Wednesday, March 2, 2016


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

CHARLESTON, W. Va. — Lawmakers in West Virginia have passed a bill that makes it illegal for abortionists to perform dilation and evacuation abortions (D&E) in the state, also known as dismemberment abortions.
H.B. 4004 and S.B. 10 are known as the “Unborn Child Protection From Dismemberment Abortion Act,” and make criminal “for any person to purposely perform or attempt to perform a dismemberment abortion and thereby kill an unborn child unless necessary to prevent serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother.”
H.B. 4004 defines a dismemberment abortion, a common procedure for second trimester abortions, as an act to “purposely to dismember a living unborn child and extract him or her one piece at a time from the uterus through use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors or similar instruments that, through the convergence of two rigid levers, slice, crush, or grasp a portion of the unborn child’s body to cut or rip it off.”
The bill passed the House on Monday 86-13 while S.B. 10 passed the Senate 24-9 on Feb. 17.
While outlawing dismemberment abortions with the exception of the mother’s health, the legislation notes that it does not apply to suction aspiration abortions, which are commonly performed in the first trimester to rip the child from the womb using a vacuum-like device.
“The term ‘dismemberment abortion’ does not include an abortion which uses suction to dismember the body of the unborn child by sucking fetal parts into a collection container, although it does include an abortion in which a dismemberment abortion is used to cause the death of an unborn child, but suction is subsequently used to extract fetal parts after the death of the unborn child,” it reads.
The bill was debated for less than an hour before coming up for a vote, with some opposing the legislation in stating that it interferes with the patient-doctor relationship.
“It’s not any of your business, and yet, you’re making it your business,” Del. Nancy Guthrie, D-Kanawha, asserted.
Del. Kayla Kessinger, R-Fayette, said that protecting those destined for death should be indeed be the business of the state.
“We are not just talking about another limb on our body. We’re talking about a completely separate individual that has a right to life and that’s why it’s our business,” she argued.
“We cannot just turn out back on those persons and say that they can legally, without repercussions, legally and physically be torn apart,” Del. Tom Fast, R-Fayette, likewise declared.
The bill now heads to the desk of Democratic Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, who identifies as pro-life, but has not indicated whether he will sign or veto the legislation. Last year, Tomblin vetoed a bill banning abortions past 20 weeks gestation over concerns that it would be ruled unconstitutional. His veto was overruled by a majority vote.
Nearly 60 million babies have been murdered in the womb since abortion was “legalized” in 1973 via the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade.
In an introductory lecture to his course on obstetrics in 1854, Philadelphia Dr. Hugh Lennox Hodge explained that if a woman were to come to a medical doctor in pursuit of an abortion, “he must, as it were, grasp the conscience of his weak and erring patient and let her know in language not to be misunderstood that she is responsible to her Creator for the life of the being within her.”
“So low, gentleman, is the moral sense of community on this subject. So ignorant are even the greater number of individuals, that even mothers in many instances shrink not at the commission of this crime, but will voluntarily destroy their own progeny, in violation of every natural sentiment, and in opposition to the laws of God and man,” he said.
“Perhaps there are few individuals in extensive practice as obstetricians who have not had frequent applications made to them by the fathers or mothers of unborn children (respectable and polite in their general appearance and manners), to destroy the fruit of illicit pleasure under the vain hope of preserving their reputation by this unnatural and guilty sacrifice.”


Photo of Gov. Dennis Daugaard.jpg
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

