Image: Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks


Police-Report-Woman
Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
by: Lance D Johnson
https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-02-27-vaccine-industry-plans-to-come-after-home-school-students.html

Image: Vaccine Industry to partner with police, come after home school students in Iowa for mandated quarterly “health and wellness” checks

(Natural News) After the World Health Organization (WHO) named “vaccine hesitancy” a global health threat in 2019, vaccine compliance has become top priority for every government that is run by Big Pharma. FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb has called on the states to limit vaccine exemptions and strip parents of their rights. The war to achieve max vaccine compliance is moving into new, bold territory.

The Vaccine State is now targeting home school families. Many home school families do not follow the CDC’s full vaccine schedule and some families opt out of vaccines altogether. Iowa State Representative Mary Mascher has proposed a piece of legislation that would target them in their homes, to enforce compliance. Iowa’s HF 272 would require home school families to submit proof of their child’s vaccination record to the state, while requiring the families to submit to quarterly “health and wellness” safety checks, which may be conducted by officials from the Health and Human Services Department and accompanied by local law enforcement.

HF 272 is where the Vaccine State takes its most intrusive step to date. On lines 22-24, the bill instructs all home school parents to provide the district with evidence that the child has had the immunizations “required under section 139A.8.” Furthermore, parents would be required to submit a full portfolio of the child’s school work, including an “outline of course of study,” all subjects covered, all lesson plans, and a time log for each area of study. The bill is both intrusive and dishonest. Even parents who send their kids to public school can opt out of one or all vaccines that are recommended by the CDC. Religious and medical exemptions to vaccines still exist in the state.

The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store and help support this news site.

School districts to “conduct quarterly health and safety home visits” and may enlist law enforcement if parents don’t give consent
To enforce the new rules, the bill instructs the board of directors of the school district to “conduct quarterly home visits to check on the health and safety” of children within the district. The bill provides adequate funding for the school district to police home school families in the area. The visits are to be conducted within the home and include an observation of the child and an interview with the child. If the parent does not consent, then the district can obtain probable cause from the juvenile court to forcefully enter the home and conduct the observation and the interview. The superintendent of the school district shall “designate a person to carry out the duties.” This person is designated as the “mandatory reporter.” Most sickening, the school district may collaborate with the department of human services and “local, county and service area officers” to enter the home and conduct the checkup.

Since officers are required to “do their job,” they will be critical for intimidating parents to open their doors and submit their kid to the intrusive interview and the vaccine requirements. If parents do not cooperate and hand over proof of vaccination records, it will be very easy for Child Protective Services to take the child from the home, have them vaccinated, and sent away to live with another family.

In Oregon, lawmakers want to enforce vaccine compliance as soon as parents take their newborns home from the hospital. Under a proposal in Oregon, every new parent, including adoptions, would be visited two or three times by a nurse or health care practitioner. The visits are intended to connect parents with primary care physicians, screen them, and schedule their myriad of vaccinations.

These intrusive bills are a glimpse of how far the authoritarian Vaccine State will go to achieve vaccine compliance and force people to obey. Home school families must be ready to hold their elected representatives accountable, as to not permit pharmaceutical companies the ability to create laws and turn law enforcement against good people.

For more news about medical fascism and tyranny, read MedicalTyranny.com.

Sources include:

VaccineImpact.com

Legis.Iowa.gov

NaturalNews.com

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?”

Lying Little Shit Hogg: SHOCK: David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire By Peter D’Abrosca – Mar 26, 2018


SHOCK: David Hogg Changes Story, Wasn’t At School When Cruz Opened Fire
By Peter D’Abrosca – Mar 26, 2018

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/breaking-david-hogg-changes-story-wasnt-school-cruz-opened-fire/

In a not-yet-released CBS Documentary, David Hogg, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School student who has become the face of the gun control movement, changes his entire story and admits that he was not at the school during the event.

In a Time interview done within hours of the shooting Hogg recounted, “Our first response was ‘that sounded a lot like a gun shot’ and we closed the door.” Hogg claimed that he was in his AP enviromental science class during the shooting. He also made videos of himself and other students, regarding gun control, purportedly while the shooting was going on.

