Notre quotidien. Après cette vidéo, il a tenté de voler mon téléphone et a frotté son chibre contre moi. Un joger inconnu a récupéré mon téléphone et m’a protégé. Merci à lui. Je me suis faite agresser sexuellement 12 fois dans une balade de 20 min. C’est ça la 🇫🇷 en 2022. pic.twitter.com/HNyxIuKJHX
Mila, however, says, “I’m not attacked as Mila, but as a woman,” and describes “an everyday life that has become unbearable for women.”
This is because she and other women who are harassed are walking around unveiled. “O prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their veils close around them. That will be better, so that they may be recognized and not molested.” (Qur’an 33:59
A warning cry, but also a cry of rage. On Instagram and later on Twitter, Mila recounted her nightmarish afternoon walking along the banks of the Rhône in Lyon. On the phone with her boyfriend, she first declared that she was being “annoyed” everywhere she went, “every 30 seconds”: “You get harassed, any young woman could confirm it the same way,” she said at first. Then she explains the assaults she has just experienced: “You have a nice ass, we are going to spank you, we are going to rape you,” etc.
She is quite annoyed and admits that she reacted by insulting them, which she did not really want to do. While she was reporting the first attacks, she was again harassed by a group of other people who spoke poor French. When she videoed them, the situation finally got out of hand. As can be seen in the footage she posted, one of the men pretended to show her his private part and spat in her direction. He then grabbed her arm and took her mobile phone away.
She managed to free herself, but another interfered and started deleting the videos on the mobile phone that incriminated him. At the same time, her attackers call her a “son of a bitch” and threaten to throw her mobile phone into the Rhône. When she started screaming but no one came to her aid, a man who was actually jogging managed to save the mobile phone and drove the attackers away.
She recounted these scenes later that evening, still in her posts. “I get so annoyed all the time, but 99% of the time you don’t feel like filming it,” she laments. “I’m not attacked as Mila, but as a woman,” she adds, describing an everyday life that has become unbearable for women. Finally, in the evening, she decided to press charges. On Twitter, she revealed that the police “probably can’t do much” because the main attacker was “probably an illegal.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-02-23 06:23:102022-02-23 07:12:05WATCH: Muslim Migrants Attack French Actress Mila a Critic of Islam in Broad Daylight
Democrats widely support Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s handling of the “Freedom Convoy” protests, according to a Trafalgar Group poll released Tuesday.
A majority of respondents, 55.3%, said they disapprove of Trudeau’s handling of the protests, while 35.1% said they approve. When polling Democrats only, a whopping 65.7% said they approve of Trudeau’s handling while 17.2% said they disapprove.
Republicans offered a stark contrast, with 87.3% saying they disapprove and 8.1% saying they approve. Among those who offered no party affiliation, 74.4% disapprove.
The poll was conducted among 1,080 likely general election voters between Feb. 18 to Feb. 20. There was a 2.99% margin of error.
In an unprecedented move, Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14. The move allowed him to take additional steps to quell the protests against mandates in Canada. With the invocation of the act, Trudeau said police would be given additional tools to strengthen their ability to impose fines or imprisonment on those who do not comply with orders.
The government could then ensure essential services are rendered, such as towing vehicles blocking roadways, while permitting financial institutions to regulate and prohibit the use of property to fund or support illegal blockades.
“This is not a peaceful protest,” Trudeau said. “The blockades are harming our economy and endangering public safety. This is hurting workers who rely on these jobs to feed their families.”
“I want to be very clear, the scope of these measures will be time limited, geographically targeted and reasonable and proportional to the threats they are meant to address. This is about keeping Canadians safe.”
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association publicly opposed Trudeau’s invocation, calling it a “threat” to democracy and civil liberties.
“The federal government has not met the threshold necessary to invoke the Emergencies Act. This law creates a high and clear standard for good reason: the Act allows government to bypass ordinary democratic processes. This standard has not been met,” the association said. “Emergency legislation should not be normalized. It threatens our democracy and our civil liberties.”
WATCH: Close up of peaceful protestors in Ottawa protesting mandates being trampled by the mounted unit.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-02-23 06:08:252022-02-23 06:17:30Democrats By Wide Margin Support Trudeau’s Move Against Truckers
If you’re wondering how we’ll ever put an end to these draconian COVID-19 mandates that are destroying lives and sanity across the world, take heart. History can serve us in this regard
Over 135 years ago, in 1885, England became the host to a massive anti-vaccination movement that ultimately resulted in people overturning the government’s compulsory vaccination rule
Tens of thousands of people took to the streets in opposition to compulsory smallpox vaccinations. Many were fined and jailed, but in the end, the government relented and abolished the mandate
The trucker protest in Canada and elsewhere is almost identical to what happened during smallpox vaccination campaigns more than a century ago, when mass protests and peaceful disobedience broke the government’s tyrannical hold
The Leicester Model was proven successful in the wake of that 1885 anti-vaccination protest and has been standard ever since. By quarantining infected patients and improving public hygiene, smallpox was finally eradicated
If you’re wondering how we’ll ever put an end to these draconian COVID-19 mandates that are destroying lives and sanity across the world, take heart. History can serve us in this regard. The parallels between the COVID-19 pandemic and its countermeasures that of previous smallpox pandemics are fascinating to behold, and therein we can also find the answer to our current predicament.
Smallpox, a highly infectious and disfiguring illness with a fatality rate around 30%,1 has been with us for many centuries, probably thousands of years. During the last four centuries, forced mass vaccination has been a recurring countermeasure relied on by government during these kinds of outbreaks, often with devastating results, and there have always been large portions of society that opposed it.
In the 1700s, Boston, Massachusetts, was hit by a series of outbreaks, and the introduction of a vaccine led to violent rebellion by those who believed it was dangerous and a violation of God’s will. Local newspapers were rife with disputes for and against the vaccine.2
The hypodermic needle had not yet been invented at this time, so the vaccination consisted of rubbing some cowpox pus into an open wound on the arm. Dr. Zabdiel Boylston, who introduced the inoculation at the urgings of Rev. Cotton Mather, was forced into hiding and was eventually arrested. Mather’s home was firebombed.
In 1862, it was Los Angeles, California’s turn. Compulsory vaccination was again rolled out, and anyone who refused was subject to arrest. Infected people were terrified of being forcibly quarantined in a “pest house,” miles outside the city limits, and for good reason. It was a place where you were dumped to die, with not so much as a bedsheet for comfort.3
The Anti-Vaccination Rebellion of 1885
In the decades to come, smallpox outbreaks were occurring all over the world, and forced inoculation was typically the answer, even though it had its own risks. In 1885, England became the host to a massive anti-vaccination movement that ultimately resulted in people overturning the government’s compulsory vaccination rule.
As reported by the BBC, December 28, 2019, mere weeks before COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic:4
“In the late 19th Century, tens of thousands of people took to the streets in opposition to compulsory smallpox vaccinations. There were arrests, fines and people were even sent to jail.
Banners were brandished demanding ‘Repeal the Vaccination Acts, the curse of our nation’ and vowing ‘Better a felon’s cell than a poisoned babe.’ Copies of hated laws were burned in the streets and the effigy was lynched of the humble country doctor who was seen as to blame for the smallpox prevention program.”
A Substack user going by the moniker “A Midwestern Doctor”5,6 details this part of history, explaining why it matters to us today. He writes:7
“What is occurring now in Canada and other places is almost identical to what happened with the smallpox vaccination campaigns over a century ago, and I believe it is critical we understand these lessons from the past and it is vital this message gets out to the Truckers.
Briefly, the original smallpox vaccine was an unusually harmful vaccination that was never tested before being adopted. It increased, rather than decreased smallpox outbreaks.
