Yesterday, over 4 million people near the California-Oregon state line were in for quite a scare. First, a magnitude 7.0 earthquake took place around 10:44 a.m. PT, making it the area’s strongest since 2005. Back then, they experienced a 7.2 earthquake. This moment alone was anxiety-inducing, but it’s what happened after that sent many residents into a bit of a panic. That’s because it triggered a Tsunami Warning in parts of California and Oregon. As a result, lots of people were informed to get to higher ground. Because, while there was no guarantee there would be a destructive tsunami, the chance was too high to risk it. The magnitude of this earthquake can be seen in videos residents have shared online. A particularly viral video shows someone’s backyard pool shaking to an alarming degree. See for yourself in the video below. Since when is our pool a wave pool omg this is crazy. It’s still rolling 10 min later there’s apparently a 6.0 near the coast #earthquake #california pic.twitter.com/4jXnbgq468— Sultana‍ (@anatlus89) December 5, 2024 California Woman’s Pool Shakes Just Before They’re Given a Tsunami Warning One minute, everything seems fine. Then, all of a sudden, Ana’s pool shakes violently. What’s even more strange is the fact that, in the video, Ana says she can’t feel the earthquake. She only knew it was happening because of the pool’s unusual movements. Not long after, the Tsunami Warning was announced. “A tsunami is not a solitary wave,” Pat Abbott, a San Diego State University Geologist says. “It’s the front of a big sheet of water coming in. So if it’s even coming in knee-depth, then you can’t stand up and it’s going to carry you, you know, 100 feet, 1,000 feet, a quarter of a mile. And it could be beating you up with three branches and things at the same time.” Thankfully, the tsunami warning was canceled not long after the initial announcement. But, had there been one, residents would have been given a much better chance at making it to safety. “It’s best to give people time. We don’t want to give fake warnings, you know, warning that there’s nothing behind this kind of thing. You don’t want people to lose faith in the system,” Pat continues. “But this one, it needed to go out.” You can find the source of this story’s featured image here! The post Clip Shows Entire Pool Shaking During Magnitude 7.0 Earthquake In Northern California appeared first on InspireMore.

'All three children were safe and unharmed'

'It is disgusting, it is evil'

'A foreign government threatens to distort free speech'

A video shared on X claims to show a Somalian pirate boat being destroyed. Somali pirate boat is no more. pic.twitter.com/2qth4kKG4h — David Atherton (@DaveAtherton20) December 5, 2024 Verdict: False The video shows training from the United States Navy and is not a Somalian vessel. Fact Check: A Chinese fishing vessel came under the control of […]

Let’s make this clear right from the start: we love these songs, we respect these songs, and the mere fact that they are among the most overplayed in rock and roll and popular music history is a testament to just how great they truly are. This article is simply a presentation of brilliant songs that, for many of us, have likely been played just one too many times in our individual lives. That’s all—it’s a statement of fact and a reflection on rock and roll and pop music history. Why is any song overplayed? Why do classic rock radio stations, The post Ten 1970s Songs We’ve Heard Way Too Many Times appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

