, and why the Deep State is dangerous – capable of assassinating Trump, if efforts to impeach him or to force him to resign fail.

Corsi will also define a three-point strategy Trump — as a political independent, opposed both by Democratic Party enemies and GOP establishment — must employ to stay in office and have a chance of a successful first term in office.

Editorial reviews provided by Amazon:

“Nobody understands the Deep State like Jerome Corsi. Anyone who wants to see it dismantled, needs this book, because Trump can’t do it alone.”
—JOSEPH FARAH, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, WND.com, WND Books, WND Films
“Jerry Corsi may just be the best investigative journalist working today and this incredible book proves it.” .”
—Roger Stone, New York Times Bestselling Author
“Killing the Deep State is an explosive must-read that not only exposes the insidious nature and goals of the shadow government, but also provides a roadmap to ensuring that the will of the people – through President Trump – succeeds.”
— Ed Klein, #1 New York Times Bestselling Author

About the Author

Corsi has been quite active in promoting the Qanon phenomenon popular with conspiracy theorist. Corsi regularly decodes and interprets the “crumbs” left by “Q” on 4-chan and 8-chan. For more about the Qanon hashtag, click below:

 

Atheist Challenges Court Sentence Requiring AA Meetings as First Amendment Violation

James Lindon, a self-described Atheist and Humanist, has filed in Civil Compaint in Ohio Courts claiming state coercion to participate in religious activities by asserting his right to be free from religious compulsion. No secular alternative to participation in the Alcoholics Anonymous 12-Step program was offered to him.

The lawsuit is available to read here:

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/LindonComplaint.pdf

The Freedom from Religion Foundation addresses this subject in detail:

Court-Ordered Participation in A.A.

Can a court, prison, or probation officer sentence me to attend A.A., which is a religious program?

The trend of current case law shows that forcing a prisoner or probationer to attend A.A. or N.A. or other religiously centered rehabilitation program is increasingly seen as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Information for Prisoners and Probationers Required to Attend A.A., N.A., or Other Religiously Centered Drug and Alcohol Rehab Programs

Summary

The trend of current case law shows that forcing a prisoner or probationer to attend A.A. or N.A. or other religiously centered rehabilitation program is increasingly seen as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Courts from the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 11th Circuits have all explicitly or implicitly ruled that this is true. In order to establish such a claim, prisoners must generally show three things: (1) that the program is religious; (2) that if they do not attend the program they will either (a) lose some benefit they are otherwise entitled to or (b) be subject to some detriment or punishment; and (3) that there is no secular alternative available.

Argument

The fundamental rule of the Establishment Clause is this: “It is beyond dispute that, at a minimum, the Constitution guarantees that government may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in a way which ‘establishes a [state] religion or religious faith, or tends to do so.’” Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 587 (1992).

In analyzing cases where the state requires an individual to partake in a program with a religious element, courts applied what is called the “coercion test.” Here “only three points are crucial: first, has the state acted; second, does the action amount to coercion; and third, is the object of the coercion religious or secular?” Kerr v. Farrey, 95 F.3d 472, 479 (7th Cir. 1996).

There is a substantial body of case law recognizing that A.A. (and N.A.) is a religious body for purposes of 1st Amendment Analysis. See Cox v. United States, 296 F.3d 89, 108 n.11 (2nd Cir. 2002) (finding that A.A. is a religious organization under the Establishment clause and stating: “To the best of our knowledge, no court presented with an Establishment Clause claim implicating A.A. or a comparable therapy program incorporating religious concepts has reached a contrary [conclusion]”).

Recent trends make clear that the coercion test is the proper vehicle for analyzing claims by prisoners or probationers that they are being forced to attend Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous meetings under the threat that they will be punished or that some benefit or right will be withheld if they do not participate. See Kerr, 95 F.3d at 480; Warner v. Orange County Probation Dept., 115 F.3d. 1068 (2nd Cir. 1997); Bobko v. Lavan, 157 Fed. Appx. 517, 518 (3rd Cir. 2005) (unpublished disposition) (case dismissed where secular alternative available to defendant, court said: “The government violates the First Amedment’s Establishment Clause when it requires a prisoner to participate in a drug or alcohol rehabilitation program with a religious component”); Munson v. Norris, 435 F.3d 877, 880 (8th Cir. 2006).