As the danger and inefficacy became known, increasing public protest developed towards vaccination. Yet, as smallpox increased, governments around the world instead adopted more draconian mandatory vaccination policies.
Eventually, one of the largest protests of the century occurred in 1885 in Leicester (an English city). Leicester’s government was replaced, mandatory vaccination abolished, and public health measures rejected by the medical community were implemented.
These measures were highly successful, and once adopted globally ended the smallpox epidemic, something most erroneously believe arose from vaccination.”
The alternative countermeasure implemented in Leicester involved quarantining infected people and notifying anyone who’d been in close contact with the patient. They also used “ring vaccination” in which hospital workers who took care of infected patients had been inoculated.8
As a result, when smallpox broke out again between 1892 and 1894, Leicester got off lightly, with a case rate of 20.5 cases per 10,000. In all, the town had 370 cases and 21 deaths — far lower than the towns of Warrington and Sheffield, where vaccination rates were high.
On the other hand, there were well-vaccinated areas that had lower case rates and fewer deaths, and areas with low vaccination rates that also fared worse in this regard, so vaccination was probably not the determining factor either way.
In 1898, the U.K. implemented a new law that allowed people to opt out of vaccination for moral reasons. As reported by the BBC, this was “the first time ‘conscientious objection’ was recognized in U.K. law.”9 Now, we have to fight to regain that right yet again, all around the world.
Dissolving Illusions
“A Midwestern Doctor”10 goes on to discuss Dr. Suzanne Humphries’ 2009 book, “Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History,” in which she shatters the notion that vaccines (and certain other medical interventions) have been single-handedly responsible for improved health and increased life spans. As a nephrologist (kidney specialist), Humphries noticed a pattern among her patients.
Many who experienced kidney injury or kidney failure had recently received a flu vaccine. It was a singular common denominator. So, she began to challenge the hospital’s routine practice of vaccinating patients. Humphries was roundly ignored and was ultimately forced to leave. The book grew out of her frustration with people who insisted that vaccines had eliminated scourges like polio and smallpox. Once she delved into the research, what she found was something else entirely.
With regard to smallpox and smallpox vaccination, living conditions during the industrial revolution were horrid. Plagues and infectious outbreaks were commonplace, not because of insufficient vaccination, but because sanitation was near-nonexistent and people, including children, were overworked and underfed. Early progressives believed deadly plagues could be prevented by improving living and working conditions, and they were correct.
We know this because other plagues for which there were no vaccines disappeared right along with smallpox and polio. While the medical industry eventually embraced vaccination, and increasingly over time treated it as something that could not be contested or questioned, Humphries’ book details the opposition.
Smallpox Opposition
As it turns out, many doctors have spoken out against smallpox vaccination and published data demonstrating its dangers. For example:11
In 1799, Dr. Woodville, after having administered the vaccination to many children, stated that “in several instances, the cowpox has proved a very severe disease. In three or four cases out of 500, the patient has been in considerable danger, and one child actually died.”
In 1809, the medical observer reported more than a dozen cases of often fatal smallpox, contracted as long as a year post-vaccination. The 1810 medical observer contained 535 cases of smallpox after vaccination (97 of which were fatal), and 150 cases of severe vaccine injuries.
An 1817 London Medical Repository Monthly Journal and Review reported that many who received the smallpox vaccination were still getting sick with smallpox.
In 1818, Thomas Brown, a surgeon of 30 years and ardent proponent of vaccination, after vaccinating 1,200 people stated: “The accounts from all quarters of the world, wherever vaccination has been introduced … the cases of failures are now increased to an alarming proportion.”
In 1829, The Lancet described a recent smallpox outbreak, stating: “It attacked many who had had small-pox before, and often severely; almost to death; and of those who had been vaccinated, it left some alone, but fell upon great numbers.”
In 1845 George Gregory M.D. reported: “In the 1844 smallpox epidemic, about one-third of the vaccinated contracted a mild form of smallpox, but roughly 8% of those vaccinated still died, and nearly two-thirds had severe disease.”
In 1829, William Cobbett, a farmer, journalist and English pamphleteer, wrote: “Why, that in hundreds of instances, persons cow-poxed by JENNER HIMSELF have taken the real small-pox afterwards, and have either died from the disorder, or narrowly escaped with their lives!”
An 1850 letter to the Hampshire Telegraph and Sussex Chronicle claimed there were more admissions to the London Small-Pox Hospital in 1844 than during the smallpox epidemic of 1781, before vaccination began, and that one-third of the deaths from smallpox were in people who had previously been vaccinated.
The Moving Goal Post
Once it became clear that the smallpox vaccine was incapable of providing long-lasting immunity as initially promised, the medical profession moved the goal post and started justifying vaccination on the basis that it could protect against more severe illness, even if it couldn’t provide lifelong “perfect” immunity the way recovering from the infection could.
This has been a basic mantra ever since, and we’ve gotten a double-dose of it during this COVID pandemic. Within months, the goal post was switched from “two doses are near-100% effective,” to “two doses wear off in six months and leave you more vulnerable to severe illness thereafter.” Some bargain!
Corruption of Vital Statistics Protect Vaccination Narrative
What’s worse, the trend of not reporting vaccine injuries due to “allegiance to the practice,” as noted by Henry May in the Birmingham Medical Review in January 1874, has continued unabated. According to May, vaccinated people who died were typically recorded as having died from some other condition, or were erroneously listed as “unvaccinated.”12 As noted by “A Midwestern Doctor”:13
“This corruption of the vital statistics creates many challenges in assessing the efficacy of immunization, and is also why many authors have noted no metric can be used to assess COVID-19 immunizations except total number of deaths (independent of cause) as this cannot be fudged.
Of note, a different significant overlap exists with the early polio campaigns (also detailed within ‘Dissolving Illusions’), where ‘polio’ diagnostic criteria was repeatedly adjusted to meet the political need for polio cases.
Governments responded to this skepticism by progressively using more and more force to mandate vaccination. Vaccination was made compulsory in England in 1853, with stricter laws passed in 1867. In the United States, Massachusetts created a set of comprehensive vaccination laws in 1855 (which created the Supreme Court case Jacobson v. Massachusetts a case that is frequently cited about state enforced vaccination).
Lemuel Shattuck emphasized the need for vaccination and pushed for house-to-house vaccination to be enforced by the authority of the City of Boston in an 1856 report, also noting ‘The City has already provided that no unvaccinated child shall be admitted into the public schools.’
A situation emerged I term the ‘Vaccine positive feedback cycle.’ Keep in mind that most systems in nature are instead negative feedback systems. In these, when something occurs, it self-corrects the system and turns it off rather than accelerating it, as occurs in a positive feedback system. The cycle is as follows:
A concerning disease exists.
↓
Immunization is cited as a potential solution to the problem.
↓
An immunization campaign is conducted and makes the problem worse.
↓
As the problem is now worse, the need for immunizations to address it increases and another campaign is conducted.
↓
This makes the problem worse.
↓
This increases the need for more aggressive measures to increase immunization.
↓
This makes the problem worse and further perpetuates the cycle, before long leading to very questionable governmental policies designed to force unwilling parties to vaccinate.
The underlying drivers of this process seem to be an unquestionable faith in vaccination, a conviction dating back to the days of smallpox, that vaccinating an ever-increasing proportion of the population through vaccination can end epidemics (now termed herd immunity), and the government having limited options to address the issue besides immunizations and governmental force.”
The Effects of Forced Smallpox Vaccinations
“A Midwestern Doctor” continues describing the effects of the government’s insistence of forced smallpox vaccination:14
“In accordance the positive feedback cycle, these results were found everywhere. Within the United States, as smallpox worsened in Boston, in 1855, the government made enacted strict enforcement of vaccination.
