Is this depopulation bioweapon experiment?


Woman-Doctor-Sick-Whooping-Cough
“Mystery virus” spreading like wildfire across U.S. population, putting people in bed for a MONTH… is this a depopulation bioweapon experiment?

01/11/2019 / By Isabelle Z.

A cough can be rather annoying, especially when it keeps you up at night, but you can usually take comfort from knowing that it tends to run its course rather quickly and you’ll be back to normal in no time. Unfortunately, a new virus is going around that is turning what is normally a week-long nuisance into a month-long nightmare – and speculation abounds regarding its origin.

Physicians around the nation are reporting a spike in cases of people suffering from a very unusual cough. It’s caused by a virus and it’s lasting anywhere from four to six weeks – and in some cases, even longer.

One doctor, Texas Health Dallas’s Dr. Gary Gross, says he has been seeing at least a patient a day suffering from the virus, and he lamented the fact that it lasts so long without seeming to get better.

Dr. Gross told CBS DFW that the virus has no quick fix. Patients have no choice but to let it run its course, although some medications can help soothe the cough somewhat. Patients are advised to get plenty of sleep as well as lots of fluids.

Emergency medicine specialists in Cincinnati have warned the public about the virus, which they say has caused a surge in patients presenting with upper respiratory symptoms such as a cough, congestion, and shortness of breath.

Bethesda North Hospital’s Dr. Kenneth Patton describes the difficulties patients with the virus experience in breathing, saying: “They are retracting, their ribs are doing a lot of work. You can see their neck muscles, you can really see that they are having a hard time breathing.”

Patients’ biggest complaint, however, is the duration, with many people stuck in bed for weeks. Avoiding the virus is a matter of washing your hands frequently and keeping your distance from people who are sick. Once you get it, however, you’ll simply have to wait it out.
What is the source of this virus?

bill_collage

Naturally, any time a new virus like this emerges seemingly out of nowhere, it’s hard not to wonder if it could be part of a depopulation bioweapon experiment.

Plant Pathology Professor Dr. Cyril Broderick has stated his belief that the Ebola virus was manufactured and then released intentionally in Africa as a weaponized virus. Other experts agreed with his theory. Meanwhile, in the wake of the Zika outbreak, governments in Latin America urged women to avoid pregnancy because of the potential for birth defects.

The idea that depopulation efforts are underway is bolstered by the ongoing push toward reducing human populations in the name of somehow saving the planet from “global warming” and the testing of vaccines and experimental drugs in African nations. Influential names like Bill Gates have openly declared that reducing the human population could help “save” the planet, and The New York Times recently printed an editorial arguing that the end of humanity would actually be a good thing for the planet.

There’s also the fact that pharmaceutical companies have a lot to gain in the wake of such outbreaks by developing new vaccines and drugs. In fact, a team of researchers at California’s Scripps Research Institute have engineered a deadly new bird flu strain that can infect humans on the pretense of learning what such a virus could do in order to prepare for it. The mutations they’ve created allow the virus to make its way into human lung cells. What could possibly go wrong?

When you pay attention to everything that is going on in the world today, it’s not a stretch to question whether depopulation efforts are behind viruses that emerge mysteriously and suddenly affect a significant number of people.

Sources for this article include:

DFW.CBSLocal.com

KUTV.com

NaturalNews.com

Parents Fighting For Kids After Police Team Forcibly Snatches Them Over Fever The victims are warning all parents that the state has the power to take your children at any time, and then place them with strangers, force the parents to perform all sorts of tasks, and fight a corrupted system of ‘protection’ to get their children back.


maxresdefault-2-780x392
This is Wrong!

Compilation Of News Media Collusion Lies, Pushing Impeachment


PUBLISHED: 2:00 PM 28 Mar 2019
UPDATED: 6:47 PM 28 Mar 2019

Parents Fighting For Kids After Police Team Forcibly Snatches Them Over Fever
The victims are warning all parents that the state has the power to take your children at any time, and then place them with strangers, force the parents to perform all sorts of tasks, and fight a corrupted system of ‘protection’ to get their children back.
by Georgette

A loving home has been destroyed because of one meddling doctor and offended DCS do-gooders.

A dramatic video shows Arizona police officers, with guns drawn, break down the door of a family home—not a suspected drug or child trafficker or a woman pepper spraying her foster kids—and snatch three children from the parents.

The reason?

One of the 2-year-old boys had a high fever, and the parents took him to the doctor.

When the doctor found out the boy had not been vaccinated, he ordered the mother to take the child to the hospital. However, when she got home, the boy’s fever dropped.

She told the doctor that she decided not to go to the hospital since the child was playing and had no fever, but the doctor contacted the Department of Child Safety (DCS). DCS called the police and made the check on the boy.

When the police got to the home late that evening, the father refused to allow an invasive search.

So, police got a warrant, spurred on by DCS do-gooders, come back to the house at 2:00 a.m., and broke down the door.

