Trump Administration Strikes UN, Announces Funding Will Be Significantly Cut

By Chris Agee


The Trump administration is slashing the United States’ contributions to the United Nations human rights office, according to National Security Advisor John Bolton.

As The Associated Press reported, Bolton made the announcement during an interview on Thursday.

He indicated that the U.S., which provides more U.N. funding than any other member nation, will no longer be supporting the Human Rights Council, an office of the U.N. that the Trump administration has already pulled out of, along with its Israeli allies.

Bolton said he would work with officials to determine how much of the nation’s U.N. budget goes toward the human rights office. That amount will be removed from future payments to the international body.

“We are going to de-fund the Human Rights Council,” Bolton said.

The U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which includes the Human Rights Council, explains its purpose in benvolent terms.

The Human Rights Council is an inter-governmental body within the United Nations system made up of 47 States responsible for the promotion and protection of all human rights around the globe,” the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights website states.

In June, just before the United States left the council, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had a decidedly different take:

We have no doubt that there was once a noble vision for this council. But today, we need to be honest – the Human Rights Council is a poor defender of human rights,” he said, according to the State Department.

“Worse than that, the Human Rights Council has become an exercise in shameless hypocrisy – with many of the world’s worst human rights abuses going ignored, and some of the world’s most serious offenders sitting on the council itself.”

President Donald Trump has previously shared his belief that America sends too much of its money to the U.N. Estimates show U.S. donations comprise about 22 percent of the U.N.’s budget.

During remarks to member-state representatives in September, Trump argued that the body needs to be reformed in order to accomplish its stated mission.

“The United Nations was founded on truly noble goals,” Trump said. “These include affirming the dignity and worth of the human person and striving for international peace. The United Nations has helped advance toward these goals in so many ways: feeding the hungry, providing disaster relief, and empowering women and girls in many societies all across the world.”

Trump blamed “bureaucracy and mismanagement” for what he described as the body’s inability to perform those tasks at its peak.

“While the United Nations on a regular budget has increased by 140 percent, and its staff has more than doubled since 2000, we are not seeing the results in line with this investment,” Trump said.

According to Trump, supporters of the U.N. deserve to see leadership set clear parameters for the body’s ongoing missions.

“To honor the people of our nations, we must ensure that no one and no member state shoulders a disproportionate share of the burden, and that’s militarily or financially,” he said. “We also ask that every peacekeeping mission have clearly defined goals and metrics for evaluating success. They deserve to see the value in the United Nations, and it is our job to show it to them.”

Trump concluded his address by encouraging U.N. Secretary General António Guterres “to fully use his authority to cut through the bureaucracy, reform outdated systems, and make firm decisions to advance the U.N.’s core mission.”

He went on to encourage member nations to “look at ways to take bold stands at the United Nations with an eye toward changing business as usual and not being beholden to ways of the past, which were not working.”





Chris Agee Contributor, News

Chris Agee is an American journalist with more than 15 years of experience in a wide range of newsrooms.

Attorney Explains how to Protect Against America’s Epidemic of Senior Medical Kidnappings

Introduced by Brian Shilhavy


As we have previously reported here at Health Impact News, the medical kidnapping of America’s elderly is a $273 BILLION industry.

Medical kidnapping of senior citizens occurs when a doctor, usually a psychiatrist, deems that the senior can no longer take care of themselves, and gets a judge to sign an order of “guardianship” or “conservatorship” to someone working for the State.

This state-appointed guardian then comes in and seizes all of their assets, and keeps them a prisoner locked up in a mental facility, most of the time against the wishes of their family members.

This epidemic in the U.S. is even a larger problem than child medical kidnapping, as state-appointed guardians currently have 1.3 million elderly people nationwide under their control. See:


Adults-Seniors-Medical-Kidnappingjpg
Images of adults who were medically kidnapped that Health Impact News has covered.

The few stories we have covered here at Health Impact News regarding seniors medically kidnapped represent just a tiny fraction of what is going on all across the U.S. every single day. (List of links below.)

Attorney Mark Nestmann has written an article that was published on LewRockwell.com giving people practical advice on how to oppose these adult medical kidnappings:

Attorney Explains how to Protect Against America’s Epidemic of Senior Medical Kidnappings

Portrait of Sad Senior couple
Protect Yourself from America’s Corrupt Guardianship System

by Mark Nestmann
LewRockwell.com

John Oliver is hardly a libertarian, but his Last Week Tonight show on HBO regularly highlights how US citizens are royally screwed by Uncle Sam and his minions. Over the years, he’s tackled subjects ranging from civil forfeiture to abuses in forensic science.

Recently, Oliver turned his attention to the guardianship system and how it can abuse senior citizens. Nearly 50 million Americans are 65 or older, and more than one million of them are under guardianship. Nearly 500,000 other disabled adults are part of the guardianship system as well.

State courts appoint guardians to make personal and financial decisions on behalf of adults found to be legally incompetent. A guardian is supposed to ensure that their “wards” have safe housing and help them negotiate a legal and medical system they may be incapable of dealing with on their own. According to an auditor for the Palm Beach County (Florida) guardianship fraud program, guardians control assets valued at $273 billion.

