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




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.


Texas Seeks to Terminate Mother's Parental Rights Over Daughter Injured by Gardasil Vaccine

by Health Impact News/MedicalKidnap.com Staff



A trial began this week for a mother who was separated from her baby after the 4-month-old mistakenly received a Gardasil-9 vaccine intended for her older brother.

Anita reads to Aniya at a recent visitation. Photo supplied by family.

The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services seeks to convince a jury to terminate the parental rights of Anita Vasquez for her now 22-month-old daughter, Aniya Blu Vasquez.

Jury selection began on Monday, June 18, 2018, for the trial which is expected to last up to 2 weeks.

We originally reported their story in June of last year:

UPDATE:
 

Infant Accidentally Vaccinated with Gardasil – Mother Blamed for Vaccine Injuries and Baby Medically Kidnapped

The previously healthy baby, Aniya, began showing symptoms of problems almost immediately after getting the shot, a vaccine which is not approved for use in children under 10 years of age.

Her mother sought medical attention for the symptoms that her daughter exhibited, asking each practitioner about the connection between the symptoms and the Gardasil-9 shot that her baby should not have received, but her concerns were rebuffed at every turn.

No doctor that saw her daughter wanted to admit that the shot could have any kind of side effects.

The doctor who made a medical error in giving her the vaccine has suffered no consequences, but the baby’s family has been ripped apart.

Previously health baby Aniya’s health declined after her doctor mistakenly gave her the Gardasil-9 vaccine. Photo supplied by family.

Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy Accusation to Cover up Gardasil Injury?

Instead, the mother was accused by doctors and social workers of Munchausen syndrome by proxy (today usually called “factitious disorder”), a diagnosis that has become a convenient scapegoat to accuse parents, usually mothers, of children who are vaccine injured, medically complex, or victims of medical malpractice.

It is a difficult accusation to fight, since even Munchausen experts recognize that the symptoms of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, or “medical child abuse” as it is sometimes referred as, are remarkably similar to those of parents who are seeking medical help for children with difficult medical conditions.

Dr. Marc Feldman, who is considered to be a leading authority on the subject of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, says that the very fact that a mother protests and defends herself and her child is perceived as a further indication of her guilt. It is a lose/lose scenario, he told Health Impact News. (see article).

The very criteria for diagnosing MSBP are prejudicial, according to Dr. Helen Hayward-Brown, a medical anthropologist from Australia. The profile criteria “lacks scientific credibility” and “is being used by medical practitioners to hastily condemn women.”

In a paper entitled, “False and Highly Questionable Allegations of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy,” which Dr. Hayward-Brown presented to the 7th Australasian Child Abuse and Neglect Conference in Perth, she lists behaviors that are listed among the diagnostic criteria for MSBP and shows how these could actually apply to any normal, innocent parent, especially one with a medically complex child.

See also:

Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy – A False Diagnosis to Blame Parents for Vaccine Injuries and Deaths

Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy Label Destroys Families – Covers Up Vaccine Injuries

As we continue to report at Health Impact News, the safety of the Gardasil vaccine has come under fire by many countries around the world. The lives destroyed or ended, after the vaccine, continue to stack up while mainstream media and doctors ignore the dangers. A recently published study linked the Gardasil vaccine to infertility.

In this case, a family could be forever-separated as a side effect of the shot, unless the jury finds in favor of the mother.

Baby Aniya and her mother Anita Vasquez. Photo from Justice for Aniya Facebook page.


The Victoria Advocate is covering the story of the Vasquez trial.

Excerpts:

Jurors began hearing a case Monday that will ask them to determine whether a toddler’s illness was the result of endangerment from her mother or the accidental injection of an HPV vaccine.

Attorneys for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services are suing Victoria mother Anita Vasquez, 36, to terminate her parental rights for 22-month-old Aniya Blu Vasquez. They claim the child struggled to gain weight and was hospitalized for severe medical problems because of her mother’s actions.

“I would like a hashtag movement (called) #KeepAniyaSafe,” said Shelly Merritt, an attorney representing the state, to jurors. “It’s what she deserves.”

Note: this seems to be in response to the #BringAniyaHome twitter hashtag that family and supporters have been using as they post in social media and share the story of the medical kidnapping of Aniya.

But Vasquez’s attorney, Chris Branson, of Houston, told jurors the allegations against his client were “nonsense” and based on “an assumption.”

He also asked jurors to hold state attorneys to the strict burden of “clear and convincing evidence” that they are required to meet when the custody of a child is at stake. That burden, one lower than the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt requirement used in criminal cases, is the highest available in civil court.

Anita and her daughter during a recent visit. Photo supplied by family

During the jury selection process Monday morning, Judge Jack Marr said the trial could take as long as two weeks.

Branson said he planned to call as many as 14 witnesses. Attorneys for the state and Barron declined to comment, and a Texas Department of Family and Protective Services spokeswoman did not answer phone calls Monday.

Anita Vasquez, who is a registered nurse, first took the stand after jurors were selected, describing Aniya’s battle with persistent health problems in 2017.

Vasquez said those problems manifested after a Victoria doctor accidentally administered to Aniya an HPV vaccine meant for her 14-year-old son.

After the mistake, Aniya suffered not only physical symptoms such as fever and weakness but also psychological changes, such as lip smacking and staring spells, Vasquez said.

Doctors don’t know the cause of Aniya’s illness and have no reason to accuse Vasquez of endangerment, she said.

Note by Health Impact News: Although CPS has argued that her health problems disappeared, there is evidence that she continued to experience health issues after going into state custody.

There was at least one occasion that the fosters took Aniya to the emergency room that the family learned about. The mother has been denied medical information about her daughter in foster care.