They then took all three children into custody and placed them with various strangers approved by the system.

Fox News reported:

State Rep. Kelly Townsend criticized the raid as excessive.

“At that point who now owns control over the child?” Townsend said. “And it seems like we’ve given that now to the doctor and the parent no longer has the say or they risk the SWAT team taking all of your children and potentially the newborn.”

Chandler Police said the officers who raided the home were regular officers and not a SWAT team.

Nicholas Boca, the family’s attorney, said that type of force should be “reserved for violent criminals.”

“All because of a fever,” Boca said. “It’s absolutely ridiculous.”

“It was not the intent (of the law) that the level of force after obtaining a warrant was to bring in a SWAT team,” Townsend said.

“The imagery is horrifying. What has our country become that we can tear down the doorway of a family who has a child with a high fever that disagrees with their doctor?”

“What about parents’ rights to decide what’s best for their child?” Townsend said. “Parents felt the child was fine. Next thing we know, the Gestapo is at their door.”

Now, the parents are fighting to get their children back and warning others:

Arizona Central reported:

A DCS caseworker called Chandler Police and “requested officers to check the welfare of a two year old infant,” according to police records. A caseworker said he was on his way to the house.

It was about 10:30 p.m. when two police officers knocked on the family’s door. The officers heard someone coughing.

Officer Tyler Cascio wrote in a police report that he knocked on the door several times but no one answered.

A neighbor approached the officers and police explained the situation. The woman said she knew her neighbor and that “she was a good mother.” At the request of officers, the neighbor called the mother and said police wanted to speak with her.

The DCS caseworker arrived and updated police on the toddler’s fever and the mother choosing not to take her child to the hospital. The officer called the family’s doctor, who repeated her recommendation that the mother take the child to the hospital.

Police dispatch told the officers that a man at the home had called requesting that they call him. They called, and the man identified himself as the sick boy’s father.

The officer said they told the father they needed to enter the home for DCS to check on the child. The father refused, explaining that his son’s “fever broke and he was fine,” according to police records.

Officers tried to call the parents again, but no one answered. They told the caseworker the parents refused to open their door.

At about 11:30 p.m., the caseworker informed officers that DCS planned to obtain a “temporary custody notice” from a judge to remove the child for emergency medical aid.

The caseworker “advised they obtained a court order for temporary custody in order to take (redacted) to the hospital.” The order was signed at 12:04 a.m. by Judge Tracy Nadzieja, according to police records.

Cascio wrote that officers consulted with the police criminal investigations bureau and SWAT.

“Based upon the court order, the intent of DCS to serve the order, and exigency to ensure the health and welfare of the child, the decision was made to force entry to the home if the parents refused to respond to verbal requests,” according to police records. Police knocked, saying they had a court order and would force entry if needed, according to police records.

The Republic has requested the police-worn body-camera footage.

It was after 1 a.m. when officers kicked down the family’s door. One officer carried a shield, while another was described as having “lethal coverage.” Officers pointing guns yelled, “Chandler Police Department,” and entered the house.

The father came to the door. Officers placed him in handcuffs and took him and the mother outside. Inside, they found a juvenile who said she was sick and had thrown up in her bed.

Officers said the home was “messy” with clothing piles and concrete floors. In the parent’s room, a shotgun lay next to the bed, according to police records.

The caseworker spoke with two of the children without their parents present. He told officers it was “necessary to obtain a temporary custody order” for the parents’ two other children, according to police records.

Since there was no “criminal incident” and because the mother refused, no photos were taken inside the home, according to the police records.

Neither of the parents was arrested.

Officials took the parents’ three children to Banner Cardon Medical Center.

a Mesa juvenile court hearing 10 days later, the parents got their first chance before a judge to fight for their children to be returned.

Each parent had an attorney. The parents had raised a family together but weren’t legally married.

The father’s parents sat on a bench next to a friend of the mother. Ford and Christina Lawler, with Arizona DCS Oversight Group, sat quietly listening and taking notes. Townsend, the state lawmaker, sat near the grandparents. She wanted to see whether the family’s rights had been violated.

A lawyer for the state Attorney General’s Office, representing DCS, asked the judge to close the hearing to the public.

In Arizona, we like our courts to be open, Judge Jennifer Green said. After listening to the lawyer’s reasoning — the attorney said members of the news media were in the courtroom and the family had spoken with the news media about the case, which he said wasn’t in the best interest of the children.

Attorneys for the parents said they hadn’t known of any restrictions on them speaking with media.

Green denied the request to close the hearing, but warned everyone that they could be held in contempt of court if they revealed personally-identifiable information about the children or any others mentioned in the hearing.

Attorneys for the parents said the children hadn’t seen each other since being taken from their parents’ home. The parents had only had one visit with their older children. DCS officials told the parents the toddler couldn’t make that visit because he was at a medical appointment.