A ward loses nearly all civil rights once a judge approves a guardianship. The guardian has complete control over the ward’s personal and financial affairs. All of a ward’s money can be transferred to a guardian’s own account. A ward can also be forcibly relocated to any residential facility the guardian sees fit. Family members may lose the right to obtain information about the ward’s finances or medical conditions. Indeed, family members may even lose the right to visit the ward, because the guardian can forbid it.

As Judge Steve King of Tarrant County, Texas said on Oliver’s program: “Guardianship is a massive intrusion into a person’s life… they lose more rights than someone who goes to prison.

The powers that guardians wield are rife with abuse. In a series of cases from Las Vegas described last year in The New Yorker, a guardian in Las Vegas named April Parks targeted elderly individuals with substantial assets. Parks persuaded doctors to declare these individuals incompetent and place them under her guardianship. She would then acquire control over their assets and charge outrageously high fees to arrange for their care. When her wards’ estates were depleted to the point where they qualified for Medicaid, she would place them in nursing homes at government expense. In virtually all cases, this happened without a formal cognitive assessment to determine if the ward could continue living independently.

In the meantime, Parks, her lawyer, and her office manager were indicted for racketeering, theft, perjury, and exploitation of their wards. Their trial is scheduled to begin in September.

The horror story surrounding the North guardianship is not an isolated case. I’ve come across abusive guardianship cases in many other states, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington. And while I suspect the vast majority of guardians exercise their authority ethically and with discretion, if only 1% of guardianship cases are abusive, that means 15,000 Americans are victims of this system.

Since it’s extremely difficult to escape from a guardianship once you’re in the system, plan ahead to avoid it. Getting your legal documents in order is the best way to avoid becoming the next victim. We insist that all Nestmann clients execute durable powers of attorney and health care proxies and record them in public records.

These documents should name someone you trust – generally your children or grandchildren – to step in if you become incapacitated. Whomever you name should not be someone in financial difficulty who might use your assets to satisfy their own financial obligations. The document should also be revocable unless a formal cognitive assessment performed by a licensed physician (ideally two licensed physicians) determines you are incompetent.

Another precaution is to build a safety mechanism into your planning. If the agent you name steps in to assist you if you’re incapacitated, your documents should require the agent meet periodically with an independent party – your accountant, for instance – to ensure your assets truly are being used for your benefit.

The guardianship system is one of the biggest rackets in the US today. Don’t be the next victim of this corrupt system.


Original source: Nestmann.com



About the Author Mark Nestmann is a journalist with more than 20 years of investigative experience and is a charter member of he Sovereign Society Council of Experts. He has authored over a dozen books and many additional reports on wealth preservation, privacy and offshore investing. Mark serves as president of his own international consulting firm, The Nestmann Group, Ltd.

The Nestmann Group provides international wealth preservation services for high-net worth individuals. Mark is an Associate Member of the American Bar Association (member of subcommittee on Foreign Activities of U.S. Taxpayers, Committee on Taxation) and member of the Society of Professional Journalists. In 2005, he was awarded a Masters of Laws (LL.M) degree in international tax law at the Vienna (Austria) University of Economics and Business Administration.




BIill Clinton's Loving Wife

by Dick Morris

 

If you happen to see the Bill Clinton five minute TV ad for Hillary in which he introduces the commercial by saying he wants to share some things we may not know about Hillary's background, beware as I was there for most of their presidency and know them better than just about anyone.  I offer a few corrections.
 
Bill says:  "In law school Hillary worked on legal services for the poor."

Facts are:  Hillary's main extra-curricular activity in ' Law School ' was helping the Black Panthers, on trial in Connecticut for torturing and killing a 'Federal Agent.'  She went to Court every day as part of a Law student monitoring committee trying to spot civil rights violations and develop grounds for appeal.
 
Bill says:  "Hillary spent a year after graduation working on a Children's rights project for poor kids.
 
Facts are:  Hillary interned with Bob Truehaft, the head of the California Communist Party.  She met Bob when he represented the Panthers and traveled all the way to San Francisco to take an internship with him

Bill says:  "Hillary could have written her own job ticket, but she turned down all the lucrative job offers."
 
Facts are:  She flunked the D.C. bar exam, 'Yes', flunked it, it is a matter of record, and only passed the Arkansas bar.  She had no job offers in Arkansas , 'None', and only got hired by the University of Arkansas Law School at Fayetteville because Bill was already teaching there.  She did not join the prestigious Rose Law Firm until Bill became Arkansas Attorney General and was made a partner only after he was elected Arkansas Governor.
 
Bill says:  "President Carter appointed Hillary to the Legal Services Board of Directors and she became its Chairman."
 
Facts are:  The appointment was in exchange for Bill's support for Carter in his 1980 primary against Ted Kennedy.  Hillary then became chairman in a coup in which she won a majority away from Carter's choice to be chairman.
 
Bill says:  "She served on the board of the Arkansas Children's Hospital."
 
Facts are: Yes she did.  But her main board activity, not mentioned by Bill, was to sit on the Wal-Mart Board of Directors, for a substantial fee.  She was silent about their labor and health care practices.
 
Bill says:  "Hillary didn't succeed at getting health care for all Americans in 1994 but she kept working at it and helped to create the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that provides five million children with health insurance."
 