It was followed by the epidemics of 1859-1860, 1864-1865, 1867 (these were all similar in size to earlier epidemics), and then infamous 1872-1873 epidemic which dwarfed all previous epidemics (proving fatal to 1040 persons, at a rate of 280 deaths per 100,000 people).
By the end of 1868, more than 95% of the inhabitants of Chicago had been vaccinated. After the Great Fire of 1871 … strict vaccine laws were passed, and vaccination was made a condition of receiving relief supplies. Chicago was then hit with a devastating smallpox epidemic in 1872 where over 2,000 persons contracted smallpox, with over 25% dying, and the fatality rate among children under 5 being the highest ever recorded.
A 1900 medical article discussed vaccination in three European nations. In England, of 9392 small-pox patients in London hospitals, 6,854 had been vaccinated and 17.5% of the 9,392 died.
In Germany ‘official returns show that between 1870 and 1885 one million vaccinated persons died from small-pox.’ In France, ‘every recruit that enters the French army is vaccinated. During the Franco-Prussian war there 23,469 cases of small-pox in that army.’
An 1888 article in the Encyclopedia Britannica describing Prussia’s strict vaccination practices throughout the population (including mandatory re-vaccination for school pupils), noted: ‘Notwithstanding the fact that Prussia was the best revaccinated (boosted) country in Europe, its mortality from smallpox in the epidemic of 1871 was higher (59,839) than in any other northern state.’”
Other countries reported the same smallpox trends, including Italy and Japan, where smallpox death rates after successful vaccination campaigns were unprecedented. Vaccine injuries, including deaths, were also common. It is shocking how closely the miserable failures of the smallpox vaccines mirror the COVID jabs.
One of the most common causes of death after smallpox vaccination was erysipelas, a painful bacterial skin disease. An 1890 Encyclopedia Britannica article reported that smallpox vaccination had triggered a disastrous epidemic of erysipelas. Other side effects included jaundice, syphilis, tuberculosis, eczema vaccinatum (a rare and lethal skin condition).
Massive Historic Public Protests Over 135 Years Ago
As skepticism of and opposition against smallpox vaccination grew, enforcement increased. Vaccine refusers were fined, jailed and sometimes vaccinated by force. Parents were even forced to vaccinate their second child even if the first one died from the inoculation. Intermittently, riots would break out. A Midwestern Doctor details what happened next:15
“In 1884, 5,000 court summons had been issued against the unvaccinated, a case load that completely overloaded the court system. Letters in local newspaper at this time revealed widespread disdain for the irrationality of the procedure and the medical profession’s steadfast defense of a dangerous practice that had clearly failed over the last 80 years.
Tensions reached a boiling point and on March 23, 1885, a large protest estimated at 80,000 to 100,000 people erupted. It was composed of citizens of all professions from across England and receive support from citizens across Europe who could not attend it.
The procession was 2 miles long, with displays showing the popular sentiments against vaccination present throughout the crowd. The demonstration was successful, and the local government acceded to and acknowledged their demands for liberty. Many of the description of this protest (and the jubilant mood there) are extremely similar to reports I have read of the Trucker’s protest.
Mr. Councilor Butcher of Leicester addressed the protest and spoke of the growing opinion that the best way to get rid of smallpox and deadly infectious diseases was to use plenty of water, eat good food, live in light and airy houses, while it was the municipality’s duty to keep the streets clean and the sewers in order. He emphasized that if this was not done, it was unlikely any act of Parliament or vaccination could prevent the diseases.
That year, following the protest, the government was replaced, mandates were terminated, and by 1887 vaccination coverage rates had dropped to 10%. To replace the vaccination model, the Leicester activists proposed a system of immediately quarantining smallpox patients, disinfection of their homes and quarantining of their contacts alongside improving public sanitation.
The medical community vehemently rejected this model, and zealously predicted Leicester’s ‘gigantic experiment’ would soon result in a terrible ‘massacre,’ especially in the unprotected children, who were viewed by government physicians as ‘bags of gunpowder’ that could easily blow up schools (along with much other hateful and hyperbolic rhetoric directed at them).
This smallpox apocalypse would forever serve as a lesson against vaccine refusal the medical profession bet their stake upon. [But] the predicted catastrophe failed to emerge and Leicester had dramatically lower rates of smallpox in subsequent epidemics than other fully vaccinated towns (ranging from 1/2 to 1/32).
Various rationalizations were put forward to explain this, but as the decades went by, a gradual public acceptance of Leicester’s methods emerged, but even 30 years later, a New York Times article still predicted a disaster was right around the corner and it was imperative Leicester change their methods.
Fortunately, the value of Leicester’s novel approach of quarantining and improvement public hygiene was recognized and gradually adopted around the world, leading to the eventual eradication of smallpox.”
Keep in mind that these protests occurred when the population was much lower, so as a percentage of the population it was much higher. In 1885, the U.K. population was only 36,015,500,16 so a protest with 100,000 was just under 0.3% of the entire population. As of February 16, 2022, today’s U.K. population is 68,471,390,17 so to match that protest, percentage-wise, about 205,400 would have to hit the streets.
History Repeats Itself
Those who don’t know their history are bound to repeat it, and it seems that’s precisely what we’ve allowed to occur in the past two years. Many doctors predicted and warned that the pandemic would be prolonged and worsened by rolling out non-sterilizing vaccines (i.e., vaccines that do not prevent infection and transmission). And that’s precisely what we’ve witnessed.
Predictions of devastating side effects have also come true. And, as resistance to the shots grew, draconian mandates followed. History tells us forced vaccination is not the answer. History also tells us how to get out from underneath a tyrannical government’s insistence on forced vaccination.
The answer is peaceful noncompliance. The answer is standing together, en masse, and saying “No more. Enough.” The truckers in Canada, the U.S., Belgium and elsewhere have the right idea, and the rest of us need to join and support them, in any way we can.
“Like the smallpox vaccination campaigns, the COVID-19 immunization campaign has been so egregious it has inspired a large global protest movement with the large scale current protests being very similar to those that occurred 135 years ago,” A Midwestern Doctor writes.18
“My hope is that this movement can remember the lessons from the past and carry them forward to now so a future generation does not have to repeat our mistakes.”
If you want to learn more about the fraud of all vaccines, I would encourage you to carefully review Suzanne Humphries’ excellent book, “Dissolving Illusions.” In my view it is the best book out there on the subject.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MERCOLA Take Control of Your Healthhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMERCOLA Take Control of Your Health2022-02-23 05:27:482022-02-23 05:27:48How to End Vaccine Mandates — A History Lesson
On July 27, 2006, I testified at a hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims on the topic, “Whether the Attempted Implementation of the Reid-Kennedy Immigration Bill Will Result In an Administrative and National Security Nightmare.”
The Reid-Kennedy Bill upon which that hearing was predicated would have created a massive amnesty for unknown millions of aliens who were illegally present in the United States, not unlike the sort of massive amnesty for which the Biden administration has been advocating since before he took office — except the number of illegal aliens who would eligible to participate in this dangerous and ill-conceived program has grown exponentially.
I began my prepared testimony for the hearing by saying, in part:
“The principle by which most responsible and sensible people live their lives could be summed up by the phrase, ‘Safety first.’ Yet this fundamental and common sense approach is clearly lacking among all too many of the senators of our nation. They voted for a bill that utterly ignores the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission at a time when our nation is threatened by acts of terrorism.”
It has been said that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Safety should be the number one priority for our leaders.
However, radical Democrats have prioritized the concerns of law violators, including violent criminals, over those of everyone else — and not just where immigration is concerned, but across the broad spectrum of issues that are encompassed within the criminal justice system — by advocating for the defunding of police, bail reform and criminal justice reform under the guise of seeking “social justice.”
In point of fact, immigration law enforcement has always been “defunded” by both political parties who have bowed to the demands of the globalists and special interest groups that fund their political campaigns.