The photo below was taken during a visit while Aniya was in state care. Her family described her as lethargic that day, and her eyes showed that she was not feeling well.

Grandma Mary holds baby Aniya on her 1st birthday during visitation. Photo provided by Vasquez family. Read the full article at Victoria Advocate.

Supporters have set up a Facebook page called Justice for Aniya for the public to follow Aniya’s story.



Calif. School District Forbids Parents to Remove Kids From Graphic Sex Ed Class

by Ben Marquis


California passed a law in 2015 known as the California Healthy Youth Act, part of which expanded and overhauled sexual education classes to include information about homosexuality, gender identity issues and abortion, and which is just now being implemented in schools across the state.

The new sex ed course is intended to help students develop “healthy attitudes” (via state brainwashing - ED) with regard to such issues as “gender (and) sexual orientation” while also informing students about the effectiveness of various contraceptives and spurring an “objective discussion” about “parenting, adoption, and abortion.”

According to LifeSite News, there are some parents who don’t want their children being exposed to everything the curriculum offers.

There’s plenty to object to.

The curriculum includes a study guide about transgender issues and a “sexual health toolkit,” which teaches young students about such things as sex toys and anal intercourse, downplays such quaint notions as “abstinence” and “virginity” and relies heavily upon left-wing organizations such as Planned Parenthood and Advocates for Youth — which are pro-homosexuality and pro-abortion — as resources.

The 2015 law recognized that “parents and guardians have the ultimate responsibility for imparting values regarding human sexuality to their children,” and as such had expressly allowed for parents and guardians to “excuse their children from participation” in the courses as a whole without any sort of penalty.

However, if parents allow their children to take the course at all, they can only keep their children from some aspects, specifically dealing with the physical organs. Otherwise, the children must be exposed to every part of it, including sex toys, anal sex and homosexuality. And parents will be in no position to object.

So, having a kid learn about sexual health means having the kids learn about homexuality and anal sex, too?

That’s the intepretation the Orange County Board of Education — more specifically Orange County Department of Education general counsel Ronald Wenkart — has reached anyway.

That’s because a statement in the law specifically exempts from the parents’ opt-out power “instruction, materials, presentations, or programming that discuss gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, discrimination, harassment, bullying, intimidation, relationships, or family and do not discuss human reproductive organs and their functions.”

In a memo published in full by the San Juan Capistrano Patch, Wenkart indicated that students could only be excused from the portions of the courses that dealt directly with human reproductive organs, and all other information imparted by the courses was mandatory.

Wenkart did, however, suggest that parents retained the right to “advise their children that they disagree with some or all of the information” put forward in the courses and were permitted to “express their views on these subjects to their children.” Gee, thanks for the permission.

The attorney also cited judicial precedents at the conclusion of his four-page memo that claimed “parents do not have a constitutional right to excuse their children from portions of the school curriculum that they find objectionable.”

Needless to say, there are rumblings of pushback brewing among parents .

According to LifeSite News, Heidi St. John, an author who runs a Facebook site called The Busy Mom, advised that parents in California raise the issue with their local school boards, as well as contact their local political representatives in order to make their displeasure at the decision known.

“These are our children!” she wrote in a Facebook post in April. “They do not belong to the schools.”

This episode is just the latest example of how public schools have become little more than indoctrination centers designed to cram as much of the progressive agenda and beliefs into students’ heads as possible, indoctrination that is increasingly being made mandatory.

This also serves as a glaring example of the notion held by far too many progressive leftists that they know what is best for everybody else, even more so than parents know about their own children, and everyone should just be quiet and accept their great wisdom, even if we wholeheartedly disagree.

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.








Mass Shootings and Psychiatric Drugs: The Connection

by Jon Rappoport of No More Fake News.


I’ve been tracking the connection since 1999, when I wrote a long white paper, for the Truth Seeker Foundation, on school shootings and psychiatric drugs. The paper was titled: “Why Do They Do It? School shootings Across America.”

The drugs aren’t the only causative factor, but they produce what I call the Johnny Appleseed effect throughout society. Sprinkle enough of the drugs among enough people and you get otherwise unexplainable violence popping up—in schools, in workplaces. The psychiatric plague eats out the country from the inside.

Here are excerpts from my 1999 report—

The massacre at Columbine High School took place on April 20, 1999. Astonishingly, for eight days after the tragedy, during thousands of hours of prime-time television coverage, virtually no one mentioned the word “drugs.” Then the issue was opened. Eric Harris, one of the shooters at Columbine, was on at least one drug.

The NY Times of April 29, 1999, and other papers reported that Harris was rejected from enlisting in the Marines for medical reasons. A friend of the family told the Times that Harris was being treated by a psychiatrist. And then several sources told the Washington Post that the drug prescribed as treatment was Luvox, manufactured by Solvay.

In two more days, the “drug-issue” was gone.

Luvox is of the same class as Prozac and Zoloft and Paxil. They are labeled SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). They attempt to alleviate depression by changing brain-levels of the natural substance serotonin. Luvox has a slightly different chemical configuration from Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft, and it was approved by the FDA for obsessive-compulsive disorder, although many doctors apparently prescribe it for depression.

Prozac is the wildly popular Eli Lilly antidepressant which has been linked to suicidal and homicidal actions. It is now given to young children. Again, its chemical composition is very close to Luvox, the drug that Harris took.

Dr. Peter Breggin, the eminent psychiatrist and author (Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Prozac, Talking Back to Ritalin), told me, “With Luvox there is some evidence of a four-percent rate for mania in adolescents. Mania, for certain individuals, could be a component in grandiose plans to destroy large numbers of other people. Mania can go over the hill to psychosis.”

