Translate

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

UTAH DETECTIVE WHO ARRESTED NURSE, FIRED FROM PARAMEDIC JOB FOR SAYING HE WOULD "TAKE GOOD PATIENTS ELSEWHERE"~HOSPITAL BANS POLICE CONTACT WITH NURSES

 
SEE OUR PREVIOUS POST:
POLICE DETECTIVE ARRESTS, DRAGS SCREAMING NURSE OUT OF HOSPITAL FOR NOT ALLOWING BLOOD TO BE DRAWN FROM UNCONSCIOUS CRASH VICTIM WITHOUT WARRANT
UTAH DETECTIVE WHO ARRESTED NURSE, FIRED FROM PARAMEDIC JOB FOR SAYING HE WOULD 
"TAKE GOOD PATIENTS ELSEWHERE"
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 SALT LAKE CITY, Utah — The Utah police detective whoarrested a burn unit 
nurse for explaining that he needed a warrant in order to withdraw blood from 
an unconscious crash victim as per the police department’s agreement with the 
hospital has now been fired from his part-time paramedic job for remarking to 
another officer that he would “take the good patients elsewhere.”
Salt Lake City Police Department Detective Jeff Payne told another officer during the July 26 incident, as captured on his body camera, that he wondered how the scuffle and arrest would “affect [his] Gold Cross” job.
“I’ll bring ’em all the transients and take the good patients elsewhere,” he remarked.
Payne had worked as a paramedic for Gold Cross Ambulance for over 30 years, even before he began serving as a detective.

However, footage released last week of his manhandling and arrest of University of Utah Hospital burn unit nurse Alex Wubbels outraged many viewers, some of whom contacted the ambulance company and called for his termination.
Payne “violated several company policies and left a poor image of the company,” Gold Cross President Mike Moffitt told the Salt Lake Tribune. It was therefore determined that “it was best to part ways” with Payne.
“Although Jeff was not working for Gold Cross Ambulance at the time of the incident, we take his inappropriate remarks regarding patient transports seriously,” the company said in a public statement on Tuesday.

“We acknowledge those concerned individuals who have contacted us regarding this incident and affirm our commitment to serving all members of the community with kindness and respect,” it remarked. “We will continue to maintain our values of outstanding patient focused care, safety and the complete trust of the communities we serve.”
Moffitt said that Payne’s behavior was “uncharacteristic” of what he had witnessed for the past 30 years.
As previously reported, on July 26, Utah Highway Patrol was involved in a chase with driver Marcos Torres, 26, in Cache County after he was reported for driving recklessly. Torres soon crossed into oncoming traffic and smashed into a semi head-on, which was driven by 43-year-old William Gray. The truck burst into flames.
While Torres died from his injuries on the scene, Gray, who works as a reserve police officer when not driving semis, was transported to University of Utah Hospital, where he was treated for severe burns.
Payne later arrived at the hospital’s burn unit to request samples of Gray’s blood to determine if he had drugs in his system, as directed by another agency. The Salt Lake City Police Department’s blood draw program trains participating officers as phlebotomists so that they can draw the vials themselves.
However, on-duty nurse Alex Wubbels explained to Payne that he needed to meet one of three conditions as per the police department’s agreement with the hospital: 1) obtain consent from the patient 2) obtain a warrant or 3) the patient must be under arrest.
As Gray was not under arrest since he was the victim in the incident, and as he was in a comatose state and was therefore not able to give consent, Wubbels outlined to Payne that he would need to obtain an electronic warrant. She proceeded to contact numerous supervisors to ask what to do about the situation.
Becoming unhappy with her answers, Detective Payne repeatedly threatened that he was going to arrest Wubbels and take her to jail.
“I either go away with blood in vials or body in tow,” he warned.
With another staff member at her side to provide assistance, Wubbels soon printed out the hospital policy for blood draws and read it to Payne, advising him that he needs to meet one of the three conditions.
“This is something that you guys agreed to with this hospital,” she explained calmly.
Wubbels also placed one of the supervisors on speaker phone to talk to Payne about the matter himself.
“The patient can’t consent, he’s told me repeatedly that he doesn’t have a warrant, and the patient is not under arrest,” she explained to the supervisor. “I’m just trying to do what I’m supposed to do, that’s all.”
“So, I take it [that] without those in place, I’m not going to get blood. Am I fair to surmise that?” Payne asked.
The supervisor, who advised Wubbels that she was simply relaying the information, then asked Payne why he was “blaming the messenger,” and he replied that it was because she was the one who was denying his request.
The supervisor then warned Payne sternly, “Sir, you’re making a huge mistake because you’re threatening a nurse.”
Payne snapped.
“We’re done!” he declared, grabbing for Wubbels phone. “You’re under arrest!”
She backed away from the officer, but Payne continued to move toward Wubbels and within seconds, he physically grabbed the nurse and forced her out the door.
“Somebody help me! Stop! Stop! I did nothing wrong!” she exclaimed, screaming. “You’re assaulting me! Stop!”
Other hospital employees tried to reason with Payne, who handcuffed Wubbles, but to no avail.
“She’s under arrest,” Payne said.
“For doing her job?” the employee asked.
“I’ve done my job; she’s done hers,” Payne replied.
View a video of the incident released by the Salt Lake Tribune here.
Wubbles was released 20 minutes later, and has not been charged with any crime.
According to the Salt Lake Tribune, Payne outlined in a report on the incident that he had been advised by Lt. James Tracy, the commander on duty that evening, to arrest Wubbles for interfering with a police investigation if she declined to allow him to take the blood sample. He said that he had been told that “implied consent” was sufficient.
Detective Payne, along with another officer who has not been identified, has now been placed on paid administrative leave by the police department, and is also under a criminal investigation initiated by Salt Lake District Attorney Sam Gill.
 _______________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:
 