This was the focus of my recent article, “Profiteers of Biden Administration’s Open Borders Policy Malfeasance Has Its Rewards.”
Advocates for effective and fair enforcement of our immigration laws are frequently vilified as being “anti-immigrant” while those who seek immigration anarchy are lauded as “pro-immigrant.”
Nothing could be further from the truth.
America’s immigration laws were enacted to protect public health, public safety, national security, and the jobs and wages of Americans.
A review of section 8 U.S. Code § 1182 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which establishes the categories of aliens who are deemed inadmissible, would dispel the lies and propaganda deployed to denigrate the importance and reasonableness of our immigration laws and reinforce the absolute need for our nation to enforce those laws.
Failures to enforce our immigration laws undermine the safety and wellbeing of Americans and lead to the exploitation of desperate and vulnerable illegal aliens.
Effective immigration law enforcement requires emphasis on enforcement within the interior of the United States. Meaningful interior enforcement has never been a part of any proposed legislation or strategy for any administration. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) only has a few thousand employees and since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, ICE agents enforce a broad spectrum of laws that have nothing to do with immigration.
Not long after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, I was invited to meet with several members of Congress and their staffs. During our meeting I asked them if they knew how many times an aspiring illegal alien could attempt to enter the U.S. without inspection. One of the congressmen appeared perplexed and asked if there was a specific number. I told him that the numbers might vary but there is a formula that works — aliens simply had to attempt illegal entry one more time than the number of times they get caught.
The point is that any alien who is determined to gain entry into the U.S. will ultimately succeed. Consequently, interior enforcement is the key to success.
Consider this excerpt from an article published by The Epoch Times entitled, “Illegal Aliens Ran Sex-Trafficking Ring in New York City, Using Minors From Mexico.”
The border-crossing records of two of the convicted sex traffickers reveal a common pattern of continually crossing the border illegally until they make it past law enforceemnt.
Abel Romero-Melendez, who received a 20-year sentence, was apprehended by Border Patrol and returned to Mexico eight times after crossing illegally. The crossing dates included March 22, 2002, near Casa Grande, Arizona; July 14, 2006, near Nogales, Arizona; July 21, 2006, near Sasabe, Arizona; July 25, 2006, near Nogales, Arizona; July 30, 2006, in the Tucson sector of Arizona; June 4, 2012, in the Tucson sector; June 15, 2012, near Willcox, Arizona; and Oct. 29, 2012, in Falfurrias, Texas.
Fabian Reyes-Rojas, who is awaiting sentencing, was apprehended by Border Patrol and returned to Mexico seven times after crossing illegally, and jailed once for illegal re-entry.
Border records show Border Patrol apprehended Reyes-Rojas on March 11, 16, and 18 in 2003; Sept. 7 and 13 in 2007; and Sept. 8, 2011.
After being caught near Douglas, Arizona, on May 16, 2012, Reyes-Rojas was charged with illegal re-entry and spent 30 days in jail before being returned to Mexico.
No further entry records exist, but Reyes-Rojas resided in New York City from at least 2014, according to the complaint.
The illegal alien thugs noted above coerced young Mexican girls they smuggled into the United States into working as prostitutes by raping them, beating them, and threatening to kill their parents.
Today, there are thousands of similar criminals from countries around the world plying their “trades” in our country, turning the U.S. into a “Land of Opportunity” for lawbreakers, members of transnational gangs, drug traffickers, and terrorists — and the Biden administration is determined to do nothing to prevent their entry into our country or seek their removal.
There is no justice of any sort to be found in the policies and actions of this morally bankrupt administration. As I recently noted, for the Biden administration, national security is ‘mission irrelevant.’
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Michael Cutlerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMichael Cutler2022-02-22 15:56:302022-02-23 12:22:39The Radical Democrats’ Reign of Terror Began With Immigration and Metastasized Throughout the Criminal Justice System
Australia finally got around to listing the infamous jihad terror group known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, and better known as Hamas, as a terrorist group on Thursday. That’s great, even though it should have been done years ago. The way that Australian authorities chose to do it, however, once again demonstrated the moral cowardice and intellectual bankruptcy of the Left: the Australians had to find a way to condemn Hamas without appearing to be “Islamophobic.” They found a way to do that, but they didn’t find a way to avoid appearing to be woke, politically correct fools.
The Associated Press reported Thursday that Australia has “added the U.S.-based far-right extremist group National Socialist Order and planned to add the entirety of the Palestinian group Hamas to its list of outlawed terrorist organisations as concerns rise about radicalised children.”
Now, it’s easy to see why Hamas is being added to the list of outlawed terrorist organizations. Just in the past few days, its plan to target Israelis living in the Philippines was thwarted. It celebrated the murder of a 91-year-old Holocaust survivor. Before that, it sent rockets into Israel on New Year’s Eve. The leader of the Hamas Women’s Movement has claimed that all the Muslim women in Gaza are ready to blow themselves up in jihad suicide bombings.
And that’s just recently. For decades now, Hamas has called for and worked toward the total destruction of Israel, which would necessarily involve a new genocide of the Jews. For years, its website featured a “Glory Record” detailing its murders of Israeli civilians. Hamas also receives funding from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is just as genocidal and anti-Semitic as Hamas itself.
At the same time as it announced intentions to list Hamas as a terror group, Australia’s Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews announced that it had also added “the National Socialist Order, formerly known as Atomwaffen Division,” to its terror list. It seems that the National Socialist Order “advocates a global ‘race war’ and the collapse of democratic societies.” This is not the first “far-right” group that Australia has added to its terror list: “The Base, a neo-Nazi white supremacist group formed in the United States in 2018, was listed in December and the British-based Sonnenkrieg Division was listed in August.”
Undeniably, neo-Nazis are horrible people, and I have no doubt that the National Socialist Order thoroughly deserves to be listed as a terrorist group. But why did Australia have to add the National Socialist Order to its terror list as it added Hamas? Have you ever even heard of the National Socialist Order before reading this article? The ADL says that the Atomwaffen Division “is a small neo-Nazi group,” and that “a series of arrests in 2019-20 decimated the group’s active membership.” It adds that “in July 2020, AWD was disbanded, and the National Socialist Order emerged under the remaining AWD leadership.”
So the National Socialist Order is a rump group formed out of another that collapsed, and is likely to be an insignificant band of potbellied LARPing sociopaths, or else FBI agents trying to validate a “far-right” threat. That hardly compares to Hamas, an organization that for years has terrorized a nation with jihad rocket attacks and attacks on civilians. Hamas has international support, most notably from the Islamic Republic of Iran, while no nation has or ever will given support to the National Socialist Order.
So why has Australia only listed Hamas as a terror group in tandem with this insignificant band of Nazi idiots? The answer is clear. Australian authorities are trying to prop up the National Socialist Order as some kind of moral equivalent to Hamas, in order to try to avoid enraging its Muslim population, among whom are numerous Hamas supporters, and to avoid giving the impression that the Australian government is “Islamophobic” and is targeting only Islamic terrorists while ignoring non-Muslim terrorists.
This sort of thing isn’t limited to Australia, of course. I myself am banned from Britain in the British government’s absurd attempt to smear me as a “far right” leader on par with jihad terrorists. Then-Prime Minister Theresa May said in 2016: ““And I acted to keep those who peddle hatred and extremism out of our country. I kicked out Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada. I stopped Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and Pastor Terry Jones – because Islamophobia comes from the same wellspring of hatred. And I stopped people like Dieudonne coming to Britain. Because nothing excuses antisemitism – not comedy, not satire, not even irony. Antisemitism is just hatred. And it is just wrong.”Spen
So as far as May was concerned, Pamela Geller and I were the “Islamophobic” equivalents of Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada. Abu Hamza is in solitary confinement in a super-max U.S. for, among other things, conspiring to set up a training camp for jihad terrorists in Bly, Oregon. Abu Qatada was convicted of plotting the jihad massacre of Americans and Israelis in Jordan. Neither Geller nor I have ever advocated or condoned any violence at all. But May needed some “far-right extremists” to balance her actions against jihadis and appease Muslims in Britain, and so she didn’t hesitate to smear us.