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo is a psychiatrist in private practice in Washington DC. He is the president of the Washington chapter of the American Society of Psychoanalytic Physicians. Tarantolo states that “all the SSRIs [including Prozac and Luvox] relieve the patient of feeling. He becomes less empathic, as in `I don’t care as much,’ which means `It’s easier for me to harm you.’ If a doctor treats someone who needs a great deal of strength just to think straight, and gives him one of these drugs, that could push him over the edge into violent behavior.”

In Arianna Huffington’s syndicated newspaper column of July 9, 1998, Dr. Breggin states, “I have no doubt that Prozac can cause or contribute to violence and suicide. I’ve seen many cases. In a recent clinical trial, 6 percent of the children became psychotic on Prozac. And manic psychosis can lead to violence.”

A study from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that in five examined cases people on Prozac developed what is called akathesia. Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the “jerking of extremities,” and “bicycling in bed or just turning around and around.” Dr. Breggin comments that akathesia “may also contribute to the drug’s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies … Akathesia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior … The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, ‘Akathesia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.’”

Other studies:

“Emergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment,” published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al. It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.

July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: “full of energy,” “hyperactive,” “clown-like.” All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were “totally unlike him.”

September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor. The boy is then “hyperactive, agitated … irritable.” He makes a “somewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.” Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.

The well-known Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics reveals a strange fact. It states that Ritalin [given for ADHD] is “structurally related to amphetamines … Its pharmacological properties are essentially the same as those of the amphetamines.” In other words, the only clear difference is legality. And the effects, in layman’s terms, are obvious. You take speed and, sooner or later, you start crashing. You become agitated, irritable, paranoid, delusional, aggressive.

In his book, Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Breggin discusses the subject of drug combinations: “Combining antidepressants [e.g., Prozac, Luvox, Paxil] and psychostimulants [e.g., Ritalin] increases the risk of cardiovascular catastrophe, seizures, sedation, euphoria, and psychosis. Withdrawal from the combination can cause a severe reaction that includes confusion, emotional instability, agitation, and aggression.” Children are frequently medicated with this combination, and when we highlight such effects as aggression, psychosis, and emotional instability, it is obvious that the result is pointing toward the very real possibility of violence.

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was titled, “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed over a hundred adverse affects of Ritalin and indexed published journal articles for each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects then, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions
• Paranoid psychosis
• Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
• Activation of psychotic symptoms
• Toxic psychosis
• Visual hallucinations
• Auditory hallucinations
• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
• Effects pathological thought processes
• Extreme withdrawal
• Terrified affect
• Started screaming
• Aggressiveness
• Insomnia
• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphatamine-like effects
• psychic dependence
• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
• Decreased REM sleep
• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
• Convulsions
• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

Other ADHD medications, which also have a chemical profile similar to amphetamines, would be expected to produce some of the same effects listed above.

The ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News publishes the following warning in bold letters: “Do Not Try to Abruptly Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs. When trying to withdraw from many psychiatric drugs, patients can develop serious and even life-threatening emotional and physical reactions…Therefore, withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done under clinical supervision…”

—end of excerpts from my 1999 white paper on school shootings and psychiatric drugs—

There is a problem. It is chilling. Pharmaceutical companies, which manufacture drug after drug for “mental disorders,” are doing everything they can to cover up the drugs’ connection to violence.

They use their lawyers and PR people—and their influence over the press—to scrub the connection.

And now, one typical, disturbing, official reaction to every new mass shooting is: build more community mental health facilities. Obama was prominent in this regard, after Sandy Hook in 2012. The implication? More drug prescriptions for more people; thus, more violent consequences.

’ll close with another excerpt from my 1999 report. It is the tragic account of Julie Marie Meade (one account of many you can find at ssristories.org (also here)):

Dr. Joseph Tarantolo has written about Julie Marie Meade. In a column for the ICSPP (International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology) News, “Children and Prozac: First Do No Harm,” Tarantolo describes how Julie Meade, in November of 1996, called 911, “begging the cops to come and shoot her. And if they didn’t do it quickly, she would do it to herself. There was also the threat that she would shoot them as well.”

The police came within a few minutes, “5 of them to be exact, pumping at least 10 bullets into her head and torso,” as she waved a gun around.

Tarantolo remarks that a friend of Julie said Julie “had plans to make the honor roll and go to college. He [the friend] had also observed her taking all those pills.” What pills? Tarantolo called the Baltimore medical examiner, and spoke with Dr. Martin Bullock, who was on a fellowship at that office. Bullock said, “She had been taking Prozac for four years.”

Tarantolo asked Bullock, “Did you know that Prozac has been implicated in impulsive de novo violence and suicidalness?” Bullock said he was not aware of this.  Tarantolo is careful to point out, “Violent and suicidal behavior have been observed both early (a few weeks) and late (many months) in treatment with Prozac.”

The November 23rd, 1996, Washington Post reported the Julie Meade death by police shooting. The paper mentioned nothing about Prozac. Therefore, readers were left in the dark. What could explain this girl’s bizarre and horrendous behavior?

The answer was there in plain sight. But the Post refused to make it known.



We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos. The article first appeared Here 






Training urged as midwives deal with female genital mutilation cases

 by Claudia Calleja


There have been "quite a number" of women who underwent female genital mutilation and who have turned up at the hospital to give birth, a conference on FGM organised by the Malta Union of Midwives and Nurses heard this morning.

 Antoinette Saliba, senior midwife and university lecturer said the patients were often "anxious and so afraid".

There was no local policy on how these cases should be tackled. For example, there was no policy on how to go about the reversal of the infibulation (the sewn vagina) before the woman gave birth. This could be done at various stages including during pregnancy or during the first stages of labour. It was against the law for the vagina to be re-sutured after birth, even though some husbands requested this.

