Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” – Former CIA Director William Casey
This is a follow up to our last report based on a tip sent to us by a viewer who wanted to know how it was okay that the largest elementary school in Dallas put up a giant cell phone tower right on the basketball court next to the playground.
After we released the video, lots of people sent us tips from one side of the nation to the other.
These cell towers are being placed on school property — next to even preschool playgrounds and sometimes directly on the rooftops of the schools themselves — all over America.
With no long-term studies for safety, troubling health data pointing to everything from cancer to negative impacts on the immune system to impairing hormone function — why?
Why is there such a concerted, nationwide push to place these dangerous towers right next to our growing children in the very buildings they spend all their time in during the week?
Well…there is one theory…but you aren’t going to like it.
For more on this, check out the source docs on Stopthecrime.net.
Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton created TruthstreamMedia.com, where this first appeared, as an outlet to examine the news, uncover the deceptions, pierce through the fabric of illusions, know the real enemy, unshackle from the system, and begin to imagine the path towards taking back our lives, one step at a time, so that one day we might truly be free…
“Children eligible for expanded Medicaid contribute more in taxes as adults” (In other words, children who think the state is mommy and daddy feel more obligated to it)
The study is based on an analysis of tax returns for nearly all children born in the United States from 1981 to 1984. It compared children from similar backgrounds who were eligible for Medicaid for different lengths of time, depending on where and when they were born.
Medicaid, which began in 1965, is a public health insurance program for low-income people. It expanded dramatically in the 1980s and again in the 1990s, with the establishment of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. Historically, states have set different eligibility thresholds for Medicaid.
Yale University economist Amanda Kowalski, one of the study’s co-authors, said the research has implications for today’s Medicaid landscape, as well. “Although it will take years to know the long-term impact of current expansions of Medicaid undertaken as part of the Affordable Care Act, this study shows that the investments that the government made in Medicaid in the 1980s and 1990s are paying off in the form of higher tax payments now,” Kowalski said.
According to the study, the federal government recouped 14 cents for each dollar spent on childhood Medicaid by the time the children reached age 28. Assuming these higher tax payments persist, the federal government would recoup 56 cents on each dollar by the time these children reach age 60.
Children eligible for more years of Medicaid made higher combined income and payroll tax payments as adults, the study found. They also collected less from the Earned Income Tax Credit, and females had higher cumulative wages.
In addition to Kowalski, who also is affiliated with the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the study’s co-authors are David Brown and Ithai Lurie, from the Office of Tax Analysis at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. The study was released Jan. 12 as an NBER Working Paper.
The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in the study are entirely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Feds: Parents, public schools don’t mix
Michael F. Haverluck (OneNewsNow.com)
It’s becoming more and more commonplace: parents being ushered out the door of their children’s educational life. But a Virginia-based nonprofit is working on legislation to counter that trend.
Other than dropping their kids off at school and purchasing their school supplies, parents’ roles in their children’s education is becoming marginalized to the point where their input on curriculum, assistance in homework, and ability to opt them out of offensive curriculum is overstepping their authority over students – which the federal government says belongs to them.
Becoming more apparent than ever under the federal government’s Common Core, parents of publicly schooled children are deemed unfit to have any say in their children’s education, which is something to be left up to the “experts,” according to ParentalRights.org, a Christian nonprofit organization based in Purcellville, Virginia, dedicated to protecting children by empowering parents.
“It is no accident, no coincidence … and it’s not just your imagination,” insists Michael Ramey, director of communications and research for ParentalRights.org. “There really is a steady trend by the government and the courts to remove the influence of parents from the public schools.”
Disarming those believing that this warning is some kind of right-wing conspiracy theory, Ramey argues that the complete government takeover of public schools and the children they train has arrived, and it’s no secret with the implementation of the federally imposed Common Core and fairly recent court decisions from the government’s judicial branch.
“I’m not saying your child’s teacher or principal, or even your local school board, is out to get you … Nor am I suggesting some giant system-wide conspiracy, where some shadow organization is secretly working through all different channels to rob you of your rights,” Ramey assures. “It is something bigger and more dangerous than that.”
According to officials funded by the tax dollars they pay, parents don’t have their children’s best interest at heart when it comes to their education.