In fact, calling the National Socialist Order “far-right,” the same term that is used for people (including me) who aren’t remotely Nazi and are simply enunciating unwelcome truths, shows how the term is employed as a weapon to stigmatize, demonize, and marginalize all those whom the elites hate. Lump us in with some Nazi idiots, and the job is done.
It’s good that Australia will list Hamas as a terror group. But the way Australian officials have done it shows them to be Leftist cowards and self-deluded fools.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Judicial Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJudicial Watch2022-02-22 08:18:222022-02-22 08:21:24In Listing Hamas as a Terror Group, Australia Shows the Bankruptcy of the Left
Project Veritas released Part Two of its video series on the FDA today, which features FDA Executive Officer, Christopher Cole, speaking about the inner workings of the agency — including the FDA’s conflicts of interest, overspending, and why it’s hard for those within the agency to speak out on such abuses.
Here are some of the highlights from today’s video:
FDA Executive Officer, Christopher Cole: “The drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies. So, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products.”
Cole on FDA fees: “Congress approved user fees for [the] FDA. Basically, we charge the industry millions of dollars in order to hire more drug reviewers and vaccine reviewers which will speed up the approval process. So, they [pharmaceutical companies] make more money.”
Cole: “They [FDA] tone down the impact of the user fees on their operations because they know they’re dependent on the drug companies, and the vaccine companies, and these other companies for their agency to operate.”
Cole on blowing the whistle: “There’s not an incentive to speak out in government, surprisingly. You would think there would be, but there’s not. It’s better just to just not say anything and just ignore it.”
Cole’s LinkedIn page lists him as an Executive Officer within the agency’s Countermeasures Initiatives, which plays a critical role in ensuring that drugs, vaccines, and other measures to counter infectious diseases and viruses are safe. He made these revelations on a hidden camera to an undercover Project Veritas reporter.
A spokesperson for FDA issued a statement yesterday saying, “The person purportedly in the video does not work on vaccine matters and does not represent the views of the FDA.”
This statement appears to contradict a phone call released Wednesday afternoon by Project Veritas wherein Cole reiterated that he is “a manager in the office that helps oversee the approval of the COVID vaccines for emergency approval.”
Will the FDA clarify this situation? Only time will tell…
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00O'Keefe Media Grouphttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngO'Keefe Media Group2022-02-21 08:07:102022-02-21 08:11:11VIDEO: FDA Exec Exposes Close Ties Between Agency and Big Pharma
This shocking story, if proven true, would just be the tip of the iceberg on the federal stimulus’s disastrous, dysfunctional results.
Another day, another crazy possible example of our tax dollars being misused.
A Florida woman allegedly used money from a federal stimulus loan to hire a hitman to murder a law enforcement enforcer, according to court documents and reporting from the Miami Herald.
“The accused mastermind of the plot, Jasmine Martinez, received a $15,000 [Paycheck Protection Program] loan—which she claimed was to keep her single-employee beauty salon afloat—last April,” writes Herald court reporter David Ovalle. “She then withdrew over $10,000 of that in the days leading up to the murder, according to arrest warrants.”
NEW: The hit on a Miami TSA officer was likely bankrolled by a federal PPP loan, new records show https://t.co/O1NYLgYQnB
“On May 3, 2021, the accused hitman, an ex-con named Javon Carter, ran up to U.S. Transportation Security Administration officer Le’Shonte Jones as she walked into her South Miami-Dade apartment, shooting her multiple times, according to police,” the Herald’s reporting continues.
“Detectives believe Martinez, who had a series of run-ins with Jones over the years, paid Carter at least $10,000 to kill the Miami airport worker—a deal they say was bankrolled by money from the federal Payroll Protection Program.”
The reporting cites numerous examples of evidence against Martinez, who has been charged with murder.
Her phone records allegedly reveal that she communicated with the accused hitman 127 times in the month before the killing. So, too, police say her cell records show that she met up with the accused hitman immediately after the killing. According to arrest warrants, Martinez said during a prison phone call with an incarcerated individual that she was “ready to go kill this ho.”
Martinez’s lawyer maintains her innocence. And I want to be very clear: She has yet to be convicted of any crime and absolutely deserves the presumption of innocence. The reported charges above are all accusations sourced from law enforcement, not proven facts against her.
We don’t yet know for sure if our tax dollars were actually used to fund a hit on the late TSA officer Le’Shonte Jones, the mother of a 3-year-old. But it seems, at the very least, highly plausible that this is the case based on the facts we have now. And, unfortunately, it would be par for the course with the absurd and haphazard way money was thrown out the door during the federal government’s “stimulus” efforts.
The $835 billion Paycheck Protection Program has proven to be a complete disaster. It was created by Congress in March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and then repeatedly extended and re-funded in future legislation. The idea behind the program was that it would supposedly give “loans”—many were really grants because they usually didn’t need to be paid back—to help businesses stay afloat and keep their employees on payroll during this crisis.
Suffice it to say it didn’t work out so great.
The feds sent hundreds of billions flying out the door with little to no verification process. Rampant fraud, waste, and dysfunction inevitably ensued. So, too, the program was quickly co-opted not by the small businesses it was supposedly aimed at, but by large corporations.
“We estimate that the program cumulatively preserved between 2 and 3 million job-years of employment over 14 months at a cost of $170K to $257K per job-year retained,” Autor wrote.
The study also found that only 23-34 percent of the money went to jobs that actually would’ve been lost without it. Autor also found that the program’s benefits were “highly regressive,” meaning it benefited the wealthy more, with about 75 percent of the benefits flowing to the top 20 percent of earners.
Overall, the Paycheck Protection Program was a terrible way to spend $800+ billion in taxpayer money. Now we’re learning it may have even financed a hit taken out on a law enforcement officer. But that shocking anecdote, if proven true, would just be the tip of the iceberg on the federal stimulus’s disastrous, dysfunctional results.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-02-20 13:26:582022-02-20 13:29:04Florida Woman Accused of Using Stimulus Funds to Order Hit on Law Enforcement Officer Gunned Down in 2021
Hamilton’s Federalist #78 and its relevance in today’s political minefield.
America’s founding fathers knew tyranny, as they experienced it first-hand living under British rule. In all their wisdom, I don’t think that they could have foreseen the corruption and evil that we are dealing with today. Federalist #78, written by Alexander Hamilton, sheds some light on the subject of judicial independence, and the role that it plays in the function of the judiciary. In this essay, Hamilton surmises that the judiciary would always be the least dangerous to the God given rights of the American citizenry. We have witnessed first hand in recent years, a judiciary that is perfectly comfortable with legislating from the bench. We have watched as the courts condone lawlessness, promote unconstitutional government overreach, and even legitimize the murder of unborn children. From where we stand today, it seems like the judicial branch has become the most dangerous government branch to human rights. Activist progressive judges use the courts to advance social justice, equity, and communism disguised as green energy policy, while ignoring the US Constitution and the rule of law.
With all of this in mind, is judicial independence still a necessity in this world of judicial corruption and outside influence on the rulings of our men and women that hold a place on the bench? The simple answer is yes. There is no perfect system. There will always be advantages and disadvantages to particular aspects of our American system of government. Knowing that there will be pros and cons, an independent judiciary makes sense. This independence does not allow checks and balances to work in the case of an unconstitutional ruling. Because Justices are given the task of interpreting the meaning of the constitution, it leaves the possibility that an activist on the bench, can make the constitution into whatever he/she wants in to be. Once again, no check on judicial rulings, no matter how bad the ruling, and no matter what the societal consequences. Keep in mind, because Hamilton believed that the judiciary did not pose any threat to peoples’ rights, the lack of oversight by the other two branches wasn’t a problem in his mind.