PIERRE, S.D. — The Republican governor of South Dakota has vetoed a bill requiring that public school students use the restroom or locker room that corresponds with their birth gender as he believes that it “openly invites federal litigation.”
As previously reported, last month, the state Senate voted 20-15 in approval of H.B. 1008, just weeks after the House advanced the bill 58-10.
“Every restroom, locker room, and shower room located in a public elementary or secondary school that is designated for student use and is accessible by multiple students at the same time shall be designated for and used only by students of the same biological sex,” the bill, authored by Rep. Fred Deutsch, R-Florence, reads.
“In addition, any public school student participating in a school sponsored activity off school premises which includes being in a state of undress in the presence of other students shall use those rooms designated for and used only by students of the same biological sex,” it adds.
The bill notes that those if a student identifies as the opposite sex, and attestation is provided in writing by the student’s parent, an accommodation must be made, such as a “single-occupancy restroom, a unisex restroom, or the controlled use of a restroom, locker room, or shower room that is designated for use by faculty.”
But Gov. Dennis Dougaard vetoed the legislation on Tuesday, opining that there is not a pressing need for the law at this time and that it conflicts with the Obama administration’s interpretation of civil rights law—which could result in a possible lawsuit.
“If and when these rare situations arise, I believe local school officials are best positioned to address them,” he wrote to lawmakers in explaining the veto. “Instead of encouraging local solutions, this bill broadly regulates in a manner that invites conflict and litigation, diverting energy and resources from the education of the children of this state.”
Dougaard had reportedly heard from those on both sides of the issue before making his decision. Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner and LaVerne Cox were among those that had urged Dougaard to veto the bill.
“I’m sick and I’m heartbroken,” Linda Schauer, South Dakota director of Concerned Women for America, told the Argus Leader. “We had hoped the governor would do the right thing.”
Deutsch says that he will not seek to override Dougaard’s veto, but is considering introducing similar legislation again next year.
“It’s very simple: Boys in the boys’ shower. Girls in the girls’ shower. Accommodation for students who are transgender,” he told reporters.
Deutsch stated that he believes the Obama administration has read further into Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination against a person based on their gender. The regulation has customarily been considered to apply to female participation in sports programs.
“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance,” it reads in part.
The Department of Education had pressured a school district in Illinois last year to allow a male student who identifies as female to use the girls’ locker room due to the text in Title IX.


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump donated $30,000 to “gay” activist organizations in 2012, a filed tax return outlines, including to a group that promotes homosexuality to children.
Trump Screenshot-compressed
The Donald J. Trump Foundation donated $20,000 to the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) according to a form 990 posted online and available for public review, as well as $10,000 to the Gay Men’s Health Crisis.
GLSEN was founded in 1990 by Kevin Jennings and a coalition of Massachusetts school teachers who supported advocacy for homosexual issues. The group, whose motto is “championing LGBT issues in K-12 education,” creates printed resources for teachers to use in the classroom, including for LGBT History Month and LGBT Pride Month. It also provides suggestions for reading material to use as lessons for the children, including the books “Heather Has Two Mommies,” “It’s OK to Be Different” and “Tango Makes Three.”
But some of the books that GLSEN has recommended have drawn severe criticism due their graphic sexual content, including “Queer 13: Lesbian and Gay Writers Recall Seventh Grade.” In the book, writer Justin Chin recalls how as a 13-year-old, he experienced “near-rapes” by older men, but “really did enjoy those sexual encounters.”
In the book “Reflections of a Rock Lobster,” author Aaron Frickle outlines how he and his male friends often engaged in sexual activity in elementary school and “never worried” if they got caught.
“By first grade I was sexually active with many friends. In fact, a small group of us regularly met in the grammar school lavatory to perform [a sexual act] on one another,” it reads.
According to reports, those involved with GLSEN believe in speaking about sex and gender to students from an early age.
“Children in the kindergarten age are ‘developing their super-ego’… That’s when the saturation process needs to begin,” activist and New York school teacher Jaki Williams said in teaching a workshop on “Inclusive Kindergartens” at a GLSEN conference.
“Five-year-olds are very interested in the big questions. They’re very interested in sex, death, and love, and they ask those questions, and they talk about them,” she asserted. “And we want to help them find the answers.”

  • “Children in the kindergarten age are ‘developing their super-ego’… That’s when the saturation process needs to begin,” activist and New York school teacher Jaki Williams said in teaching a workshop on “Inclusive Kindergartens” at a GLSEN conference.

The other organization that the Trump Foundation supported in 2012, the Gay Men’s Health Crisis, is a New York-based group that seeks to address the HIV/AIDS epidemic among homosexual men.
“In 1981, six gay men (and their friends) gathered in writer Larry Kramer’s living room to address the ‘gay cancer’ and raise money for research. This informal meeting provided the foundation for what would soon become Gay Men’s Health Crisis,” its website reads.
Trump’s donations are among a variety of causes the foundation supported, including the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, which received $100,000, the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, which received $5,000, and the Magic Johnson Foundation, which received $10,000.
As previously reported, last month, Trump was interviewed by lesbian publisher Susan O’Connell of the homosexual publication Bay Windows, who asked, “When President Trump is in office can we look for more forward motion on equality for gays and lesbians?”
“Well, you can,” Trump, who personally opposes “gay marriage,” replied. “And look, again, we’re going to bring people together. And that’s your thing (homosexuality) and other people have their thing. We have to bring all people together, and if we don’t we’re not going to have a country anymore.”