The state’s attorney argued that the children shouldn’t be returned to their parents yet because they’d been hostile to DCS workers and weren’t cooperating. He said the parents had attended a DCS visit with members of Arizona DCS Oversight Group who were combative toward DCS workers. He said the grandfather had tried to videotape a meeting with DCS, and recording is not allowed to protect the privacy of the children.

DCS wanted the parents to undergo psychological evaluations.

Attorneys for the parents argued such evaluations were for people who had a history of mental-health issues, which neither parent had. They said the parents weren’t hostile, but they were living a nightmare that started with a child’s fever. They were woken up in the middle of the night, police busted down their door, brandishing guns and their three children were taken from them, attorneys said. The grandfather did what most people would think they had the right to do — record government officials.

The father had agreed to drug testing and the grandparents had agreed to background checks in hopes of becoming temporary caretakers for their grandchildren. Everyone was cooperating, the father’s attorney said.

A court-appointed guardian ad litem, who’s assigned to look after the best interests of the children, said he had one primary concern: Each child was still in a separate foster-care placement. Not only were the children separated from their parents, but this was also the first time they’d been separated from each other.

The judge asked the parties to attend an expedited hearing that afternoon.

After the hearing, in the courthouse hallway, the father held the mother in his arms. She cried and rested her hand on her pregnant belly.

Townsend spoke with the father about the road to getting his kids back.

“Why do they make it so hard?” he said with tears in his eyes. She tried to comfort him.

Outside the courthouse, Townsend said she didn’t know the parents personally but was disturbed by the case.

“It was brought to my attention that these parents may have been targeted by the medical community because they hadn’t vaccinated their children,” she said.

Townsend said parents who don’t vaccinate their children because of medical concerns aren’t criminals and shouldn’t be treated as such. She worried physicians were using it as a reason to refer parents to DCS.

“I think if DCS decides to use this as a factor they would be violating a parent’s right to have a personal exemption, a religious exemption and perhaps a medical exemption,” she said.

Townsend said the hearing opened her eyes to issues she will raise with fellow lawmakers. She questioned why the state’s attorney and DCS used the parent’s frustration with DCS to label the family as hostile and argue they weren’t cooperating with DCS.

“It doesn’t say anywhere that after your kids are taken, after police bust down your door, that you have to be nice to DCS to get your kids back,” she said.

It was just before 2 p.m. when the parents walked back into the courtroom.

A DCS investigator, a former police officer, took the stand. She said upon visiting the hospital, doctors found the toddler had RSV, a respiratory virus that can cause serious illness in young children. She said the parents weren’t complying with DCS’ request to provide medical records for the children. She said they also weren’t following steps to regain custody of their children.

One of the parent’s attorneys asked the DCS investigator to outline specific steps the parents must follow to get their children back. The caseworker said she couldn’t remember any of them.

Attorneys for the parents claimed DCS was angry at the parents for speaking with the media and as retribution DCS officials were making it more difficult for the family to regain custody of their children. They said the child’s fever had gone down, as evidenced in medical reports.

The judge asked what was delaying placing three children with their grandparents. The state’s attorney said the grandparents still needed a home-safety check.

Green asked if that check could be expedited. The state’s attorney said DCS contracts with a company to conduct safety reviews and has no control over timelines but that it could take up to 30 days.

The guardian ad litem, representing the best interest of the children, told the judge he didn’t see why the children couldn’t be cared for by their grandparents while their parents worked with DCS to regain custody.

The judge said the removal was warranted, citing the mother’s refusal to follow the doctor’s orders. She said records showed the family had a history of domestic violence, noting an incident in which the father punched a wall.

She approved psychological evaluations for both parents, saying it would help identify the best services for the parents. She ordered DCS to complete a safety check of the grandparents’ home within four days. And she ordered the father to continue drug and alcohol testing.

She reminded the grandparents and parents that they were no longer in control of the children’s medical and health decisions. If a doctor orders treatment, the family must follow those directions, she said.

Then, she told the parents to remember that the state had them on a family-reunification plan and wants them to regain custody of their children.

After they left the courtroom, father and mother, both in tears, embraced.

The parents declined an interview with The Republic. They said they were afraid saying anything might upset DCS officials and hurt their efforts to regain custody of their children.

ord, with the DCS watchdog group, said this is how it goes.

“They (DCS) had no right to bust into this family’s home and take their kids,” she said in the courthouse parking lot. “But now, they (DCS) have control of this family. These children are traumatized, and all over a fever that wasn’t even a fever anymore when they went the hospital—just like the parents had said.”

She was upset with Townsend and other Arizona lawmakers who talk about holding DCS accountable but never do. Meanwhile, children and their families suffer, she said.

“They hold the purse strings, if they wanted to force DCS to make changes that would protect family’s rights they’d stop funding them,” she said.

Townsend hopes this case is an outlier, but the only way to know for sure is to review DCS child-welfare check policies, medical providers’ power over families and the DCS warrant process for removing children.