Utah Hospital Bans Police Contact With Nurses After ‘Appalling’ Arrest of Nurse Over Blood Draw Policy 
BY HEATHER CLARK
 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 SALT LAKE CITY, Utah — The University of Utah hospital where a burn unit 
nurse was dragged out screaming and placed in handcuffs for explaining to a 
police detective that he needed a warrant to withdraw blood from an 
unconscious crash victim has announced that it has made changes to its police 
policies, including barring officers from being in patient areas and having direct 
contact with nurses.
University of Utah Hospital interim CEO Gordon Crabtree held a press conference on Monday, during which he praised nurse Alex Wubbels and decried her arrest as unacceptable.
“There’s absolutely no tolerance for that kind of behavior in our hospital,” Crabtree said of the actions of Salt Lake Police Detective Jeff Payne.
“[Wubbels] upheld hospital policy [and] patient privacy. She put her own safety at risk to ensure the safety and privacy of the patient. Her actions are nothing less than exemplary,” he said. “She was placed in an unfair and unwarranted position.”

Crabtree outlined that as “the buck stops here,” the hospital determined following the incident that police officers will no longer be allowed in patient areas and must now go to supervisors for their requests.
“The nurses who are caring for patients [will no longer] interact with law enforcement,” Chief Nursing Officer Margaret Pierce, who said she was “appalled” by how Wubbels was treated, also explained. “We have house supervisors who are highly skilled and highly trained, and the police officers will interact with those individuals who know all the rules and laws, and we can work those things out together.”
“We will never interact with the police department in a patient care area,” she added. “This is never acceptable, and if there’s a discussion or an issue, it needs to happen outside the patient care environment.”

Crabtree further noted that hospital security and university police should have stepped in to protect and support Wubbels, and introduced University of Utah Police Chief Dale Brophy, who apologized for the situation and advised that officers would be trained in situation de-escalation.
“We are … working with Chief Brophy and our university security officers to ensure that officers who are on duty at the hospital, first, that they understand that their primary duty is to advocate for and protect our patients and staff,” Crabtree outlined. “Second, that they have a duty to uphold and instill a confidence [in] those of the hospital that they serve.”
He said that it was hospital administrators who advocated for Wubbel’s release following her arrest, appearing both in person and calling the police department to plead on the nurse’s behalf. The intervention resulted in Wubbels being set free without charges.
View the press conference in full below.
THE INCIDENT