Planned Parenthood Orange County, California Changes Abortions to Harvest Intact Fetuses
for Local Company's Sales

Published on Mar 1, 2016

Medical Director Jennefer Russo Admits “We Try” For Intact “Specimens” in Up to 6-Month Abortions at Planned Parenthood in Orange, CA So Local Company Da Vinci Bio Can Harvest and Sell Body Parts

Contact: Peter Robbio,, 703.683.5004

IRVINE, March 1--A new undercover video shows the relationship between Planned Parenthood’s late-term abortion clinic in Orange County and a local for-profit biotech company, Da Vinci Biosciences, to harvest the organs of aborted fetuses to sell nationally and internationally.

The video, produced by The Center for Medical Progress, highlights a conversation between Dr. Jennefer Russo, the Medical Director at Planned Parenthood of Orange & San Bernardino Counties, and citizen journalists from The Center for Medical Progress posing as a for-profit fetal tissue company similar to Da Vinci. Dr. Russo performs abortions up to 24 weeks at Planned Parenthood’s abortion center in Orange, CA.

Russo confirms that her Planned Parenthood affiliate is currently working with a local biotech company to supply aborted fetal body parts: “Yeah, it’s Da Vinci,” she states. Da Vinci Biosciences, LLC, and its sister company, DV Biologics, LLC, are located in Orange County, CA and have been partnered with the local Planned Parenthood affiliate since 2008. Planned Parenthood Orange & San Bernardino Counties’ 2008 Annual Report lists Da Vinci Biosciences as one of the major financial donors to the abortion group.

“They take the whole specimen,” Russo explains about Da Vinci. Russo asks the undercover buyer, “You’re looking ideally for an intact specimen?” “As intact as possible,” the buyer replies.

In the first CMP undercover video, Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, described using an ultrasound-guided procedure to flip the fetus to feet-first position in order to get intact specimens. When asked about using this procedure to harvest more intact body parts, Orange County’s Russo confesses, “Yeah, we like to do that too.”

Using ultrasound guidance to manipulate the fetus from vertex to breech orientation before intact extraction is the hallmark of the illegal partial-birth abortion procedure (18 U.S.C. 1531). Nucatola previously recommended Russo and Planned Parenthood in Orange County as good prospective partners for fetal body parts harvesting.

Russo also divulges that her Planned Parenthood affiliate is not using digoxin, the chemical used as feticide in later 2nd-trimester abortions to kill the fetus and prevent a live birth, due to a nationwide supply shortage. Without a feticidal procedure like digoxin, it is possible for a fetus extracted intact during an abortion to be born alive.

Asked a second time about producing intact fetuses in late 2nd-trimester cases for organ harvesting, Russo admits, “It happens sometimes, but it’s pretty rare.” She continues with a smile, “But, we try.”

A secret-shopper phone call to Da Vinci Biosciences confirms that Planned Parenthood’s latest cases are being done without feticide. When a caller asks for fetal brain from 18 to 24 weeks gestation, a Da Vinci sales representative assures, “It is feticide-free, considering that we have such a large catalogue of fetal tissue, I believe that would be a requirement for us, in order to have so many fetal products available.”

Invoices show Da Vinci Biosciences charging $350 for fetal liver, $500 for fetal thymus, and $750 for fetal brain. The sale or purchase of human fetal tissue is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2).

“Although Planned Parenthood’s political and PR cronies work overtime to cover-up the revelations of its illicit baby parts trade, Planned Parenthood’s interstate criminal scheme to harvest and sell aborted baby parts continues without any transparency or accountability,” notes David Daleiden, CMP Project Lead. “The fact that a community like Orange County, CA, is open for business for baby body parts makes clear the need for law enforcement and elected officials to hold Planned Parenthood accountable,” Daleiden says. “And as the Supreme Court prepares to hear a landmark abortion business regulation case, Planned Parenthood’s baby parts scheme sends an urgent message about the critical need for States to have strong regulatory authority over the abortion industry.”


See the video at:

Tweet: #PPSellsBabyParts

For more information on the Human Capital project, visit
The Center for Medical Progress is a 501(c)3 non-profit dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances.

FULL FOOTAGE: Planned Parenthood Orange County Changes Abortions to Harvest Intact Fetuses




BILL CLINTON SNAPS at Military Veteran During Speech 'Shut Up And Listen!' at Hillary Rally
Published on Feb 27, 2016
Marine wants to know about Hillary's role in Benghazi

“Am I allowed to answer? I’m not your commander in chief anymore but if I were, I’d tell you to be more polite and sit down.”

“I wouldn’t listen!” the man shouted in return.

“Do you have the courage to listen to my answer? Don’t throw him out. Shut up and listen to my answer. I’ll answer it,” Clinton said as the man was pushed out of the gymnasium by sheriff’s deputies.