Remember that our inherent rights come from God, not from government. What is required to recognize rights, is that the government acknowledge the divine presence that sanctions these rights of man. We have seen the courts create rights out of thin air, to pander to special interests like homosexual marriage, access to abortion, and many other government created rights that are brought into the mix to buy votes, or please major political donors.
On the plus side, and independent judiciary and lifetime appointments allow for decisions to be made on tough issues, without fear of political repercussions from the electorate. So, the independence is still needed. I don’t think that the founders took blackmail into account as it is used all the time in the political world to keep people from falling out of line when it comes to the official narrative. This was the nature of the operation of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, setting up sexual encounters for the elite class with minors and recording the encounters to have something to hang over their head, to keep them in line.
Our Judicial system is still the best game in town compared to what they have elsewhere. It is still effective in most cases, and the vulnerability that exists is going to be there no matter how much you tweak the system. We have to remember the reason why we need a government at all. Because man is fallible and we are subject to greed, jealousy, hatred, and many other human emotions that can affect how we act in society. James Madison once said, “If Men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and the next place, oblige it to control itself.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Save America Foundationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSave America Foundation2022-02-20 08:26:192022-02-20 08:31:08Judicial Independence – Pros and Cons
AOC said she has been told by “hospitals, doctors and social workers” that the increase in violence is mainly being caused by young men. Why this should come as news to her is a mystery, since young men have always been the source of most criminal violence.
“And we allow the discourse to make it sound as though it’s, like, these shady figures in the bush jumping out from a corner. These are young men. These are boys. We’re also not discussing the mental health crisis that we are experiencing as a country as a result of the pandemic,” she said.
A pandemic manufactured and exploited by AOC’s party.
Then she pointed out that the child tax credit expired on Dec. 31 “and now people are stealing baby formula.”
“We don’t want to have that discussion. We want to say these people are criminals or we want to talk about “people who are violent,” instead of ‘environments of violence,’ and what we’re doing to either contribute to that or dismantle that,” the reality-challenged congresswoman said.
Violent crime isn’t surging across America because desperate young mothers can’t afford baby formula. It’s not the result of “environments of violence”; indeed, it is the violent criminals she doesn’t want to talk about who create “environments of violence,” not the other way around.
Surging violence is the direct result of the Democrat Party’s war on law enforcement and its “criminal reform” policies that greatly reduce or eliminate any consequences for committing violent crime. That’s the discussion AOC doesn’t want to have.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2022-02-20 08:15:042022-02-20 08:15:04AOC: ‘Environments of Violence’ to Blame for Rising Crime in NYC
The allegations from Sens. Ron Wyden and Martin Heinrich are quite serious. Here’s what we know so far.
The Central Intelligence Agency has secretly been running mass surveillance operations to collect data on Americans, according to a newly published letter written by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.).
Wyden and Henrich, both members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, wrote the letter in April 2021, and the letter was partly declassified on Thursday.
In the letter, Wyden and Henrich called on the CIA to inform the public about the data collection program, calling for full transparency.
“This declassification is urgent,” the senators wrote.
The CIA responded to the allegations in a statement published by the Wall Street Journal.
“CIA recognizes and takes very seriously our obligation to respect the privacy and civil liberties of U.S. persons in the conduct of our vital national security mission, and conducts our activities, including collection activities, in compliance with U.S. law, Executive Order 12333, and our Attorney General guidelines,” said Kristi Scott, the agency’s privacy and civil liberties officer. “CIA is committed to transparency consistent with our obligation to protect intelligence sources and methods.”
The allegations from Wyden and Heinrich are serious, but the extent of the danger and severity is clouded by several factors, not the least of which is the fact that the letter is highly redacted.
So I’d encourage readers to review the redacted letter themselves, as well as the press release that accompanied its declassification. Nevertheless, here are a few important takeaways.
You may not have heard, but the CIA has been running a secret massive surveillance program for some time. pic.twitter.com/WSG9dtBY2V
As Politico noted, the CIA “is largely prohibited by law from engaging in domestic spying,” which makes the revelations troubling. But, as the Wall Street Journalreports, at times intelligence agencies have found ways to circumvent these prohibitions, noting that “some U.S. intelligence programs collect broad streams of internet or telephone data in a way that can scoop up information on Americans, such as when someone is communicating with a target of surveillance who lives overseas.”
This is known as “incidental collection,” and it’s an issue lawmakers in both parties have flagged as a violation of civil liberties and personal privacy.
2. The Nature of the Surveillance Is Unclear
Several publications have pointed out that the nature of the surveillance isn’t really clear. Yet the language in the redacted letter suggests the program involves nontraditional surveillance, noting data collection is done in “bulk” and uses “backdoor searches of Americans, the same issue that has generated bipartisan concern in the FISA context.”
As the ACLU says, this implies the spy agency may be “vacuuming up” vast amounts of information “to spy on Americans” and storing it indefinitely.
This surveillance is done without any court approval, and with few, if any, safeguards imposed by Congress to protect our civil liberties.https://t.co/zeLbFI7En1
While the nature of the surveillance is murky, Sens. Wyden and Heinrich make one thing clear. The information being collected is “warrantless,” meaning the data are being “scooped up” without a warrant.
This directly violates the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution, which states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
4. The Program Appears to Be Unlawful
While what constitutes “spying” is debatable, but Wyden and Henrich suggest that the program may have exceeded its lawful bounds.
While the Senators don’t use the words “unlawful” or “illegal,” they suggest the program may be just that, noting it falls “entirely outside the statutory framework that Congress and the public believe govern this collection… .”
What the precise “statutory framework” is isn’t spelled out here, but it’s safe to say that Wyden believes the CIA is acting outside of that scope.
5. The CIA Is Acting Without Oversight
While there has been a great deal of discussion on the idea that the FBI’s FISA warrant process is “broken,” it’s worth noting that at least that program had some judicial oversight (weak as it often was).
Wyden and Henrich suggest this is not the case with the CIA’s data collection program, which they say operates “without any of the judicial, congressional or even executive branch oversight that comes from [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act].”
6. This Isn’t Wyden’s First Dustup With CIA
Finally, it’s worth noting that this is not the first time Wyden has clashed with the CIA over rogue operations.
In 2016, the Senator from Oregon had a heated exchanged with then-CIA Director John Brennan over the CIA’s improper search of Senate files, including the unauthorized search of the emails of Senate staffers investigating the CIA’s use of torture in the War on Terror. Brennan denied the CIA’s actions were improper, even though both a CIA Inspector General and a review board appointed by Brennan himself conceded “the search resulted in inappropriate access to the Senate’s work product,” prompting a sharp rebuke from Wyden.
In 2013, Wyden also asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper if the NSA collected “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”
Clapper responded, “No, sir … not wittingly.”
It was later revealed the NSA was in fact collecting metadata on millions of law-abiding Americans without warrants.
‘The Rule of Nobody’
Many thinkers have written about the dangers of bureaucracy, a system in which important decisions are made not by individuals or even elected representatives, but state officials.
The famed writer and traveler Alexis de Tocqueville saw bureaucracy as the Achilles heel of modern democracy. A century later, the great economist Ludwig von Mises wrote an entire book about its nature and evils: Bureaucracy.
My personal favorite description comes from the philosopher Hannah Arendt, who described bureaucracy as the rule of Nobody, “a tyranny without a tyrant,” which she described as the most oppressive kind of government.