Screenshot of patrol cam footage of Gray’s semi engulfed in flames
As previously reported, on July 26, Utah Highway Patrol was involved in a chase with driver Marcos Torres, 26, in Cache County after he was reported for driving recklessly. Torres soon crossed into oncoming traffic and smashed into a semi head-on, which was driven by 43-year-old William Gray. The truck burst into flames.
While Torres died from his injuries on the scene, Gray, who works as a reserve police officer when not driving semis, was transported to University of Utah Hospital, where he was treated for severe burns.
Salt Lake Police Detective Jeff Payne later arrived at the hospital’s burn unit to request samples of Gray’s blood to determine if he had drugs in his system, as directed by another agency. However, on-duty nurse Alex Wubbels explained to Payne that he needed to meet one of three conditions as per the police department’s agreement with the hospital: 1) obtain consent from the patient 2) obtain a warrant or 3) the patient must be under arrest.
As Gray was not under arrest since he was the victim in the incident, and as he was in a comatose state and was therefore not able to give consent, Wubbels outlined to Payne that he would need to obtain an electronic warrant. She proceeded to contact numerous supervisors to ask what to do about the situation.
Becoming unhappy with her answers, Detective Payne repeatedly threatened that he was going to arrest Wubbels and take her to jail.
“I either go away with blood in vials or body in tow,” he warned.
With another staff member at her side to provide assistance, Wubbels soon printed out the hospital policy for blood draws and read it to Payne, advising him that he needs to meet one of the three conditions.
“This is something that you guys agreed to with this hospital,” she explained calmly.
Wubbels also placed one of the supervisors on speaker phone to talk to Payne about the matter himself.
“The patient can’t consent, he’s told me repeatedly that he doesn’t have a warrant, and the patient is not under arrest,” she explained to the supervisor. “I’m just trying to do what I’m supposed to do, that’s all.”
“So, I take it [that] without those in place, I’m not going to get blood. Am I fair to surmise that?” Payne asked.
The supervisor, who advised Wubbels that she was simply relaying the information, then asked Payne why he was “blaming the messenger,” and he replied that it was because she was the one who was denying his request.
The supervisor then warned Payne sternly, “Sir, you’re making a huge mistake because you’re threatening a nurse.”
Payne snapped.
“We’re done!” he declared, grabbing for Wubbels phone. “You’re under arrest!”
She backed away from the officer, but Payne continued to move toward Wubbels and within seconds, he physically grabbed the nurse and forced her out the door.
“Somebody help me! Stop! Stop! I did nothing wrong!” she exclaimed, screaming. “You’re assaulting me! Stop!”
Other hospital employees tried to reason with Payne, who handcuffed Wubbles, but to no avail.
“She’s under arrest,” Payne said.
“For doing her job?” the employee asked.
“I’ve done my job; she’s done hers,” Payne replied.
View a video of the incident released by the Salt Lake Tribune here.
Wubbles was released 20 minutes later, and has not been charged with any crime.
According to the Salt Lake Tribune, Payne outlined in a report on the incident that he had been advised by Lt. James Tracy, the commander on duty that evening, to arrest Wubbles for interfering with a police investigation if she declined to allow him to take the blood sample. He said that he had been told that “implied consent” was sufficient.
PAYNE ON PAID ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
Detective Payne, along with another officer who has not been identified, has now been placed on paid administrative leave, and is also under a criminal investigation initiated by Salt Lake District Attorney Sam Gill.
The Salt Lake Police Department, as well as Mayor Jackie Biskupski, have decried Payne’s actions, holding their own joint press conference on Friday.
“What I saw is completely unacceptable to the values of my administration and of the values of the Salt Lake City Police Department,” Biskupski said. “I extend a personal apology to Ms. Wubbels for what she has been through for simply doing her job.”
“To date, we have suspended the officer from the blood draw program. We have already replaced our blood draw policy with a new policy,” also outlined Police Chief Mike Brown. “All remaining officers on the blood draw program have reviewed, and are operating under the new policy and protocol.”
The Rigby Police Department, for which crash victim Gray works as a reserve officer, expressed appreciation for Wubbels’ protection of Gray and noted that he was not under any suspicion of wrongdoing.
“The Rigby Police Department would like to thank the nurse involved and hospital staff for standing firm, and protecting Officer Gray’s rights as a patient and victim. Protecting the rights of others is truly a heroic act,” it said in an online statement.
“It is important to remember that Officer Gray is the victim in this horrible event, and that at no time was he under any suspicion of wrongdoing. As he continues to heal, we would ask that his family be given privacy, respect, and prayers for continued recovery and peace.”

 
 

JUDGE DISMISSES LAWSUIT FILED BY CALIFORNIA CHURCHES OVER DIRECTIVE REQUIRING ALL INSURANCE PLANS TO COVER ABORTION

 http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/KJM.jpg
JUDGE DISMISSES LAWSUIT FILED BY CALIFORNIA CHURCHES OVER DIRECTIVE REQUIRING ALL INSURANCE PLANS TO  COVER ABORTION
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research 
purposes:
 SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A federal judge has dismissed alawsuit filed by several 
California churches over a state directive that they believe forces all faith-based 
employers to pay for abortion coverage regardless of their religious beliefs.
“[P]laintiffs have not alleged sufficient facts to make it plausible that the director has selectively applied the law to target the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs,” wrote U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly Mueller on Friday.
As previously reported, the California Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) issued a letter in August 2014 requiring all insurance companies in the state to cover abortions, seemingly leaving no way for religious organizations, including churches, to opt out or choose an alternative plan.
“Abortion is a basic health care service,” Director Michelle Rouillard wrote to the seven insurance companies that refused to offer coverage. “All health plans must treat maternity services and legal abortion neutrally.”