“Pretty disgusting” and “grotesque.” That’s how a Florida parent described an online session for students on “gender” provided by two K-12 virtual public schools in November—a session that virtual school officials held without first informing parents. This schools’ attempt to sidestep families is just the latest in a long list of examples demonstrating that some educators and academic publishers will simply go around parents to push lewd content on K-12 students. Yet this particular incident has implications for local, state, and even federal policymakers. Connections Academy and Pearson Online Academy, online public schools managed by the U.K.-based Pearson publishing company, offered the online programing as an optional “Pride Snack and Chat” for students last month. Yet the session was not listed on the online calendars parents use to track student activities and assignments, and a parent told a Florida news station that the “chat” was a surprise. The session’s instructors described terms such as “sexually fluid abrosexual,” “masexual,” and “syndemisexual,” to name a few. Presenters displayed a slideshow to students during the chat that also promoted organizations such as GLSEN, a group that promotes LGBT issues in K-12 schools, and The Trevor Project, an organization that hosts a website connecting adults with minor-age children for discussions on everything from chest binders to puberty blockers to explicit sex acts. Considering Pearson’s record, the surprise “Snack and Chat” should come as anything but a shock. Pearson is the world’s fourth-largest textbook publisher by revenue and operates the virtual K-12 schools known as Connections Academies, which have locations around the country. Pearson also has a history of advocating for school materials that include discussions of diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI; “antiracism;” and gender issues. In 2023, Pearson officials scrubbed their website after a Heritage Foundation investigation exposed their radical content. The company had published editorial guidelines for its content creators stating that the publisher was committed to DEI and antiracism and would make “colorism,” “colonial discourse,” “genderism,” and “intersectionality” part of everything the company produces. Yet after the Heritage report, Pearson removed some of the antiracist materials from its website without explanation. The company’s “Business Partners Code of Conduct” now says Pearson and its partners will follow any state laws prohibiting the teaching of “gender” in K-12 schools. The “Snack and Chat” content appears to violate Florida’s rules against exposing K-12 students to the topics of gender or sexual orientation. Florida Education Commissioner Manny Diaz, Jr. sent a letter to Connections’ Florida director Marcie Trombino and has opened an investigation into the programming. “As commissioner of education, I expect you to govern yourselves according to state law,” Diaz wrote. Other state officials and even federal lawmakers should be on notice. Though Pearson has sold off some of its K-12 operations in recent years, the company still holds large testing-related contracts with states such as Tennessee. Of significance for federal taxpayers today, Pearson owns PDRI, the company that operates USA Hire, which is the web portal that the U.S. Office of Management and Budget uses to receive and review applications for federal job postings. Some 40 federal agencies use USA Hire, and more than 500,000 applications are submitted to the site annually. Federal officials should be aware of Pearson’s repeated attempts to inject DEI and other discriminatory ideas throughout its portfolio of services, even as it attempts to hide its dealings when exposed. Lawmakers at the state and federal levels have introduced proposals to prohibit the use of taxpayer spending on DEI, and some of the proposals include prohibitions on using contractors that operate DEI programs. When he was a U.S. senator from Ohio, Vice President-elect JD Vance sponsored a federal proposal to do so and said he hopes to “root out DEI from our federal bureaucracy” and intends to “[strip] funding for DEI policies anywhere it exists.” The optional “chat” for Florida virtual school students connects to a web of gender-related advocacy and racial discrimination that reaches all the way to Washington. State and federal officials should unravel this network, rejecting both graphic sexual content in schools and the racial discrimination promoted by DEI ideology. The post Major Textbook Publisher Caught Spreading LGBTQ and DEI Ideology in Schools appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The winds of Washington are blowing icy cold for TikTok this December. A federal appeals court panel handed down a ruling today that could send the app packing— or at least force it into a kind of corporate divorce. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has today declared the law threatening TikTok’s existence to be totally constitutional, leaving the platform to fight for its digital life. In short, TikTok has until mid-January to break ties with its Beijing-based parent, ByteDance, or risk an outright ban in the United States. TikTok responded with the following statement: “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue. Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people. The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” The Free Speech Shuffle TikTok played the First Amendment card, arguing that banning the platform would stomp on Americans’ free speech rights. But the court wasn’t having it, throwing in a little verbal aikido about protecting actual freedom. “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States,” the court wrote, presumably while straightening its tie in a metaphorical mirror. “Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” Translation: TikTok, it’s not you — it’s China. TikTok has been accused of being influenced by the Chinese Communist Party. ByteDance’s Legal Tango TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, is already planning to appeal to the Supreme Court because apparently, they’re gluttons for punishment. And hey, why not? When you’re staring down a deadline that could nuke your entire US business, you either fight or fold. But here’s where it gets interesting: the same President-elect Donald Trump who once tried to fire TikTok like it was a contestant on The Apprentice now says he’s against a ban. Trump has promised to swoop in and “save” the platform during his second term. The law itself was signed by President Joe Biden in April, marking a rare bipartisan moment in a town otherwise allergic to cooperation. For years, Washington has been gnashing its teeth over TikTok’s ties to the Chinese government, accusing the app of being a national security threat disguised as a dance challenge factory. Of course, critics argue this is about power. TikTok’s cultural dominance has made it an unpredictable disruptor, threatening not only Big Tech’s grip on social media but also giving the average American teen more clout than your local senator. Government officials argue that the app’s voracious appetite for user data could lead to sensitive information, from browsing histories to biometric identifiers, being vacuumed up by the Chinese communist government. But the main issue? The proprietary algorithm, that magical machine-learning potion that keeps you scrolling at 2 a.m., is painted as a weapon of influence — a subtle but powerful propaganda tool ready to tweak your feed for Beijing’s benefit. Except, there’s a catch: a good chunk of the government’s evidence for these claims is locked behind classified curtains. TikTok’s attorneys — and by extension the American public — are left in the dark. More than 170 million Americans use TikTok. TikTok Fights Back TikTok has steadfastly denied being a Chinese Trojan horse, insisting that no evidence exists to prove they’ve ever handed over data to Beijing. As for the algorithm? TikTok says any suggestion of manipulation is pure speculation. Their legal team hammered home that the government’s arguments rely on what might happen in the future — a slippery foundation for ripping apart a platform that’s glued to the cultural zeitgeist. But the Department of Justice isn’t just playing futurist. It has hinted — vaguely and ominously — at unspecified past actions by TikTok and ByteDance in response to Chinese government demands. The key word here is “unspecified,” because whatever receipts the DOJ might have, they’re conveniently out of reach for TikTok’s lawyers, the media, or anyone else. A Courtroom Tango: First Amendment vs. National Security The appeals court panel, a politically mixed trio of judges, seemed as torn as the rest of us about how far Uncle Sam can stretch its First Amendment arguments to justify banning an app with foreign ties. Over two hours of oral arguments in September, the judges volleyed tough questions at both sides. Can the government really shut down a platform just because it’s foreign-owned? the judges asked, channeling TikTok’s core argument. On the flip side: What happens if this platform turns into a covert disinformation campaign during wartime? they wondered, invoking wartime-era laws restricting foreign ownership of broadcast licenses. Both sides twisted themselves into legal yoga poses. TikTok’s lawyer, Andrew Pincus, argued that a private company — even one with foreign owners — deserves constitutional protections. The DOJ’s Daniel Tenny countered that the government has a duty to head off potential foreign interference, even if the threat isn’t fully realized yet. $2 Billion in Data Defenses TikTok itself hasn’t just been sitting back while lawyers spar. The company claims it’s invested over $2 billion to fortify its US data, including setting up Project Texas — a heavily marketed initiative to store American user data on servers managed by Oracle. ByteDance has also floated the idea of a comprehensive draft agreement that it says could have eased Washington’s fears years ago. But according to TikTok, the Biden administration ghosted them, walking away from the negotiating table without offering a viable path forward. The DOJ insists the draft didn’t go far enough, but skeptics wonder if the government’s hardline stance is less about national security and more about flexing control over Big Tech. Divestment Drama Washington’s solution to the TikTok dilemma sounds deceptively simple: ByteDance should sell the US arm of TikTok. However attorneys for the company argue that such a divestment would be a logistical and commercial nightmare. And without TikTok’s algorithm—intellectual property that Beijing is unlikely to let go of—the app would lose its magic. Imagine TikTok without its eerily intuitive feed: it’d be MySpace 2.0, a ghost town for millennials waxing nostalgic. Still, some sharks smell blood in the water. Billionaire Frank McCourt and former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin have rallied a consortium with over $20 billion in informal commitments to snap up TikTok’s US operations. A Perfect Storm of Lawsuits TikTok isn’t going down without a fight and it’s bringing allies to the battlefield. The company’s legal challenge has been bundled with lawsuits from several content creators, who argue that losing the platform would gut their livelihoods, and conservative influencers who claim a ban would silence their political speech. TikTok, ever the sugar daddy, is footing the legal bills for its creators — a savvy PR move if ever there was one. The Clock is Ticking If TikTok’s Hail Mary appeal to the Supreme Court fails, it’ll be up to President Trump’s Justice Department to enforce the ban. That means app stores would have to scrub TikTok from their offerings, and hosting services would be barred from supporting it. And what happens to the millions of creators, small businesses, and teenagers who’ve turned TikTok into a cultural juggernaut? Well, they’ll probably migrate to Instagram Reels or YouTube Shorts—platforms that coincidentally happen to be owned by US tech giants who’ve been salivating at the thought of TikTok’s demise. This is far from over. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post TikTok on the Clock: US Appeals Court Hits the “Ban” Button appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