This case is more than enough reason to be concerned, she said.

“The fact that they got the warrant shows it wasn’t a matter of exigency by definition — it wasn’t something that they were rescuing this child from imminent death,” she said. “The expectation of child welfare is we’re thinking about the children in the family. We’re not talking cartels holding someone who’s been kidnapped, we’re not talking about a drug bust, we’re not talking about a flight risk. We’re not talking about any of that. This was a family with a child who has a fever. … We used a SWAT team on a family with a child with a high fever.”

On March 15, the father told The Republic that DCS had placed their three children with his parents.

“We get to see them again,” he said. “Thank God.”

He still can’t shake the night police kicked down their door and entered his home with guns drawn. He still can’t believe they took all three of their children.

He said he has asked DCS why the caseworker never presented himself and showed a warrant for removal, but he hasn’t received a clear answer.

“I know people have the right not to let the police into their home,” he said. “But if the caseworker had called me or knocked, and shown me their warrant, I would’ve let them in.”

He said home security video showed police had stated they had a DCS warrant for removal, but the family didn’t hear them because they were sleeping in the back bedrooms with their sick children.

The judge’s approval of DCS’ request for psychological evaluations has created another barrier to regaining custody of their children, he said. The wait for an evaluation is months, he said.

Short-Term Pain, Long-Term Wonder Foreclosure.com Scholarship Program Winning Essay 2017, (Grand Prize)


You know, I just read the following article, and see that the “Millennials” are being brain washed. Goldman Sachs said back around 2008 “Only the rich should own houses, everyone else should be renting”. Sorry, I am still looking for the article wherein I quoted from. I will find it, I used that in a brief.

I knew that meant trouble. Even with foreclosure hell in the middle of its heyday, it still meant something. Not long after that, people being foreclosed upon, began being offered the chance to rent the house that they just lost.

Now, these third party entities popped up almost over night, and instead of the properties at foreclosure, reverting back to the lenders, these third parties now purchase at foreclosure auctions. Then they offer to rent you your house, or take you to magistrate court and have your thrown out, instead of the banks having to do that.

Funny thing, if you research most of these third parties, back far enough, the banks own them too, so still the same thing, just different names. Nevertheless, I could not help but post the article. It is obvious that “they” want us all in little apartments in and around the cities, easier to control “us”. I just had not realized that they were in the progress of brain-washing the Millennials into not even wanting to own a house.

Read the article:

Short-Term Pain, Long-Term Wonder
Foreclosure.com Scholarship Program Winning Essay 2017, (Grand Prize)
https://article.foreclosure.com/short-term-pain-long-term-wonder-82f82b90ff52
Go to the profile of Foreclosure.com Staff
Foreclosure.com Staff
Feb 28, 2018
By Jack Duffley | University of Illinois At Urbana-Champaign

foreclosure-kid
(photo from https://article.foreclosure.com/short-term-pain-long-term-wonder-82f82b90ff52)

In the gleeful times of 2005, my parents decided, like so many others, that it was time to “upgrade.” They sold our smaller home on the other side of town, which had appreciated nicely, and bought a 3700 square foot behemoth in a town with already exorbitant property taxes. My younger brother and I were thrilled to finally have a basement, our own rooms, and even a concrete basketball court in our backyard! All eight-year-old me knew was that things were going to be a whole lot more comfortable from there, and my optimistic parents seemed to think the same.

Jack Duffley | University of Illinois At Urbana-Champaign
The year is 2017, and my parents have only just now reached the equity levels in the house that they started with over a decade ago, nearly one-hundred-fifty mortgage payments later. However, after being bombarded by extremely high taxes for that entire time, they are essentially underwater on the property, but see little choice but to hang on for dear life until equity recovers just a bit more before they abandon ship. A thin retirement plan, mostly resting on the house, has forced their hand.

My parents’ story is in no way unique; millions of Americans who purchased homes before the 2008 recession have faced similar dilemmas, often worse than theirs. Many had no choice but to foreclose during the worst of it. After all, the homeownership rate has declined almost 5 points nationwide since the recession.[1] If anything, they can be considered lucky, yet they are still stuck in the mud. Their children, on the other hand, are now at their own fork in the road: to be [a homeowner] or not to be.

And, all things considered, they are often choosing not to be. The census shows a stark dip in homeownership among those under the age of 35 of almost 10 percent, lowering significantly from its peak pre-recessionary levels of 43 percent to a dismal 34 percent. At the same time, rental vacancy rates nationwide fell from over 10 percent to less than 7 percent as more people turned to renting, millennials especially.[2] Why is this happening?

