Public awareness of crime, sexual harassment in libraries, and inappropriate books and web sites in schools due to American Library Association policy. ⚖️
Democrat lawmakers in New Jersey just passed a bill granting government employees immunity from civil and criminal liability when giving children access to obscene materials at school or in libraries, sparking outrage among those seeking to protect minors. Predators, groomers, and perverts rejoiced at the news.
The so-called “Freedom to Read Act,” passed by the State Senate on Monday after it was approved in the House earlier this year, is being portrayed by Democrats and their far-left media allies as a measure aimed at limiting “book banning.” The lawmakers behind it also claimed it would protect librarians and teachers from alleged “threats.”
Under current New Jersey law, giving “obscene material” to a minor is considered a felony of the third degree. Obscenity is described in the statute as any material that includes audio or visual picture or description of s[]xual intercourse, s[]x acts, and more. Numerous books being distributed to children in the state fit that description well.
An example of the books stirring controversy in New Jersey is “This Book is Gay.” It includes, among other outrages, tips on how children can meet up with adults for homos[]xual encounters without letting their parents find out. The book also features detailed and extremely graphic instructions for sodomy and various other s[]x acts.
Because of obscenity laws, which exist nationwide to protect the innocence of children, some librarians and teachers have hesitated before providing such material. Parents and concerned citizens have also warned librarians and “education” officials that they could be running afoul of obscenity laws by giving children access.
But lawmakers in New Jersey think children need access to such material. “In recent years, public and school libraries have come under attack by a small number of individuals hoping to erase diverse materials from bookshelves, usually targeting works focused on race and LGBTQ+ themes,” argued bill sponsor NJ Senator Andrew Zwicker, a Democrat.
“A library is a place of voluntary inquiry and provides equitable access to learning resources,” continued the far-left senator without acknowledging concerns. “Through the ‘Freedom to Read Act,’ local school boards shall implement policies that ensure our libraries still have an array of content while including the public in that process.”
Ironically, protecting those seeking to corrupt minors with perversion and s[]xual fanaticism was portrayed by Senator Zwicker as a “defense of freedom.” Critics, however, warned that the legislation was an attack on constitutionally protected freedoms including parental rights and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
One leading opponent of the bill was Victoria Jakelsky, director and founder of NJ Parental Rights. In her testimony before lawmakers against the legislation, Jakelsky read the legal definition of obscenity and warned that this “freedom” legislation was aimed at stripping parents, taxpayers, and the community of the right (and duty) to protect children.
“This bill is incorrectly named,” she continued. “The legislation is not advocating for any right, except the right of state employees to be exempt from the consequences of committing a crime — a crime that could have lifelong implications upon hundreds if not thousands of innocent children.”
Jakelsky, who has been battling the indoctrination and s[]xualization of New Jersey children in public schools for years, blasted the notion of giving state employees immunity from criminal liability for breaking the law. “Should employees of the NJ Department of Education not be held accountable if they commit this crime?” she asked rhetorically.
GOP lawmakers denounced the bill during debate, too. “How exactly does a person distribute obscene materials to a child in good faith?” asked Senator Michael Testa (Republican) on the floor of the Senate, a reference to protections in the bill for those acting in “good” faith. “I don’t want adults promoting explicit stuff to children.”
“I also think it’s incredibly telling that if some of these very same explicit materials were shown to a child by a neighbor, that individual would be charged with a Megan’s Law offense, and rightfully so,” continued Senator Testa, a reference to a law protecting children named after a 7-year-old girl who was raped and murdered by a predatory neighbor.
Of course, many Democrats claimed there was no obscene material being given to children in schools. Testa was not buying it: “To my colleagues across the aisle that are so adamant that there is no obscene material being pushed in our schools, and that there never will be under this bill, then why do you need an exemption from the obscenity law?”
While bill sponsors and supporters claimed it was the government officials corrupting minors who were being “harassed” and “threatened,” the reality is just the opposite. In fact, as The Newman Report documented last year, parents who advocate for their children have been targeted by law enforcement, lawfare, unions and even the military.
Civilized societies have always used the law to protect children and punish those who seek to corrupt them with obscene material. Unfortunately, the veneer of civilization is rapidly disappearing, especially in Democrat-controlled states. For the sake of children and society, it is imperative that these horrific trends be reversed — fast.
Thank you very much for covering this. It truly is a fight of good against evil here in NJ, but we must not grow weary.
We were thankful for one no vote from one Democrat and that the Democrat from LD-15 Shirley Turner did not vote. The NJ Democrat leadership found a way to block many emails from getting to the legislators. If the democrats had even listened to 20% of those concerned and were willing to look at the facts and the pictures that are in many of the books currently in the school libraries, they would have voted no. The leadership blocked us for being able to tell the the truth.
Thank you for showing this and covering this. God help NJ.
Always dressed up in positive sounding language, “Freedom to Read” is a license to legally s[]xualize children in schools, libraries, and predictably entertainment, as young as possible. Why? Because a basic tenet of liberal/leftist/Marxism is the deliberate destruction of childhood innocence. The best sentence in the entire article is this: “To my colleagues across the aisle that are so adamant that there is no obscene material being pushed in our schools, and that there never will be under this bill, then why do you need an exemption from the obscenity law?” The essential issue is one of language and definition. The liberal/leftist/Marxist Democrats do not consider any s[]xual act, no matter how perverse or age-inappropriate, to be obscene. Words matter.