She asserted that abortion must be covered because the “California Constitution prohibits health plans from discriminating against women who choose to terminate a pregnancy,” and also cited a 1975 law surrounding “medically necessary” health care.
The directive is believed to be a result of a decision made in 2014 by two Roman Catholic/Jesuit universities in the state—Santa Clara University and Loyola Marymount University—to no longer pay for abortions, but that employees could buy coverage through a third party. Some faculty members objected to the announcement and called upon Gov. Jerry Brown to intervene.
The Life Legal Defense Foundation (LLDF) and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) soon filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services after the DMHC refused to change its decision following written correspondence between the groups.
They then filed a second complaint with the federal government on behalf of seven churches, one of which operates a Christian school, to again assert that the mandate violates the rights of faith-based employers. It cited the federal Weldon Amendment, which mandates that a state be forfeited of certain government funds if it “subjects any … health care entity to discrimination” because the entity “does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.”
Skyline Church in La Mesa, Foothill Church and Foothill Christian School in Glendora, Alpine Christian Fellowship in El Cajon, The Shepherd of the Hills Church in Porter Ranch, City View Church in San Diego, Faith Baptist Church in Santa Barbara, and Calvary Chapel Chino Hills in Chino were all represented in the complaint.
In October 2015, Foothill Church, Calvary Chapel Chino Hills and The Shepherd of the Hills Church filed a federal lawsuit against DMHC with the assistance of ADF, seeking a declaration that the mandate violates the First and Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the directive.
They explained that they had contacted their insurers in an effort to ensure that their employee health plans do not include abortion, but were told that the DMHC’s directives prevented them from providing plans that exclude or limit abortion coverage.
However, on Friday, Judge Mueller, appointed to the bench by then-President Barack Obama, said that the churches hadn’t proven that the DMHC and Rouillard would not accommodate their religious beliefs. She noted that the churches had found that Rouillard had granted an exemption to at least one organization, but the entity allows abortion in the cases or rape or incest, while the churches believe abortion is always wrong.
“Plaintiffs also allege the director has granted an exception to accommodate religious employers who oppose abortion except in the case of rape or incest, but has not granted an exception that would accommodate plaintiffs’ beliefs that abortion is always immoral. They claim these allegations show she ‘has exercised her discretion in a way that prefers some religious beliefs to others,'” Mueller outlined.
The judge disagreed with this conclusion, remarking that the “exemption evinces, if anything, the director’s ‘intent to accommodate, rather than impose burdens on, religious belief.'”
“[P]laintiffs have made only the bald allegation that the director ‘refuses to grant an exemption that would accommodate the religious beliefs of the churches,'” Mueller said. “Plaintiffs have not alleged that any plan that would be acceptable to them has been submitted to the director for approval, nor that she rejected any such plan.”
“Thus their allegation that ‘she has repeatedly refused to grant them [an exemption],’ is conclusory and insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.”
ADF says that the churches are considering the path forward at this time.
“If the state can force a church to pay for the very thing they counsel against, in violation of their constitutionally protected religious beliefs, then no American is secure,” said legal counsel Jeremiah Galus. “Because the court’s decision ignores the longstanding freedom of faith communities to act consistently with their religious mission, we are consulting with our clients about next steps.”

TEXAS ABORTION CHAIN OFFERS TO MURDER UNBORN FOR FREE TO "HELP" THOSE AFFECTED BY HURRICANE HARVEY

 
 https://saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/whole-womens-health-jpg.jpg
TEXAS ABORTION CHAIN OFFERS TO MURDER UNBORN FOR FREE TO "HELP" THOSE AFFECTED 
BY HURRICANE HARVEY
BY HEATHER CLARK
 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 AUSTIN, Texas — A chain of abortion facilities in Texas has offered free 
abortions to those affected by Hurricane Harvey, it says, to “help” pregnant 
mothers who wanted to terminate their pregnancy but could not do so because 
of the storm. Whole Woman’s Health, which has locations in Austin, Fort Worth, 
San Antonio and McAllen, posted its offer to its website on Friday.
“To ensure our patients get the compassionate, quality abortion care they deserve, we’re providing no-cost abortions for those affected by Hurricane Harvey,” the organization wrote.
“There are already so many barriers to access this necessary procedure, and natural disasters stand in the way of women getting to their appointment and/or being able to afford care,” it stated. “During Hurricane Harvey, many of the clinics in Houston had to close temporarily, leaving women with very few options. Continued political attacks on abortion access make an unwanted pregnancy particularly stressful in Texas—add that to the stress of dealing with hurricane aftermath.”