But CBS News has released some transcripts from its “39 Days” documentary, in which student David Hogg is quoted.

“On the day of the shooting, I got my camera and got on my bike and rode as fast as I could three miles from my house to the school to get as much video and to get as many interviews as I could because I knew that this could not be another mass shooting,” Hogg said in his CBS News interview.

The shooting occurred in the afternoon, after alleged shooter Nikolas Cruz was dropped off after 2 PM.

“While I was in there, I thought, ‘What impact have I had? What will my story be if I die here? And the only thing I could think of was, pull out my camera and try telling others. As a student journalist, as an aspiring journalist, that’s all I could think: Get other people’s stories on tape. If we all die, the camera survives, and that’s how we get the message out there, about how we want change to be brought about,” Hogg recalled.


Watch David Hogg tell two different stories below:

Interesting. However, Hogg made some videos purportedly DURING the shooting from inside the school.

Here is Hogg’s interview with TIME magazine following the shooting in which he claimed that he was in his AP environmental science class at the time the shooting occured:

When Hogg heard a “pop” while sitting in an AP environmental science class around 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, he told his teacher it sounded strangely like a gunshot. But there had been a fire drill that very morning and talk of a “Code Red” exercise to prepare for an active shooter. This must just be a surprise drill, he reasoned.

And then the fire alarm sounded. Dutifully acting on it, Hogg and other students tried to exit the building. A janitor—Hogg doesn’t know his name but calls him an angel—knew where the shots were coming from and sent the students back. Then a culinary arts teacher, Ashley Kurth, pulled Hogg and others inside, locked the door, and made them hide in a closet. Checking Twitter and Instagram, Hogg—who’s an editor at the school’s TV station—found the news that the shooting was real and ongoing.

The shots continued for what felt like an eternity. Hogg considered the possibility that he would not live to see the end of the day.

“While I was in there, I thought, ‘What impact have I had? What will my story be if I die here?’” Hogg told TIME in the hours following the ordeal. “And the only thing I could think of was, pull out my camera and try telling others. As a student journalist, as an aspiring journalist, that’s all I could think: Get other people’s stories on tape. If we all die, the camera survives, and that’s how we get the message out there, about how we want change to be brought about.”

Pretty big contradiction there.

Here is some of “student reporter” David Hogg’s interviews with his classmates, purportedly during the shooting. By the way, there is no way Hogg could have gotten into the school during the shooting, because the Broward County Sheriff’s Office set up a perimeter around the school during the shooting, all the while refusing to enter the school to stop the bloodshed.

Here is Hogg claiming to be inside the school during the shooting.

Here are Hogg’s interviews with his classmates, purportedly during the shooting:

Sheriff Scott Israel’s Broward County Sheriff’s Office made a concerted effort to not enter the Parkland high school during February’s mass shooting, instead allowing the shooting to happen.

The mainstream media is finally reporting on police and emergency scanner audio tapes that show the full extent of the Sheriff’s Office’s complicity in the horror at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

“Do not approach the 12 or 1300 building, stay at least 500 feet away,” Sheriff’s Office deputy Scot Peterson said over radio dispatch, disproving his claim that he didn’t go inside the school because he was ordered not to do so if he didn’t have body cameras on. School surveillance footage has still not been released, and is unlikely to ever be released.

Big League Politics first reported on audiotapes showing that the Sheriff’s Office set up a perimeter around the high school during the shooting, after learning that multiple people were shot dead inside the high school. The police dispatcher ordered police to “hold all perimeters” while the shooter was still at large. Thirty minutes after learning of the active shooter situation, the Sheriff’s Office was still holding its perimeter and dispatchers were reporting “The shooter is not down. The shooter is not down.”

Our reporting proved that Israel’s office lied by claiming that they only set up a perimeter around the school AFTER the shooting, not during the shooting. In fact, they set up a perimeter four minutes after learning that people were shot dead inside.