Happening next door in PA too. I’m done with legislative hearings. We now have a President who will prosecute these crimes and my Defendants should buckle up!
Disorderly Persons Offense by NJ Legislators? Will A3446 Be Passed Despite Ethical Violations Amounting to a Failure of the Public Trust?
Author: Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, Chatham, NJ.
Date: 6/28/2024
To: NJ Legislators
Issue:
Has one or more members of the New Jersey Assembly and Senate promoted legislation and released confidential information to the drafters and proponents of A3446 S2421 2024, thereby committing a “disorderly person” offense under N.J.S.A. 52:13E-8? Have they violated the Legislative Code of Ethics 2:1a and 2:11? Have they violated the Conflicts of Interest Law 52:13D-12 and 52:13D-25? Have they committed substantially the same violation as presented in the Ethics Tutorial, Question 24, meaning they know or should have known they committed a disorderly persons offense? Does being a legislator exempt one from arrest and possible fine and jail time for having committed a disorderly persons offense? Does the Assembly as a whole passing A3446 for the Governor’s signature mean the entire law is based on ethical and criminal violations of law?
Aggravating Factors:
Is it an aggravating factor that A3446 S2421 is written by a Chicago, Illinois, private entity, the very organization promoted and tipped off, to nullify Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982) and leave school children exposed to pervasively vulgar and educationally unsuitable material? Is it an aggravating factor that A3446 S2421 is written to nullify N.J.S.A. 2C:34-3 Obscenity for Persons Under 18 and leave school children exposed to obscenity under New Jersey law? Is it an aggravating factor that the very same private entity being promoted by the Assembly and tipped off by the Senate, in this case one of its subgroups called New Jersey School Library Association, is directly made by A3446 S2421 the very drafter of the proposed model school library book selection and book challenge policies, in other words, the lead benefactor of A3446 S2421? Is it an aggravating factor that a member of those not privy to the inside information was labeled a “meddling minority” on the (A3446) S2421 issue by Senator Andrew Zwicker? Is it an aggravating factor that the ultimate victims are children? Is it an aggravating factor that the children have no representation except for a relatively few parents who speak up only to get ignored by legislators who post open support for a Chicago organization that wrote the legislation before hearing even one word of public testimony?
2:1. a. No member of the Legislature shall … act in any way that impairs the objectivity or independence of judgment of the member of the Legislature in the exercise of his or her duties or is violative of the public trust by an elected official or which creates a justifiable impression among the public that such trust is being violated (C.52:13D-12 and 52:13D-23).
2:11. No member of the Legislature shall willfully disclose to any person, whether or not for pecuniary gain, any information not generally available to members of the public which he receives or acquires in the course of and by reason of his official duties. … (C.52:13D-25).
(a) In our representative form of government, it is essential that the conduct of public officials … shall hold the respect and confidence of the people. Public officials must, therefore, avoid conduct which is in violation of their public trust or which creates a justifiable impression among the public that such trust is being violated.
52:13D-25. Disclosure or use for personal gain of information not available to public
No … member of the Legislature shall willfully disclose to any person, whether or not for pecuniary gain, any information not generally available to members of the public which he receives or acquires in the course of and by reason of his official duties. ….
L.1971, c. 182, s. 14, eff. Jan. 11, 1972.
Other Provisions –
52:13E-8. Dissemination of evidence adduced at private hearing
Except in the course of subsequent hearing which is open to the public, no testimony or other evidence adduced at a private hearing or preliminary conference or interview conducted before a single-member agency in the course of its investigation shall be disseminated or made available to the public by said agency, its counsel or employees without the approval of the head of the agency. Except in the course of a subsequent hearing open to the public, no testimony or other evidence adduced at a private hearing or preliminary conference or interview before a committee or other multimember investigating agency shall be disseminated or made available to the public by any member of the agency, its counsel or employees, except with the approval of a majority of the members of such agency. Any person who violates the provisions of this subdivision shall be adjudged a disorderly person.
Relevant provisions of the Conflicts Law and the Code of Ethics: N.J.S.A. 52:13D-25; sections 2:11 and 3:13 of the Code of Ethics.
Summary: These provisions prohibit legislators and legislative employees from disclosing nonpublic information acquired in the course of official duties.
Question 24
Senator B serves on a special committee directed by resolution to conduct an investigation. As part of that investigation, preliminary sworn statements were taken at private hearings and the transcripts of those statements were given to the members of the special committee including Senator B. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:13E-8, the transcripts are confidential unless a majority of the special committee votes to make them public. No such vote was taken. The transcripts concern activities affecting the Senator's district and he wants to share the information with local officials immediately. Can he give copies of the transcripts to the local officials and request that they not go public with the information?
You answered No which is correct.
The Senator may not release this information. Not only would the release of this confidential information violate N.J.S.A. 52:13D-25 and section 2:11 of the Code of Ethics, it would be a disorderly persons offense pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:13E-8.