Facts are:  Hillary had nothing to do with creating CHIP.  It was included in the budget deal between Clinton and Republican Majority Leader Senator Trent Lott.  I know; I helped to negotiate the deal.  The money came half from the budget deal and half from the Attorney Generals' tobacco settlement.  Hillary had nothing to do with either source of funds.

Bill says:  "Hillary was the face of America all over the World." (LOL)
 
Facts are:  Her visits were part of a program to get her out of town so that Bill would not appear weak by feeding stories that Hillary was running the White House.  Her visits abroad were entirely touristic and symbolic and there was no substantive diplomacy on any of them.
 
Bill says:  "Hillary was an excellent Senator who kept fighting for Children's and Women's issues."
 
Facts are:  Other than totally meaningless legislation like changing the names on courthouses and post offices, she has passed only four substantive pieces of legislation.  One set up a national park in Puerto Rico .  A second provided respite care for family members helping their relatives through Alzheimer's or other conditions.  And two were routine bills to aid 911 victims and responders which were sponsored by the entire N.Y. delegation.  Presently she is trying to have the US memorialize Woodstock .

Here is what bothers me more than anything else about Hillary Clinton. She has done everything possible to weaken the President and our Country (that's you and me) when it comes to the 'War on Terror'.
 
1.  She wants to close GITMO and move the combatants to the USA where they would have access to our legal system.
 
2.  She wants to eliminate the monitoring of suspected Al Qaeda phone calls to/from the USA .
 
3.  She wants to grant constitutional rights to enemy combatants captured on the battlefield.
 
4.  She wants to eliminate the monitoring of money transfers between suspected Al Qaeda cells and supporters in the USA .

5.  She wants to eliminate the type of interrogation tactics used by the Military & CIA where coercion might be used when questioning known terrorists even though such tactics might save American lives.
 
One cannot think of a single 'Bill', Hillary has introduced or a single comment she has made that would tend to strengthen our Country in the 'War on Terror'.  But, one can think of a lot of comments she has made that weaken our Country and makes it a more dangerous situation for all of us.  Bottom line: She goes hand in hand with the ACLU on far too many issues where common sense is abandoned.
 
Share this with everyone you know, ask them to prove Dick Morris wrong.  Think about it - he's (Dick Morris) said all of this openly, thus if he were not truthful he'd be liable for 'Defamation of Character' !
 
And you better believe Hillary would sue him. Her winning in 2020 means the final death knell for America!  Her whole public life has been a LIE.
 

 


Dick Morris was a former political advisor to President Bill Clinton







IEET’s George Dvorsky offers course on Introduction to Transhumanism

{An interesting 2014 article demonstrating an artificially stimulated interest in transhumanism - ED].


by Institute for “Ethics” and Emerging Technologies (IEET)
(Co-founded by transhumanists James Hughes and Oxford don Nick Bostrom)

IEET’s George Dvorsky offers course on Introduction to Transhumanism

George Dvorsky, prominent futurist, writer on ethics and technology and Chairman of the IEET Board of Directors, is offering his:  Introduction to Transhumanism course during May, from May 1st to May 31st, 2014.

This course introduces the philosophy and socio-cultural movement that is transhumanism. We will survey its core ideas, history, technological requirements, potential manifestations, and ethical implications. Topics to be discussed will include the various ways humans have tried to enhance themselves throughout history, the political and social aspects of transhumanism, the technologies required to enhance humans (including cybernetics, pharmaceuticals, genetics, and nanotechnology), and the various ways humans may choose to use these technologies to modify and augment their capacities (including radical life extension, intelligence augmentation, and mind uploading). Along the way we will discuss social and ethical problems that might be posed by human enhancement.

Schedule and readings: Specific reading and discussion goals are set for each week, and students can proceed at their own pace. There are no live events planned. An assortment of resources will be used, including academic papers, online presentations, instructional videos, and popular articles. Everything about the course and all readings are provided within the PSA Moodle website. Course lectures, links to websites, and forums for discussions with the instructor and students are included in the Moodle website classroom. Visit the class anytime to contribute your posts and receive George Dvorsky’s replies in discussion forums. There is nothing “live” you can miss – log in and participate anytime day or night, 24/7, throughout May.

Ask George about this course by tweeting to him at twitter.com/dvorskyor posting on his facebook wall at www.facebook.com/gdvorsky

Canadian futurist, science writer, and ethicist George Dvorsky has written and spoken extensively about the impacts of cutting-edge science and technology—particularly as they pertain to the improvement of human performance and experience. George is a contributing editor at io9 where he writes about science, culture, and futurism. A founding member of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, he is its Chair of the Board and the founder and program director for its Rights of Non-Human Persons program. In addition, George is the co-founder and president of the Toronto Transhumanist Association and has served on the Board of Directors for Humanity+ for two terms. His work has been featured in such publications as The Guardian, the BBC, CBC, Forbes, the New York Times, Slate, Radio Free Europe, and al-Jazeera. He is also an avid CrossFitter, an ancestral health enthusiast, and an accomplished music performer, composer, and recording engineer.




[Note:  Couldn’t be more “in their own words” and “in your face”.  Let’s remember that bioethics founder Art Caplan is on the IEET board of trustees, so we already know which “ethics” they use, including utilitarian’s “for the greater good” and the libertine bioethics principle of absolute “autonomy”:  http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/bio/caplan/;  also,

http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/category/C46.   And of course, see a good upfront description of transhumanism/futurism/posthumanism in the recent articles by transhumanists, at:  http://wavism.net/principles/what-is-social-futurism/, and at  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-transhumanistphilosopher/201404/transhumanist-explores-new-type-community (Bitcoin and all). The article first appeared here.