“Can I just saying something? That’s what’s wrong: his mind has been poisoned by lies and he won’t listen,” Clinton said.

A woman just jumped up and began shouting at the former president.

“Hillary lied over four coffins,” she said as a man near her yelled “Bullshit.”

“She lied and she lied to those families. So all those families are liars?” she said as Clinton tried to stop her and a Secret Service agent moved closer to the former president.

“Did she lie?” the woman said as Clinton responded, “Will you let me answer?”

“No,” he said. “Why are you afraid to listen to my answer?” Clinton said.

“Are you afraid?” he asked her. “No I’m not afraid because I know you’re going to lie,” she responded.

The video shows her then forcibly removed from the room. Clinton never did answer.


Simon & Schuster Gets With The Program
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Last week it was announced that Simon and Schuster will publish a line of Muslim-themed books for children called Salaam Reads. The undertaking appears to have been prompted by one Zareem Jaffery, an executive editor at the publishing house, who says the “aim with the Salaam Reads imprint is in part to provide fun and compelling books for Muslim children” that will also be “entertaining and enriching for a larger non-Muslim audience.” She convinced Simon and Schuster that the time was right to get with this program, the program being to make Muslim children feel at home by reading about Muslim children just like themselves and to make familiar, and palatable, Muslim religious observances and beliefs to non-Muslim children, by showing how kids of four different “faith traditions” — “Musa, Moises, Mo, and Kevin” (can you spot the Catholic?) – become friends, pal around together, and find out about each other’s faiths, without anything to trouble their carefree, innocent friendship as each learns, in turn, about the religious practices and beliefs of each of the three other members of the group.
All this sweetness and light, however, will almost certainly be based on a lie, or rather on a series of lies. Of course, none of the books has yet been published, but we can confidently predict what in them will not be included, and what will. Just imagine, for a minute, how the two most important Muslim holidays, Eid Al-Adha and Eid Al-Fitr, are likely to be presented by Salaam Reads. At both of these feasts, an animal — a lamb, a goat, a cow, a camel — is sacrificed, its throat slit, and then it is left to bleed to death, often in full view of smiling and excited onlookers. You can find photographs of such scenes online, at Muslim websites. If the aim of Salaam Reads is to convey a truthful picture of Islam, then it ought to show how almost all Muslims practice it, and that includes the way those animals are killed, which is part of the violence that suffuses Islam. But do you think those responsible for Salaam Reads will provide any such pictures or photographs of these animals, dying or dead? When it comes to sharing knowledge of this aspect of the Muslim faith, Salaam Reads will not only avoid showing the practice, but in the text will provide only a vague brusque admission that “animals are sacrificed” at the two Eids, while carefully not hinting at how.
Ramadan will undoubtedly be given a lot of attention in the Salaam Reads series. After all, this month of fasting and prayer is comfortingly akin to the Christian observance of fasting and prayer at Lent. The treacly analogizing in a Salaam Reads book for middle-schoolers will likely go something like this: “Ramadan and Lent are both times for prayer. And just as Christians fast during 40 days of Lent, Muslims fast for a month of Ramadan. But there are differences. When Christians fast for Lent, they don’t give up all food – even the well-known giving-up of meat is not total, for it is abstained from mostly on Fridays and on Ash Wednesday. And individual Christians often choose to give up some particular food they especially like – such as chocolate or honey-glazed donuts or ice cream — or abstain from some activity that the one abstaining finds particularly pleasurable, such as shopping or watching television. When we Muslims fast, our fast is total, and goes from dawn to dusk.” (All this slyly implying the moral superiority of Muslim Ramadan to Christian Lent.)
You will likely find the following: “And at Ramadan we Muslims give to charity.” That is a most misleading phrase. What I am certain you will not find anywhere in the Salaam Reads books is the important information that for Muslims “zakat” (giving to the needy) means “giving to needy fellow Muslims,” and only to them. This is quite different from the Christian practice of giving to one’s fellow man, not just to one’s fellow Christians.
And readers will be treated to the heartwarming, cloudless and practically identical family lives of Musa, Moises, Mo and Kevin. These practitioners of the “three abrahamic faiths” will be shown to have so much in common. Perhaps not the quintessential It’s-A-Wonderful-Life home for all four families, but in all four families there will be one wife for one husband (thereby airbrushing out the actual arrangements of tens of millions of Muslim families all over the world), and in Mo’s Muslim family, his mother and sisters will not be off-puttingly niqabbed, but dutifully and demurely hijabbed. There will be no mention of plural wives, nor any discussion of the total authority of the Muslim father over his wife (wives) and children. No discussion of what can and has happened to Muslim girls who defied that authority and refused to wear the hijab – see the case of Aqsa Parvez, and of so many more like her.