A handful of followers wrote supportive messages under the post, stating that that the offer is “very generous” and “a beautiful thing.”
“That’s very generous. I hadn’t even stopped to consider the women that might find themselves in this situation. On top of losing your home and belongings, now there’s an unwanted pregnancy. Or vice versa,” one commenter wrote.
“Thank you for doing this, and for providing the opportunity for others to take part. What a beautiful thing!” another stated.
 As previously reported, Whole Woman’s Health of Austin was fined $17,430 in 2011 for mislabeling boxes containing the remains of aborted babies, which were then collected by the medical waste company Stericycle and autoclaved before being dumped in a municipal solid waste landfill with household and commercial trash.
Stericycle was fined $42,000 for its part in the matter as it is illegal in Texas to dump human remains in landfills. Local company representatives said that the aborted babies should have rather been shipped to Stericycle’s incineration plant in Apopka, Florida, where they would be burned with other pathological waste.
“It was explained that medical waste is placed in red biohazard bags, then placed into boxes provided by Stericycle. Each fetus resulting from an abortion is placed into a hard plastic container and then into a red biohazard bag. The bag is then placed into a freezer, where it is stored,” an investigative report from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) outlined.
“When Stericycle arrives to transport the medical waste, the individual fetuses are removed from the freezer and placed into another large red biohazard bag. The red biohazard bag containing the fetuses is placed into the medical waste box along with other medical waste generated at the facility that requires treatment,” it explained.
Last year, Whole Woman’s Health was among those that filed a lawsuit against the Texas Department of State Health Services after it finalized a rule at the request of Gov. Greg Abbott that required abortionists to utilize burial or cremation services provided by funeral homes rather than hiring medical waste companies to dispose of the children with other medical trash.
“I find the interference by the government into women’s personal health decisions to be morally offensive,” Amy Hagstrom Miller, president of Whole Woman’s Health, argued.
However, as previously reported, 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.

 

ISLAMIC RACISM: LINDA SARSOUR SAYS HER HIJAB TRANSFORMED HER FROM "WHITE" INTO A "PERSON OF COLOR"

 https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-hSWrWZ0aNN0/Wa2ulDQE0zI/AAAAAAAA8KA/4HvGAYwahQAhENMKPhM_O0ROlf4tddwYACLcBGAs/s640/personofcolor.png
LINDA SARSOUR SAYS HER HIJAB TRANSFORMED HER FROM "WHITE" INTO A "PERSON OF COLOR"
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 Elder of Ziyon has made the most amazing discovery: Linda Sarsour “magically
 changed from white to a ‘woman of color’ in an instant,” just by putting on a 
hijab.
 
Sarsour says in the above video: “When I wasn’t wearing hijab I was just some ordinary white girl from New York City.” That comes from a Vox video published in January 2017.
But in an April 2017 interview, there is this:
After watching Michelle Pfeiffer’s character in Dangerous Minds, Sarsour decided to become a high school teacher, “inspiring young people of color like me, to show them their potential.” She graduated a year early, gave birth to her eldest son, and enrolled in community college.
I’ve often argued against the idea that opposition to jihad terror is “racist” by pointing out the Islam is not a race, and that converts to Islam don’t change their race when they change their religion. But now I see how it works, courtesy of Linda Sarsour: conversion to Islam, or at least devout observance of Islam, really does change one’s race! It’s magic! Sarsour should help a sister out and call Rachel Dolezal to tell her that all she has to do in order to become a member of her preferred race is don a hijab.

ROBERT SPENCER CONFRONTS ANTIFA IN GERMANY

ROBERT SPENCER CONFRONTS ANTIFA IN GERMANY 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
Many Americans assume that Antifa is a new group, but in reality, it is only new, or relatively new, in the United States. Back in 2011, I spoke at an outdoor rally in Stuttgart, Germany, and Antifa was out in force. Hundreds of police were there also, and if they had not been, I would not be writing this today: before I spoke, I was standing in front of the massive police phalanx with some members of the German group that had invited me; among them was a young man who I took to be one of their number until I shook his hand and smiled and he responded, “If it weren’t for all these police here, I would have knifed you by now.”
As the other speakers and I spoke, Antifa members threw rocks, bottles, and manure at us, while screaming things like “Nazis raus.” This was ironic, as they were behaving much more like Nazis than those they were screaming at. So I decided to address them. In the midst of this barrage, I stood at the front of the stage and addressed the Leftists, while they blew their vuvuzelas and booed to try to drown me out, and kept on throwing things. This is what I said:
I came from the United States of America to stand for freedom, with all free people, against the forces of oppression and darkness which you are representing.
I came here in order to stand with the people who are fighting for the freedoms that make it possible for you to do what you are doing today.
Not the violence and hatred, but to stand and dissent, but you can’t stand to have any kind of rational discussion, you can’t stand having dissent, you have to try to throw bottles, and drown us out, because you are cowards, because you know that you stand for nothing except for oppression and darkness and hatred, and that is why you are there.
And that is why I am here.
You are fronting for the most radically intolerant and hateful ideology on the planet. Everywhere in the world, everywhere in the world, where there are Muslims and non-Muslims, there is conflict because the Muslims attack the non-Muslims. The Qur’an teaches to make war against the unbelievers, and to subjugate them.
And you are already subjugated! You are already their useful idiots. You are already their tools. You are out here in their service.
And you think you’re fighting for freedom. You are fighting for your own slavery!
You are fighting for your own enslavement.
And it will come. It will come to you.
You are fighting for an ideology that denies the freedom of speech, and one day you will wish you had the freedom of speech, and one day, you will wish you had the freedom of speech that you are trying to fight against today.
You are fronting for an ideology that denies the freedom of conscience and will kill you if you disagree, which is exactly what you want to do already.
You are fighting on behalf of an ideology that denies equality of rights for women, and all the women among you will one day be enslaved, if you get what you want.
You are fighting for the destruction of all the freedoms that you enjoy.
You are fighting for the utter defeat of your own selves, and your own life.
You are slaves seeking slavery. You are the oppressed loving your oppression, and thinking that you are standing for freedom.
You are the most foolish, you are the most evil, foolish, people on Earth.
We are standing for the human rights of all people. Of the oppressed Christians in Indonesia, in Pakistan, in Egypt, in the Sudan that you just heard about.
We are standing for the oppressed people who are targeted by Islamic jihad everywhere around the world. In Israel. Everywhere around the world.
And so, in closing, I have to say: Shame on you!