‘Unhackable’ Apple Embarrassed by Teen Who Dumped Secure Data in Folder Named ‘Hacky Hack Hack’

by Jack Davis


A 16-year-old boy was so fascinated with his favorite technology company that he hacked his way into Apple’s servers, stealing 90 gigabytes worth of files and accessing customer accounts as well.

The Children’s Court in Melbourne, Austrailia, heard the case Thursday, in which the teen pleaded guilty. The teen’s name is being withheld by the court.

His defense lawyer said the teen was so well known in the hacking community that sharing details of the case could put him at risk.

The teen said he “dreamed of” working for Apple, and decided to hack his way into their servers, something he did for about a year.

The boy’s hacking exploits came to an end last year when the Australian Federal Police executed a search warrant on his home, The Age reported.

While the attacker tried to hide his identity, Apple was able to identify the serial numbers of the laptops used to perform the attacks, and that’s how the investigation led to Australia, according to the New York Post.

Police also found a trove of hacking files and instructions in a folder titled “hacky hack hack.”

Apple trumpeted its role in eventually finding the hacker.

“At Apple, we vigilantly protect our networks and have dedicated teams of information security professionals that work to detect and respond to threats,” the company said in a statement, according to The Guardian.

“In this case, our teams discovered the unauthorized access, contained it, and reported the incident to law enforcement,” the statement said.

However, the teen also helped get himself caught by bragging about what he had done on WhatsApp, police said.

Apple insisted that despite what was said in court, no personal accounts were compromised

“We … want to assure our customers that at no point during this incident was their personal data compromised,” its statement said. .[Yeah, right! - ED]

Suelette Dreyfus, a privacy expert from the University of Melbourne, is urging that the teen be treated with leniency, saying kids push limits online just as they do everywhere else.

“I have researched a number of teen hacker cases internationally,” Dreyfus said.

“Almost all these teens grew out of the technology boundary-pushing of their youth, and then went on to live useful lives and contributing to society. Putting them in prison is often a waste of that potential,” she said.

“Young people often make mistakes when they are exploring and rule-breaking especially online — including boasting about their exploits. It’s not right, but for tech teens, it can be a part of growing up … there’s usually a really worried teen and family at the end of this sort of court case,” Dreyfus concluded.








Jack Davis is a free-lance writer. Writing as "Rusty" Davis, he is a Spur Award-nominated writer whose first two novels, “Wyoming Showdown” and “Black Wind Pass” were published by Five Star Publishing.

Senate Intel Chair Reprimands Brennan, Provides Cover for Trump Stripping Sec. Clearance

by Randy DeSoto


Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., sharply rebuked former CIA Director John Brennan on Thursday for his allegation in an Op-Ed this week that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 presidential race.

Burr further contended that if Brennan’s claim is purely political with no facts to support it, President Donald Trump was completely justified in pulling his security clearance.

On Wednesday, the White House announced it was revoking the former Obama administration official’s clearance explaining, “Mr. Brennan’s lying and recent conduct, characterized by increasingly frenzied commentary, is wholly inconsistent with access to the Nation’s most closely held secrets and facilitates the very aim of our adversaries, which is to sow division and chaos.”

Brennan responded in an Op-Ed in The New York Times the following day titled, “President Trump’s Claims of No Collusion Are Hogwash.”

The piece is subtitled, “That’s why the president revoked my security clearance: to try to silence anyone who would dare challenge him.”

Brennan pointed to Trump’s public call in the summer of 2016 for Russia to find his rival Hillary Clinton’s 30,000 missing emails as an indication collusion occurred between the GOP candidate’s campaign and Moscow. The former CIA head further contended that if Trump was willing to make such a public call, the question is what was happening privately.
“While I had deep insight into Russian activities during the 2016 election, I now am aware — thanks to the reporting of an open and free press — of many more of the highly suspicious dalliances of some American citizens with people affiliated with the Russian intelligence services,” Brennan wrote.

“Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion are, in a word, hogwash,” he then proclaimed.

Brennan concluded his piece with an accusation that Trump’s decision to pull his security clearance was “politically motivated” to protect himself.

“Now more than ever, it is critically important that the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and his team of investigators be allowed to complete their work without interference — from Mr. Trump or anyone else,” he argued, “so that all Americans can get the answers they so rightly deserve.” [Or to continue his assault on windmills in the finest tradition of Don Quixote - Ed]

Burr issued a statement in response to Brennan’s Op-Ed noting that the former CIA director included no firm evidence of collusion in the Intelligence Community Assessment released in early 2017.
“Director Brennan’s recent statements purport to know as fact that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign power,” Burr said. “If Director Brennan’s statement is based on intelligence he received while still leading the CIA, why didn’t he include it in the Intelligence Community Assessment released in 2017?”

Burr observed that if Brennan’s assertion is based on information he has received since leaving office, publicizing it constitutes a breach of intelligence.  Further, “If he has some other personal knowledge of or evidence of collusion, it should be disclosed to the Special Counsel, not The New York Times.”

The North Carolina senator then turned to the other alternative: Brennan’s allegation is purely a political attack.