Using the coercion test, a number of courts have recently found that forcing prisoners or probationers to attend Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous meetings under the threat that some benefit or right will be withheld for failing to attend is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. See Id. at 480; Warner, 115 F.3d. 1068; Turner v. Hickman, 342 F.Supp.2d 887, 893-894 (E.D. Cal. 2004); Catala v. Commissioner, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31695 (D. N.H. 2005) (unpublished disposition); Edmondson v. Curry, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45119 (D. N.H. 2006) (unpublished disposition); Rainesv. Siegelman, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15542 (M.D. Ala. 2006) (using coercion test, court found no violation where plaintiff had secular alternative); Cummings v. Darsey, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4257 (D. N.J. 2007) (unpublished disposition).

Conclusions and Recommendations

A growing body of law shows that prisoners and probationers may not be forced to attend A.A., N.A., or any other religiously based organization. Prisoners and probationers who feel they are being forced attend a religiously centered organization should request a secular alternative. If that request is denied, or if there is no secular alternative, prisoners should gather information about the program to show that it is religious in nature. Prisoners should then request that authorities not condition any benefit or threaten any punishment based on their refusal to attend the religious organization. If authorities refuse to comply, suit should be brought in Federal District Court alleging Establishment Clause violations under Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 587 (1992) and its progeny, Kerr v. Farrey, 95 F.3d 472, 479 (7th Cir. 1996), Warner v. Orange County Probation Dept., 115 F.3d. 1068 (2nd Cir. 1997), Bobko v. Lavan, 157 Fed. Appx. 517, 518 (3rd Cir. 2005), and Munson v. Norris, 435 F.3d 877, 880 (8th Cir. 2006).

With warm thanks to Michael J Fellows, Esq.

Courtesy Freedom From Religion Foundation Website:

https://ffrf.org/legal/item/14012-court-ordered-participation-in-aa

Interestingly, there are secular alternatives to Alcoholics Anonymous. In fact, Smart Recovery, a science-based, religion-free alternative was founded by humanists. To explore the Smart Recovery Program, visit https://www.smartrecovery.org/

Harvard Humanist of the Year Issues Call for Facilitators to Lead SMART Recovery Meetings

Doodle 4 Google Contest Open Until March 2nd for Grades K-12

Illustration by Melissa Crowton: “I get inspiration from all of the beautiful places around the world. Fill up the tank, hit the road, and discover the hidden treasures in your own backyard!”

Let the doodling begin

Students in grades K-12 are invited to take part in the 2018 Doodle 4 Google contest, and create an uplifting doodle that tells the world “What inspires me.” From crayons to clay, graphic design, or even food, young artists can utilize any materials to bring their creation to life. Like all Google Doodles, each doodle must incorporate the letters G-o-o-g-l-e. One national winner will receive a $30,000 college scholarship, a $50,000 technology package for their school/non-profit organization, and a behind-the-scenes experience with the Doodle team to transform their Doodle into an interactive experience on Google.com. The contest is open for entries until from March 2nd, 2018.

Contest info:

https://doodles.google.com/d4g/?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=HPP2&utm_campaign=D4G2018

Gallery:

https://www.google.com/doodles/

 

Donald Trump Jokes About Bald Spot at CPAC

President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump  in China (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

From the official White House Transcript:

“By the way, what a nice picture that is.  Look at that.  I’d love to watch that guy speak.  (Laughter.)  Oh, boy.  That’s a — I try like hell to hide that bald spot, folks.  I work hard at it.  (Applause.)  It doesn’t look bad.  Hey, we’re hanging in.  We’re hanging in.  We’re hanging in there, right?  Together, we’re hanging in.”

http://metro.co.uk/video/video-trump-boarding-plane-shows-bald-patch-1623486/?ito=vjs-link

Full remarks:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-conservative-political-action-conference-2/

Milo’s Publishing House, Dangerous Books, Announces 2018 Line-Up: New Releases by Two NY Times Bestselling Authors, Expansion into Graphic Novels & More

February 23, 2018 (Miami, FL):  Dangerous Books, the publishing house founded by Milo Yiannopoulos in 2017, today announced its publishing line-up for 2018. The independent book publisher will release five titles in 2018, including one graphic novel and two books by New York Times bestselling authors.

“Earlier this week, I ended my lawsuit against Simon & Schuster and pledged instead that I would be focusing in bringing conservative authors to consumers,” said MILO. “Today I am honoring that pledge by revealing our 2018 slate of authors.”