WAR WITH NORTH KOREA: ALL OR NOTHING~POSSIBLE "EMP" ATTACK THREATENED BY NORTH KOREA

WAR WITH NORTH KOREA: ALL OR NOTHING 
 North Korea Brags Of EMP Attack 
 North Korea can now at the very least claim that they have a powerful hydrogen bomb that can be mounted on an inter continental ballistic missile that after tests in July gave the North Korean regime a range of 10,000 km. Which is advanced enough to reach the U.S. mainland. President Trump has responded by suggesting a trade embargo with any country that does business with North Korea. This could force China to cut its oil pipeline to North Korea. General Mattis declared a massive military response to the threats. Threats that include the very real possibility of an EMP attack, as was mentioned by North Korean media.
 

GERMANY SUBMITS TO ISLAMIC MODESTY RULES~POLICE ADVISE WOMEN TO JOG IN PAIRS TO AVOID VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT

GERMANY SUBMITS TO ISLAMIC MODESTY RULES
 Paul Joseph Watson covers a story about German women being assaulted while jogging. The police department gave a less than assuring response to these acts of violence and sexual assault.
 

NIGEL FARAGE WARNS: EUROPE FACING DECADES-LONG "BLOODY FIGHT" WITH JIHADISTS

EUROPE FACING DECADES-LONG "BLOODY FIGHT" WITH JIHADISTS, WARNS NIGEL FARAGE 
 Civil war in Europe now inevitable due to 
Islamic invasion
BY DAN LYMAN
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
British statesman Nigel Farage has conceded that Europeans have crossed a tipping point and are now facing a battle against jihadists that could go on for decades, despite countless forewarnings about border security and immigration trends issued by nationalists like him.
In an interview with Westmonster, Farage was asked how he feels about the unfolding crisis of Islamic terrorism in the UK and Europe, knowing that he has attempted for many years to avert the looming catastrophe while being constantly defamed and slandered by the global elite, EU internationalists, and mainstream media alike.

“No one said sorry, not one – the legions who lined up to say that I was racist, neo-fascist – no one has apologized.” Farage said. “Surely, decent people would admit they were wrong.”
“To be honest, even my most pessimistic view of what was going to happen here has been far exceeded by truth and reality.”

“I think we are in a very bad place. I think we are in for decades of a very difficult and literally bloody fight, and I believe we have brought it all upon ourselves,” he assessed.
The EU’s head of counter-terrorism, Gilles de Kerchove, revealed in a recent interview with El Mundo that there are more than 50,000 known Islamic radicals currently in Europe, 20,000 – 25,000 of whom are in the United Kingdom.
I would not venture to a specific figure, but tens of thousands, more than 50,000,” Kerchove stated when asked to estimate the number of jihadists in Europe.
According to El Mundo, Kerchove believes that Islamic slaughter in Europe is “a generational question that will accompany us for decades,” and that “we will suffer more attacks… it seems clear that something like Barcelona will happen again,” which serve as confirmations of Farage’s assertions.
Additionally, Kerchove admits that European governments and intelligence agencies have been overwhelmed and are incapable of tracking all threats since the migrant crisis exploded, saying, “Three years ago it was easy to identify someone radicalized. Now, most fanatics disguise their convictions.
Neil Basu, counter-terrorism chief for the London Metropolitan Police, disclosed that security services are currently probing over 600 possible terrorist plots – more than 60 of which have been opened in the past six weeks, and that more investigations are being launched than are being closed.
“It is not going to change. This was truly a summer like no other, it was truly a shift and not a spike, it is truly a new norm that we face,” Basu told a conference of police superintendents, blaming “porous” borders and ports, and “a lack of biometrics and advanced passenger information” for new arrivals.
At least 35 attempted or successful terrorist attacks have been carried out across Europe so far in 2017, as demonstrated on a map compiled by Breitbart London’s editor-in-chief, Raheem Kassam, who writes, “The continent has seen 72 deaths and over 430 injuries this year as a result. Only one of those deaths, and 10 of the injuries, were not migration-related or Islamic in nature.”