“Indeed, if we identify tyranny as the government that is not held to give account of itself, rule by Nobody is clearly the most tyrannical of all, since there is no one left who could even be asked to answer for what is being done,” Arendt wrote in On Violence. “It is this state of affairs which is among the most potent causes for the current world-wide rebellious unrest.”
The tentacles of the US bureaucratic state do not reach as far as those of socialist states in the 20th century—the period in which Arendt wrote—but as early as the 1930s government reports have warned about “a headless ‘fourth branch’ of the Government, responsible to no one….”
That was more than 80 years ago.
Now we have a secret CIA program that has been spying on Americans free from any kind of oversight for an undetermined length of time. This sounds just a bit like the terror Arendt described.
What happens next, however, is unclear.
The list of US intelligence scandals and “improper” programs has grown lengthy in recent years, but accountability has been elusive. We’ll see if this time is any different.
Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-02-20 07:35:352022-02-20 07:39:216 Things We Know about the CIA’s Secret Mass Surveillance Program
ADELANTO, Calif., (Feb. 19, 2022) American truckers are launching The People’s Convoy, a peaceful and unified transcontinental movement, on Wednesday, February 23, 2022, from the Adelanto Stadium in Southern California. Starting at 10:00 a.m., hundreds of truckers will hear words of encouragement and blessings from a group of speakers supporting them on their journey. The truckers and blue-collar workers of the United States will be joined by freedom-loving supporters from all walks of life – frontline doctors, lawyers, first-responders, former military servicemen and women, students, retirees, mothers, fathers and children – on this peaceful and law-abiding transcontinental journey toward the east coast.
The truckers encourage one and all to come out to the stadium in the heart of Adelanto, California to wish them well and see them off.
This convoy is about freedom and unity: the truckers are riding unified across party and state lines and with people of all colors and creeds – Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Mormons, Agnostics, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, Republican, Democrats. All individuals are welcome to participate by either attending the launch gathering – at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday February 23, at Adelanto Stadium – or by getting in their own vehicles and following the big rigs from Adelanto toward the east coast!
The message of The People’s Convoy is simple. The last 23 months of the COVID-19 pandemic have been a rough road for all Americans to travel: spiritually, emotionally, physically, and – not least –financially. With the advent of the vaccine and workable therapeutic agents, along with the hard work of so many sectors that contributed to declining COVID-19 cases and severity of illness, it is now time to re-open the country.
The average American worker needs to be able to end-run the economic hardships of the last two years, and get back to the business of making bread – so they can pay their rents and mortgages and help jumpstart this economy. To that end, it’s time for elected officials to work with the blue collar and white collar workers of America and restore accountability and liberty –by lifting all mandates and ending the state of emergency – as COVID is well-in-hand now, and Americans need to get back to work in a free and unrestricted manner.
The People’s Convoy is a non-partisan effort supported by a cross-cultural and multi-faith consortium of organizations including Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense TV – which will be embedding with the convoy and carrying live updates, along with numerous other media outlets – as well as many doctors including the Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance, liberty-minded lawyers and transportation workers like pilots, and organizations such as The Unity Project, The America Project, Advocates for Citizens’ Rights, U.S. Freedom Flyers, The American Foundation for Civil Liberties & Freedom, and faith leaders from every spectrum. The convoy is being assisted by retired military personnel and security experts, who are spearheading logistics in order to ensure a 100% safe, lawful, and peaceful journey.
The People’s Convoy Route:
The convoy will be departing from Adelanto at 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, February 23, 2022 heading east to land in the vicinity of Kingman, Arizona that evening.
On Thursday, February 24, the convoy will leave the Kingman area and head east toward the Lupton, Arizona vicinity.
Friday morning (Feb 25) will see the convoy heading from the Lupton Arizona area, landing in the Glenrio, Texas area Friday night.
The People’s Convoy will abide by agreements with local authorities, and terminate in the vicinity of the D.C. area.
To support the truckers, see the routes, or find out more, please visit: www.ThePeoplesConvoy.org
The People’s Convoy website and the official social media handles are the ONLY source of accurate data about this peaceful, law-abiding convoy – we hope to see America there!
By Scott Norvell, NORVELL, Special to the Sun | February 19, 2022
Just as the three-week trucker protest in Canada looks to be fizzling, drivers across the border in America are beginning to ramp up their own demonstration against vaccination requirements and other Covid-related restrictions.
Calling themselves the “People’s Convoy,” the group of U.S. truckers now say they plan to depart Adelanto, California, on February 22 and make their way to the nation’s capital before President Biden’s State of the Union address on March 1.
The organizers have set up a web page and various social media accounts in an effort to raise funds on behalf of the effort, including a Facebook page that has 110,000 followers. An earlier version of the page was removed by the platform for what the company said was violations of its terms of service.
A statement posted Friday to Facebook listed some high-profile supporters, including the anti-vaccine activist Robert Kennedy Jr. and his group Children’s Health Defense, and a former Trump national security adviser, Michael Flynn.
In a video posted on the group’s website, truck driver Mike Landis says the group is hoping to convince the Biden administration to rescind a national state of emergency related to Covid that was extended on February 24, 2021, and is in effect through March 1.
“We want this government to bring back the Constitution by ending the Emergency Powers Act and then those that were a part of this whole scheme to be held accountable,” Mr. Landis said in the video. “We want our country back.”
The organizers and their supporters have made multiple appearances on conservative media outlets in recent days to gin up support, including several appearances on Fox News’s popular primetime programs. The musician Ted Nugent is one of the celebrities endorsing the effort, saying he would be joining the convoy at some point along its route.
“I know these guys. I am these guys,” Mr. Nugent said in an appearance on Newsmax TV. “I got a big Zebra Ford Bronco with 900 horsepower that gets exactly 600 yards to the gallon. So I am going to go join those guys and make sure that the middle finger stays on fire.”
Also enlisted in the fundraising effort is a Boston-based nonprofit, the American Foundation for Civil Liberties and Freedom, that was formed in April 2021 by a lawyer, Christopher Marston. It bills itself as “transpartisan.”
As first reported by Grid news, Mr. Marston’s most recent fundraising efforts have been on behalf of President Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Mr. Marston did not respond to a message left on his office phone Friday.
The group has adopted C.W. McCall’s 1975 hit single “Convoy” as its de facto theme song. The anthem hit no. 1 on both the country and pop charts during a brief period when truckers were portrayed in popular culture as lovable rascals who spent their time running bootleg beer with the likes of actor Burt Reynolds.
Federal officials are keeping a wary eye on the developing protest, with the Department of Homeland Security last week issuing a warning to law enforcement nationwide about the convoy. The warning cautioned that the protests were just “aspirational” at the time but bear watching.
Police officials in charge of security at the U.S. Capitol reportedly briefed congressional staffers late Friday on plans for coping with a potential influx of truckers. In a statement, the Capitol Police said it is aware of the truckers’ plans and will “facilitate lawful First Amendment activity” on the National Mall.
Capitol Police “is closely coordinating with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies, including DC’s Metropolitan Police Department, the United States Park Police, the United States Secret Service and other allied agencies to include the DC National Guard,” the agency said.
On Friday, the Canadian truckers who have come close to paralyzing the Canadian capital, Ottawa, during three weeks of mostly peaceful protests began to disperse. According to press outlets on the scene, hundreds of police officers — some of them decked out in riot gear — began forcibly removing some of the protesters and towing away their vehicles.
Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
The Biden administration has failed to ensure the security of the U.S. and should look at Poland’s example if it wants to successfully secure the southern border, a Polish government minister, Marcin Romanowski, told the Daily Caller.
Poland is building a wall on its border with Belarus after thousands of illegal migrants threatened to cross its border in August. The EU accused Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenka of facilitating the wave of migrants and trying to destabilize Poland.