America's Top Proponent of Gender Affirming Care is Being Sued

While the U.S. Supreme Court is deciding whether to uphold state bans on the use of puberty blockers as well as hormone treatment for minors who think they might be transgender, the Washington Post is hyping both procedures, especially puberty blockers. This hype was provided by Casey Parks whose job description describes her as a "Social issues reporter covering gender and family." Or you can enjoy her leftist-celebrated book about her "queer lineage." The Parks pitch for puberty blockers appeared in the Post on Tuesday, "Puberty blockers, hormones: What to know about gender care for minors." That sounds like a fact sheet. But the biggest problem with the Parks pitch disguised as a newspaper story is how it absurdly overlooks the many, many medical concerns about using puberty blockers and hormone treatments. Oh, Parks does toss in this rather insignificant reservation, then goes on to ignore the major reservations presented by medical experts: Critics of transition care have noted that using these drugs to treat gender dysphoria is an “off label” use, meaning that the medications were approved by the Food and Drug Administration for another purpose. But researchers have noted that many drugs are used “off label” for pediatric patients, because medications are often only tested on adults while being developed. Yeah, the objection to puberty blockers is just a dispute over "off label" use which now allows Parks to skip the much larger medical objections provided by experts. Parks also brushes off the effect of puberty blockers on bone density by citing an associate professor of medicine Carl Streed who turns out not to be very reassuring at all: Using puberty blockers can reduce a patient’s bone mineral density, but Streed said research shows many patients do catch up, bone density wise, once they either resume puberty or start hormones. That’s not always the case, though, and doctors are continuing to study the drug’s effects, Streed said. “That’s something we’re still further characterizing, but this isn’t leading to people having brittle bones or bones that are breaking easily and so forth,” Streed said. “This is just us measuring what people’s bone density is and seeing that there’s a difference. I wouldn’t say it’s irreversible. I would say that’s just the known effect of the medications.” So Streed says it can reduce bone mineral density in a patient and he can't say for sure if its irreversible but, hey, shouldn't we all just roll the dice and gamble with our health that those promoting puberty blockers are right? In addition to causing a reduction in bone density there is also the problem of sterility. Parks provides this not very reassuring "assurance." Not in most cases. A patient’s outcomes will vary based on when they start puberty blockers, whether they take cross-sex hormones and how long they remain on the medication. And concludes with this rather frightening gem: Surgeries to remove a patient’s ovaries or testes do make a trans person infertile, though doctors encourage those patients to freeze their eggs or sperm first. Ouch! The overall problem with Parks' story is that it is the result of incredible misinformation due to not citing the many medical experts around the world who not only have deep reservations about the use of puberty blockers but are now actively warning against its use. It takes mental blockers to avoid seeing the many dangers of puberty blockers since a quick search on the web easily reveals this information such as the Google search for "puberty blockers Europe" which yields these easy to find results: England The National Health Service (NHS) stopped prescribing puberty blockers to children at gender identity clinics in March 2024. The decision was based on a lack of evidence that the drugs are safe and effective. Puberty blockers are now only available for children under 18 who are already taking them, or in clinical trials. Scotland In April 2024, Scotland's only gender clinic stopped prescribing puberty blockers to people under 18. The clinic also stopped prescribing other hormone treatments to new minor patients. Sweden In 2021, the Karolinska University Hospital stopped prescribing hormones to minors. The hospital cited a lack of evidence on the long-term consequences of the treatments. The National Board of Health and Welfare updated its guidelines to state that puberty blockers should only be used in exceptional cases. And in America's next door neighbor, Canada, a pioneer in the use of puberty blockers now regrets her role in it: Doctors in Canada have been prescribing puberty blockers to children with gender identity disorders since the early 2000s. Child psychiatrist Dr. Susan Bradley, now 82 and the founder of a controversial former gender identity clinic at Toronto’s Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, said she regrets using the drugs. “I kept asking myself, ‘Is it possible that we are actually colluding rather than taking the pressure off and giving (children) a chance to think everything out,” Bradley said. “And it turns out that I think we were colluding, not consciously, but subconsciously,” said Bradley, a professor emeritus of psychiatry at the University of Toronto. So rather than being just a reporter, Casey Parks is an advocate for highly questionable medical procedures in the name of promoting the trans ideology. An advocacy that is so extreme as to cause her to completely ignore medical advice that does not adhere to her dangerous doctrines.