Relevant Facts:
On June 6, 2024, starting at 10 AM, the Assembly Education Committee heard public testimony for the first time on the so-called "Freedom to Read Act" A3446 that was written by the American Library Association (ALA) based in Chicago, Illinois, and promoted nationwide and federally with its organization called, "Unite Against Book Bans." ALA promotes Unite Against Book Bans on X via use of the hashtag #UniteAgainstBookBans. I testified at that hearing about the grip of the Unite Against Book Bans organization over New Jersey’s librarians. To me it seems my testimony was ignored.
Seventeen minutes before the hearing began, then again during the meeting, the X account @NJAssemblyDems posted its support for ALA, first by posting the ALA’s hashtag, then by posting with a tag to ALA’s Unite Against Book Bans group on X called @UABookBans. It later deleted that second tweet. So, before even ever hearing from the public on the issue, the Assembly demonstrated it openly sided with the legislative efforts of the Chicago-based organization that drafted the legislation. Even the Speaker of the New Jersey General Assembly demonstrated his support for the Chicago organization’s legislation before any testimony was heard. This has to violate at least some of the codes/laws cited above. Passing A3446 now essentially rubber stamps ethical and possibly criminal violations made by those legislators who voted for A3446.
An hour or so later, I can’t be sure since the post has since been deleted but I have a screen grab of it showing it was sent an hour after the first post, @njassemblydems sent out a response to its own post discussed above saying only, "@PENamerica @sikh_coalition @UABookBans".
Speaker of the New Jersey General Assembly, Speaker Craig J. Coughlin, posted on X from @SpeakerCoughlin by saying, "The Freedom to Read is fundamental to our democracy" and reposted the 9:43 AM Jun 6, 2024, prejudicial post. He did this at 11:08 AM Jun 6, 2024, only an hour and eight minutes after the Assembly hearing started and hours before it concluded.
On or before June 12, at least one member of the NJ Senate Education Committee [SEC] provided New Jersey Association of School Librarians [NJASL], which is a Chapter of the American Library Association’s [ALA] American Association of School Librarians [AASL], with a June 20 date of the SEC hearing for S2421 “Freedom to Read Act.” S2421 was never heard that day but still, the librarians were tipped off. After that, on or before June 13, that information was placed on an ALA web site (via ALA crypto group EveryLibrary) with the call to “email or call” the legislators of the SEC. On June 14 at 6:18AM, an ALA astroturfed group in New Jersey started by North Hunterdon-Voorhees High School school librarian Martha Hickson using ALA resources posted on X from @NHVfREADom the link to that ALA/EveryLibrary web site and tagged @NJASL @AndrewZwicker @aswdrulis, so at least those people knew for certain of the ALA/EveryLibrary web site announcing the date of the S2421 hearing. As of June 19, 12:26 PM, the SEC still doesn’t list S2421 as being heard on June 20 despite NJASL and ALA having known and having announced it since June 12. Further, by June 14, two legislators knew or should have known of the release of the information via a third ALA source. So seven days had gone by and the New Jersey public still didn’t know of the S2421 hearing on June 20, but ALA did, ALA’s EveryLibrary did, ALA’s AASL Chapter NJASL did, and ALA’s astroturfer Martha Hickson @NHVfREADom did. The ALA and its supporters have been able to rally for a week before the June 20 hearing while New Jersey citizens had yet to have been informed of the June 20th hearing date, although again it didn’t happen that day. Indeed some could not attend as a direct result of this lack of public notice. It’s ALA that wrote the legislation and is pushing it in New Jersey, in states nationwide, and federally. Somehow ALA knew of the SEC’s June 20th hearing on S2421 at least a week before the SEC ever made the New Jersey citizenry aware. NJ legislators are the only possible source of this inside information.
Date/Time: 13 Jun 2024 19:43:45 UTC
Source: American Library Association (via EveryLibrary)
The companion bill, S2421, sponsored by Senators Zwicker and Ruiz will be heard by the Senate Education Committee on Thursday, June 20. Please email or call the following legislators and ask them to vote YES on S2421.
Senator Vin Gopal, Chair (LD11) Monmouth County 732-695-3371 sengopal@njleg.org
Senator Shirley Turner, Vice Chair (LD15) Hunterdon, Mercer County 609-323-7239 senturner@njleg.org
Senator Kristen M. Corrado (LD40) Bergen, Essex, Passaic County 973-237-1360 sencorrado@njleg.org
Senator Owen Henry (LD12) Burlington, Middlesex, Monmouth, Ocean County 732-607-7580 senhenry@njleg.org
Senator Angela McKnight (LD31) Hudson County 201-360-2502 senmcknight@njleg.org
The NJ Freedom to Read Act is having a positive influence even before it’s passed by giving other states ideas for protecting the right to read. Let’s make sure we pass our bill @njasl @AndrewZwicker @aswdrulis https://www.saveschoollibrarians.org/njaslbookbans
Senator Andrew Zwicker calls Dan Kleinman a “meddling minority”:
"One critic who told legislators he would testify against the bill is Dan Kleinman, a Texas-based blogger who last year launched the World Library Association as an alternative to the American Library Association, which has led the charge nationally against banning books. Zwicker said neutralizing that meddling minority of out-of-towners is one of his goals.