“What we are witnessing is the rise of an ideology, a statist mindset that actually believes that ‘expert’ agents of the state can make better decisions for your child than you can,” Ramey declares.
Good ruling from the past, grueling rulings from the present
Ramey says courtroom decisions affirming parental authority over their children’s education from decades ago are a thing of the past.
“In 1979, the Supreme Court held, ‘The statist notion that governmental power should supersede parental authority in all cases because some parents abuse and neglect children is repugnant to American tradition’ (Parham v. J.R., 1979),” Ramey informs. “Unfortunately, a growing, powerful minority no longer finds that idea repugnant today.”
In an alleged ruse to gain full control of children and instruct them with whatever indoctrination tools they see fit, government officials over education are declaring parents irrelevant and incompetent when it comes to training children to become productive members of society.
“Instead, they argue that because not all parents are experts in education, parents should not be trusted with educational decisions for their child,” Ramey continues. “[They say] education is far too important; it must be kept in the hands of the experts.”
Evidence for this evolution in thinking when it comes to parental involvement in education comes from landmark court decisions within the past decade.
“This trend is seen in court cases such as Fields v. Palmdale (2005), which held that parents have no say in what, when or how their children are taught about controversial subjects in the public schools,” Ramey explains. “[A]nd Parker v. Hurley (2007) … held that parents have no right to opt their children out of objectionable material, even if it does not involve a core curricular subject.”
Even more recent machinations by lawmakers have targeted parents who want to withdraw their children from the overreaching public school system, ruling that their tax dollars collected for public education cannot be used to instruct their children outside the state-run schools.
“It is also seen in legislative action, such as Congress’ 2009 defunding of a voucher program in DC that allowed low-income families to make school choices for their children.” Ramey points out. “And that perfectly parallels a lawsuit brought in 2013 by the federal government against the state of Louisiana in an attempt to end a similar educational choice program in that state.”
Ramey emphasizes the fact that he covered all three branches of the federal government – judicial, legislative and executive – which have had their hand in removing the hands of parents from their children’s education.
Overreaching to the Core
The federal government isn’t the only entity that has had its hand in public education and shown a vested interest in America’s youth. It has recently joined hands with the private business sector to grab more control of children through “educational” polices and materials administered through the Common Core – a federal instructional program that all states must adopt … or surrender their eligibility for millions in federally issued education funds.
“Perhaps the greatest example of this intrusive statist mindset, however, has been the push to adopt the Common Core State Standards,” Ramey explains. “Conceived by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and fleshed out by trade unions in DC, the Common Core includes ‘curriculum standards’ that all states must adopt in order to be eligible for federal ‘Race to the Top’ education dollars.”
As if parents didn’t think their control over their children’s education wasn’t usurped enough by teachers, school districts and the departments of education, a higher authority is now claiming its stake as the chief controller over children’s education – and it’s using the Common Core as tool to do it.
“Under Common Core, local school districts and even state departments of education are losing authority over education decisions to a smaller and more centralized group of ‘experts’ who are further away from and less accountable to the real experts – the parents and local school teachers who know those children and work to meet their needs every day,” Ramey asserts.
For progressives not believing the Common Core is overreaching enough, it works hand-in-hand with a high-maintenance (and high-priced) digital information system that tracks children – a system through which world governments have all the data they need on those within its system.
“Common Core is also coupled with a scheme to create a national database of American students,” Ramey notes. “Proponents claim it will allow educators to tailor curriculum to the individual student’s needs – but critics see it as a ploy to help big businesses exploit student data for advertising revenue.”
And just how many states already ascribe to the federal government’s Common Core? Currently 42 states plus the District of Columbia are fully on board with the Common Core. The initial number was 45, but Oklahoma, Indiana and South Carolina withdrew their allegiance after seeing its detrimental effects on student learning and development. Minnesota has partially adopted with the Common Core minus Math standards. The four states that have never adopted the Common Core are Texas, Virginia, Nebraska and Alaska. All the remaining states have completely signed on, but some are having second thoughts.
“Fortunately, parents have started to push back,” Ramey shares. “Several states that adopted the Common Core have since reversed that decision; five states declined to adopt it in the first place. And other states where Common Core was implemented this school year are still seeing parents and lawmakers pushing to retake control of education from the centralized federal powers behind this program.”