And in Salaam Reads publications will be no mention of what Muslims are instructed to think about, and how to behave toward, non-Muslims, which are very different from what one would gather from the cheerful palling around of Muslim Mo with non-Muslims Musa, Moises, and Kevin. No Qur’an 60.4: “enmity and hatred have appeared between us [Muslims] and you [non-Muslims] forever until you believe in Allah.” Nothing about the many other verses instructing Believers such as Mo to be merciful with other Believers, but stern with the disbelievers, such as Musa, Moises, and Kevin. Nothing about the Islamic doctrine known as Al Wala’ Wal Bara’ (loyalty and disavowal), whereby a Muslim is required to love what Allah loves, and hate what Allah hates, and to be kind to Believers and harsh or angry with the Disbelievers.
The five pillars of Islam, incumbent on all Believers – shehada, zakat, salat, Ramadan, hajj – will be listed and discussed (as noted above, “zakat” will be translated as “charity,” instead of as “charity to fellow Muslims”), for they are relatively innocuous. The duty of Jihad, incumbent upon Muslims and so important that it has been described by some Sunni scholars as the “sixth pillar of Islam,” will either not be mentioned or, if mentioned, will be given the usual misleading maquillage, presented prettily as the individual Muslim’s “struggle to master himself, to be a better person” (part of the confusing folderol about the “greater jihad” and the “lesser jihad”), when Jihad’s main meaning, in Muslim minds, is the “struggle” to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam, all over the world.
Salaam Reads will certainly be sure to include Quran 5:32, in its popular but incomplete and misleading form:
“The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind.”
But Salaam Reads will not include the modifying verse Qur’an 5:33:
“The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land.”
And I can just imagine the four boys – Musa, Moises, Mo, and Kevin – visiting each other’s churches, synagogues, mosques as part of Interfaith Outreach, and one of the non-Muslim boys proudly proclaiming that in this great land of ours, the First Amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion, and Mo then replying, “You know, some people seem to think that Muslims don’t respect freedom of religion, but nothing could be further from the truth. Why, more than a thousand years before the First Amendment guaranteed freedom of religion here in our home, we Muslims observed freedom of religion as guaranteed in the Holy Qur’an: ‘There is no compulsion in religion.'” (2.256) What that phrase actually meant in practice is that all non-Muslims have three choices under Muslim rule: death, or conversion to Islam or, if you were a Christian or Jew, and thus of the People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) you could be “tolerated” as long as you agreed to a life of indignity and humiliation as a “Dhimmi,” and agreed to pay a special tax, the “Jizyah.” If, in the Salaam Reads series, the word “Jizyah” appears at all, it will no doubt be defined as “an amount non-Muslims pay the Muslim state to protect them.” But protect them from whom? From the Muslims themselves. The exaction of the “Jizyah” is classic extortion.
Muhammad is the central figure in Islam. He is the Perfect Man (al-insan al-kamil) and the Model of Conduct (uswa hasana). But I’m fairly sure that in the Salaam Reads series, there’s a lot you won’t be told about Muhammad. You won’t learn of Muhammad’s consummation of his marriage to little Aisha when she was six, or about the assassination of the poetess Asma bint Marwan or the killing of the elderly Jewish poet Abu ‘Afak, who had mocked Muhammad in verse. You won’t find out about Muhammad’s raid on the Khaybar Oasis, where this “Perfect Man” seized loot from the inoffensive Jewish farmers, and in the afternoon took for himself as a sex slave a Jewish girl, Safiyya, whose husband, father, and brothers Muhammad had had killed that very morning. You won’t hear about the slaughter of 600-900 members of the Banu Qurayza in Medina after they had surrendered.
When the Salaam Reads books start to come out, see if you can find anywhere in their texts “kitman” and “taqiyya.” You won’t find those words printed on the pages. But not to worry: they’ll both be staring you in the face.


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

In 2013 Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer became one of the most visible of a score of sheriffs across the US who stood up against gun control measures proposed by the Obama administration. Last year he was hospitalized after receiving a letter containing a suspicious substance. This year he is under investigation as a potential “security leak.” Joining us today to share the details of their ongoing investigation into the political persecution of Sheriff Palmer are Sibel Edmonds and Spiro Skouras of

Sheriff Richard Mack & Sibel Edmonds Discuss Oregon, Federal Tyranny & Political Persecution


Faces revocation of his police certification.