"'We already live in a system where a parent has the ability to limit what their child does or doesn’t read. But we should never live in a system where someone else gets to choose what your child gets to read. A small number of people, if they had their way, would dictate what the rest of us and our children could choose to read. And that’s un-American,’ he said."
Lastly, ALA’s Director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom and its Freedom to Read Foundation, Deborah Caldwell-Stone, Esq., trained librarians that before legislation gets promoted there needs to be sustained messaging that reframes known s*xually inappropriate material as diversity and inclusion. That is apparently exactly what has happened in New Jersey, right down to the wording of the legislation, and why legislators willingly violate ethical codes leading to violations of obscenity statutes. And children are the target. If the legislators don’t stand up for New Jersey’s children, who will? The parents will, but the legislation intentionally and severely limits their ability to act in such a manner. Specifically, the ALA leader/attorney said:
"But ultimately, we found that the thing that needs to happen most, and it needs to happen before these bills are introduced, is sustained uh messaging that reframes this issue um that uh that takes it away from the idea that these are inappropriate for minors, or s*xually inappropriate for minors, and promotes them as diverse materials and programming that are about inclusion, fairness, and protection of everybody's right to see themselves, and their families reflected in the books in the public library."
And ALA has worked for over half a century to promote inappropriate material in public schools and libraries. See: Koganzon, Rita. “There Is No Such Thing as a Banned Book: Censorship, Authority, and the School Book Controversies of the 1970s.” American Political Thought 12, no. 1 (January 2023): 1–26. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PZ2pDhKhRAtlNgR7gek_1kcdGFoskHpa/view?usp=sharing. New Jersey parents don’t stand a chance against such sustained community organizing and really must rely on legislators to protect their rights, yet it appears those rights are being tossed aside for flowery "freedom to read" language that was made up by ALA in the 1960s precisely to take power away from parents and school boards and enrich authors like New Jersey’s own Judy Blume. The New Jersey legislature is delivering the coup de grâce since ALA doesn’t have the power to do that by itself.
Conclusion:
From the above it is my opinion that at least one New Jersey legislator has violated ethical codes in a manner that may be considered a criminal offense subject to a possible fine, jail, and a criminal record. Further, there are a number of aggravating factors that make this a serious offense, including that the will of the public will have been subverted so that school children may be s*xualized and indoctrinated in schools by school librarians ignoring the US Supreme Court and New Jersey criminal statutes on obscenity, let alone the will of the public, all to satisfy the interests of a private organization based in Chicago, Illinois, promoting “Freedom to Read” and “Right to Read” legislation nationwide and here in New Jersey that simply defies the law, community standards, common sense, and that directly harms children. I’ve been called a “meddling minority” by one of the legislators, but it appears any meddling being done is by the legislators themselves violating ethical codes and possibly committing disorderly persons offenses. This “Freedom to Read Act” is being forced on people like in New Jersey by legislators acting in collusion with ALA to s*xualize and indoctrinate school children. The legislators demonstrate they’ve already made up their minds and any input from citizens is merely to make a showing about caring for the people of the state; to check off a box before passage of legislation into law.
These acts are fatally flawed from the start, they are being promoted with flagrant violations of ethical codes and criminal laws, they harm children and violate existing law like Board of Education v. Pico allowing immediate removal of pervasively vulgar and educationally unsuitable material, and now they are about to be sent to the Governor for his signature.
I’ll be publishing this so the public knows what’s going on in legislatures and why their children are being harmed in public schools and libraries and how legislators are turning that harm into law by violating ethical codes.
I call for the appropriate legal remedy to be launched against these legislators given the above, even if that includes their immediate arrest. And certainly the "Freedom to Read Act" A3446 S2421 should not be advanced any further.
No one is above the law.
NOTE ADDED 6 JULY 2024:
The page discussed about on an ALA site has been changed to remove the evidence presented above, the exact reason the archived copies were provided. So ALA is hiding the collusion this report revealed. Here is an archive of the page as it appears as of today with the incriminating evidence removed:
The Freedom to Read Act by the American Library Association [ALA] in Chicago, Illinois, is sweeping America. In New Jersey, S2421 (and A3446) will codify the Chicago organization's aspirational creed as NJ law. Section 4(a) requires "model [school library curation] policy established by the Commissioner of Education" and section 4(b) requires "the commissioner shall consult with the State Librarian and the New Jersey Association of School Librarians" [NJASL]. So the required model policy for schools requires the model policy be written by NJASL. Problem? The president of NJASL was interviewed 4/11/2023 by the well-respected One On One With Steve Adubato and lied her way though. As a result, the S2421 model policy will be based on the lies of a partisan organization parroting the words of a Chicago organization, and NJ school children will be directly harmed. The Freedom to Read Act (aka Right to Read Act, Libraries For All Act) is fatally flawed and should never become New Jersey law. Further, NJASL is directly supported by ALA which is astroturfing in New Jersey to pass this law that this group in Chicago wants, and NJASL with its lying president is essentially made the overseer of school boards by the Freedom to Read Act. One hand washes the other—to take away parental rights and harm school children.