The 2018 line-up includes:

  • CATHOLIC REPUBLIC: Why America Will Perish Without Rome, by Timothy Gordon (March)
  • REAGAN: The American President, by #1 New York Times bestselling author Larry Schweikart (July)
  • AYN RAND’s ANTHEM: The Graphic Novel, Adapted by Jennifer Grossman and Dan Parsons (August)
  • DESPICABLE, by New York Times bestselling author Milo Yiannopoulos (September)
  • WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS, by Laura Loomer (October)

REAGAN: The American President will be released July 4th and will be on every patriot’s summer reading list. REAGAN draws on never-before-seen evidence from the Reagan Library and other documentary sources  and reveals Reagan as the statesman of genius and conviction who won the Cold War and forged the modern era. “Ronald Reagan was an intellectual and a visionary who saw that America’s exceptional founding was the key to its success, and its confidence in the future more powerful than military might or silos full of missiles,” said Larry Schweikart, the #1 New York Timesbestselling author of The Patriot’s History of the United States. “”I am excited to form a new partnership with Dangerous Books to bring you this new look at the greatest president of the 20th century.”

AYN RAND’S ANTHEM is scheduled to release at the start of the 2018 school year. The graphic novel was created in cooperation with The Atlas Society,  the not-for-profit foundation that promotes open Objectivism, the philosophy of reason, individualism, achievement, and freedom originated by Ayn Rand. “The dramatic sequencing and artistic rendering of this production will appeal to all ages, but we crafted the graphics specifically for a YA (Young Adult) audience who already consume comics and have historically enjoyed this novella,” said Jennifer Grossman, author of the adaptation and president of the Atlas Society.

ABOUT DANGEROUS BOOKS

Dangerous Books was founded with a single mission: to publish the bold titles that the existing publishers were too squeamish to touch. In July 2017 Dangerous Books released its first book, DANGEROUS by Milo Yiannopoulos. DANGEROUS shipped over 100,000 copies and was a #1 Amazon bestseller, #1 Publishers Weekly bestseller, and #2 New York Times bestseller and was named one of the ten most important conservative books of the year by Conservative Book Club. DANGEROUS was followed by FATWA: Hunted in America, the memoir of free speech advocate and anti-Sharia crusader Pamela Geller.  Today, Dangerous Books is the premier home for courageous stories by divisive, daring, and dangerous authors. For more information, visit www.dangerous-books.com or email us.

ABOUT CATHOLIC REPUBLIC

The symptoms of America’s decline are all around us. Few, if any, have sought to explain the origin of all of these problems at once. In Catholic Republic, Timothy Gordon argues that America’s premature withering could have been avoided if only the founders had fully incorporated into the new republic the Catholic natural law. CATHOLIC REPUBLIC is available for pre-order now with softcover and e-book release March 2018

ABOUT REAGAN: THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT

Drawing on never-before-seen evidence from the Reagan Library and other documentary sources, #1 New York Times best-selling author Larry Schweikart reveals Reagan as the statesman of genius and conviction who won the Cold War and forged the modern era. REAGAN is available for pre-order nowwith hardcover, e-book, and audiobook release on July 4 2018.

ABOUT AYN RAND’S ANTHEM

Imagine a world where man has neither independence nor individuality, existing merely as part of a great collective “WE” that lives and dies for the State. In this world, any man who speaks the forbidden word “I” is marked for death. This is the world of ANTHEM, Ayn Rand’s dystopian science-fiction masterpiece, available now as a graphic novel created by the Atlas Society and published by Dangerous Books. AYN RAND’S ANTHEM will become available for pre-order in May 2018 with softcover release August 2018.

ABOUT DESPICABLE

MILO follows up his New York Times bestselling book DANGEROUS with DESPICABLE, an investigation into the ugly sexual abuse culture in Hollywood that has enabled monsters to ruin lives for decades — and into the journalists and politicians that made it possible. Despicable is available for pre-order now at www.dangerous.com and will be released in hardcover, e-book, and audiobook in September 2018.

ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS

Citizen journalist and investigative reporter Laura Loomer explores the events surrounding the Mandalay Bay Massacre. She reveals an intricate web of cover-ups, conspiracies, and collusion between law enforcement, local politicians, and casino operators designed to ensure that what happens in Vegas stays unknown. WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS will be available for pre-order in July 2018 with release in hardcover, e-book, and audiobook in October 2018.

 

Florida Students & “Never Again”: A Teachable Moment

As the students from Florida are so eager to organize in the movement they are calling #NeverAgain, I, as a former teacher, would make some suggestions as to what I would do.

First, I would guide them. They want change. They want to be heard. How can we make that happen? I would develop a curriculum suited to helping them through this time.

First, I would take them as a large group and we would view the 2015 Frontline Documentary “Gunned Down: The Power of the NRA.” Why? Because it lays out the difficulty of changing gun laws even in the wake of previous horrible mass shootings and even with President Obama in power.

Second, we would go to the website Sandyhookpromise.com. Why? Because we do not need to reinvent the wheel—some of the work is done for us.