Aside from the obvious fear of the failure that their parents faced, millennials are renting more as they define their own unique lifestyle. Millennials, in ever increasing numbers, are focusing on “living now.” They are choosing to move into urban areas in particular. As a predominantly liberal group, and with large cities tending to lean left, this is partially due to political forces. The majority, however, is due to lifestyle conveniences that come with a city: multiple options for transportation and not needing to own a car, proximity to cultural events and nightlife, and, especially with the decline of the suburbs as retail simultaneously sinks, a more positive future economic outlook. They more readily take the loss in living space for these benefits than their previous generations did.

At the same time, a growing number of millennials are facing burdensome student loan debt. Rather than come out of college with pristine back-end ratios primed for a hefty mortgage, they are handcuffed by the debt that they have amassed in their early twenties. As the Pew Research Center has noted, 37 percent of people under the age of thirty have student loan debt. They contribute to the $1.3 trillion in student debt, leverage that could presumably be used for a mortgage or some other useful credit if it were not locked up already.[3] Millennials are trying to increase their earning power by going to school so that they have the opportunity to advance economically, but it is simultaneously holding many of them back via years of extra debt — debt that is notably not going to a physical asset.

What does this mean for real estate? For the single family home market, it spells disaster, at least in the short term. Grant Cardone, one of the premier real estate investors in the world, calls homeownership a “scam,” and emphasizes that renting over homeownership among young people is becoming more and more popular. He notes that there is a huge need for affordable rentals as millennials deviate away from single family homes. Cardone is always one to advocate renting as a more advantageous and flexible lifestyle choice, and, as it has been mentioned, millennials increasingly value the flexibility that comes with renting instead of buying a home. Many, like Cardone, now see homeownership as a solely negative ordeal.

While it may not be up to the level of a “scam,” there are significant drawbacks with owning a home. For one, it locks up a significant amount of capital, money that could be used for a number of different projects or investments. In sum, homeownership is very expensive, at least in the short term when people make their initial down payment and any potential renovations. This makes it very hard to own a home for people of all ages. Additionally, owning a home can financially lock someone to a particular location, one which they might not want to be in after a while. Finally, for those hoping for appreciation when they purchase their home, as with any investment, there is a chance that it does not pan out. A poorly timed crash can wipe out an owner’s equity in seconds just as it did to my parents and so many others.

While there are drawbacks, the Great Recession and its subsequent lifestyle shift suggest the lack of education about the benefits of owning real estate. Even my parents are constantly warning me of the dangers of homeownership; the shift is not totally driven by millennials themselves. They too are still shaken by their mistakes and the sledgehammer that was the crash. They ignore the value of building equity over the long term, the typical tax benefits that come with a primary residence, and the relative stability of the real estate market because they mistakenly overpaid for a house that, in hindsight, they cannot comfortably afford in a downturn. They just hope that I do not do the same, and rightfully so. However, what millennials should have learned from the recession is not that real estate is bad, but that they simply must be careful and reasonable with what they assume when purchasing it.
3310-Harrison-Rd-east-point
Unfortunately, the average consumer purchases on emotion. With the tremendous amounts of emotional trauma from the recession, millennials are increasingly refusing to buy a home as their parents might have desired at the same age. But what are they purchasing in its place? Many take on higher rents, consistent with the “living now” mentality. Many more use their money to buy a wealth of products online. Some are even speculating on cryptocurrency, something far more unknown than real estate, expecting to make a lot of money. Why do they do that? Because the average consumer purchases on emotion, not on something systematic. Real estate has already been proven to be a relatively safe and a potentially very powerful asset. Instead, the negatives have been, and continue to be, emphasized. This masks the positives of owning a home, or even a simple condo. Millennials in some cases are mistakenly ignoring all real estate and not just the kind of overleveraging or speculating that got their parents into trouble.

Does this spell the end to America? Will the country burst into flames as millennials move to urban areas? Of course not. It must be noted that the current trend does not own the future; millennials could very well begin to purchase homes in huge numbers, especially as prices drop over the next few years. While it is likely that this will not be the case, it is impossible for anyone but millennials themselves to determine that.

What is certain is that, in the short run, there will be pain. The single family housing market is going to suffer as millennials make lifestyle choices contrary to their parents. The market will be oversupplied with single family homes. However, millennials will still need a place to live, just like anyone else. Their increasing demand for urban locations and conveniences will push rent up in cities, as it already has in places like San Francisco and Seattle. This will open a new, and huge, opportunity for real estate investors and developers alike to profit in the cities as millennials develop their own American Dream. After all, a dream is only what a person makes of it, not what someone else defines it as.

References:
[1] U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Homeownership Rates for the United States and Regions: 1968–2016, (accessed Dec 10, 2010), https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/charts/fig05.pdf

[2] U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Rental Vacancy Rates for the United States and Regions: 1968–2016, (accessed Dec 10, 2010), https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/charts/fig03.pdf

[3] Anthony Cilluffo, “5 facts about U.S. student loans,” Pew Research Center, last modified August 24, 2017. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/24/5-facts-about-student-loans/

The winning essay above was submitted to Foreclosure.com’s scholarship program.