Ms Saliba spoke about the importance of education and also the need to incorporate training on FGM for midwives that was currently obtained through experience

Laura Pullicino, a nurse who works with the Jesuit Refugee Services, said she was involved in a project with the UNHCR during which she spoke to women and men and explained to them that FGM was not accepted in Europe and why

During group sessions men and women were shown a video clip of the procedure. The clip showed a girl, about five years old, screaming as she was held down by women while her genitals were cut and sewn shut. "You could see the tears in the eyes of the women even after so many years. 

Some women were angry that their culture was being questioned but some recognised that it should not continue. Women spoke about the strong social pressure they felt to undergo FGM as otherwise they were isolated by their community. The women spoke about their experience during intercourse with some husbands slitting them with a knife

Group sessions with men revealed that some men said this was done to control their women to ensure they were not promiscuous. When they were shown the video clip some men could not take the images. It turned out they never witnessed an FGM procedure

They defended their tradition but were open to discussion. One man said that, now that he saw how it was done, he would never send a woman for the operation.

 Ms Pullicino said there was the need for more sensitivity from healthcare professionals in Malta and she gave the example of a gynaecologist who asked: "What can I do for her? Why did she let them do it to her in the first place?"

 She spoke about the need for more training and education.

Labour MP Chris Fearne urged nurses and midwives to report any cases of female genital mutilation which they knew of and that would soon become a crime under Maltese law.

 In September, Dr Fearne tabled a private members bill in Parliament to make FGM illegal in Malta. This will also apply to cases where Maltese girls are taken abroad for the procedure to be carried out overseasThe bill is being given a second reading next week and is expected to become law since there seemed to be consensus in Parliament, he said.

 Dr Fearne, a paediatric surgeon, said nurses and midwives were duty bound to report any cases they became aware of. Failing to do so made them, and anyone who did not report such a case, liable to a fine and the new law would exempt them from patient confidentiality in such cases.

 He said it was important to educate people that FGM was not a good thing and to "scare" anyone from performing it in Malta or on a Maltese citizen. He said the World Health Organisation estimated that between 150 million and 200 million women in the world were living with the consequences of FGM but little was known as the western world tended to ignore this.

 "But now we were seeing migrant communities coming into Europe and the subject needs to be discussed," he said.

 "This is not a stand against something from a foreign culture but against something that is intrinsically wrong," he said.

 FGM is a common cultural ritual carried out in many African countries. There are three man types of FGM carried out on young girls. One includes snipping off the clitoris, another removes the clitoris and the inner labia and, in the most severe case, the outer labia are also removed and there is the fusion of the wound.

Women suffer in future as intercourse is painful with some men not managing to penetrate their wives and resorting to creating a slit with a knife. This also creates complications during labour with two per cent of babies dying because of FGM.

 



A 2013 article republished here as a community education effort  The article first appeared here.

Parents File Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit Against Minnesota Because CPS Kidnapped Their Children

by Brian Silhavy


This past week (April 2018) a group of Minnesota parents filed a federal civil rights lawsuit accusing Dakota County and the State of Minnesota for kidnapping their children and placing them unnecessarily into foster care.

Dwight D. Mitchell (center at podium) is the lead plaintiff in a federal lawsuit of parents suing the State of Minnesota for kidnapping their children via Child Protection Services. Image courtesy kaaltv.com.


The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit is Dwight D. Mitchell, who founded an association of parents called Stop Child Protection Services From Legally Kidnapping, which has about 250 members in Minnesota. Mr. Mitchell and several parents held a press conference at the State Capital last week, and Mr. Mitchell was interviewed by several local media sources. Mr. Mitchell explains how he had his three children removed from his home because a family babysitter reported him to CPS for a “bottom spanking” with one of his children. It took him almost 2 years to get his son back home.


According to the Star Tribune:

“It was every parent’s worst nightmare,” said Mitchell, 57, a management consultant. “My children were legally kidnapped for a bottom spanking that was done out of love, because I want my children to grow up to be hardworking members of society.”

The child, Xander Mitchell, was kept in state custody for 22 months, during which time his father was refused all contact. Mitchell’s other child was removed for five months, according to the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis.

Mitchell said his involvement with child protection began on the night of Feb. 16, 2014, when he and his wife went to dinner and a movie and left their children in the care of their longtime babysitter. A day earlier, Xander had received a “bottom spanking” from his father for stealing and other acts of disobedience, including failing to do his homework and playing video games when he should have been sleeping.


When the babysitter called to report the alleged maltreatment of the child, police were dispatched to Mitchell’s residence and his three children were taken to the police station for questioning, he said. Days later, Dakota County filed a court petition seeking protection for Mitchell’s children, who were removed from his home and placed in foster care while the county investigated.

Mitchell said his son Xander, now 15, has never been the same since. The once-gregarious and athletic child, who loved soccer and skiing, has become increasingly introverted and now spends most of his time indoors, he said. “The abduction by child protection services ruined my son’s life and changed it forever,” Mitchell said. “Can you imagine if you thought that your father abandoned you?”

In Minnesota it is reportedly illegal to use corporal punishment with one’s own children, but not in schools where it is allowed by teachers. 

The lawsuit claims that Minnesota unfairly targets Black families and other minorities in removing children from homes. TwinCities.com reports:

“Every night, I went to sleep not knowing where he was,” Mitchell said, describing the experience as traumatic and comparing it to a legal kidnapping.  “The abduction by (child-protective services) ruined my son’s life and changed him forever,” Mitchell said. “Without a doubt, this has been the most horrific experience of our life.”