“If, however, Director Brennan’s statement is purely political and based on conjecture, the president has full authority to revoke his security clearance as head of the Executive Branch.”




Randy DeSoto is a graduate of West Point and Regent University School of Law. He is the author of the book "We Hold These Truths" and screenwriter of the political documentary "I Want Your Money."

[Story] How to Make a Gangster Weep

by Chris Campbell


[You’ll have to excuse today’s profanity-laced missive. I will tell the story — which occurred last Friday night — as it happened, in all its intensity.]

We watched as the man stood at the end of the road, in a victory stance, announcing his next conquest.

“You hear me!? I want to fight!”

His t-shirt was missing, revealing tattoos on every inch of his skin up to his neck as he growled through the shadows.

He stomped toward us, fists clenched.

I was sitting down on the stoop. He walked up and stuck his face in mine and shouted more profanity-laced threats.

Two minutes later, he was on the ground, weeping like a lost child in Wal-Mart.

I’ll tell you what happened — and how I made him cry in a bush — in a moment.

Last Friday night, I learned the second lesson of 99 Things Every Millennial Man Should Know (a book I’m putting together in 90 days using James Altucher’s The Choose Yourself Guide to Self-Publishing)… 

99 Things is a compendium of powerhouses (heavyweight boxer Ed Latimore, “Gentleman Mystic” Billy Red Horse, kung fu master and mentalist Jonathan Pritchard, and much more) imparting their wisdom.

Hours before I was to leave for C.J. Midlam’s house (self-published author of The Windows Around, we spoke of last week), I received the second chapter to 99 Things, written by Kung-Fu master Jonathan Pritchard (see below).

It was about self-defense through de-escalation of violence.

I read it, appreciated its approach, then left for the long drive to Dayton to hang out with C.J. at Germanfest.

Little did I know, the very tactics described in Pritchard’s piece would potentially save my life.

C.J. and I started at a bar, Dayton Beer Co., and downed a couple beers. 

Soon, we found ourselves downtown, gulping down Jager Bombs (hey, as they say, when in Rome). Then another bar, called “Therapy,” a truly God-forsaken place, in which we had a gin and tonic and I silently vowed never to return. And then, we headed to C.J.’s home.

It was a nice night, we agreed. We relaxed outside on the stoop, under a soon-to-be midnight moon.

As we talked, a man rounded a dark corner down the street, heaving like a wild banshee.

His body flailed as he stormed through, kicking up dust and debris like a bull in heat. His shirt was missing. His pants, drooping. Tattooed from neck to toe.

He was the “bad guy in the dark alley” your mother warned you about.

He raised his arms up like he’d just finished a marathon, stopped, and yelled, “I want to FIGHT somebody! F*CK!”

We took a look around and a realization crept up our spines from our inner-bellies. It was just us on this lonesome street. So, naturally, he headed in our direction. “Well, this should be interesting,” C.J. said.  “Yep,” I said.

“What’s up, bitch?” the breathy man said, one hand on his belt. I was still sitting on the stoop. An easy target, a sitting duck.

He ran up, stuck his face in mine, and said “What’s up? What you want? Huh!?”

Pritchard’s piece popped in my mind. Time to put it into action.

It must’ve been the Jagermeister in my veins, but I was irrationally placid. Cool as a cucumber.

I said, “Hey, it’s OK.”

He stuck his face closer.

His breath was hot. It stunk of an ancient rage.

My ego almost grabbed me…

There was a loud moment inside my head where I screamed the obvious: “Get out of my face.”

But I didn’t say it. Instead, I tried something else, “Look, you’re a good person,” I said.

Like that weird alien in that Steven Spielberg movie, I reached up and touched his heart with my index finger.

“Here,” I said. “Right here.”

And, you know what, I meant it. I felt it.

It was genuine. I was in the moment. I was with this man, not against him. Not judging him. I felt what’s best described, although the term is lacking, as compassion.

And, some. blessing. how. it worked.  First, he whimpered.  Then, he staggered back and crumpled like a cheap suit.

He fell into a bush and began to weep. I tried to help him up, but his bones had melted into his skin. He slumped to the ground like a bowl of Jello.

This grown man, tattooed from head to toe, possibly gunning for a night gig at MS-13, transformed into a toddler. He didn’t want to fight. He just wanted someone to love him. Be his friend. Tell him everything would be OK. Touch his heart. Teach him how to walk.

“I have no friends!” he shouted. “I want friends,” he cried.

A dark figure emerged from whence he came. A female figure. It approached as C.J. and I hoisted the man on our shoulders.

It was his mother.  “Come on! The cops are looking for you,” she said. “Thank you boys so much. Thank you. Thank you.”

“I love you mom,” he said. “Try to walk, honey,” she said.

We tried to walk with him for a bit, but it proved more difficult than anticipated.

He goose-stepped all over the street. He would extend his left leg in front of me, on his right, and would do the same with his right to C.J. on the left.

We finally carried him, leaving his legs to drag behind. His pants began to loosen, and then dropped right down to his ankles. Cojones exposed, flapping in the breeze.

His mistake that morning to meet the day au naturale was the first of many, it appeared.

“Uh,” C.J. said, “Hey, Mom. This is a job for Mom.”

“Oh, no,” she said, looking back.