Below is a transcript of the lies made by NJASL President Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot. She has several main points. Each one sounds legitimate but each is intentionally misleading, sometimes to the point of simply being false.
As trained professionals, librarians are in the best position to help everyone, Ewa says. They have teaching certificates and librarian certificates so they are "dually certified." Sounds good, but she leaves out A.) ALA requires MLIS degrees to "infuse concepts of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion throughout the standards." See: https://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2024/03/mlis-degrees-are-woke.html. B.) She also leaves out that ALA bragged to the Biden administration how librarians are better than teachers at indoctrinating school students because they have the children for years whereas the teachers have them for only a class. See: (citation will be added when I recall where I put it). C.) She also leaves out "the library and information services profession's commitment to racial and social justice ... diversity and inclusion as one of the profession's core values." See: https://www.ala.org/news/member-news/2021/07/ala-adopts-new-code-ethics-principle-racial-and-social-justice So yes, they are trained, but librarianship is a job, not a profession, and the training requires diversity, equity, and inclusion in all topics, and we all know what DEI really means. D.) She also leaves out that ALA policy is all material for all ages: "Library policies and procedures that effectively deny minors equal and equitable access to all library resources available to other users violate the Library Bill of Rights. The American Library Association opposes all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users." See: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/minors. So the NJASL leader tells you librarians are trained but leaves out they are trained to provide any material at any age. Does this match the community standards of New Jersey parents? Is this common sense? Is there a reason parental rights should be overturned in NJ to assuage the feelings of people from Chicago who think children should get anything at any age? E.) And that "task force" NJASL created? It's to "force" parents and legislators to cede control of NJ school and children to a politically-motivated outside organization from Chicago, IL. That's the task force. Any parents who step out of line are gang rushed, like the parents intimidated from even attending a public meeting about the issue they raised in Glen Ridge, NJ. I was the only person who spoke in favor of those parents, and even afterwards the NJ ACLU decided to deride me for doing so. That's the effect of the "task force" about which she brags that bully parents so much they fear even attending open public meetings.
"We d- don't come up with these recommendations and with the- these books out of thin air." False. School policies substantially match the model policies made up in Chicago, IL. This whole Freedom to Read Act S2421 is essentially a giant recommendation from Chicago, IL. It even replaced a previous attempt called the Right to Read Act that specifically named ALA's "Library Bill of Rights" and required that it become NJ law. That got shot down and reformed as the Freedom to Read Act, only the explicit inclusion of the "Library Bill of Rights" was excluded. But the ideas are all the same in the new act, just without the explicit reference, and with more teeth. And books out of thin air? Gender Queer was a book written for adults and sales lagged for two years until ALA found it and gave it two awards, including one specifically for kids. Now it's in nearly every school, as if summoned out of thin air. No, actually, ALA creates lists of books like this or gives them awards and all those books go right into the schools because everyone trusts librarians, and all from ALA in Chicago, IL, about which the NJASL leader acts innocent and claims librarians are only responding to NJ educational requirements. Super deceptive.
"[O]ur biggest problem here right now is that a lot of school districts are not following their school policies and are not following the state standards and laws." Okay, perhaps. So if that's the problem, why is there a need for a law to force a school board to accept a policy it's not going to follow anyway? Because S2421 A3446 is a giant power grab, that's why. They are grabbing the power from New Jersey parents, giving it to Illinois librarians who "oppose[] all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users," then getting NJ legislators to pass it into NJ law. And into law in state after state as ALA tries to push this nationwide.
Ewa then digs into her biggest lie of all: that no parents should have the right to control what the children of other parents are reading. And we hear books are "lifesaving" for that one special kid so all the kids have to read the "lifesaving" books. "Lifesaving," you know, like Gender Queer and its guidance to see kink dot com, you know, that kind of "lifesaving," and all kids have to read that. Can you see why this is so deceptive? Can you see the huge lie? It sounds so good. It sounds correct. Of course no parent should tell another parent what his child should or should not read. Of course. Only that's not the issue. The issue is not parents dictating what books other families should allow their kids. Not once has a parent ever removed a single book from a school library, short of theft. The reality is parents have the right under the First Amendment to bring concerns to the government, in this case the school board, then it's the school board that makes the decisions, not the parents. So arguing, "I would say to those parents, if you are not comfortable for your child to read that, you have the right to do it, but you cannot make this decision for all of the children," sounds great but it is intentionally false. It is a well-honed lie to mislead people. And the "lifesaving" lie is the icing on the cake. We are supposed to think all children should be exposed to inappropriate material that could be removed under the law just so one super troubled youth might read something that maybe makes him feel a little better about himself. Fine. That's what public libraries are for. School libraries are not public libraries. School libraries are not for anything-goes, especially simply because the anything-goes people from Chicago, IL, organize "task forces" to intimidate people into allowing their children to be exposed to harm and to intimidate legislators into making it law.