BY Sibel Edmonds 
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes, from: 

In the latest development involving the Burns-OR Standoff case, the Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training is asking the state Department of Justice to investigate Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer after receiving numerous complaints from the public and others, including dispatchers and the John Day police chief. The Department has released eight separate complaints, including ones from a 911 manager and the John Day police chief, alleging misconduct by Palmer, and raising alarm concerning Palmer’s association with leaders of the refuge occupation.
The Department of Justice has been asked to investigate the case, and the licensing agency has warned Palmer that if violations of police standards are found, he could face revocation of his police certification.
According to a one-sided article published by Oregon Live on Thursday, February 18, Palmer has drawn criticism for his association with the armed militants who took over the wildlife refuge and his meeting with some of the occupation leaders:
“I have a great public safety concern when the Grant County sheriff is allowed to openly meet with and be part of this group of lawbreakers,” said John Day Police Chief Richard Gray in his complaint.
 According to Valerie Luttrell, emergency communications manager for John Day 911:
“Glenn Palmer is viewed as a security leak, not only by local law enforcement staff but by the Oregon State Police and FBI."
The article goes on to list verbatim quotes from anonymous complainants- and does not indicate whether the complainants are associated with or employed by BLM orother interested parties.
The most interesting aspect of the Oregon Live article is what has been ‘intentionally’ left unsaid, unexplained, and plainly omitted. Nowhere in the article is there any mentioning of Sheriff Palmer’s highly public profile since 2013, his history of constitutional activism, or of his being a prime target of a never-solved bizarre bio-terror case.
I would like to emphasize intentionally, since just a simple internet query under the news category on Sheriff Glenn Palmer brings up dozens of results that range from front page headlines to popular syndicated radio shows dating back to 2013. In fact, since Oregon Live has been the leading mainstream media outlet providing coverage on cases involving Sheriff Palmer, the query did not need to extend outside the publication’s own archives!
Sheriff Palmer was one of the first and most publicized sheriffs across the nation who stood up to gun control measures proposed by the Obama administration in 2013. And in Oregon Palmer became the de facto leader and spokesperson for a host of sheriffs who had said that they would not comply with any excessive and unconstitutional gun regulation proposal:
In a letter to Vice President Joe Biden, Grant County Sheriff, Glenn Palmer writes: "I too, have taken the Oath of Office to defend and uphold the Constitution for the State of Oregon as well as the Constitution of the United States. I take my duty and responsibility seriously. The citizens of Grant County have entrusted and empowered me to represent them. We have a history with customs and cultures that will support and defend the Second Amendment as well as the Oregon Constitution. The Oath that I swore to is to support and defend our constitutions from enemies, both foreign and domestic. I will not tolerate nor will I permit any federal incursion within the exterior boundaries of Grant County, Oregon, where any type of gun control legislation aimed at disarming law abiding citizens is the goal or objective.”
Oregon Live was one of the main publications providing coverage for Sheriff Palmer’s unwavering stand against tight restrictions on gun ownership, as late as 2015:
Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer called it "borderline treasonous" to pass this bill, which he said would further impinge on gun rights. He said there was no way for law enforcement to know when private parties are involved in a gun transfer and said he had "no intention" of trying to enforce the provisions of the bill if it became law.
Palmer won applause from the crowd, as did several other opponents who argued that legislators shouldn't even be considering a bill they regarded as an unconstitutional infringement on gun rights.
In February 2013 Palmer was one of four sheriffs from across the country who joined Glenn Beck on The Blaze TV to discuss the Second Amendment versus the push for more gun control legislation.
Palmer’s opposition to the Obama Administration’s intense lobbying to speedily pass new gun control laws immediately following the Sandy Hook incident received extensive coverage- from The Examiner to The Washington Times and Breitbart Report.
But most interestingly, most of the coverage of Sheriff Palmer was provided by Oregon Live.
In 2015 the outspoken Grant County Sheriff became the subject of national media coverage again in a highly suspicious incident that was never truly solved. In July 2015 the FBI investigated at least 20 letters received by law enforcement agencies across Oregon after Sheriff Palmer was hospitalized following exposure to an unidentified white powder in an envelope. Palmer was exposed to an unknown "chemical substance" after opening a letter delivered to his office, and was hospitalized and treated after developing a rash caused by the substance.  Yet,according to the FBI the suspicious letters sent to government offices throughout Oregon did not appear to contain any hazardous materials. This, despite the record of Sheriff Palmer’s hospitalization and treatment due to reaction from exposure to the suspicious envelope containing the unidentified substance. Palmer was one of three recipients who suffered actual physical reaction and a rash from exposure to the substance, requiring his hospitalization.