We rounded the corner, that blasted corner that started this whole thing, and dropped him in the backseat of his mom’s Buick. We did our good deed for the night, and might have avoided being stabbed.

So, yes, please pay heed. And recognize nothing, not even violence, is inevitable.



Published under a creative commons license here.

The Perils of Success and How to Overcome Them


Tim Huelskamp Heartland

by Tim Huelskamp, Ph.D.


A veteran businessman who successfully founded and grew multiple businesses in a variety of industries once observed, “No one wants to fail, but the toughest challenges emerge when you achieve your goal, not when you fall short.

This counterintuitive idea—that success may be more difficult to handle than failure—is not the sort of thing we often hear. Yet, business history is littered with examples. In 1984, IBM posted the greatest after-tax profit of any company in world history until that time: $6.58 billion. Just eight years later, IBM reported the greatest corporate loss ever up to that time: $5 billion, as the business historian John Steele Gordon observed.

Or consider the rise and fall of Polaroid. It so dominated its market that everybody called instant photos Polaroids. The name was literally a household word. It seemed everyone was snapping and shaking their Polaroid cameras—right up until the digital revolution passed the company by and Polaroid filed for bankruptcy protection in 2001, just like one of its instant photographs from decades gone by.

Or consider Yahoo! In 2005, it was number one in the online advertising market. But after relying too heavily on its marketplace prominence instead of changing to serve its customers better as new competition arose, and backing out of potential deals to purchase Google and Facebook, Yahoo now finds itself in danger of completely disappearing.

In these three cases and countless others, successful businesses achieved dramatic success and then failed—sometimes spectacularly, sometimes with barely a whimper. They achieved record profits and prominence, but as new challenges arose, they couldn’t, to use the unofficial U.S. Marine Corps slogan, “improvise, adapt, overcome.”

Political Success—or Failure?

It’s not so different in the political, policymaking arena. A few years back, a friend of mine was the majority leader of his state legislative chamber, with the duty—and great power—of selecting which bills to place on the legislative calendar for floor debate, vote, and passage. All others would suffer a swift demise.

During a legislative scheduling session, the majority leader identified an insurance bill that had been supported by key business interests, passed the appropriate committee, and appeared to be a solid, conservative bill for his Republican majority to consider. The majority leader invited the special interests’ lobbyist to the state capitol to discuss the impending victory.

After proudly announcing that the bill would move forward and almost certainly pass, he was stunned by the lobbyist’s response: “Do not bring the bill up for debate!” The majority leader was utterly confused. Had the industry changed its opinion on the topic? No. Had new political opposition arisen? Nope. Had the state’s governor decided to oppose the bill? No.

What was the problem, then? The lobbyist was very clear: If this bill were to pass in the current legislative session, the lobbyist asked, what would he do next year? If he accomplished his legislative goal, he might not be hired again. Success would mean there was no further need for his services.

In politics as in business, success can be perilous.

The Heartland Institute has achieved significant, measurable policy successes in recent years. One need look no further than two Heartland visits to the White House which occurred almost exactly one year apart.

On June 1, 2017, Heartland’s Joe Bast joined President Donald Trump in the Rose Garden for the official announcement of the United States’ withdrawal from the horrendous Paris Climate Accord. “President Trump made exactly the right call by deciding to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Treaty,” Joe said at the time. “Staying in would make it impossible to implement his America First Energy Plan and result in U.S. taxpayers and consumers paying hundreds of billions of dollars in higher taxes and higher energy costs.”

The successes continued. In January 2018, Heartland’s government relations team planted boots on the ground in Wisconsin on numerous occasions, testifying and counseling lawmakers on the ins and outs of welfare reform. The result of Heartland’s hard work came on April 11, when Gov. Scott Walker signed a package of laws that brought conservative, commonsense, work-focused welfare reform to Wisconsin. We are now working to export these historic innovations to the other 49 states and the federal government.

Heartland’s Successes

The Heartland Institute has achieved significant, measurable policy successes in recent years. One need look no further than two Heartland visits to the White House which occurred almost exactly one year apart.

On June 1, 2017, Heartland’s Joe Bast joined President Donald Trump in the Rose Garden for the official announcement of the United States’ withdrawal from the horrendous Paris Climate Accord. “President Trump made exactly the right call by deciding to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Treaty,” Joe said at the time. “Staying in would make it impossible to implement his America First Energy Plan and result in U.S. taxpayers and consumers paying hundreds of billions of dollars in higher taxes and higher energy costs.”

The successes continued. In January 2018, Heartland’s government relations team planted boots on the ground in Wisconsin on numerous occasions, testifying and counseling lawmakers on the ins and outs of welfare reform. The result of Heartland’s hard work came on April 11, when Gov. Scott Walker signed a package of laws that brought conservative, commonsense, work-focused welfare reform to Wisconsin. We are now working to export these historic innovations to the other 49 states and the federal government.

In late June, U.S. District Court Judge William Allsup threw out a lawsuit brought by left-wing city officials in San Francisco and Oakland, who were attempting to hold five of the world’s largest oil companies financially liable for rising sea levels and other alleged damages from manmade global warming. In many cases, the supposed damages had never occurred.