Another lie the NJASL leader pushes is how data shows school librarians "increase all kinds of state sc- uh s- scores in, in all state standards." Scores are dropping everywhere as DEI gets pressed into every subject. Math proficiency in Chicago, for example, is 0% in all classes. The kids are experts on pronouns, microaggressions, and white supremacy, but reading, science, and mathematics scores are falling off a cliff nationwide—at the same time ALA is making DEI one of its "core values." So librarians are not "increas[ing] all kinds of state sc- uh s- scores in, in all state standards." Just the opposite. And there's the Freedom to Read Act praising librarians: "school library media specialists and librarians are trained to curate and develop collections." No, they are not. They are trained to follow Chicago ALA's orders: "The American Library Association opposes all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users." This is precisely why schools are awash with inappropriate material, why parents oppose this, why Chicago's ALA wants New Jersey legislators to pass into law Chicago's rules, and why the NJASL leader is flat out lying in a deceptive way that sounds good but it really hiding the real goal.
Now, given the above, go read and/or listen to this interview of the NJASL President. At least the public is starting to wake up to the lies, as shown with this tweet by @WakeUpNJ below. The question is, will NJ legislators wake up in time?
By the way, ALA itself has started to directly apply pressure by tweeting out, via its @EveryLibrary de facto subgroup, a call to "support the Freedom to Read Act, which protects children's access to books and defends educators from harassment." It really protects Chicago ALA's "oppos[ition to] all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users," and "defends educators" from parents who oppose the elimination of age from school book selection policy. In other words, the Freedom to Read Act opposes common sense, community standards, and the law.
Notice too an astroturfing website created and maintained by ALA to "SEND AN EMAIL: Ask Your NJ State Legislators to Co-Sponsor Freedom to Read Legislation." See: https://www.saveschoollibrarians.org/njaslbookbans:
Help the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) to put an end to book bans in schools and public libraries by contacting your New Jersey Assembly Member and state Senator and asking them to co-sponsor Sen. Zwicker's Freedom to Read bill. .... Please join the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) and SWEEP NJ to send a message to the Assembly and Senate Leadership that New Jersey should protect the Freedom to Read.
Do you see what just happened here? Do you see it? Think before reading on.
Help the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) to put an end to book bans in schools and public libraries by contacting your New Jersey Assembly Member and state Senator and asking them to co-sponsor Sen. Zwicker's Freedom to Read bill. .... Please join the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) and SWEEP NJ to send a message to the Assembly and Senate Leadership that New Jersey should protect the Freedom to Read.
Look at NJ S2421 2024 again:
4(b): “the commissioner shall consult with the State Librarian and the New Jersey Association of School Librarians….”
The NJASL is to be made by law the drafter of the model policy for school boards. Yet NJASL is supported directly by Chicago's ALA (therefore by its de facto subgroup EveryLibrary also based in Chicago), the drafter of the legislation. The legislation was written by ALA, for ALA, and power comes from within the ALA, only delegated to NJASL. New Jersey families are cut out. Is there any chance at all that the New Jersey law will not be what the Chicago librarian group wants and New Jersey citizens don't want? Zero.
ALA even does direct manipulation of the New Jersey legislators themselves!! At that website it urges people to write directly to their legislators to say the following, even provides a web form to make this easy:
I am writing to ask you to co-sponsor the New Jersey "Freedom to Read" bill, S2421 and A3446, sponsored by Senator Andrew Zwicker, Senator Teresa Ruiz, and Assemblywoman Mitchelle Drulis. It is a comprehensive, affirmative bill that would protect the right to read in public libraries and school libraries across New Jersey. Censorship is on the rise in our state, and the freedom to read is under threat across the country. The time to act is now. Please co-sponsor this important legislation and preserve the right to read for every resident of our state.
At the hearings for this legislation, listen if any of the legislators mention all the emails they got in support of the legislation. Now you know they are astroturfed by ALA with full knowledge and support of NJASL. The fix is in.
What we have here is a law Chicago's ALA wants nationwide, here in NJ as S2421, and Chicago's ALA showing NJASL will do exactly what ALA wants, openly supporting NJASL, even putting NJASL directly into the astroturf letter writing website URL www.SaveSchoolLibrarians.org/njaslbookbans, and ALA getting directly involved in astroturfing the public to pressure the legislators (and paying for all the support and infrastructure that goes into designing, building, and maintaining that site), AND ALL TO ENSURE SCHOOL CHILDREN REMAIN EXPOSED TO THE VERY HARM ABOUT WHICH NEW JERSEY PARENTS ARE COMPLAINING AND THAT'S LEGAL TO REMOVE FROM SCHOOL LIBRARIES.
— Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries® (@SexHarassed) March 22, 2024
And here is EveryLibrary acting for ALA, and using its power to astroturf as detailed above to push for bad legislation in New Jersey that will harm children and deny parents rights:
The Freedom to Read Act requires NJASL to set model policy for New Jersey school boards. After watching the NJASL president lie and lie throughout an entire interview, and after seeing ALA directly promoting NJASL in an astroturfed letter writing campaign, it is apparent that the model policy written by NJASL will exactly match the policies of Chicago's ALA, namely, "The American Library Association opposes all attempts to restrict access to library services, materials, and facilities based on the age of library users."