Mitchell’s lawsuit claims Minnesota laws regarding corporal punishment by parents, such as spanking, are unconstitutionally vague. Child protection can investigate parents for any action that causes pain or mental injury.  Mitchell says state and county officials enforce that and other child-protection laws inconsistently and black families are considerably more likely to end up in the system and lose custody of their children.

State data show black children are three times more likely to be involved in the child-protection system and be taken from their parents. Black parents also are more likely to lose their parental rights than their white neighbors.  The disparity is even higher for multi-racial and American Indian children and their families.

When children of color are removed from their homes, they are often placed in white homes for foster care that some parents feel is culturally inappropriate.

ABC affiliate KaalTV interviewed Dwight Mitchell about the federal civil rights lawsuit for kidnapping children:

Richard Wexler, the executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, wrote an op-ed piece for MINNPOST earlier this month on why Minnesota’s approach to child protection makes children less safe.  Citing statistics that Minnesota takes children away from their families at the sixth highest rate in the country, a rate more than double the national average, Wexler points out that this has been a long-standing problem in Minnesota that has nothing to do with abusive parents on drugs:

No, this is not because of opioids or any other drug plague. Minnesota has been an outlier since at least 1999 and probably far longer.

Everything was made worse by the state’s bungled response to the death of Eric Dean in 2014. The governor promptly named the obligatory task force. Incredibly, the task force concluded that a state which for nearly two decades was among the most extreme in tearing apart families was not extreme enough. The result was predictable: a foster-care panic – a sharp, sudden spike in children torn from their homes.

Of course all of this was done in the name of making children safer. After all, New York City, with its much lower rate of removal, has had horrible cases of deaths of children known to the system so clearly – oh, wait. Minnesota is still seeing such tragedies as well, in spite of taking children at a rate more than six times higher.  In fact, foster-care panics actually make such tragedies more likely. (Source.)

Wexler points out that the main reason children are taken away from their families is not because of abuse, but because of poverty. He cites studies showing that children left in poor, troubled homes, fare far better than the ones taken out of those homes and put into foster care:

Far more common are cases in which family poverty is confused with “neglect.” Other cases fall between the extremes. The problem is compounded by the sort of racial bias cited by the Minneapolis NAACP.

So it’s no wonder that two massive studies involving more than 15,000 typical cases found that children left in their own homes typically fared better even than comparably maltreated children placed in foster care. A University of Minnesota study, using a smaller sample and different methodology, reached the same conclusion. (Source.)

If one wants to find the main cause of child abuse in America today, look no further than foster care homes:

That harm occurs even when the foster home is a good one. The majority are.  But the rate of abuse in foster care is far higher than generally realized and far higher than in the general population. Multiple studies have found abuse in one-quarter to one-third of foster homes. The rate of abuse in group homes and institutions is even worse.  But even that isn’t the worst of it. The more that workers are overwhelmed with false allegations, trivial cases and children who don’t need to be in foster care, the less time they have to find children in real danger. So they make even more mistakes in all directions. That’s almost always the real reason for the horror stories about children left in dangerous homes.

That’s why Minnesota’s longstanding embrace of a take-the-child-and-run approach to child welfare, an approach that’s only worsened in recent years, makes all children less safe. (Source.) 

Related

The U.S. Foster Care System: Modern Day Slavery and Child Trafficking

Child Kidnapping and Trafficking: A Lucrative U.S. Business Funded by Taxpayers



Is the U.S. Government Evil? You Tell Me

by John W. Whitehead


The greatest evil is not now done … in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern.” ― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters

Is the U.S. government evil? You tell me.


This is a government that treats its citizens like faceless statistics and economic units to be bought, sold, bartered, traded, tracked, tortured, and eventually eliminated once they’ve outgrown their usefulness.  This is a government that treats human beings like lab rats to be caged, branded, experimented upon, and then discarded and left to suffer from the after-effects.  This is a government that repeatedly lies, cheats, steals, spies, kills, maims, enslaves, breaks the laws, overreaches its authority, and abuses its power at almost every turn.  This is a government that wages wars for profit, jails its own people for profit, and then turns a blind eye and a deaf ear while its henchmen rape and kill and pillage.

No, this is not a government that can be trusted to do what is right or moral or humane or honorable but instead seems to gravitate towards corruption, malevolence, misconduct, greed, cruelty, brutality and injustice.  This is not a government you should trust with your life, your loved ones, your livelihood or your freedoms.

This is the face of evil, disguised as a democracy, sold to the people as an institution that has their best interests at heart.  Don’t fall for the lie.  The government has never had our best interests at heart.

Endless wars. The government didn’t have our best interests at heart when it propelled us into endless oil-fueled wars and military occupations in the Middle East that wreaked havoc on our economy, stretched thin our military resources and subjected us to horrific blowback. 

A police state. There is no way the government had our best interests at heart when it passed laws subjecting us to all manner of invasive searches and surveillance, censoring our speech and stifling our expression, rendering us anti-government extremists for daring to disagree with its dictates, locking us up for criticizing government policies on social media, encouraging Americans to spy and snitch on their fellow citizens, and allowing government agents to grope, strip, search, taser, shoot and kill us. 

Battlefield America. Certainly the government did not have our best interests at heart when it turned America into a battlefield, transforming law enforcement agencies into extensions of the military, conducting military drills on domestic soil, distributing “free” military equipment and weaponry to local police, and desensitizing Americans to the menace of the police state with active shooter drills, color-coded terror alerts, and randomly conducted security checkpoints at “soft” targets such as shopping malls and sports arenas. 

School-to-prison pipeline. It would be a reach to suggest that the government had our best interests at heart when it locked down the schools, installing metal detectors and surveillance cameras, adopting zero tolerance policies that punish childish behavior as harshly as criminal actions, and teaching our young people that they have no rights, that being force-fed facts is education rather than indoctrination, that they are not to question governmental authority, that they must meekly accept a life of censorship, round-the-clock surveillance, roadside blood draws, SWAT team raids and other indignities.