Heartland Institute policy advisors joined an important amici curiae brief answering the judge’s call for a “climate tutorial”; Heartland submitted a Policy Brief, “The Social Benefits of Fossil Fuels,” to answer Allsup’s questions about the benefits of fossil fuels; and Heartland experts published key op-eds—all of which helped to win the “Climate Trial of the Century.”

Ah, winning. It never gets old.

But wait, there’s more. Remember I said that there were two visits to the White House? Well, almost a year to the day after Joe’s visit, I was invited to the White House to watch Trump sign into law the Right to Try bill, groundbreaking legislation promoted by The Heartland Institute that will help terminally ill patients and their families gain greater access to potentially lifesaving medications that have passed the Food and Drug Administration’s safety protocols and await full approval, providing hope to tens of thousands of families.

Beyond the Zenith

As we roll through the halfway point of 2018, I am happy to report The Heartland Institute has reached the zenith of its success—so far. There are many battles yet to be waged and wars to be won in the weeks, months, and years ahead.

Some might suggest that now is the time to rest, to take the foot off the pedal for a bit and enjoy the fruits of our labor. I’m guessing the executives at IBM, Polaroid, and Yahoo might have thought the same thing, and look where that got them!

The Heartland attitude is markedly different from those businesses’ and many other think tanks’. It is perhaps best summed up by Heartland friend and retired U.S. Air Force Col. John A. Warden III, a Vietnam War combat pilot and the architect of the air campaign strategy in Operation Desert Storm. In his book written with business consultant Leland A. Russell, Winning in Fast Time, Warden lays out what many politicians, lobbyists, and businesses just don’t get about success: “When in doubt, attack. When you take the offensive, you have the opportunity to achieve exactly what you want because you set the agenda and the timetable.”

I promise you, we at Heartland will continue to press the attack in the war for America’s future, not rest on our laurels. We will work diligently to set the agenda and take the fight to those who oppose our personal liberties, not wait for their attacks. We will remain on the offensive, always looking for new successes, not simply defending our past victories. That’s how all vital wars are won, and nothing is more important than this war for freedom.


Tim Huelskamp, Ph.D.

Tim Huelskamp is the president and CEO of The Heartland Institute.

The 3 Deadliest Words in the World: ‘It’s a Girl’

by Paula Bolyard


{A 2013 article that highlights the real war on women in China and India where infanticide on female babies is the norm. There is no gender confusion there but it's nothing that advances the media agenda. - ED}

The United Nations estimates there are as many as 200 million girls missing from the world today — killed, aborted or abandoned, simply because they are females. India and China alone “eliminate” more girls than are born in the United States every year. 

In India, the desire for male children has led to widespread sex-selection abortions targeting females. On average, one girl a minute is aborted in India just because she is female. Infanticide — the murder of baby girls who survive birth — is also widely practiced in some areas. 

According to The Invisible Girl Project, “Infanticide is so widely practiced in some areas of India, that the mortality rate for girls between the ages of 1-5 is 75% higher than the mortality rate for boys of the same age.” Girls and women also die from neglect, lethal violence, and dowry killings. There are 37 million more men than women in India, a statistic that has contributed to widespread human trafficking; women and girls are regularly sold in India’s brothels.

In China, the country’s one-child policy has led to 18 million more boys than girls under the age of 15.  One out of every six girls is lost to gendercide. All Girls Allowed says that, “Gendercide, defined as ‘the systematic extermination of a particular gender,’ has become widespread in China. With the use of illegal ultrasound equipment, couples can determine the sex of their child and choose to abort the female fetus. In other cases, midwives have been reported to deliver “stillborn” girls by strangling the female infant with the umbilical cord as she is delivered.” 

New York Times contributor Mai Jian described the brutality of the forced abortions and forced sterilization, particularly in rural villages in China: “Village family-planning officers vigilantly chart the menstrual cycle and pelvic-exam results of every woman of childbearing age in their area. If a woman gets pregnant without permission and is unable to pay the often exorbitant fine for violating the policy, she risks being subjected to a forced abortion.”  

Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, said that China’s one-child policy “causes more violence against women and girls than any other official policy on earth.”

Human rights advocate Markus Redding from Columbia University has called gendercide “our generation’s holocaust — a systematic extermination of millions just because they are females.” 

He said, “Most people can’t believe it. They can’t believe the numbers. When you talk about a Nazi holocaust occurring right now, people are in denial about it.” Redding said it’s a direct violation of human rights and against international law and we must mobilize the international community to end this abuse of women.  

It’s A Girl, a feature-length documentary that focuses on gendercide and forced abortion in India and China, was recently presented to Amnesty International’s film series against gender violence by Women’s Rights Without Frontiers. The documentary is part of the group’s “Save a Girl” campaign that includes providing monthly support for women at risk of aborting or abandoning their baby girls and emergency help for women in danger as a result of oppressive coercive family planning policies.

Littlejohn says we must “stop the violence” and end the war on women.


 


The article first appeared here

Horrifying UN Report Details Widespread Child Rape by High-Level UN Employees

by Matt Agorist


A deeply disturbing report has finally been released by the United Nations detailing the rampant sexual exploitation of children by UN employees that is widespread, throughout multiple countries.

While pieces of the report were released previously, the full report, detailing the scope and horrifying nature of the abuse was only just released in July.

