[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




New Way to Kidnap Children from Their Homes: Pretend to be a Social Worker

by Terri LaPoint  (Health Impact News)

It is the one of the scariest things that a parent can ever experience. There is a knock on the door. Someone says, “I am a social worker from Child Protective Services. We got a call and I need to see your children.”

It happens every day in every state all across America. Social workers, alone or accompanied by police, show up to homes and to hospital rooms without a court order or warrant. There is no emergency circumstance where a child’s life is in danger in the time it would take for them to get a court order or warrant signed by a judge, as provided for in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

As terrifying as this is, what if the person on the doorstep is not even a social worker? What if they are a kidnapper posing as a social worker?

This happened to a mother in New York recently. Ashley Bradley posted her story on Facebook, and the post went viral. If she had not known her rights, she could easily have fallen prey to a scheme to kidnap her 9-month-old baby.

CafeMom writes:

Ashley Bradley had just put her little boy down for a nap on Wednesday afternoon when there was an unexpected knock at her door. The mom from New York wasn’t expecting any visitors, which is why the woman on her doorstep caught her off guard.

But when she opened the door, this stranger announced that she was from Child Protective Services and was there to take Bradley’s 9-month-old son away.

Bradley describes her reaction on Facebook:

At first I was so mad and hurt I wasn’t thinking right but the[n] I realized that she 1. Didn’t have a state issued badge, 2. My son’s name was spelled wrong on the folder she had in her hand and 3. I have no cps cases so they would not have been coming to my house.

She wisely demanded proof of the woman’s identity, but the social worker impersonator refused. Bradley called the police, and the woman disappeared.

Similar to Visits by Real Social Workers

At first glance, the clues that this was an impersonator appear legitimate. However, the behavior of the criminal at Ms. Bradley’s door is no different from the behavior of Child Protective Services social workers all over America.

Many parents have reported to Health Impact News that the social workers who take their children refuse to give their names or show their badges. Some have a badge that is turned around backwards.

It is not at all uncommon for children’s names to be misspelled on the folder or in documents. In fact, social worker documents and even medical records are routinely filled with inaccuracies.

Perhaps the most disturbing similarity of this case to hundreds of thousands of real CPS cases in the United States and other countries is this statement by Ashley Bradley:

I have no cps cases so they would not have been coming to my house.

This is true for many parents whose children are taken by the state. Sometimes their first contact with the system is the time that a social worker shows up on their doorstep, unannounced, out of the blue, even when the parents are innocent of any wrongdoing.

“But I Haven’t Done Anything Wrong”

The reality is that only 17% of allegations against parents are even substantiated (Source). The majority of children seized by Child Protective Services should never have been taken. Innocent parents lose their children to the state every single day.

Parents who have done nothing wrong often think that there obviously must be a mistake. If they let the social worker in and show them everything is fine, many parents naively believe that it will all get sorted out and be ok.

Too many parents have learned the hard way that they could not be more wrong.

If the real CPS shows up on the doorstep, the social worker has a reason. They have received a report, whether true, false, or completely made up by someone with a vendetta, and the social worker is there to investigate.

If they had substantial reason to believe the grounds were legitimate, then they could have obtained a warrant. Most don’t. Many of the investigations amount to little more than “fishing expeditions.” Once the investigation opens and the social worker gets a foot in the door, they frequently “find” something – anything – to try to legitimize their case against the parents.

One attorney described the allegations thus:

They throw everything they can think up at the wall and hope that something sticks.

New York Incident Not an Isolated Event

SimpleMost reports other similar incidents to the one in New York:

Unfortunately, this is not the first case of its kind. Shortly after Bradley’s call to police, Delaware State Police began searching for three people accused of posing as caseworkers from Child Protective Services in the town of Dover. The suspects told a woman they had to check on the welfare of her children. Again, they could not provide credentials or any other proof of identification.

In Texas, a stranger also posing as a caseworker told a father to hand over his three children. That father was armed and able to get his family to safety.

In 2017, police in Milton, Pennsylvania, say a woman tried to barge into a home and take a child without any explanation. When she was asked to provide identification, she ran away.

Child Trafficking

The police officer who came to Ashley Bradley’s home in response to her call told her that the attempted kidnapping could be linked to child trafficking. She wrote:

He said people come from different countries and states kidnap kids and traffic them it does not matter what the age.

The police officer who came to Ashley Bradley’s home said that this could have been a possible attempt at abduction for child trafficking. Source.

While it is true that children can be snatched by strangers or people posing as social workers in order to traffic them, the overwhelming majority of children rescued from child sex trafficking come from the foster care system.

The evidence is undeniable that children in the Child Protective system are at a much higher risk for being sexually trafficked than other children. Sometimes CPS workers are directly involved in the trafficking.

See:


Blacked-Out Parkland Shooting Doc Released, Reporters Erase Black & Finally Find Truth

by Joe Saunders


Florida’s Broward County had already become a byword for deadly incompetence even before a newspaper report last week detailed the school board’s failures to deal with the teenager who eventually killed 17 students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February in Parkland.

Now, it’s making another reputation, as the home of a school district willing to go to court to punish a newspaper that revealed the truth.

According to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, the Broward County School Board is asking a judge to hold the newspaper in contempt after it published a damning story last week that showed just how badly the school district had failed to handle the case of Nikolas Cruz, the troubled teenager who turned into a mass killer.

The Sun-Sentinel’s article published Saturday was based on a Tallahassee-based consultant’s report the Broward School Board tried mightily to suppress.

However, it finally released a heavily redacted version of the report on Friday under a court order. About two-thirds of the document was supposed to be kept from the public by being blacked out. The problem for the school board was the redactions disappeared when the report was copied and pasted into another software.

That let the Sun-Sentinel reporters read the entire report – and let their readers know what the black-out version of the report kept hidden: That Cruz, who had been a student at Stoneman Douglas before transferring to an alternative school, had not been offered all available options for special education opportunities in the district; and that he was not able to attend the alternative school he wanted thanks in part to Stoneman Douglas administrators.

It also showed that School Superintendent Robert Runcie was misleading the public when he claimed that Cruz had refused special education options the district offered.

As the Sun-Sentinel reported:

“In the past, Runcie said that when Cruz turned 18 and rejected special education placement, the district could no longer provide him with the services given to students with emotional and behavioral disabilities. But the consultant’s report reveals for the first time that Cruz himself requested to return to special education, and his request went nowhere.”

Now, there’s no way of knowing whether anything the school district did could have prevented the February shooting. And no one is responsible for the crimes Cruz committed but Cruz himself. Now 19, he is charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder.

But the facts are that the school district essentially blew it when it came to the case of a deeply troubled teenager, then tried to keep the facts from the public – officially to protect the student’s privacy, of course. The concealment just happened to have another effect.

As the Sun-Sentinel put it: “The redactions removed specifics of the killer’s history in the school system — and in the process removed details of mistakes the district made in handling him.”

The Parkland shooting unleashed a wave of gun-control hysteria, led by the media and touted by the voluble David Hogg and other student “survivors,” who’ve been using the crime as a means of political activism and personal celebrity for eight months now.

But the Sun-Sentinel report – like earlier reports about the Broward County Sheriff’s Office – shows the failure of Democrat-dominated local government to deal with a potential problem before it became a tragedy.

And now the school board is going to court against a newspaper that revealed the truth?

In a time when liberals throughout the land are accusing President Donald Trump and his administration of being at war with the idea of a “free press,” nothing can show how hollow the liberals’ claims are than a school board in a Democrat-dominated county suing a newspaper for revealing the truth about government incompetence.

Broward County has really made a name for itself.



Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.


The White House under Trump

submitted by LeRoy C


On Friday, the Trump administration released their annual report to Congress on White House Office Personnel.  It includes the name, status, salary and position title of all 377 White House employees.

The report also said that Trump decided not to take a dime of his salary; instead he donated it to an amazing cause! See below.
 
The report also showed that President Trump is far better at saving money than Obama was. The total annual White House salaries under Trump are 35.8 million vs. $40.9 million under Obama, a savings of $5.1 million.  Here are some other key findings:
 
There are 110 fewer employees on White House staff under Trump than under Obama at this point in their respective presidencies.
 
Nineteen fewer staffers are also dedicated to The First Lady of the United States (FLOTUS).  Currently, there are only two staffers dedicated to Melania Trump vs. 22 staffers who served Michelle Obama (FY2009).
 
However, it's what the report said Trump did with this salary that has everyone talking.
 
Instead of taking his salary, Trump donated all $400,000 to the Department of the Interior where it will be used for construction and repair needs at military cemeteries!  AMAZING! It's so great to have a President who loves our brave military men and women so much!
 
Oh, and where's the media coverage of this? That's right, they don't cover anything decent that the President does...

Hospital Gifts Woman $25 After Performing C-Section Without Anesthesia

by Nick Givas


{This is the kind of healthcare you can expect under socialized medicine. It's cost controls and lack of accountability ensure that its just a matter of time before other surgery such as removal of an appendix or gall bladder is done without anesthetic. Five million in punitive damages may not be enough. - ED}

A California mother is suing Tri-City Medical Center after she received a C-section without anesthesia in November 2017.

“Once I felt it, I was just screaming like, ‘Stop. I can feel it. I can feel it.’ And after that, I’m pretty sure I passed out from the pain,” Delphina Mota told NBC4.

“Something like out of a horror movie,” the 26-year-old continued. “You can’t imagine. I would rather have delivered (my daughter) vaginally, with no medicine, than being cut with a knife.”

Mota and her husband filed a lawsuit on July 13 and it was first obtained by NBC 7.

They claimed the problem began when Mota’s blood pressure began to drop. Three minutes after her blood pressure started falling, Mota’s doctor ordered an emergency C-section.

The anesthesiologist on call, Dr. David Seif, was paged several times to assist with the procedure but “did not respond,” according to the lawsuit. After waiting for almost ten minutes, they strapped Mota to the operating table and cut her open.

Mota’s fiance and the father of her daughter, Paul Iheanachor, told NBC 7 he could hear his future wife screaming, before she mercifully passed out.

Iheanachor claims he tried to enter the operating room to comfort Mota, “but was held back by several hospital personnel.”

If somebody put a knife in your stomach and cut you open, and had their hands on your insides, and ripped your baby out, you know. I just tried to put myself in her shoes,” Iheanachor told NBC 7. “Just tried to wrap my mind around how it would feel to basically be gutted like a fish.”

Aaron Byzak, the chief government and external affairs officer for Tri-City Medical Center, provided a statement to NBC 7, contradicting Mota’s version of events. He said:

Patient safety and quality are the utmost priorities for Tri-City Medical Center and all of our partners. While we normally don’t comment on pending litigation, the patient’s public discussion of the care she received during her emergency C-section compels us to address this outrageous allegation. The patient was administered anesthesia prior to the surgery. We are pleased that the baby is “healthy” and “happy.”

“I was crying because I was scared, I didn’t know what was going on. I was laying there and [obstetrician Dr. Sandra Lopez] was like, ‘We have to just do it,’” Mota told People magazine.

Iheanachor said the hospital tried to “smooth it over” by buying them off with a $25 gift card to the gift shop. “They said, ‘Sorry for what happened, here’s a gift certificate.’ I feel like it was damage control. We were just in shock,” he said.

The baby was born without complications, but Mota says she’s been scared from the experience.

“I still don’t feel like myself. It’s something traumatic. I’m scared now to have another baby,” Mota told People.

Mota and Iheanachor are seeking up to $5 million in damages.



A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.





Trump Admin Fights Back, Wants Judge to Toss Lawsuits So it Can Defund Planned Parenthood

by Micaiah Bilger


Share this story:

The Trump administration is fighting back against lawsuits challenging its efforts to defund the abortion giant Planned Parenthood.

This week, attorneys for the government asked federal judges to dismiss two lawsuits the abortion chain filed against changes to Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) program grants, Reuters reports.

In June, Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit challenging a Department of Health and Human Services decision to prioritize sexual risk avoidance programs instead of the abortion giant’s risky sex education programs.

The Trump administration also cut millions of dollars in TPP program grants to the abortion chain in 2017 after evidence showed the program was not effective. However, the abortion chain is suing to stop those cuts as well in a separate lawsuit.

Lawyers for HHS argued this week that Planned Parenthood chose not to apply for the grants under the new changes so it does not have standing to sue, according to the report.

The Daily Caller reports more:

HHS lawyers countered that the new criteria for awarding grants under the program, which they changed in May, was “reasonable” and consistent with HHS’s past practices and congressional intent. Under the new criteria, recipients for grants must either follow a “sexual risk reduction model” or a “sexual risk avoidance model,” which aim to curb or completely stop sexual activity among teens respectively.

Planned Parenthood asserted that HHS’s new approach “stigmatizes” teens who have sex and that it prevents them from informed decision-making concerning intercourse, according to Reuters. HHS argued, however, it does not favor “sexual risk avoidance models” over “sexual risk reduction models,” and that halting grants to organizations that do follow a sexual risk avoidance model would not serve the public good, since such organizations can put those grants to “good use.”