If New Jersey legislators do not stop this Freedom to Read Act from Chicago becoming law in New Jersey, our children will directly suffer, and there will be nothing any parent can do about it because it will be the law. There will need to be a massive effort and lawsuit to strike down the law under the First Amendment, the New Jersey Constitution, and other laws. Let's hope the legislature has the sense to stop it now. Detailed information about the laws overstepped by the Freedom to Read Act are here: https://worldlibraryassociation.org/right-to-read-act/.
Finally, here is the transcript, now better understood in light of the above:
Steve Adubato:
All right, folks. My colleague, Jacqui Tricarico, joined me down in Atlantic City for the New Jersey Education Association convention, and Jacqui sat down with Ewa Elliot, who is the president of the New Jersey Association of School Librarians, to talk about a whole range of important issues affecting school librarians and students in our public schools who rely on those libraries. Here's Jacqui.
Jacqui Tricarico:
Joining me now is Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot, who is the president of the u- New Jersey Association of School Librarians, has over 10 years experience as a school librarian, um, and is here today at the NJEA Convention. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us.
Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot:
Thank you for having me here today.
Jacqui Tricarico:
So, let's describe the Association of School Librarians. What is that in, here in New Jersey?
Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot:
Um, we are NJEA members, um, and, um, what we do is we provide professional development and support for school librarians across the state of New Jersey. Uh, what that means is that, um, if the school district, let's say, is writing new curriculum, or if they are hiring a new librarian and that li- librarian needs additional training, we're able to provide that training, we're, uh, able to provide that professional development, we're able to provide mentorship. Um, but also, in the light of the latest book challenges, we are cr- we have created a task force, and that task force is able to provide resources, uh, to support school districts, school administrators, school board members, and the school librarians across the state of New Jersey.
Jacqui Tricarico:
Well, let's talk a little bit about that. We're hearing that word "book banning," that term a lot now in the media. What does that mean for a school librarian, the role that they play, in terms of book banning, or, or specific issues that community members, parents, caregivers, um, bring up about the books that are being presented on the shelves in the libraries of our st- of our schools?
Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot:
This is actually very complex problem, and I think that at the core of it is something that, um, shows a very negative impact on our librarianship as a profession, um, because we... As school librarians, we have teaching certifications, and on top of that, we have library certifications, so we are dually certified. And here, we have, um, community members coming to our libraries and saying that we don't know what we're doing, and we are specialists in the field. We are trained to provide expertise and proper materials for our school libraries, and this is something that we have to remember.
School librarians' materials are supplementary materials, and they support state standards, so anything and everything that we provide in our libraries is to support already existing policies and curricula and state standards. We d- don't come up with these recommendations and with the- these books out of thin air. If there is a certain book in a library, that, um, book was purchased keeping in mind that we have to provide some level of support for classroom, or for some kind of lesson plan. So it's, it's a well-thought-out process.
Um, when it comes to book banning, it's, again, very, very complex issues, but, um, it's greatly under-reported, and our biggest problem here right now is that a lot of school districts are not following their school policies and are not following the state standards and laws. So the issue is very under-reported. We, as association, receive information from our members, um, that school administrators or school board members come into the library space and make requests to remove something out of fear of potential book challenge. Um, that's sweeping the problem under the rug, so-
Jacqui Tricarico:
Well, yeah, and playing devil's advocate a little bit, what do you say in terms of parents who say let's leave it up to the parents to decide if these books that, you know, are causing these issues, um, or that are coming up in a lot of these school board meetings as books that should be taken off the shelves, leave it up to the parents to make that decision if the kids can have access to them?
Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot:
I would say to those parents, if you are not comfortable for your child to read that, you have the right to do it, but you cannot make this decision for all of the children, because there are children out there who look forward to have these resources in their hands. They really need it. In some cases, um, seeing a protagonist struggling with the same problem that the chil- child or the student is struggling, it might be lifesaving, so I would say to those parents, if you are not comfortable having these conversations with your child, if you are not comfortable with your child to be exposed to certain subjects, you have right to do it, but, um, take care of it with your child. Don't put this on everybody else, because remember, if you are putting that pressure on yours or my child, another parent may do the same to your child. They may put something, um, that is not compliant with your belief system, so it, it's, it works both ways.
Jacqui Tricarico:
It's a, it's a challenging conversation, and, and things, that, so something that we're consistently hearing. Lastly, how important is the role of the school librarian? How important is it for us as a community, for parents, to support the librarians that are in our children's lives as part of their education?
Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot:
So, um, there is a lot of studies. Librarians love data (laughs). We love studies and data. Uh, there is a lot of studies that are showing that having a school librarian actually increases all kinds of state sc- uh s- scores in, in all state standards, um, if they are properly aligned. And what happens is, um, having a school librarian actually helps with literacy more than having early interventions, which basically means that, um, if you're talking about money, if you're talking about hiring someone, um, as a school administrator, you are better off hiring a skilled librarian with proper certifications, who can provide support for your child, for your student, uh, rather than even having, um, certain programs. Um, then on, on top of that, we are providing, um, all kinds of research, um, assistance. Our job changes from grade level to the grade level. Um, elementary school librarian has completely different job description than middle or high school. Elementary school librarian is more like a intervention teacher, um, for library literacy, skill liter- a l- skill reading literacies, and then middle and high school is more college prep oriented.
Um, we are the only people in school buildings who actually work with everyone who knows the curricula and lesson plans across the board. We are prepared, and ready, and trained to work with absolutely any department in the building. I can provide assistance to art teacher. I can provide assistance to science teachers, to math, uh, English, social studies, because I'm trained to do it. We are the only people in the building who can also provide IT s- uh, IT help. So, we are very diverse in that.
Jacqui Tricarico:
Yeah. Ewa, thank you so much for giving us some more insight into the challenges right now facing school librarians and just how important that role is in our children's lives. Thank you so much.
Ewa Dziedzic-Elliot:
Thank you.
Announcer:
One on One with Steve Adubato has been a production of the Caucus Educational Corporation. Funding has been provided by Holy Name, New Jersey Sharing Network, the Russell Berrie Foundation, Valley Bank, PSE&G, The Fidelco Group, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, The Healthcare Foundation of New Jersey, and by the New Jersey Education Association. Promotional support provided by the New Jersey Business and Industry Association and by AM970 The Answer.
Librarians suddenly care about parental rights, but only to mislead people to pressure legislators to pass the Freedom to Read Act, NJ S2421 / A3446. Look at tinyurl.com/testify2421 to see the disinformation campaign at work. Examples:
In addition, banning books interferes with parental rights to determine what their family can read.
Parents: The bill protects my rights as a parent to offer my child a wide range of reading material.
The bill also protects the right of all parents to challenge materials by providing a process to follow in the event they believe materials need to be removed from a library.
Parents have always had the right to request that limitations be placed on their own child’s access to library materials; this bill retains that right.
All that is fake, phony, fraud. Parental rights are removed by the Freedom to Read Act as I will be detailing here:
Join Dan Kleinman @SexHarassed@SafeLibraries to learn more about The Right to Read Act. Under RTR Act, material that is educationally unsuitable or pervasively vulgar will NOT be removed. Parents lose the 1st Amendment right to challenge those materials. https://t.co/T1TwmHKzW3pic.twitter.com/6G5YAdXuvZ
Let's dig further. Like child trafficking victims are trained to go out and get more child trafficking victims, that same document contains another link that gives students specific directions on how to astroturf for the Freedom to Read Act that will indoctrinate and s@xualize more children. Click here. That has instructions like, "Hybrid Template 1: Copy paste this template into your email if you want to use a pre-written message that contains some of your own thoughts about the value of diverse books. Be sure to personalize it with your name, town, grade, school, and your ideas for each of the highlighted prompts." See graphic top right.
Remember, what librarians mean by "diverse" or "diverse books" is "s@xually explicit material":
Sen. @BasedMikeLee just played the clip of American Library Association legal counsel Deborah Caldwell-Stone saying out loud that they want to provide sexually explicit books to minors while changing the narrative to promote them as "diverse materials."
Here comes the worse part. The information in that document comes directly from the American Library Association. It's a giant astroturf technique to fool people into thinking like ALA, then they in turn get the legislators to think like ALA, and suddenly there's a law that embeds ALA's Chicago Way into states nationwide and parents lose their rights. Let's look at the final paragraph in the document I first linked:
General: The bill addresses a broadly popular, non-partisan topic: the right to read. Americans on both sides of the political aisle oppose censorship. An October 2023 IPSOS poll found that 78% of Americans are less likely to support a candidate who favors book bans. Recognizing the danger of censorship, legislators in Illinois and California have already passed “right to read” bills. Similar bills are being advanced in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Kansas, Wisconsin, Colorado, New Mexico, and Washington. As a national leader in educational excellence, New Jersey should join these states in establishing protections for intellectual freedom. Please pass the bill.
That language is substantially similar to the "long-term inoculation" American Library Association has done as detailed here, right down to the use of fake polls:
So after long-term inoculation in New Jersey, and now short term astroturfing of students and others to support the Chicago Way, here we are in New Jersey on the verge of passing a law written by ALA from Chicago, Illinois, that embeds Marxism:
Oh yes, let me add this. S2421 / A3446 seeks to exempt librarians from obscenity laws. What? Hello? Of course we should not exempt people from obscenity laws, especially those giving obscenity to children. But beyond that, isn't that a tacit admission school librarians are currently making obscenity available to children?
Should we not be arresting these people? Should Martha Hickson, Roxana Caivano continue to get away with giving obscenity to children? Why do they need an exemption if they are not already guilty of the crime? Hello? Anyone listening? Anyone thinking?
Oh look, more astroturfing for the Chicago Way, this time from the New Jersey Association of School Librarians, the very organization S2421 / A3446 charges with creating model policies for school boards to adopt, “the commissioner shall consult with the State Librarian and the New Jersey Association of School Librarians….” Don't expect any model policy to defend any parental rights or protect any children from harm in the slightest—just another reason why the Freedom to Read Act is flawed:
Help protect the right to read & stop harassment of librarians!
NEEDED:
People to testify in Trenton 2/15/24 or send emails in support of the NJ Freedom to Read bill S2421.