Instead of sitting back and watching or lamenting over the landslide of parental rights in the public school system, ParentalRights.org is working on legislation this year to usher children back under the control of their parents when it comes to education.
“The ultimate way to push back … will come in 2015 with [ParentalRights.org’s] newly concerted effort to push the Parental Rights Amendment through the U.S. Congress,” Ramey says. “This Amendment to the Constitution will secure the ‘fundamental right’ of parents ‘to direct the upbringing, education and care of their children,’ including ‘the right to choose public, private, religious or home schools, and the right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one’s child.'”
Ramey says that rulings such as Fields and Parker that usurp parental authority to make choices in the children’s education should not be left uncontested and that the Parental Rights Amendment will help ensure that parents will no longer experience the inability to influence the culture and teachings in their children’s educational environment.
“Your tax dollars pay for the public schools,” he contends. “Yet elitist bureaucrats are making them unsafe for parental rights while pushing their own statist worldview. And anywhere unsafe for parents is unsafe for children.”
Ramey insists that by standing up for the fundamental rights of parents to have a say in their children’s education, the government takeover can stop dead in its tracks.
“Together, we [must] reverse this trend and restore the rights of parents in the education of their children,” Ramey exhorts parents and freedom-loving Americans.
This Is What Happens When We Lock Children in Solitary Confinement
“That place mentally messed me up,” a teen recalls of his 82 days in the hole. “I really wanted to die. I felt hopeless.”
One night in March 2013, a 17-year-old named Kenny was walking with a friend through farm country in Reilly Township, Ohio. The boys had been drinking and were checking car doors in the hope of finding a little money when they came across a pickup with keys in the ignition. They decided to take it for a spin.
If you hadn’t guessed by now, Kenny wasn’t exactly thinking straight. He was just three weeks out of court-ordered rehab for marijuana possession and public intoxication, and his dad had just caught him stealing his anxiety medication. The pair drove a few miles to the home of Kenny’s girlfriend, whose mother saw the purloined truck and called the cops. The boys bolted, spent the night in a shed, and the next night were arrested while partying at a frat house. A judge found Kenny guilty of receiving stolen property worth less than $7,500, a low-level felony. He deemed Kenny, who had some pot on him when he was caught, a “delinquent child,” and sentenced him to six months at the juvenile correctional facility in Circleville.
But Kenny’s sentence wound up being rougher than the judge had perhaps intended. While the Circleville facility’s website boasts rehabilitative programs such as music, worship, woodworking, and education, he didn’t have much of a chance to take advantage of them. Shortly after arriving, Kenny landed in solitary confinement for fighting. Over the next six months he spent nearly 82 days in the hole—locked in his own room or an isolation cell—once for 19 days at a stretch, according to court documents.
I learned about Kenny’s case from legal filings in a lawsuit brought by the Obama administration against the state of Ohio. They make for some chilling reading. For years, the Department of Justice has pressured Ohio and other states to fix widespread problems in their juvenile prisons. In the fall of 2013, the department learned that some facilities were punishing kids like Kenny with long stretches of solitary. It investigated and filed suit the following March, asking a judge to immediately intervene because children would continue suffering “irreparable harm” if the practice wasn’t stopped. Kenny’s case was cited as a key example of the damage solitary could do.
While in isolation, Kenny—who was diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder prior to the sixth grade—wrote to his mother, Melissa Bucher, begging her to make the two-hour drive to visit him. “I don’t feel like I’m going to make it anymore,” he wrote. “I’m in seclusion so I can’t call and I’m prolly going to be in here for a while. My mind is just getting to me in here.”
Bucher, a warm, lively woman who at first glance could be mistaken for Kenny’s big sister, insists that forced isolation turned her teen from a social kid with some mental-health issues into a depressed young man who shies away from others and experiences panic attacks at night. “Other inmates would call me a lot and tell me he was not doing good and hearing voices,” she said. When she visited Kenny, she noticed “he had scratch marks all over his arms. He was just digging into them.” Alphonse Gerhardstein, an attorney representing Kenny and others in a separate lawsuit that was eventually consolidated with the Justice Department’s case, noted in an email to the state attorney general’s office that the boy “bangs his head frequently” and “had fresh injuries.”