The 2017 essay topic:
IS THE “AMERICAN DREAM” OF ONE DAY OWNING A HOME ALIVE AND WELL AMONG MILLENNIALS?
Millennials having experienced the “Great Recession,” which was the traumatic housing crisis that triggered the financial crisis a decade ago. As a result, data suggests that Millennials (those born between 1981 to 1997) have been slow to adopt homeownership. Discuss the pros and cons of homeownership for Millennials, as well as which factors could increase or decrease homeownership among the generation. Will their collective hesitation and apprehension hurt them in the long run or are Millennials simply in the process of re-defining the “American Dream?”

Another State Wants Every Gun Owner To Hand Over Their Social Media Accounts And Internet Search History


internet-spying
Profile picture for user Tyler Durden
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 02/08/2019 – 17:45
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-02-08/another-state-wants-every-gun-owner-hand-over-their-social-media-accounts-and
Authored by ‘Dagny Taggart’ via The Organic Prepper blog,

Unconstitutional gun law ideas seem to spread from one state to another like some kind of insidious virus.

Late last year, an Orwellian gun bill was presented in New York state. If signed into law, anyone who wants to buy a gun would have to turn over three years of their social media history and one year of their internet search history.

“A three-year review of a social media profile would give an easy profile of a person who is not suitable to hold and possess a firearm,” said Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, who has proposed the legislation with New York State Senator Kevin Parker. (source)

Before purchasing a gun, applicants would have to turn over their social media passwords to accounts like Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram. They would also have to allow police to see a year’s worth of their searches on Google, Yahoo, and Bing.

That law would also require anyone renewing their permit for a pistol to be subject to this invasion of privacy as well.

In the article, This Anti-Gun Bill Would Require the Social Media History and Internet Search History of Prospective Buyers, Daisy Luther wrote (emphasis mine):

Remember, these things never stop with just one state.

It’s easy to scoff and say, “Those crazy people in New York are getting what they voted for.” I know someone’s going to say it so there, I said it for you.

But that’s short-sighted, and dare I say, ignorant of the way the world works.

Look at all the states that have recently flipped from red to blue in the midterm elections. If you don’t think it could ever happen where you are, you’re not paying attention. Please keep in mind that I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, but am referring to some party generalizations here. (source)

Now, another state has an Orwellian gun bill on the table.

It turns out, Daisy’s prediction was spot-on. In Illinois, to be allowed to possess your own gun, you have to have a special card, and the requirements to get that card could be about to become much more intrusive:

Meanwhile, in the Illinois House, state Rep. Daniel Didech, D-Buffalo Grove, has filed HB 888 which would require those who apply for a state-issued Firearm Owners Identification Card– mandatory for legal gun owners– turn over a list of their social media accounts to authorities under threat of a Class 2 felony. The State Police would use the information to determine if the accounts have any “information that would disqualify the person from obtaining or require revocation” of a FOID card. (source)

FOID cards also require your photograph, height, weight, address, birthday, hair color, and eye color. That is pretty basic information for a government-issued ID card.
But that isn’t all that Illinois requires.

In order to be granted a FOID card by the overlords in Illinois:

…you have to answer a questionnaire that asks if you’ve ever been convicted of a felony, whether you are addicted to narcotics, whether you’ve been treated in a mental institution or are “intellectually disabled.” Other questions ask about convictions of some specific crimes, whether you are an illegal alien, whether you’re named on a current order of protection that prohibits firearms. (source)

As you can see, being granted a permission slip to exercise a Constitutional right in Illinois is already a tedious and invasive process. If this bill becomes law, the process will become a lot more complicated and intrusive.
What kind of social media content will police be looking for?

In addition to the obvious problems with the new bill, here’s something to really be concerned about: Exactly what kind of information found on social media accounts would be used to “disqualify” people from getting a card, or lead to the revocation of FOID cards?

That seemingly important detail is not specified anywhere in the bill (which can be read here).

Will decisions simply be based on the thoughts and feelings of individual police officers who are assigned to evaluate social media accounts?

Will there be specific, objective guidelines to follow or will decisions regarding who gets to exercise their Second Amendment rights be arbitrary and subjective?
What else will the information collected be used for?

Some groups are already voicing opposition to the bill, including gun rights groups and the ACLU.

“When people look at this everyone who has a Facebook account or email account or Twitter account will be incensed or should be,” said Richard Pearson with the Illinois State Rifle Association.

But the ACLU is opposed as well.

Rebecca Glenberg with ACLU Illinois says the bill “doesn’t say anything about how that list will be retained and for how long and what uses it might be put to.”

The first amendment group worries police scanning social media may show bias.

“A person’s political beliefs, a person’s religious beliefs, things that should not play a part in whether someone gets a FOID card,” Glenberg said. (source)

This bill is another example of pre-crime legislation, and it is terrifying.

Just days ago, we reported on a new study that found the privacy of those who have deactivated all of their social media accounts – or never had any in the first place – is not guaranteed.