Third, we would jointly write a mission statement. What can we all agree on that we want to see happen? This would be subject to revision.

Fourth, we would divide into small study groups each tasked with a different issue to report back to the larger group. Study groups might include:

History/timeline of school/mass shootings. Any similarities? Is it escalating?

Scientific studies about school/mass shootings. What do we know statistically? What does the science say about causes and influencers? Make sure our resources are valid and unbiased.

What about the people who say it’s not the gun, it’s the person behind the gun? Is that a valid argument? How do we answer that with science and statistics?

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/lone-wolf-attacks-are-becoming-more-common-and-more-deadly/

How are gun laws made? Are there both federal laws and state laws that we have to address? If yes, we may need two groups—one that reports back on what the federal gun laws are and one that reports back on state-specific gun laws.

What pending legislation is there right now? How can we help support it if it aligns with our goals?

What are the guns we are concerned about? Assault rifles only? Automatic vs. semi-automatic? What are we specifically asking for?

What is the FBI profile of the school shooter? Make contact with local FBI office for a face-to-face meeting and any available documents to read and report back on.

Mental health laws—what are they and are they being properly enforced? Are we at risk of a copycat?

Are we being kind to our fellow students? Is bullying playing a role? Can we improve? How do we reach out to the loner?

How do we best influence our lawmakers? Letter writing campaigns? Personal meetings? Hosting them at our school? Who are the decision makers we need to target?

What financial resources do we have and how can we best use them? Is pouring money into a March the best way to use our funds? Or should we use it for filmmaking, public service announcements, social media campaigns, travel to meet our legislators? Do a cost benefit analysis.

What are other countries doing about gun laws and gun violence? See comparative studies. If guns are removed, does another kind of violence take its place?

Do we need designated spokespeople? Some students will be more comfortable and prepared in front of a group—some will be more comfortable and prepared in a debate. Find our strengths for public relations.

Be diplomatic. Avoid hostility on social media. Constructively critique each other. For example, saying things like “I think the NRA likes these mass shootings,” or “if you don’t agree with me, then you want to murder kids”—that only alienates your audience. Don’t yell at others. Be civil and earn respect.

Prepare group reports and report back to the large group. Revise mission statement. Move ahead with a solid and workable plan and go for it.

That’s just a rough sketch–but these “kids” do need support and guidance. I hope they receive it while they have the momentum.

And also… before any of this, they need any and all available counseling and emotional support. Most of us will never see the devastation these children saw.

 

Milo Reschedules Phoenix Event; Claims Antifa Violence a Factor; Antifa Responds

Courtesy Milo Yiannopoulos, Facebook:

My nearly sold out Phoenix event has been moved to Friday, March 2nd.

Here’s why:
The company hired to run production has pulled out due to threats of violence, and the new company simply wants the time to properly ensure everyone’s safety.

There are absolutely no venue issues and this event WILL NOT be cancelled. All purchased tickets and upgrades will be honored. If you haven’t purchased your tickets yet – GET ON IT, because like all my other live events, this will sell out in advance!

Buy Tickets – http://anightwithmilo.com/event/A-Night-With-MILO
RSVP – http://facebook.com/events/1051668664974320/

Email nightwithmilo@gmail.com for any further questions!


Phoenix’s Antifa group responds on Twitter, claiming this is the third time they have shut Milo down:

Study: Lead and other toxic metals found in e-cigarette ‘vapors’

Photo courtesy Slick Vapes.

Potentially dangerous levels of metals leak from some e-cigarette heating coils

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH

Significant amounts of toxic metals, including lead, leak from some e-cigarette heating coils and are present in the aerosols inhaled by users, according to a study from scientists at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

In the study, published online in Environmental Health Perspectives on February 21, the scientists examined e-cigarette devices owned by a sample of 56 users. They found that significant numbers of the devices generated aerosols with potentially unsafe levels of lead, chromium, manganese and/or nickel. Chronic inhalation of these metals has been linked to lung, liver, immune, cardiovascular and brain damage, and even cancers.

The Food and Drug Administration has the authority to regulate e-cigarettes but is still considering how to do so. The finding that e-cigarettes expose users–known as vapers–to what may be harmful levels of toxic metals could make this issue a focus of future FDA rules.

“It’s important for the FDA, the e-cigarette companies and vapers themselves to know that these heating coils, as currently made, seem to be leaking toxic metals–which then get into the aerosols that vapers inhale,” says study senior author Ana María Rule, PhD, MHS, an assistant scientist in the Bloomberg School’s Department of Environmental Health and Engineering.