Oregon Live provided further coverage of the suspicious letter incident, including statements from Palmer:
Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer said one of the letters caused him to suffer a physical reaction. Palmer said he didn't see any powder or white substance when he opened the letter, but he experienced a metallic taste in his mouth and felt a tingling in his arms.
"I thought, 'Oh, boy,' and went to the hospital intending to get my blood tested but they went full haz-mat mode on me," Palmer told The Oregonian/OregonLive. "They stripped me down and washed me down."
Another glaring hypocrisy shows up in the discrepancy in the way in which Oregon Live treats Grant County Sheriff Palmer versus BLM-Fed man, Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward, who met with the Malheur protesters, including the Bundy’s, on several occasions:
Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward, backed up by two other sheriffs, met face-to-face Thursday with protest leader Ammon Bundy to try to bring a peaceful end to a weeklong occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
Ward was encouraged to reach out directly to the militants at a town hall meeting Wednesday night in Burns that drew an estimated 400 people. Several speakers urged the sheriff to do just what he did Thursday, and several ranchers had volunteered to join him if needed to end the occupation.
Ward met Bundy on the side of Lava Bed Road, a handful of media surrounding the men. Bundy was accompanied by Ryan Payne, a self-styled militiaman from Montana.
Combing through the web you will come across many photo ops and narrations on Ward’s interactions with the Malheur protesters. In contrast to that, we have yet to locate a single photo or documented meeting(s) between Sheriff Glenn Palmer and the Bundy’s.  Not only that, Sheriff Palmer had insisted on remaining neutral, and deferred to Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward on anything related to the Malheur Protest:
“I had no idea who I was meeting with when we had lunch yesterday,” he said. “I walked in, I realized who they were and I sat and listened to them. ... They actually wanted me to come down there and make a stand, and I said, ‘not without the sheriff’s blessing."
Palmer said he has spoken to Harney County Sheriff David Ward and told him he would not interfere without permission. Palmer said he has “a pretty good working relationship” with the sheriff from the neighboring county. He said, however, he was not willing to do the only thing Ward would allow.
“About the only thing he really told me is I’m welcome to come down there if I would shame and humiliate them into giving up, and I said, ‘No, I won’t do that,’” Palmer said. “I’m not in the business of denouncing or shaming or humiliating anybody.”
But then again, it is apparent that Sheriff Ward has been a known guardian of BLM and subservient to the Feds, thus exempt from the ever-expanding Fed hit list. While the sheriff on the hit and grudge list has not been.
If two plus two makes four- then, one plus one plus one plus one makes it a slam-dunk four:
  1. Sheriff Palmer, in 2013, landed on the very wrong side of the Obama Administration and its Fed muscles with his unapologetic and highly public stand against the proposed disproportionate measures against the Second Amendment. That’s one.
  2. Sheriff Palmer was one of the prime targets in the mysterious case of envelopes containing a toxic substance mailed to Oregon law enforcement offices, which were handed over to the FBI for forensic investigation and never again saw the light of day. That’s one as well.
  3. Sheriff Palmer has been a strict constitutionalist- a proponent of the separation of powers, pro local authority vs federal intrusions, and a staunch defender of the sanctity of the Second Amendment. None of which is tolerated by the current federal powers. Any one enough to land him on the fed’s to-be-persecuted list. That’s definitely a one.
  4. Sheriff Palmer is now a direct target of the Federal Government’s witch-hunt, geared to set an example and destroy the last pockets of resistance and righteousness in the nation of the-no-longer-free. And that’s another one.
I don’t know about you, but in my book the sum of the above ones equals a solid four.
Now, someone please explain to me: How is it that a resourceful mainstream publication such as Oregon Live, which has an extensive and well-organized archive of its own news coverage for the last three years pertaining to Sheriff Palmer, publishes this recent one-sided article without even a single mention of the never-buried hatchet and long-held grudge by President Obama and the feds against the Sheriff? Publishes it without history, context and the real facts, that is. You tell me- because ‘they’ never do.
*Video: Feds Settle Score against Oregon Sheriff Outspoken on Gun Control Proposal (By Spiro Skouras)
**Video2: Sibel Edmonds, Sheriff Richard Mack & Spiro Skouras on: Federal Tyranny, the Real ‘Enemies’ & Political Persecution