A team of researchers from the University of Vermont and the University of Adelaide wanted to find out if fundamental limits exist when using information from social networks “to predict the activities and interests of individuals, and to what accuracy such predictions can be made using an individual’s social ties.”

This may not sound like a big deal, but think about the worrisome nature of different types of predictive technology. You don’t have to actually be guilty of anything if the tech says that one day you might be. The stuff we’re discussing here takes “guilt by association” to an entirely new level. (source)
2019-02-08-11-33-12

How long until control freak politicians start calling for spying on friends, and friends of friends (and so on) to find any justification for denying gun rights to all of us?

Forbidden Knowledge – This is Great, Must See Video!


GROPEFEST from
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/remy-the-longest-time-tsa-version/

We’ve Entered Full Clownworld



We’ve Entered Full Clownworld
October 27, 2018
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/weve-entered-full-clownworld/

My friend John Barnwell recently described the news media of our times as akin to “being in a wind tunnel”. This was true until the FBI’s arrest on Friday of the “MAGABomber”, Cesar Altieri Sayoc Jr., a homeless retired male stripper living out of a van that’s elaborately festooned with Trump stickers. Now, we’ve entered full Clownworld.

A few grains of ricin the size of table salt can kill an adult human. On October 2nd, envelopes that tested positive for ricin were mailed to President Trump, Defense Secretary James Mattis and to Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John Richardson. Two days later, police arrested former US Navy sailor, William Clyde Allen III of Logan, Utah in connection with those mailings. This story received next to no media coverage.

What has received wall-to-wall coverage on the Mainstream Media is a so-called “mail-bombing spree”, in which 13 packages containing prop pipe bombs were allegedly sent through the US Mail from Sunrise, Florida, without any of them being postmarked and all apparently having been hand-delivered to each targeted location, from NYC to California and in between.

(image from https://www.rt.com/usa/442176-cnn-pipe-bomb-photos/)

Bomb squads would have been called in to extract and to safely detonate the bombs. However, none of these “bombs” were detonated, likely because they couldn’t be. Some were even officially reported to be “incapable of exploding”. Nevertheless, FBI Director, Christopher Wray took great pains during a press conference to stress that the IEDs were “not hoax devices”.

A fingerprint and a DNA match on the scotch tape used to seal the packages and on file with the FBI allowed the case to be solved at breakneck speed. Sayoc was initially cooperating with investigators, telling them that the pipe bombs wouldn’t have hurt anyone and that he didn’t want to hurt anyone.

Sayoc has been charged with 5 Federal Crimes: 1) interstate transport of explosives, 2) illegal mailing of explosives, 3) threats against former presidents and other persons, 4) threatening interstate commerce and 5) assaulting current and former Federal officers. He is looking at 48 years in Federal Prison if convicted. At least he’ll have a roof over his head.

Joe M, the creator of some viral videos about QAnon has expressed his skepticism of the official story and the details which make him suspect that this story is a Clownworld False Flag in these additional points:

1) The MSM seemed to be on message with this story from the outset, with their coordinating headlines, which immediately referred to “bombs”, when these so-called bombs had no activator, no trigger and weren’t composed of any explosive substances.

2) The package sent to John Brennan at CNN had its contents taken out and photographed extensively, without any concern for safety.

3) The media has lead us all to believe that these packages actually arrived at the residences of Obama and the Clintons. The USPS does not deliver mail to anyone under Secret Service protection. All of their mail gets delivered to a Secret Service field office. If these packages were delivered to their private homes, they were not delivered by the US Postal Service.

4) Sayoc’s profile showed that he was a Democratic voter but shortly after everyone began posting about this, his profile was updated to Republican – but now, all of his social media accounts have been taken down.

5) Pictures of the “Trump stickers” on Sayoc’s rear window are totally mismatched from one picture to the next. Is this why the FBI put a tarp over the van, when they took it away to their lab? Additionally, as many have noted and as anyone who has ever lived in Florida will tell you, the extreme heat and humidity there are absolute murder on a car. Yet, all of Sayoc’s Trump stickers are totally pristine.

(pix from https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-suspected-bombers-van-needs-to-be-seen-to-be-believed/)

6) An odd detail which may or may not mean anything is that the stamps affixed to the packages are 2016 “Forever” stamps, not 2018.

7) Cesar Sayoc Jr. had multiple aliases, including Cesar Altieri Randazzo and Cesar Anthony Altieri.

8) The corrupt Broward County Sheriff, Scott Israel is in charge of this investigation…the same Scott Israel in charge of the Parkland shooting.

9) Sayoc was a mailroom clerk at Parkland High School!

10) His social media accounts were still up early Friday and someone took a screenshot of one of his characteristically semi-literate posts, which Sayoc made back in 2016: “I would like to wish my great friend from Academy 9 yrs military school Ricki a happy birthday and lifetime from CIA. Congrats on your invention and many successes my brother.”

The person who he was congratulating was Enrique “Ric” Prado, then a 25-year veteran of the CIA, serving six overseas posts, including Station Chief in a deliberately unspecified Muslim country. Domestically, he was Chairman of Operations for the DCI’s Counterterrorist Center for Ambassador Cofer Black during 9/11 attacks and subsequent war on terrorism and as a Deputy on the original Bin Laden Task Force as well as a recipient of the Distinguished Career Central Intelligence (the highest award given to senior officers), as well as CTC’s George HW Bush Award for Excellence in Counterterrorism, among others.

11) This is pretty crazy. On October 26th, 2012, Trump tweeted a warning of an “Obama bomb” that would throw the 2012 election. On October 26th, 2018, he tweeted again about “bomb” stuff that could throw the 2018 election!

There are many unanswered questions and Dave from the X22 Report does a good job of asking them in this video.

Maybe they should have looked at those who have threatened to bomb the Whitehouse, Madonna. Along with the numerous threats made against Trump’s life, I would think those people should have been on the list of suspects. But then, it’s Ok to threaten the US President and send ricin to him and his family, and most of us never hear about it. Everytime someone does something against the Democrats, it is big news, even if the bomb could have never exploded. What a world we live in! I guess money buys everything.

Speaking of money, I was checking out the sponsors of the different political entities here in GA. All of the anti-gunners accepted donations from George Soros, Alexander Soros, or both. WTF? Soros don’t have anything to do with GA. I bet they give to all of the anti-gun legislators in your state too!

‘She could’ve hurt us’: Georgia police taser 87yo Syrian woman cutting dandelions



‘She could’ve hurt us’: Georgia police taser 87yo Syrian woman cutting dandelions
https://www.rt.com/usa/436242-elderly-woman-tasered-knife-dandelions/

‘She could’ve hurt us’: Georgia police taser 87yo Syrian woman cutting dandelions

An 87-year-old Syrian woman who was cutting dandelions near her home in Georgia was tasered by police because she approached an officer with a knife. The police department has defended the move, despite outrage from her family.

When Martha al-Bishara grabbed a knife and headed to a Boys and Girls Club near her house in Chatsworth, Georgia to cut dandelions, she didn’t expect that her journey would end with being tasered. In fact, she didn’t even know what a Taser was.

To an employee of the club, however, she appeared to be a threat, because they called 911 to report that an old woman was walking around with a knife.

“This lady is walking on the bike trail, she has a knife and she won’t leave. She doesn’t speak English,” the employee said on the call, according to the Daily Citizen-News.

“She’s old so she can’t get around too well, but… looks like she’s walking around looking for something, like, vegetation to cut down or something. There’s a bag, too,” the employee said.
Read more
© Wikimedia Police brutally smash window and drag man from car for seat belt violation (VIDEO)

When asked if the woman had come at someone with the knife, the employee clearly responded with “no, she just bringed (sic) the knife onto the property in her hand. She didn’t try to attack or anything.”

But despite knowing in advance that Bishara was “old” and apparently only looking to do some gardening, she was tasered by police less than 10 minutes after the call was received.

Footage of the incident, which has not been publicly released because criminal charges against Bishara are pending, shows Chatsworth Police Chief Josh Etheridge and Officer Steven Marshall in a standoff with the woman, according to Daily-Citizen News, which reviewed the video.

As Bishara holds the knife, Etheridge aims a pistol at her. Marshall clutches a Taser. The officers can be heard yelling at the woman to drop the knife. The footage – recorded by the body camera of a third officer – does not clearly show what the woman is doing with the knife during that time.

Bishara is soon heard crying, after taser prongs hit her left breast and stomach, according to family members who say that police should have been more patient with the elderly woman.
Read more
A video of the protest shows a guard struck with a megaphone. © The Oregonian Black-clad group protesting police brutality stage brutal attack outside Portland city hall (VIDEO)

“If they would have approached her with an open hand rather than with their guns drawn, she would have handed it [the knife] to them right away,” grandson Timothy Douhne told Daily Citizen-News. “My grandmother is the most kind, generous-hearted woman.”

The woman’s great-nephew, a former police officer by the name of Solomon Douhne, agreed. “You don’t [taser] an 87-year-old woman… she was not a threat. If anything, she was confused and didn’t know what was going on. It was a ridiculous turn of events.”

“If three police officers couldn’t handle an 87-year-old woman, you might want to reconsider hanging up your badge,” he added.

Etheridge has defended the use of the Taser, however, saying that “an 87-year-old woman with a knife still has the ability to hurt an officer.”

Bishara has been charged with criminal trespass and obstruction of an officer, both of which are misdemeanors. She was reunited with her family after spending two hours at the Murray County jail.

Etheridge said the police department will conduct an internal “use of force” review. Meanwhile, Officer Marshall remains on duty without any restrictions.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!