E-cigarettes typically use a battery-supplied electric current that passes through a metal coil to heat nicotine-containing “e-liquids,” creating an aerosol–a mix including vaporized e-liquid and tiny liquid droplets. Vaping, the practice of inhaling this aerosol as if it were cigarette smoke, is now popular especially among teens, young adults and former smokers. A 2017 survey of 8th-, 10th- and 12th-grade students in public and private schools, sponsored by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, found that about one in six had used e-cigarettes in the previous 30 days.

Vaping is popular in part because it provides the nicotine “hit” and the look and feel of tobacco-smoking but without smoking’s extreme health risks. Evidence that vaping isn’t entirely safe continues to accumulate, however. Recent studies have found that e-cigarette liquids contain flavorings and other chemicals that harm cells in standard toxicology tests. Other studies, including one last year from Rule’s group, have detected significant levels of toxic metals in e-liquids exposed to the e-cigarette heating coil.

For the new study, Rule and her colleagues, including lead author Pablo Olmedo, PhD, who was a postdoctoral researcher at the Bloomberg School at the time of his work on the study, recruited 56 daily e-cigarette users from vaping conventions and e-cigarette shops around Baltimore during the fall of 2015. Working with participants’ devices, which they brought to the researchers’ lab at the Bloomberg School, the scientists tested for the presence of 15 metals in the e-liquids in the vapers’ refilling dispensers, the e-liquids in their coil-containing e-cigarette tanks and in the generated aerosols.

Consistent with prior studies, they found minimal amounts of metals in the e-liquids within refilling dispensers, but much larger amounts of some metals in the e-liquids that had been exposed to the heating coils within e-cigarette tanks. The difference indicated that the metals almost certainly had come from the coils. Most importantly, the scientists showed that the metal contamination carried over to the aerosols produced by heating the e-liquids.

Of the metals significantly present in the aerosols, lead, chromium, nickel and manganese were the ones of most concern, as all are toxic when inhaled. The median lead concentration in the aerosols, for example, was about 15 μg/kg, or more than 25 times greater than the median level in the refill dispensers. Almost 50 percent of aerosol samples had lead concentrations higher than health-based limits defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. Similarly, median aerosol concentrations of nickel, chromium and manganese approached or exceeded safe limits.

“These were median levels only,” Rule says. “The actual levels of these metals varied greatly from sample to sample, and often were much higher than safe limits.”

E-cigarette heating coils typically are made of nickel, chromium and a few other elements, making them the most obvious sources of metal contamination, although the source of the lead remains a mystery. Precisely how metals get from the coil into the surrounding e-liquid is another mystery. “We don’t know yet whether metals are chemically leaching from the coil or vaporizing when it’s heated,” Rule says. In an earlier study of the 56 vapers, led by Angela Aherrera, MPH, a DrPH student at the Bloomberg School, the levels of nickel and chromium in urine and saliva were related to those measured in the aerosol, confirming that e-cigarette users are exposed to these metals.

The researchers did observe, however, that aerosol metal concentrations tended to be higher for e-cigarettes with more frequently changed coils–suggesting that fresher coils give off metals more readily.

The researchers also detected significant levels of arsenic, a metal-like element that can be highly toxic, in refill e-liquid and in the corresponding tank e-liquid and aerosol samples from 10 of the 56 vapers. How the arsenic got into these e-liquids is yet another mystery–and another potential focus for regulators.

Rule and her team are now planning further studies of vaping and metal exposures, with particular attention to their impacts on people. “We’ve established with this study that there are exposures to these metals, which is the first step, but we need also to determine the actual health effects,” she says.

###

“Metal Concentrations in e-Cigarette Liquid and Aerosol Samples: The Contribution of Metallic Coils” was written by Pablo Olmedo, Walter Goessler, Stefan Tanda, Maria Grau-Perez, Stephanie Jarmul, Angela Aherrera, Rui Chen, Markus Hilpert, Joanna E. Cohen, Ana Navas-Acien, and Ana M. Rule.

Support for the research was provided by the Maryland State Cigarette Restitution Fund (PHPA-G2034), the Alfonso Martín Escudero Foundation, the American Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center (1P50HL120163), and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (5P30ES009089).

Lawrence Krauss: Dissecting the Buzzfeed Article on Sexual Misconduct

First off, do you know who Lawrence Krauss is? I’ve seen many comments with folks commenting that they’ve never even heard of him. His professional biography, published on Arizona State University’s website, may be found here:

http://krauss.faculty.asu.edu/

Secondly, on February 22, 2018, Buzzfeed published an article by By Peter Aldhous (BuzzFeed News Reporter) Azeen Ghorayshi (BuzzFeed News Reporter) Virginia Hughes (BuzzFeed News Science Editor). The article is titled, “The Unbeliever” and subheaded with the following:

“He Became A Celebrity For Putting Science Before God. Now Lawrence Krauss Faces Allegations Of Sexual Misconduct.