**Do Not wait for the mainstream and pseudo-alternative media for real coverage on this case and many others- Because they won’t. Instead, consider joining our campaign for Newsbud- A 100% People-Backed Media with Integrity: Click Here


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Responding to a question presented by Germany’s Left Party, German officials released a document on February 26 stating that government officials do not know the whereabouts of 130,000 migrants who registered for asylum last year. These missing aliens represent about 13 percent of the refugees, mostly from the Middle East, who entered Germany in 2015.
AFP, which broke the story, quoted a statement from the document noting, “About 13 percent did not turn up at the reception centers to which they had been directed.” The document offered several possible explanations, including that some migrants might have returned to their home countries, or moved on to other European countries, and some may have also registered more than once. 
AFP also cited a statement from a spokesman for Germany’s interior ministry that a package of new measures approved by parliament on February 25 is designed to help address the problem of unaccounted-for migrants. The measures provide for an identity document to be issued upon the arrival of a migrant, which would allow authorities to store personal data under a common database and thereby help to avoid repeated registrations.
A February 26 article in Britain’s Daily Mail speculated that thousands of the missing refugees in Germany “might even be on their way to France and Belgium in a bid to try to sneak into the UK, where asylum seekers are given accommodation, benefits, health care and education.”
The Daily Mail reported that the missing aliens failed to arrive at the government accommodations assigned to them. 
The BBC reported that Frank-Juergen Weise, the head of Germany’s migration office admitted on February 25 that up to 400,000 people were in the country under unknown identities. The BBC also noted that the new measures for processing refugees were proposed after scores of native German women complained about being sexually assaulted and robbed by a crowd of predominantly migrant men during New Year’s Eve celebrations. The report noted that Syrians represent the largest group of asylum seekers in Germany, followed by Afghans.
NPR published an article on February 26 reporting that many asylum seekers are now deciding to leave Germany and go back to their homelands. The article noted that the government’s delays in processing their applications for asylum have caused some to become pessimistic about their prospects to remain legally in Germany. The report cited Stephan Mayer, who is with the German ruling parliamentary coalition’s group in charge of home affairs. Mayer said that parts of Iraq are safe, especially now that ISIS has withdrawn from some areas. “It’s not so difficult to live there in Kurdistan and northern Iraq,” said Mayer, “so I don't see any problem if those from Iraq turn back to Erbil.”
Another report in the Washington Post noted an unexpected tendency among German immigrants, notably, that about one-quarter of migrants stated in a survey that they believe Germany should stop taking in refugees altogether. The results of this survey were initially reported in the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
The Post noted that migrants are opposed to the refugee influx in far great proportions than the overall German population, only four percent of which opposes granting asylum to these refugees. Among the reasons cited for the greater opposition among established immigrants to the more recent arrivals, are fears that negative publicity, such as that stemming from the New Year’s Eve assaults, could spill over and change Germans' views toward all immigrants.
Although Germany initially welcomed huge numbers of refugees fleeing to Europe from the turmoil in Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan, as the flood continued, the nation eventually decided that a change in policy was necessary. Germany’s Interior Minister Thomas de Mazière announced the change in policy last September 13, when he stated:
At this moment Germany is temporarily introducing border controls again along [the EU’s] internal borders. The focus will be on the border to Austria at first.
The aim of these measures is to limit the current inflows to Germany and to return to orderly procedures when people enter the country.
De Mazière explained that the new restrictions were partly necessary for security reasons and added: “This step has become necessary. The great readiness to help that Germany has shown in recent weeks ... must not be overstretched.”
The concerns of those who worried that terrorists might have hidden among the flood of refugees and entered Europe along with those who were legitimately fleeing from the ongoing war and upheaval in places like Iraq and Syria proved to be well founded.
Hans-Georg Maaßen, the president of Germany’s domestic security agency (known as the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution — BfV) told ZDF, the German public broadcaster, on February 5 that his agency had received more than 100 warnings that Islamic State (ISIS) militants have entered his nation among refugees. Maaßen said:
We have repeatedly seen that terrorists ... have slipped in camouflaged or disguised as refugees. This is a fact that the security agencies are facing.
We are trying to recognize and identify whether there are still more IS fighters or terrorists from IS that have slipped in.
Maaßen said there was “concrete evidence there are people planning terror attacks in Germany,” although there was “no indication of an imminent attack.”
Following the terrorist attacks in Paris on November 13, European authorities became more vigilant concerning the possibility of members of ISIS and other Islamic terrorist groups hiding themselves among the immense flow of refugees to enter Europe.
The findings of German intelligence authorities that there are ISIS terrorists among the refugees who have entered Germany should also make U.S. officials wary of allowing these refugees to enter the United States, at least until a more reliable vetting process can be developed. U.S. officials should also make certain that the whereabouts of all aliens who enter the United States, even legally, should be accounted for. If 130,000 migrants can go missing in Germany, the possibility of a much larger number disappearing in the vast United States is substantially greater.
Related articles: