Aggregator
Homeowners’ fight against Mamdani’s tax: Letters to the Editor — Aug. 22, 2026
Karmelo Anthony Request For New Trial Denied After Disturbing Revelations
The narrative of the innocent black kid standing up to "white bullies" is falling apart. Karmelo Anthony, age 19, was convicted in June 2026 of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf (who was also 17 at the time) by fatally stabbing him in the chest during a confrontation at a high school track meet in April 2025. A Collin County jury sentenced him to 35 years in prison. Anthony claimed self-defense; arguing that Metcalf "shoved him" and that he was protecting himself.
Anthony's family raised $634,000 from gullible liberals on claims self defense and racism, but their story started to fall apart early in the trial. His conviction was met with outrage by progressive commentators and Democrat politician who continue to assert that Anthony should be freed from prison. Efforts were immediately launched for a new trial.
However, Kaufman County Judge Michael Chitty (appointed after the original trial judge was recused) denied the motion in a brief order after a two-day hearing, stating he had reviewed the motion, record, evidence, arguments, briefs, and case law.
During the new-trial hearing, previously excluded character evidence was discussed that was kept out of the original trial. Under an informal “gentleman’s agreement” between prosecutors and defense, this evidence was omitted and focus was limited to the day of the incident in order to avoid "inflaming racial tensions".
This new evidence included text messages and notes from Karmelo Anthony expressing extreme violence. Examples included messages about stabbing someone and “licking the blood off the blade.” There were threats toward an ex-girlfriend, including a photo of a knife and Anthony saying he was “low key on the verge” the day he murdered Austin Metcalf.
There were also reports of Anthony stalking his ex-girlfriends, other threats of violence, school disciplinary issues involving fights, jokes about school shootings, and related content.
These revelations help to paint a picture of a warped individual that seemed to be looking for an opportunity for a violent encounter. This helps to explain why Anthony invaded the tent of an opposing high school team and refused to leave - He may have wanted someone to confront him, and that person just happened to be Austin Metcalf. Had it not been Metcalf it's likely that Anthony would have simply killed someone else down the road.
Defense lawyers say they plan to appeal the case to the 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas.
The incident became a flashpoint for racial tension in the US, with leftists and black activists celebrating the murder of Metcalf as "payback" for the "crimes of white America." It's a trend which has been gestating for many years due to woke ideology and the concept of social and financial "reparations" in the name of righting the wrongs of the past by punishing white people today.
The case also brought many misconceptions about self defense law to the surface and proved that, sadly, far too many people are ignorant of how these laws work. Deadly force cannot be used without a legitimate threat to life and limb. Feeling insulted because someone call you out for bad behavior, or being shoved out of a tent, is not legal grounds to murder that person.
Ultimately, the Karmelo Anthony case once again exposed a dangerous disconnect between black culture and the rest of America. Their seething obsession with "respect" that they have not earned is leading the black community down a path to disaster.
Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 14:35Kroy Biermann steps out for first time since teen son KJ’s sexual assault arrest
Kroy Biermann steps out for first time since teen son KJ’s sexual assault arrest
NYC’s Union Square seeing frenzy for office, retail space
Ex-Mayor Dan Sullivan backs Dan Sullivan to beat Dan Sullivan in bonkers Alaska Senate race
Texas dismisses linebacker Ty’Anthony Smith for conduct detrimental to team
Nvidia customers warned about AI-related price hikes above 15% on chips: report
Judge dismisses major parts of Ben & Jerry’s lawsuit accusing Unilever of silencing social activism
Cops jump in Uber, demand driver chase down fleeing suspect in wild video clip: ‘Go, go, go, go!’
WHO Says Pandemic Determinations Can Be Made Without 'Evidence Of Illness'
Authored by Jon Fleetwood via Modernity News,
The World Health Organization (WHO) says evidence that a person is actually sick is not required for a "laboratory-confirmed" human influenza infection with "the potential to cause a pandemic" to trigger mandatory international reporting.
"Evidence of illness is not required for this report," WHO states in its latest Influenza at the Human-Animal Interface assessment, which covered July 8 through August 7, 2026.
WHO says countries must "immediately notify WHO of any laboratory-confirmed case of a recent human infection caused by an influenza A virus with the potential to cause a pandemic."
Then, immediately afterward:
"Evidence of illness is not required for this report."
The statement raises an obvious question: If evidence of illness is not required to set off a chain of events that could trigger authoritarian international pandemic response, what evidence is required?
WHO points to a "laboratory-confirmed" finding.
But WHO's own influenza laboratory manual shows that such determinations are made using real-time RT-PCR tests.
But PCR does not directly observe a virus.
It measures fluorescence (the amount of light emitted) from test chemicals mixed with a sample.
WHO describes PCR methods using fluorescent dyes and probes carrying a fluorescent reporter and quencher.
But fluorescence can also increase through unintended pathways, potentially contributing to a false-positive reading.
Those pathways include reagent cross-reactions, probe cleavage or degradation, reporter or quencher detachment or degradation, optical cross-talk, and changes in reporter - quencher behavior caused by heat - which PCR intentionally applies to the sample over and over during testing.
WHO's manual confirms that PCR repeatedly heats the test material, including to 95°C, and that real-time PCR results are evaluated by whether fluorescence rises above a threshold.
It also explicitly acknowledges background signal, contamination, and false-positive results.
The implications are difficult to ignore.
WHO is saying evidence of illness is not required at the gateway to its pandemic-potential reporting system, while the "laboratory-confirmed" evidence that can substitute for illness may itself rest on light readings susceptible to false-positive signals.
Bottom LineThe world saw what can follow a pandemic determination during COVID-19: lockdowns, business and school closures, masking and distancing mandates, travel restrictions, and vaccination requirements.
WHO now says "Evidence of illness is not required" for certain "laboratory-confirmed" infections with pandemic potential to trigger international reporting.
If nobody has to be sick, and "laboratory confirmation" can ultimately rest on a fluorescence reading, what evidence of actual disease must exist before governments begin exercising pandemic powers?
Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 14:00