Lawrence Krauss is a famous atheist and liberal crusader — and, in certain whisper networks, a well-known problem. With women coming forward alleging sexual harassment, will his “skeptic” fanbase believe the evidence?”

Here is a link to the full article:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhous/lawrence-krauss-sexual-harassment-allegations?utm_term=.iwgqBEdxL#.imwGJEpQZ

Third, is Buzzfeed a reliable source? I like to use Media Bias Fact Check when I look at a publication. The website says Buzzfeed is classified as having a left-center bias with a Mixed rating on factual reporting but is “generally trustworthy.”

From the Media Bias website:
LEFT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias.  They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes.  These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: Buzzfeed is an internet media company that focuses on entertainment, but does have content for breaking news and politics. Buzzfeed occasionally uses loaded words with a left bias in headlines/articles and has failed a fact check. Buzzfeed has also been known to rush stories that are not verified and then have to retract them. For the most part, Buzzfeed is factual and very well sourced. If not for a few minor blemishes Buzzfeed would be listed as High for factual reporting. Overall, Buzzfeed is a left leaning source that is almost always accurate in reporting, however our criteria dictates that a source that fails a fact check must be rated factually mixed. Buzzfeed is generally trustworthy, but it is recommended to check other sources to verify their stories. (6/30/2016) Updated (12/22/17)

Fourth, I found it odd that Buzzfeed put “skeptic” in quotation marks.

Let’s clarify the terms skeptic and skepticism:

Merriam Webster:

Definition of skeptic

1 : an adherent or advocate of skepticism

2 : a person disposed to skepticism especially regarding religion or religious principles

Definition of skepticism

1 : an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object

2 a : the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain

b : the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism characteristic of skeptics

3 : doubt concerning basic religious principles (such as immortality, providence, and revelation)

Skepticism also has more than one branch.

Examples of major types:

Philosophical Skepticism—final truths are unknowable. I include Moral Skepticism under this heading, although others might view it as a separate area of study.

Religious Skepticism—questioning faith-based claims. A religious skeptic is not always an atheist. The two terms are commonly misused as interchangeable.

Scientific Skepticism-applying scientific inquiry and scientific method to prove knowledge. This would include debunkers such as Martin Gardner, the Amazing Randi, Penn & Teller or the popular “Mythbusters.” It also questions pseudoscience claims such as homeopathy.

So… that said, it appears that Buzzfeed uses the terms skeptic and atheist as the same thing, and that is simply incorrect.

So, back to dissecting the article:

Skeptics want evidence. Skeptics ask, “Is it true?”

Buzzfeed’s subhead quotes “whisper networks”:  “Lawrence Krauss is a famous atheist and liberal crusader — and, in certain whisper networks, a well-known problem.”

Are “whisper networks” reliable evidence? Nope.

The next line in the subhead reads, “With women coming forward alleging sexual harassment, will his ‘skeptic’  fanbase believe the evidence?”

Huh? Why wouldn’t skeptics believe reliable evidence, whether part of Krauss’s fanbase or not? But it’s got to be more than the whisper network. There is no secret oath among skeptics to deny truth or cover it up if someone is accused of sexual misconduct.

Fortunately, the Buzzfeed authors go on to present the evidence beyond just whispers and innuendo.

First up is the account of Melody Hensley. The details are in the full story so I won’t rehash them here.

Hensley: “’It was definitely predatory,’ she said. ‘I didn’t want that to happen. It wasn’t consensual.’”

Krauss: “Krauss told BuzzFeed News that what happened with Hensley in the hotel room was consensual. In that room, ‘we mutually decided, in a polite discussion in fact, that taking it any further would not be appropriate,’ he told BuzzFeed News by email.”

Now what? In the classic sense of a “he said/she said” situation, the skeptic is going to look at this situation and say truth is unknowable. Dig deeper, please. (Hence, some skeptics, male and female, have been criticized for not fully embracing the #MeToo movement that asserts we must believe everyone, regardless of the evidence. The victim is always correct and truthful. No need to look under the hood.)

Ok, so that being said, things look a little more convincing when Buzzfeed claims the following: “In response to complaints, two institutions — Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, and the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Ontario — have quietly restricted him from their campuses. Our reporting is based on official university documents, emails, and interviews with more than 50 people.”