In 2015, Infowars reported on an Islamic State handbook that detailed the group’s plans to send their fighters and loyalists into Europe, disguised within the waves of migrants and ‘refugees’ pouring onto the continent.
“A newly uncovered 99-page manifesto produced by the Islamic State brags about how the terror organization has exploited the refugee program to send jihadist sleeper cells to Europe since 2012, with the goal of creating Muslim “no go zones” in western cities that can be used as a base from which to launch further Paris-style attacks,” wrote Paul Joseph Watson. “The manifesto, entitled Black Flags from Rome, serves as a shocking reminder of the danger posed by allowing potentially millions of Muslim migrants to enter Europe and America via the ‘refugee’ red carpet.”

RADICAL SPLC NOW DEMANDING ARMY POSTS BE RENAMED

 http://www.gruntreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/150626001800-military-bases-named-after-confederate-officers-starr-dnt-ac-00003616-exlarge-169.jpg
 Every liberal, Progressive agenda — homosexual marriage, abortion, anti-bullying edicts, the marginalization of Judeo-Christian beliefs, etc. — has a societal price: We count the costs and ask whether the changes are worth the price. -
 RADICAL SPLC NOW DEMANDING ARMY POSTS 
BE RENAMED
BY STEVE BYAS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
Having recently released a list of 1,500 “Confederate monuments” that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is demanding be taken down, the radical organization is now calling for renaming several army posts because they bear the name of a Confederate general. (Although sometimes called “bases,” army installations are known as “posts”; it is air force installations that are known as “bases.”)
And if they are not taken down, the SPLC predicts, there will be “more turmoil and bloodshed.”
The SPLC has even posted the names of elementary and middle schools across the country that must be renamed, causing some alarm that such an irresponsible listing could precipitate violence that could involve little children. Some far-left agitators such as Antifa have suggested that since the police won’t shut down what they call fascists, they will have to do it themselves.

Eight U.S. army posts use the names of a Confederate general, including Fort Bragg in North Carolina (home of the 82nd Airborne division); Fort Hood in Texas; and Fort Benning in Georgia.
Fort Bragg was named for General Braxton Bragg, who commanded the Confederate “Army of Tennessee,” who won the Battle of Chickamauga in northern Georgia, but subsequently blundered away Confederate control of the city of Chattanooga (an important rail center), leading to his removal by Confederate President Jefferson Davis in 1863.
Fort Hood was named for General John Bell Hood, who had a reputation as one of the best brigade and division commanders in the Confederate army. He lost use of his arm during the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863, and then suffered a severe leg wound at Chickamauga, which led to its amputation. Despite these injuries, he led the Army of Tennessee in the famous Confederate defeat at the Battle of Franklin on November 30, 1964, which combined with an ill-advised assault upon Nashville soon after essentially destroyed the army.
Fort Benning was named for General Henry Lewis Benning, who had been a legislator and a member of the Supreme Court in Georgia, before commanding “Benning’s Brigade” in the war.
Other posts named for Confederate generals include Fort Gordon, Fort Lee, Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Polk, and Fort Rucker.
The Department of Defense has said they will not even consider renaming any of the posts.
Why did the U.S. Army choose to name several army posts after Confederate generals? The answer can be traced back to the sentiment expressed by President Abraham Lincoln in his second inaugural address, delivered on March 4, 1865, when it was clear that the Southern Confederacy was collapsing. Lincoln called for reconciliation, saying, “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
In short, it was determined among those in the victorious North that nothing was to be gained by verbally castigating the defeated foe. When General Robert E. Lee surrendered what was left of the Army of Northern Virginia, on April 9, 1865, General U.S. Grant forbade celebrating by his soldiers in Lee’s presence. “They are our countrymen again,” Grant advised them.
In other words, they wanted the country to reconcile. This was the prevailing view when it was decided that U.S. army posts in the former Confederacy be named after Confederate soldiers. It was a noble gesture — and a wise one.
Unfortunately, far too many politicians today appear to be more influenced by scoring cheap political points by trashing these generals, or they are too timid to stand up to the politically-inspired attacks upon them. And, of course, the ultimate goal is not Confederate generals, anyway. Once the precedent is established by attacking men that many are afraid to defend, lest they be accused of being “pro-slavery,” or at least “insensitive,” the cultural subverters will then move on to the Founding Fathers — men such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. This brings the subverters to the ultimate goal of chipping away at the foundations of the country, including the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, which will be disparaged as archaic documents hopelessly tainted by slavery and bigotry.
The cultural subverters will then propose to replace our Constitution with a “social democracy,” by which they really mean a Marxist regime. This Taliban-like assault will not end until Americans make it clear to their elected representatives that we will not tolerate these continued attacks upon American heritage. Marxists always use existing divisions in society (or create them) to advance their goals, and the present campaign to attack Confederate monuments is really no different.