As Disobedient Media points out in a scathing report,

The publication of a summary version of the report caused a global furor in 2002, eventually leading to some policy changes. However, these efforts have proven woefully insufficient in light of ongoing scandals, including but not limited to the recent Oxfam debacle, the Zoe’s Ark scandal, allegations of horrific sexual abuse in the Central African Republic by UN forces, and the Laura Silsby incident. All of these cases (and many others) occurred after the partial publication of the UNHCR report, pointing to one unsavory conclusion:

Aid work is not a vehicle of charity, but is, in a very real sense, a cover for atrocity. It is a weapon, a blunt instrument of power that is wielded to exploit the most vulnerable populations in crisis around the world. We can now state that sentiment as fact, not opinion.

The report reads like a nightmare and states in part:

“Agency workers from local and international NGOs as well as UN agencies are among the prime sexual exploiters of refugee children often using the very humanitarian assistance and services intended to benefit refugees as a tool of exploitation. Male national staff were reported to trade humanitarian commodities and services, including medication, oil, bulgur wheat, plastic sheeting, education courses, skills-training, school supplies etc., in exchange for sex with girls under 18. The practice appeared particularly pronounced in locations with significant and established aid programs.”

“There was compelling evidence of a chronic and entrenched pattern of this type of abuse in refugee camps in Guinea and Liberia in particular…The number of allegations documented, however, is a critical indicator of the scale of this problem as altogether 42 agencies and 67 individuals were implicated in this behavior…”

“Security and military forces including international and regional peacekeepers, national forces and police units are another significant category of exploiters. UN peacekeepers in Sierra Leone are alleged to be extensively involved in the sexual exploitation of children with the assessment team recording allegations against UNAMSIL peacekeepers from nine countries. Details of these allegations, which also require verification, have likewise been submitted to UNHCR.”

The sex exploiters are men in the community with the money, power and influence: agency workers, peacekeepers, regional and national armed forces, teachers, police, businessmen, diamond miners, refugee leaders and logging company staff.”

One would think that this 2002 report would have curtailed at least some of the abuse when a portion of it was publicly released at the time. However, that appears not to have happened. As TFTP reported earlier this year, an outright frightening dossier released by a former senior United Nations official revealed that United Nations employees have carried out over 60,000 rapes in just the last decade. What’s more, the dossier estimates that the organization currently employs at least 3,300 pedophiles.

In just ten years, under the guise of rendering aid, the United Nations has literally been raping and pillaging countries across the world. The problem has gotten so out of hand that it prompted the former UN insider, Andrew Macleod, to blow the whistle and hand over the evidence to Britain’s Department for International Development (DFID) Secretary Priti Patel.

According to the exclusive report by the Sun, the dossier reveals that on top of the 3,300 pedophiles working for the organization, thousands more “predatory” sex abusers specifically target aid charity jobs to get close to vulnerable women and children.

According to Macleod, anyone who’s attempted to blow the whistle on the horrifyingly rampant abuse is silenced and fired.

Sharing his dossier with The Sun, Prof MacLeod last night warned that the spiraling abuse scandal was on the same scale as the Catholic Church’s.

While the report reveals that there are 3,300 current employees who are active pedophiles on the UN’s payroll, Macleod estimates the real number to be far higher.

“There are tens of thousands of aid workers around the world with pedophile tendencies, but if you wear a UNICEF T-shirt nobody will ask what you’re up to.

“You have the impunity to do whatever you want.

“It is endemic across the aid industry across the world”.

“The system is at fault, and should have stopped this years ago.”

According to the report in the Sun:

Professor MacLeod worked as an aid boss for the UN all over the world, including high profile jobs in the Balkans, Rwanda and Pakistan – where he was chief of operations of the UN’s Emergency Coordination Centre.

He is campaigning for far tougher checks on aid workers in the field as well as the abusers among them to be brought to justice, and wants the UK to lead the fight.

The professor’s grim 60,000 figure is based on UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres’s admission last year that UN peacekeepers and civilian staff abused 311 victims in just one 12 month period over 2016.

The UN also admits that the likely true number of cases reported against its staff is double that, as figures outside of war zones are not centrally collated.

Prof MacLeod also estimates that only one in 10 of all rapes and assaults by UN staff are reported, as even in the UK the reporting rate is just 14 per cent.

Based on evidence from Prof MacLeod, ex-Cabinet minister Priti Patel – who resigned in November last year – this week accused senior officials at DFID of being part of the cover up.

“Child rape crimes are being inadvertently funded in part by United Kingdom tax-payer,” explained Macleod.

“I know there were a lot of discussions at senior levels of the United Nations about ‘something must be done’ but nothing effective came of it, and if you look at the record of whistle blowers, they were fired,” he said.

“We are looking at a problem on the scale of the Catholic Church — if not bigger.”

As the Free Thought Project has been reporting for years, none of these predators are ever held liable, and as this report shows, only the ones who expose it are fired.

In a blow to victims of human trafficking worldwide, a massive child sex ring was exposed in Haiti {See DC PizzaGate: A Primer UPDATED 07/07/17 seemingly linked to the Clintons - ED

— involving international ‘peacekeepers’ with the United Nations as well as other high-level officials from around the world — and no one went to jail.

Perhaps it’s time we stop relying on the ones who keep getting caught raping children to stop people from raping children. A novel idea indeed.

 


Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on TwitterSteemit, and now on Facebook.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple  We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details