That sounds like pretty damning evidence. The only documentation lacking would be independent verification by these institutions, which may happen, or a look at these documents and emails. But, clearly, this is moving in the direction of reliable evidence, which is all the skeptic wants to see. Buzzfeed fairly notes, “In lengthy emails to BuzzFeed News, Krauss denied all of the accusations against him, calling them ‘false and misleading defamatory allegations.’”

But then the article seems to take a weird turn, and it feels like an attack on the skeptic community in general:

First, it defines skeptics as rejecting all forms of faith:

“Although not a household name, Lawrence Krauss is a big shot among skeptics, a community that rejects all forms of faith — from religion and the supernatural, to unproven alternative medicines, to testimonials based on memory and anecdote — in favor of hard evidence, reason, and science.”

As illustrated above, this is not true. Case in point: Martin Gardner, considered by many to be the founder of the modern scientific skeptic movement, was a believer who wrote the essay, “Why I Am Not An Atheist.” Similarly, Carl Sagan disavowed atheism.

Next, Buzzfeed claims: “The skeptics draw heavily from traditionally male groups: scientists, philosophers, and libertarians, as well as geeky subcultures like gamers and sci-fi enthusiasts.” Traditionally male groups? Skepticism, questioning, inquiry, doubt—these are not the domains of males only. The suggestion that women can’t think critically with the best of them is insulting. Gamers and sci-fi enthusiasts? I don’t even know where that idea comes from. Skepticism has nothing to do with hobbies.

Then the article proceeds to pronounce the skeptic movement to be fracturing:

“But today the movement is fracturing, with some of its most prominent members now attacking identity politics and ‘social justice warriors’ in the name of free speech.”

Doesn’t fracturing mean falling apart? As a good skeptic, I return to Merriam-Webster:

Definition of fracture

1 : the result of fracturing : break

2 a : the act or process of breaking or the state of being broken; especially : the breaking of hard tissue (such as bone)

b : the rupture (as by tearing) of soft tissue kidney fracture

3 : the general appearance of a freshly broken surface of a mineral

Huh? So the skeptic movement is being broken apart by valuing and protecting free speech? The skeptic movement is broken for believing in discourse, debate and open-mindedness?

I’ll just leave you with this 20 minute talk on the value of free speech and free exchange of ideas by Christopher Hitchens. If you have time, it is wonderful.

Next, Buzzfeed goes with the anti-Muslim allegations so often leveled against religious skeptics. Oh brother. How many times does it have to be said. I’ll just quote Richard Dawkins here: “I am known as a frequent critic of Christianity and have never been de-platformed for that. Why do you give Islam a free pass? Why is it fine to criticise Christianity but not Islam?”

Next, we get to a paragraph that levels so many accusations, I don’t know if I can handle them all in one sitting:

“Famous freethinkers have been criticized for anti-Muslim sentiment (addressed that with Dawkins), for cheering the alt-right media personality Milo Yiannopoulos (Milo does not identify as alt-right and yeah, free speech), and for lampooning feminism and gender theory (that’s the area of the evolutionary biologists and not all skeptics speak on this topic. It is extremely complex and academic in nature).”

Next: “Several women, after sharing personal accounts of misogyny and harassment by men in the skeptic community, have been subjected to Gamergate-style online attacks, including rape and death threats.” If that is true, it is not coming from decent human beings. Prominent faces in the skeptic community, male and female, black, brown and white, do not participate in name calling and certainly don’t threaten rape or death. Ridiculous. Look at Jordan Peterson’s Twitter. A British journalist recently claimed she was harassed after interviewing Peterson, and he absolutely denounced it.

And for the kicker: “As a result, some commentators have accused parts of the movement of sliding into the alt-right.” Bleh. This was recently addressed by Sam Harris, when folks who openly identified as alt-right co-opted Steven Pinker by clipping out some YouTube comment and making it seem like he was a Nazi or some other nonsense. The New York Times even ran an opinion piece called “Social Media is Making Us Dumber” about this silliness.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/opinion/social-media-dumber-steven-pinker.html

Clearly, sexual misconduct is everywhere, and coming from many sides. Smearing an entire community, though, is just plain—what’s the scientific word—goofy.

——

UPDATE: ASU has received no complaints from ASU students, faculty or staff related to Lawrence Krauss. The university has initiated a review in an attempt to discern the facts. We encourage anyone who has concerns about faculty, staff or students to report those concerns.