Secret human experimentation. One would also be hard-pressed to suggest that the American government had our best interests at heart when it conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace—citizens and noncitizens alike—making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins. The government reasoned that it was legitimate (and cheaper) to experiment on people who did not have full rights in society such as prisoners, mental patients, and poor blacks.  


As the Associated Press reports, “The late 1940s and 1950s saw huge growth in the U.S. pharmaceutical and health care industries, accompanied by a boom in prisoner experiments funded by both the government and corporations. By the 1960s, at least half the states allowed prisoners to be used as medical guinea pigs … because they were cheaper than chimpanzees.”

In Alabama, for example, 600 black men with syphilis were allowed to suffer without proper medical treatment so that the government could study the natural progression of untreated syphilis. In California, older prisoners were implanted with testicles from livestock and executed convicts so the government could test their virility. 

In Connecticut, mental patients were injected with hepatitis so the government could study the disease. In Maryland, sleeping prisoners had a pandemic flu virus sprayed up their noses so the government could monitor their symptoms. In Georgia, two dozen “volunteering” prison inmates had gonorrhea bacteria pumped directly into their urinary tracts through the penis so the government could work on a cure.

In Michigan, male patients at an insane asylum were exposed to the flu so the government could experiment with a flu vaccine. In Minnesota, 11 public service employee “volunteers” were injected with malaria, then starved for five days, so the government could study the impact.

In New York, prisoners at a reformatory prison were split into two groups to determine how a deadly stomach virus was spread: the first group was made to swallow an unfiltered stool suspension, while the second group merely breathed in germs sprayed into the air. In Staten Island, children with mental retardation were given hepatitis orally and by injection to see if they could then be cured.

Unfortunately, these incidents are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the atrocities the government has inflicted on an unsuspecting populace in the name of secret experimentation.

For instance, there was the U.S. military’s secret race-based testing of mustard gas on more than 60,000 enlisted men (African-Americans, Japanese-Americans, Hispanics, etc.). As NPR reports, “All of the World War II experiments with mustard gas were done in secret and weren't recorded on the subjects' official military records. Most do not have proof of what they went through. They received no follow-up health care or monitoring of any kind. And they were sworn to secrecy about the tests under threat of dishonorable discharge and military prison time, leaving some unable to receive adequate medical treatment for their injuries, because they couldn't tell doctors what happened to them.”

And then there was the CIA’s Cold War-era program, MKULTRA, in which the government began secretly experimenting on hundreds of unsuspecting American civilians and military personnel by dosing them with LSD, some having the hallucinogenic drug secretly slipped into their drinks, so that the government could explore its uses in brainwashing and controlling targets. The CIA spent nearly $20 million on its MKULTRA program, reportedly as a means of programming people to carry out assassinations and, to a lesser degree, inducing anxieties and erasing memories, before it was supposedly shut down.

Similarly, the top-secret Montauk Project, the inspiration for the hit Netflix series Stranger Things, allegedly was working to develop mind-control techniques that would then be tested out on locals in a nearby village, triggering crime waves or causing teenagers to congregate.  Sounds like the stuff of conspiracy theorists, I know, but the government’s track record of treating Americans like lab rats has been well-documented, including its attempts to expose whole communities to various toxins as part of its efforts to develop lethal biological weapons and study their impact and delivery methods on unsuspecting populations.

In 1949, for instance, the government sprayed bacteria into the Pentagon’s air handling system, then the world’s largest office building. In 1950, special ops forces sprayed bacteria from Navy ships off the coast of Norfolk and San Francisco, in the latter case exposing all of the city’s 800,000 residents.

In 1953, government operatives staged “mock” anthrax attacks on St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Winnipeg using generators placed on top of cars. Local governments were reportedly told that “‘invisible smokescreen[s]’ were being deployed to mask the city on enemy radar.” Later experiments covered territory as wide-ranging as Ohio to Texas and Michigan to Kansas.

In 1965, the government’s experiments in bioterror took aim at Washington’s National Airport, followed by a 1966 experiment in which army scientists exposed a million subway NYC passengers to airborne bacteria that causes food poisoning. Now one might argue that this is all ancient history and that the government today is different from the government of yesteryear, but has the U.S. government really changed?

Ask yourself: Has the government become any more humane, any more respectful of the rights of the citizenry? Has it become any more transparent or willing to abide by the rule of law? Has it become any more truthful about its activities? Has it become any more cognizant of its appointed role as a guardian of our rights?

Or, having mastered the Orwellian art of Doublespeak and followed the Huxleyan blueprint for distraction and diversion, has the government simply gotten craftier and more conniving, better able to hide its nefarious acts and dastardly experiments under layers of secrecy, legalism and obfuscations?  Consider this: after revelations about the government’s experiments spanning the 20th century spawned outrage, the government began looking for human guinea pigs in other countries, where “clinical trials could be done more cheaply and with fewer rules.”

In Guatemala, prisoners and patients at a mental hospital were infected with syphilis, “apparently to test whether penicillin could prevent some sexually transmitted disease.” More recently, U.S.-funded doctors “failed to give the AIDS drug AZT to all the HIV-infected pregnant women in a study in Uganda even though it would have protected their newborns.” Meanwhile, in Nigeria, children with meningitis were used to test an antibiotic named Trovan. Eleven children died and many others were left disabled.

What kind of government perpetrates such horrific acts on human beings, whether or not they are American citizens? 

Is there any difference between a government mindset that justifies experimenting on prisoners because they’re “cheaper than chimpanzees” and a government that sanctions jailhouse strip searches of individuals charged with minor infractions simply because it’s easier on a jail warden’s workload?