SESSIONS ANNOUNCES TRUMP HAS ENDED "DACA" BY GIVING IT TO CONGRESS~OBAMA UPSET, CALLING IT "CRUEL"

SESSIONS ANNOUNCES TRUMP HAS ENDED "DACA" 
 Trump Kicks “Dreamer” Question to Congress, 
Where It Belongs 
BY STEVE BYAS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 
“If President Trump makes the decision we [Congress] will work to find a legislative solution to their dilemma,” said Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in reaction to President Donald Trump’s announcement today that he is ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). DACA was implemented by “executive order” by former President Barack Obama.
Under Obama’s DACA, children brought to the United States illegally by their parents would be allowed to stay. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution gave Obama the legal authority to change U.S. immigration law, but he argued that he was simply deferring prosecution of illegal aliens who were brought to the United States illegally by their parents.
Because of this, Trump’s action simply restores the status quo as it existed before Obama’s constitutionally dubious action.
Oklahoma Senator James Lankford, a Republican, agreed with Trump’s action, saying it should be up to Congress, not the president, to pass laws concerning immigration. “We must confront the nation’s out-of-date immigration policy and finally resolve the issues of strong border enforcement and merit immigration,” Lankford said.
He added, “It is right for there to be consequences for those who intentionally entered this country illegally. However, we as Americans do not hold children legally accountable for the actions of their parents.”

Whatever decision Congress eventually makes on this issue, the bottom line is that it is theirs to make, not Obama, Trump, or any other U.S. president. If Congress chooses to do nothing, that is also its decision to make, despite former President Obama’s assertion that if Congress failed to act, he had to. That is not how the Constitution is supposed to work.
Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states that all legislative power is given to Congress.
Despite the clear wording of the Constitution, presidents and courts have usurped the law-making power of Congress on matters both foreign and domestic. For example, the Iranian Nuclear Deal, regardless of what one thinks of its merits, is obviously a treaty. A treaty requires the approval of two-thirds of the U.S. Senate before it is a law in the United States, yet over the past few decades, presidents have made treaties with foreign countries without any approval by either house of Congress. They have managed to do this by calling the treaties “executive agreements,” but calling them by a different name does not change what they are — treaties.
Courts have also taken over areas that are clearly legislative. In still other instances, federal bureaucrats have essentially made law. Writing in Bureaucracy, the great economist Ludwig von Mises said, “The experts of the various government agencies are certainly fine men. But they are not right in becoming indignant whenever the legislature frustrates their carefully elaborated designs.… But the only question is: Who should run the country? The voters or the bureaucrats?”
Unfortunately, the increasingly prevailing truth is that presidents, courts, and bureaucrats make our public policy decisions — not the people’s elected representatives. Although presidents can be voted out of office, judges and bureaucrats cannot.
But why does Congress allow this situation to continue? Don’t they know that the Constitution gives them, not the president, the courts, and the bureaucracy the power and authority to determine immigration policy and other issues that concern the general public? Aren’t they jealous of this usurpation of their power?
One would think so. No doubt the framers of the Constitution assumed Congress would not allow the president, courts, or bureaucrats to infringe on their constitutional right to make laws.
It is probable that James Madison and the other delegates did not anticipate that members of Congress would cheer a president who takes unconstitutional actions they agree with. If so many members of Congress care little about their oath of office, it is not surprising that they care little about unconstitutional actions by the executive branch, the courts, or the bureaucracy.
Second, if someone else makes a decision on a controversial issue, such as what to do about illegal aliens who were brought here by their parents, then that means they, the members of Congress, do not have to go on record themselves on the issue — and face an angry electorate in the next election.
Trump’s action simply returns the power to make the decision back to Congress. As Jill Colvin of the Associate Press said in her article on this subject, this hands a “political hot potato to Republicans on the Hill.” The dirty little secret is that members of Congress, of either party, would rather someone else make the decision on these political hot potatoes, so they can tell their constituents, “I agree with you on the issue but [insert the culprit: courts, president, bureaucrats] have taken it out of our hands.”
But members of Congress are shirking their duty by allowing important issues to be usurped by others. And if members of Congress are not going to stand up for their constitutional authority, the voters need to replace them with others who will.
OBAMA CALLS TRUMP'S DECISION "CRUEL"
 OBAMA IS UPSET
 Obama never intended DACA to be perminent: Kellyanne Conway
 Sarah Sanders WH Press Briefing 
on Trump Ending DACA 9/5/17