Planned Parenthood did not comment on the development.

HHS spokesman Mark Vafiades previously told the New York Times there is very little evidence that the TPP programs were working under the Obama administration model.

Vafiades said the evidence of a positive impact is “very weak,” and the Trump administration wants to support science-based programs that provide “youth with the information and skills they need to avoid the many risks associated with teen sex.”

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must De-Fund Planned Parenthood Immediately

In 2017, the Office of Adolescent Health issued two reports evaluating the program. Of the 38 programs examined in the report, only one “reported a long-term reduction in overall rates of teen sexual activity. Nearly all of the evaluations found no long-term difference in sexual activity, use of contraception, or pregnancy rates between students enrolling in these programs and students in control groups,” Dr. Michael New, a professor at Ave Maria University, wrote in 2017.

HHS also pointed to research indicating that 73 percent of the TPP programs under the Obama administration either had a negative impact or none at all.

Many parents become very upset when they learn Planned Parenthood teaches their teenagers about sex. School districts in North Carolina and Michigan recently rejected Planned Parenthood sex education programs because of a strong public outcry.

Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the United States, aborting more than 320,000 unborn babies every year. The abortion chain also teaches sex education in public schools across the country, and promotes risky sexual behavior to vulnerable young teens at its clinics.

Planned Parenthood affiliates received several million dollars in taxpayer funds through the TPP grants. Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and Hawaiian Islands received $1 million annually to target rural teens. Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho, as well as Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, also received grants of nearly $1 million each annually to promote their risky sex agenda to teens.






$3.7 billion tax increase set up by courts and schools

{The Kansas school funding issue comes back again and again to punish citizens because of the illegal 2005 Montoy v Kansas  decision which forever enshrined the lawless Kansas Supreme Court as the 'ultimate authority' (not the people)  dictating the amount of money that must be spent to satisfy a clause in the Kansas Constitution defining "a suitable education.' There is no school funding formula that can ever be devised to prevent the endless lawsuits against the state legislature from Alan L. Rupe and company which will eventually bankrupt Kansas citizens thanks to the worthless Kansas Legislature who has failed to prevent the Court's usurpation of power. -  ED}

by Kansas Policy Institute

This calculation is produced by the Kansas Legislative Research Department (KLRD) and presents a long-term picture of the tax revenue needed to pay for the increased school funding.

Aug. 2 - Wichita - Kansas taxpayers are being set up for a $3.7 billion tax increase over the next four years unless the majority of elected officials reduce costs and stop taking orders from a runaway judiciary.  That’s what it would take to have a structurally balanced budget, with each year’s spending not exceeding that year’s tax collections.  

The calculation is based on having a legally-required ending balance[i] without transfers from the highway fund and making all scheduled KPERS pension payments through FY 2023.  The only spending increases included are those related to approved school funding, the Department of Education’s (KSDE) calculation of complying with the latest Supreme Court ruling and KLRD’s caseload estimate for existing Medicaid coverage.

About $624 million of the tax increase is already in place, noted as ‘Federal Tax Adjustment’ in the table linked here.  Federal tax reform eliminates personal exemptions, caps itemized deductions for some people and imposes higher taxes on many businesses.  The Kansas Senate voted to prevent this backdoor state income tax hike but too many House members wanted more money to spend.

Paying for approved school funding without gimmicks (transfers, KPERS delays, ignoring the ending balance law, etc.) will cost another $2.1 billion and if elected officials decide to meet KSDE’s $365 million estimate of the latest court demand, another $940 million tax hike will be needed.

The tax impact of paying for the new school funding is much greater than the simple total of the funding approved because of the cumulative impact of adding more money each year.  The estimate of meeting the court’s latest demand is a good example.

KSDE says funding would have to increase a little over $91 million each year and would, therefore, be $365 million higher in the fourth year; but that amounts to $912.3 million more being spent over the four-year period.

KSDE calculates the total amount approved thus far for FY 2018 through FY 2023 at just over $1 billion dollars.  Total aid as calculated by KSDE would slightly exceed $8 billion in FY 2023 even if federal aid remains flat and local revenue is only nominally increased.  If legislators provide the additional aid KSDE says is needed to satisfy the court with enrollment increases as KSDE anticipates, per-pupil funding would be $16,520 in FY 2023.
__________________
[i] State law requires an ending balance equal to 7.5 percent of expenditures.  Legislators and governors have often ignored that legal requirement over the last couple of decades by periodically changing the law to effectively say, ‘except this year.’