John Lennon was right: “We’re being run by maniacs for maniacal ends.”

Unfortunately, the more things change, the more they stay the same.  Just recently, for example, a Fusion Center in Washington State (a Dept. of Homeland Security-linked data collection clearinghouse that shares information between state, local and federal agencies) inadvertently released records on remote mind control tactics (the use of “psycho-electronic” weapons to control people from a distance or subject them to varying degrees of pain).  Mind you, there is no clear evidence to suggest that these particular documents were created by a government agency. Then again, the government—no stranger to diabolical deeds or shady experiments carried out an unsuspecting populace—has done it before.

After all, this is a government that has become almost indistinguishable from the evil it claims to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, drug traffickingsex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

For too long now, the American people have been persuaded to barter their freedoms for phantom promises of security and, in the process, have rationalized turning a blind eye to all manner of government wrongdoing—asset forfeiture schemes, corruption, surveillance, endless wars, SWAT team raids, militarized police, profit-driven private prisons, and so on—because they were the so-called lesser of two evils.  No matter how you rationalize it, the lesser of two evils is still evil.

There’s a scene in The Third Man, Carol Reed’s influential 1949 film starring Joseph Cotten and Orson Welles in which a rogue war profiteer (Harry Lime) views human carnage with a callous indifference, unconcerned that the diluted penicillin he’s been trafficking underground has resulted in the tortured deaths of young children.  Challenged by his old friend Holly Martins to consider the consequences of his actions, Lime responds, “In these days, old man, nobody thinks in terms of human beings. Governments don’t, so why should we?”  “Have you ever seen any of your victims?” asks Martins.

“Victims?” responds Lime, as he looks down from the top of a Ferris wheel onto a populace reduced to mere dots on the ground. “Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you twenty thousand pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare?”

Lime’s callous indifference is no different from the U.S. government’s calculating cost-benefit analyses.  In the eyes of the government, “we the people” are chump change. So why do Americans keep believing the government has their best interests at heart?  Why do Americans keep trusting the government? 

Why do Americans pretend not to know what is so obvious to anyone with eyes and ears and a conscience?

As Carl Sagan recognized, “If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.

We should never have trusted the government in the first place. 

That’s why the Founders came up with a Bill of Rights. They recognized that without binding legal protections affirming the rights of the people, the newly instituted American government would be no better than the old British despot.

It was Thomas Jefferson who warned, “In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”  Unfortunately, we didn’t heed the warning.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American Peoplethe government has ripped the Constitution to shreds and left us powerless in the face of its power grabs, greed and brutality.  So how do you fight back? How do you fight injustice? How do you push back against tyranny? How do you vanquish evil?

You don’t fight it by hiding your head in the sand. Stop being apathetic. Stop being neutral. Stop being accomplices.

Start recognizing evil and injustice and tyranny for what they are. Demand government transparency. Vote with your feet (i.e., engage in activism, not just politics). Refuse to play politics with your principles. Don’t settle for the lesser of two evils. 

As British statesman Edmund Burke warned, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men [and women] to do nothing.”

It’s time for good men and women to do something. And soon.


Hilton’s Trofi Restaurant deserves a One Star rating

by Allen Williams


This past Friday March 30, a small group of about 20 people including myself gathered to celebrate the days of unleavened bread at a special dinner at the Doubletree Hotel Trofi restaurant in Overland Park.  A number of local eateries offer private dining for a fee or on a food and beverage basis.

                                                     **Doubletree  Hotel **
                                                                  (by Hilton)

                                                            Trofi Restaurant

                                                        10100 College Boulevard,

                                                 Overland Park, Kansas, 66210-1462, USA

We had negotiated with a young lady there named Adrianne, the hotel’s evening restaurant manager, for a suitable private dining area some months prior to this event.   I and another individual met with this person and looked over the private and semi private areas available. 

At the time of our viewing these facilities we were more than 6 months out from our March 30th dinner event.  We looked at several locations inside Trofi ; one was a semi-private area located on a small mezzanine just above the main dining area and a larger enclosed room away from the dining area that would accommodate up to forty people.  After some deliberation, we decided on the larger room expecting that we might add individuals to our 20 person minimum. 

We had guaranteed the Hotel a minimum of 20 individuals for the event and asked to be notified of any pending price adjustments in advance.  During the meeting we were informed by several restaurant staff  that Trofi was looking to renovate their restaurant sometime in 2018 and might be adjusting Menu prices.

It took Adrianne nearly 3 months to get us a copy of the menu for our event with prices.  As our event drew closer, I stopped by the Hotel to enquire as to whether Trofi’s renovation might occur at or near our dinner event.  When I arrived, I found that Adrianne was in a meeting so I asked the Hotel’s front desk if someone else could be available to update me on the Trofi renovation.  Gary Rodgers, the Director of Catering and Convention Services for Doubletree met with me and I was told at that time that the restaurant was in the process of hiring a new manager, a Mr. Kevin Gunn and we should consult with him.

However when I called the hotel several days later, I was told that there wasn’t any Mr. Gunn.  But finally I got hold of Adrianne and after several email requests; she finally sent a firm price Menu.

Everything now seemed in order and we were nearing the event when a series of illness cancellations caused us to drop below the guaranteed 20 person agreement.   I expected that we might wind up somewhere between 17 to 19 individuals.  Adrianne indicated that number would suffice,

So now fast forward several weeks to the night of the event, we arrive at Trofi shortly before 7:00 pm to discover there is no Adrianne and the Hotel switched our private room to the semi-private mezzanine which was essentially open to the main dining area.  Our server and what appeared to be the night manager, a late 40’s or early 50’s man, began to herd us toward the large table along the length of the mezzanine.  At this point, about 17 people were present.