11:18 AM – 23 Feb 2018

Official statement from Lawrence Krauss published 3.7.18

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IgAGpkAa2vwSMOtFD4iAfwfryTNJbJ_5/view

UPDATE JULY 31, 2018

Arizona State University has investigated a complaint regarding allegations that Krauss touched the breast of a woman attending a conference in Australia in 2016. ASU ruled the incident is a violation of the university’s sexual harrassment policy. On page 2 of the review, there is a note that the woman involved in the incident had not wanted to make a report and did not feel the incident merited losing one’s job. However, witnesses felt the incident was reportable. The full letter and review is here:

http://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Melanie%20Thomson%207.31.18.pdf

Update October 21, 2018

Full results of ASU’s findings may be found here courtesy of Buzzfeed:

Krauss responds to these allegations here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10lHwatvaGfmWNc3NdoioncYi7daK1a-M/view

 

 

‘Too controversial’: Polk State College rejects professor’s anti-Trump artwork

Detail from “Death of Innocence” by Serhat Tanyolacar

“Tanyolacar submitted a piece titled “Death of Innocence,” which depicts several poets and writers juxtaposed with a number of pictures of President Donald Trump and other political figures engaging in sexual activity.”

By  February 20, 2018

LAKELAND, Fla., Feb. 20, 2018 — Free expression on campus isn’t childproofed — except at Polk State College, where part-time faculty member Serhat Tanyolacar’s artwork was rejected from a faculty art exhibition for being “too controversial.”

In early January, Polk State encouraged all faculty members in its arts program, including Tanyolacar, to submit artwork to a faculty exhibition scheduled to begin on Feb. 12. Tanyolacar submitted a piece titled “Death of Innocence,” which depicts several poets and writers juxtaposed with a number of pictures of President Donald Trump and other political figures engaging in sexual activity. Tanyolacar said the art is intended to highlight “moral corruption and moral dichotomy” and provoke debate.

In response to his submission, Polk State Program Coordinator Nancy Lozell informed Tanyolacar on Feb. 6 that his artwork would not be displayed. “After review by the gallery committee and the gallery administrator it was agreed upon that your piece Death of Innocence should not be displayed,” Lozell wrote, because the college “offers classes and volunteer opportunities to our collegiate charter high schools and other high schools in Polk county and we feel that that particular piece would be too controversial to display at this time.”

Serhat Tanyolacar
Death of Innocence (2017)
Suite of four relief engraving prints (unique edition)
96×48 inches

———————

This is a color version of the work (not the version to appear in the exhibit) which shows in better detail the controversial content. This is courtesy Serhat Tanyolacar’s official artist’s Facebook page.

FIRE and the National Coalition Against Censorship wrote to Polk State President Angela Garcia Falconetti on Feb. 14, asking the college to reassess Tanyolacar’s submitted artwork in a viewpoint-neutral manner.

“Members of the Polk State campus are not children, and they should not be treated as such,” said FIRE Senior Program Officer Sarah McLaughlin. “By sanitizing its campus to shield high school students from ‘controversial’ material in a faculty art exhibition, Polk State harms members of the college community by needlessly childproofing their campus, and high school students by underestimating their ability to cope with contentious or provocative artwork.”

In a Feb. 16 meeting, Tanyolacar discussed “Death of Innocence” with Falconetti, Interim Vice President of Academic Affairs Donald Painter, Jr., and Professor of Art Holly Scoggins. The administrators offered shifting justifications for the rejection of the piece, but again made clear that its “controversial” nature played a part in the decision. They reaffirmed that the faculty art exhibition — which opened on Feb. 12 — would not display “Death of Innocence.”

“For ‘Death of Innocence,’ my gallery display strategy is to engage dialogues with both the audience who appreciate the controversial imagery and the audience who may be offended by it,” Tanyolacar said. “No artwork should be barred from being exposed to the general audience in any academic institution. As educators and artists we must accept that our students cannot be protected or disconnected from the ideological controversies by the institutionalized moral authority. In fact, controversial artworks are essential to the intellectual growth of our students, and displaying them should be encouraged by both the administration and the faculty.”

This is not Tanyolacar’s first campus art controversy. As a visiting assistant professor at the University of Iowa in 2014, Tanyolacar attempted to spark a debate about racial issues in the United States by placing a piece of public art consisting of newspaper clippings about racial violence printed on a Ku Klux Klan-style robe and hood in an open, outdoor area of campus and engaging with viewers about it. In response to student complaints, UI officials required Tanyolacar to remove the artwork, prompting FIRE and NCAC to call on the university to restate its commitment to freedom of expression.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending liberty, freedom of speech, due process, academic freedom, legal equality, and freedom of conscience on America’s college campuses.

The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), founded in 1974, is an alliance of 56 national nonprofit organizations, including literary, artistic, religious, educational, professional, labor, and civil liberties groups dedicated to promoting the right to free speech. More information on its nationwide work combating censorship can be found at ncac.org.