“Tens of thousands of migrants from the Middle East arrived by air to [Belarussian capital] Minsk, and then were transported to the border,” Under Secretary of State for the Ministry of Justice Romanowski said Friday in an exclusive interview, arguing that Russia was responsible for aiding Belarus getting the migrants to Poland.
“Only thanks to the rapid, energetic and responsible reaction of the Polish Government and the dedication of thousands of border guards, soldiers and policemen, it was possible to secure the border in time,” Romanowski said. “To combat further threats, we want to build a wall along the entire border.”
President Joe Biden has refused to continue the construction of the wall at the southern border, despite a record number of illegal migrants flooding into the country. U.S. Border Patrol encountered over 1.7 million illegal migrants at the southern border for fiscal year 2021, and a record-breaking 200,000 migrants were apprehended in July alone. Migrants from at least 40 different countries have come through Yuma, Arizona, through a hole in the wall known as “The Gap.”
Romanowski called Biden’s refusal to build a wall purely “ideological.”
“A permanent border barrier saves both money and security – not only for officers, but also for the people and the national budget. The wall would go a long way to curbing human trafficking and drug smuggling that’s thriving at the moment,” Romanowski said. “President Biden [should] stick to the plan introduced by President Trump and put ideology aside. The lives and safety of U.S. citizens should be primary concern for the federal government.”
U.S. Customs Border Patrol confiscated 11,201 pounds of fentanyl in fiscal year 2021 — a 134% increase from the year before.
Left-leaning media and politicians have criticized Poland’s wall, citing human rights and environmental issues. Environmentalists have raised concerns about harm to animal migration paths if the wall is constructed through the primeval Bialowieza forest, which is on the Polish-Belarussian border.
Romanowski called these arguments “false,” and noted the “dangerous conditions in which Polish border and military officers operate.”
“Belarusian services provoke incidents every day, they cut through barbed wire and even fire shots at Poles. The only way of stopping Lukashenka and illegal migrants is to build the wall,” he said, blasting celebrities and left-leaning politicians who are “calling for unconditional entry of anyone at the border.”
Poland wants to accept legal migrants “who want to legally live and work here honestly, and become part of our nation,” Romanowski continued, mentioning the thousands of Ukrainian migrant workers that come across the border. “Poland has a rich tradition of multiculturalism and tolerance. Like the United States, we are open to people who want to legally live and work here honestly, and become part of our nation.”
Illegal migrants that successfully enter Poland are placed in transit centers, where they wait, sometimes upwards to a year, to receive international protection from the EU, Romanowski claimed.
“Migrants usually do not want to wait and flee at the first possible opportunity… This is a serious problem because we usually know nothing about these people: their past, their connections, their political or ideological commitment,” he said.
Romanowski also praised U.S. support of Poland’s security in sending additional troops to the “eastern flank of NATO” amid the Russian threat to invade Ukraine, while criticizing Biden for letting Russia get this far in the first place.
“Until now, President Trump’s team has been drawing hard red lines to Moscow, keeping it at an appropriate distance,” he said. “Russia had never before dared to organize such large military maneuvers in the immediate vicinity of [Kyiv], nor had it directly threatened war.”
“We trust that the United States will not make the same mistake as under President Obama, when withdrawal from European affairs and resetting relations with Russia cost Ukraine the loss of Crimea,” he concluded.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-02-20 05:57:592022-02-20 06:00:21EXCLUSIVE: What Joe Biden Can Learn From Poland Building A Wall On Its Border With Belarus
Back in September 2021, Joe Biden reassured Americans that the Afghan refugees whom he was bringing into the United States would be as benign and harmless as Aunt Harriet. Old Joe’s crack team (no, not Hunter) of experts would make sure of that by “conducting thorough scrutiny — security screenings for everyone who is not a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.” Well, here’s a shocker: Biden, one of the world’s least trustworthy human beings, lied again: Not only were most of the refugees not vetted at all, but on Thursday it came to light that at least fifty Afghan refugees with “potentially significant security concerns” were admitted to the United States with no problem, and are here now. Thanks, Joe!
Wait, it gets worse. The Defense Department’s inspector general reported Thursday, according to the Washington Times, that not only did Biden’s handlers bring these security risks into the country, but now they have no idea where they are: “It looked at a sampling of 31 security risk evacuees identified as of Sept. 17 and found only three could be located.” Nor is that likely to be the extent of the problem: “Tens of thousands more names remain to be checked.”
The Defense Department’s audit explained laconically: “Not being able to locate Afghan evacuees with derogatory information quickly and accurately could pose a security risk to the United States.” Well, yeah. And so once again one has to wonder: Are the people who are running Joe Biden’s presidency really this careless and stupid, that they thought vetting these Afghan refugees was something they could dispense with when in a hurry, and that there would be no downside? Or is the situation even worse? If a gang of traitors who actively wanted to weaken the United States were ensconced in the White House, how could this have been mishandled any more than it has been?
The Times report suggests that the whole thing is just a result of poor planning and organization, not the massive betrayal of American citizens that it appears to be at first glance: “Investigators said a key set of Defense Department databases was off-limits to the vetting team in the early months of the evacuation effort, because of agreements the Pentagon had with other countries. Eventually, officials developed a workaround.” But that doesn’t make the situation any better. If unvetted Afghan refugees were brought into the United States because the vetting team didn’t have access to the necessary databases, the resettlement process should have been halted until those databases became available. Instead, an unknowable number of Afghans who could be jihadis or potential jihadis have been deposited into American communities, where they’re being welcomed with open arms by people who don’t have a clue about what they’re dealing with.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-02-20 05:41:312022-02-20 05:44:02Biden’s Handlers Release at Least 50 Afghans with ‘Potentially Significant Security Concerns’ Into the U.S.
Breitbart News reports that a local Black Lives Matter (BLM) chapter funded the release of Quintez Brown, a BLM activist accused of attempting to assassinate Louisville mayoral candidate Craig Greenburg. Bail had been set at $100,000.
Brown allegedly walked into Greenburg’s office and fired shots at the candidate and four others. One of the shots struck Greenburg’s clothing, but otherwise no one was injured. Brown faces four counts of wanton endangerment.
“BLM Louisville organizer and co-founder of the Louisville Community Bail Fund Chanelle Helm said the organization wanted to keep Brown somewhere safe as he awaits trial,” an ABC affiliate reported.
Brown’s Twitter profile bio reads: ‘We have one scientific and correct solution, Pan-Africanism: the total liberation and unification of Africa under scientific socialism.’ This is the kind of racial supremacist that Black Lives Matter wants to keep “safe.”
“They are going to be responsible for what he may or may not do to anybody,” Louisville Metro Council President David James told reporters. “It’s unfortunate Mr. Brown has been bailed out of jail, due to his propensity to violence. I think it’s irresponsible and I hope those who contributed to posting this bond are prepared to be held accountable if Mr. Brown injures someone while out.”
In a document titled “What We Believe,” BLM lays out a number of major principles for which it stands. Among the most noteworthy:
“We work vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension, all people.”
“We are unapologetically Black in our positioning. In affirming that Black Lives Matter, we need not qualify our position….”
“We see ourselves as part of the global Black family …”
“We are guided by the fact that all Black lives matter, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status, or location.”
“We make space for transgender brothers and sisters to participate and lead.”
“We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.”
“We build a space that affirms Black women and is free from sexism, misogyny, and environments in which men are centered.”
“We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work ‘double shifts’ so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work.”
“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.” (Note: BLM quietly, and without explanation, removed this item from its website around September 21, 2020, in an effort to defuse the widespread criticism which the item had sparked.)
“We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking …”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2022-02-19 08:18:212022-02-19 08:21:35BLM Funds Bond for Quintez Brown Accused Kentucky Mayoral Candidate Assassin