I questioned the night Manager’s assertion that we had negotiated originally for the mezzanine which wasn’t true.  During this discussion interval three more people arrived bringing us up to our 20 person minimum.

I told the manager that there appeared to be adequate private space available as the restaurant was nearly empty.  He replied that there was a private room adjacent to where we were but that it could only hold 16 people because of Overland Park’s fire code  However,  Doubletree’s own website indicates capacity is just 14 people.  I recalled that the room we viewed earlier in our negotiations was one of three banquet rooms located down the connection corridor to the hotel rather than in the restaurant proper.   It then occurred to me that this room was misrepresented by Trofi at the time having been quoted at $600 for our event which later gradually morphed into a 20 person minimum; the hidden assumption being a $30.00 food and beverage purchase for each individual which isn’t realistic if there are children involved.  It’s just the old bait and switch marketing scam.

So realizing that we had been duped, we sat down to make the best of the evening but that notion could not be further from the truth.  We could not play our pre-recorded opening message because there was background noise from our server as well as a few people seated outside near the mezzanine.  It was intended that we would play our message first and then the server would be admitted to take orders but the server was already engaged in bringing tea, water and whatever else as we haggled with the manager.

This is supposedly a 4-star restaurant (3.8) according to Open Table.com but considering the events of the evening, by whose standards?  I’m finding it hard to believe, it’s the patron’s evaluation.  It’s interesting to note that Trofi’s own Doubletree website fails to tout the nearly four star rating from Open Table, as the difference in quality cuisine and service from Hilton’s Johnny’s Italian Steakhouse in Olathe was far sup

At 7:30 pm our server began to take our orders, running back and forth with drinks, etc but it was nearly 9:00pm before all orders for our group arrived.  I received mine at 8:50 pm but the lady across the table to my right still didn’t have hers. Given the lengthy serving times involved, one wonders if this was the chef’s first commercial experience.   

Now patrons that had received their meals between 8:15 pm and just past 8:30 pm were already eating as there was no point in having them wait for everyone to be served at that point.  During my wait I had been talking to the gentleman directly across the table from me as he ate his order of Burnt End Mac and Cheese.   Suddenly, I saw him stop and quickly bring his hand to his mouth.  Inserting two fingers he pulled out a small sharp curved object about ¾ of an inch long.   The object had pricked his gum and he had his wife look to see if any blood was drawn.

The foreign object was unknown to most of us around him but the fellow who had bitten into it thought it might be a piece from a grill brush.

Quick View

Just Grillin' Oversize

Unfortunately, some of the grill brushes depicted on the ‘Bed, Bath and Beyond' site could potentially be used in other tasks that would render them unsuitable for further grill use.  The discovery of this metal fragment in a patron’s food suggests that there isn’t much management scrutiny over the condition of food utensils employed at Doubletree.  It also gives one cause to wonder if there has ever been an FDA inspection at this facility.

When my dish arrived, it had a hastily prepared appearance.  As I began to eat, I found the rice pilaf quite dry which set me off on a 10 minute coughing fit.  By the time my cough subsided, it was past 9:00 pm and I elected to take the rest of my meal home in a takeout container.

Dining at the Doubletree restaurant was a miserable experience and I certainly wouldn’t recommend it to anyone much less the hotel guests.



Citibank Cuts Off Gun Businesses but Does Business With Iranian Terrorists

by Jack Davis


Citibank is being attacked for its recent actions to limit sales of legal firearms by critics who note that the massive bank was willing to do business with Iran a few years ago until it was fined by the Treasury Department.

“Citibank…they preemptively buckled under the pressure by refusing to cooperate with businesses that legally sell certain #firearms…Meanwhile, the Treasury Department found that same company, @Citibank, violated sanctions and did business with, wait for it…Iran!” NRATV tweeted, quoting spokesperson Dana Loesch.

Last week, Citibank said that it would no longer do business with legal firearms stores unless they agree to the bank’s most recent demands.

“Under this new policy, we will require new retail sector clients or partners to adhere to these best practices: (1) they don’t sell firearms to someone who hasn’t passed a background check, (2) they restrict the sale of firearms for individuals under 21 years of age, and (3) they don’t sell bump stocks or high-capacity magazines,” wrote Ed Skylar, executive vice president of global public affairs, on the bank’s blog.

Skylar insisted that the policy “is not centered on an ideological mission to rid the world of firearms.” “But we want to do our part as a company to prevent firearms from getting into the wrong hands,” he wrote.

But some noted that Citibank has, in the past, been willing to do business with groups that were banned by the U.S. government.

IRAN: THE ROLE OF CITIBANK – The New York Times – https://t.co/sLLNjjYWqB
Citibank refuses to do business with Companies who sell guns to Americans but they deal with Iran? Once again "To be a Democrat, you must first be a lying hypocrite."  — Larry Nelson (@southernarcher) March 27, 2018

In 2014, Citibank was required to pay $217,841, Reuters reported.

The Treasury Department said at the time that the bank was under investigation for violating multiple sanctions programs of the Office of Foreign Assets Control. It alleged that Citibank processed more than $750,000 worth of transactions to banned individuals or groups in Iran.

Loesch was not alone in criticizing the actions of the bank.

South Dakota state Rep. Kristi Noem, a Republican, said that the bank is trampling on the Americans’ rights.  “This is a constitutionally protected right. The Second Amendment is incredibly important to the people of South Dakota and what Citibank did was to come out and infringe on that right,” she told KSFY.

“I do not think it’s a business’s place to mandate to people, that they do business with, especially a bank, that they have to comply with their own set of rules and regulations,” Noem said.