Israel Solved the School Shooter Problem, US Should Follow



Chuck Morse
https://www.newsmax.com/chuckmorse/israel-maalot-school-shooter/2018/02/27/id/845719/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=idealmedia&utm_campaign=newsmax.com&utm_term=68856&utm_content=2196187
By Chuck Morse
Tuesday, 27 Feb 2018 12:34 PM

On May 15, 1974, three shooters entered the Netiv Meir Elementary School in the Jewish-Arab town of Ma’alot in northern Israel taking 115 people including 105 children hostage. At the time, Israel was on a leftist utopian bender with social experiments that included disarmament and gun free zones. On the second day of the standoff, the Israeli army stormed the building as the shooters murdered children with grenades and automatic weapons. 25 hostages were killed including 22 children, 68 were injured.

Israel responded to the atrocity by mandating armed security in every school. Retired military veterans and police, often grandfathers and grandmothers, began to monitor schools. Teachers and school staff began to volunteer for gun training and began to carry concealed weapons after registering with their school administration. Teachers started to participate in active shooter drills. There have been only two school shootings in Israel since that slaughter and in both cases the shooter was killed and stopped from killing more innocents.

In September 2015, Israel responded to a plethora of knife attacks by making it easier for citizens to obtain guns. Army officers with the rank of Lieutenant and above would be permitted to purchase guns freely and security guards would be allowed to take their guns home after work. The minimum age for gun purchases was dropped from 21 to 18. Jerusalem mayor Nir Barkat urged residents to carry a gun and was photographed carrying a Glock 23. Israelis overwhelmingly view the right to bear arms as the best means of deterring gun violence.

The mainstream media is lying about President Trump’s call for arming teachers in one of the ugliest and most dangerous pieces of fake news yet.

The president has not called for arming all teachers, only making it possible for the approximately 10 percent of teachers who are former military or security personnel, who are already licensed and trained, or who would like to obtain a license and training to be permitted to carry a concealed weapon if they choose to do so. In fact, 17 states already allow teachers who register with their school boards and who are cleared to carry concealed weapons. I’m proud to note that my own state of Massachusetts is one of those states. Apparently, Florida is not on the list.

The use by the left of impressionable young children who have been traumatized by school shootings to push their gun grabbing agenda is a particularly odious and despicable manipulation of emotions. If these leftists possessed a shred of decency or genuine concern for the safety of school children they might inquire as to whether the child feels safe going to school in a gun free zone where no one is properly equipped to stop a shooter. They might consider no longer stigmatizing and mocking gun training or the teaching of self-defense.

The social phenomena that constitutes school shootings and its uptick since Columbine, the social and psychological factors that led to this uptick, is a broad and profound subject that urgently calls out for a national discussion and a scientific inquiry free of ideology and invective from all sides. The question of gun regulation, particularly of semi-automatic weapons, is also an important topic that needs to be addressed without histrionics and posturing.

Meanwhile, and in these times of clear and present danger to our school children, common sense steps such as securing our school buildings and allowing trained and willing teachers and administrators to defend the students with concealed weapons is urgently needed.

Chuck Morse hosts “The Morse Force” live Monday-Friday at Noon, ET on YouTube. The program is also available on iTunes, Stitcher, and Google Play and his books are available on Amazon.com. For more of his reports — Click Here Now.

Law School Professionals Want Bill Robinson to Put a Sock in It « Above the Law: A Legal Web Site – News, Commentary, and Opinions on Law Firms, Lawyers, Law School, Law Suits, Judges and Courts


http://abovethelaw.com/2012/01/law-school-professionals-want-bill-robinson-to-put-a-sock-in-it/

Law School Professionals Want Bill Robinson to Put a Sock in It

By Elie Mystal

William Robinson III (a.k.a. the guy who needs to explain how he afforded his Corvair in the first place).

So earlier this week, the president of the American Bar Association, William Robinson, gave a ridiculous interview to Thomson Reuters News & Insight. You might have heard about it.

Robinson had the grace and the courage to tell law students it was their own fault for the rampant price gouging that happens as a result of the ABA’s ineffective oversight of law schools. It took real strength of character for Robinson to share this anecdote: “When I was going to law school . . . I sold my Corvair to make first-semester tuition and books for $330.” I mean, how many people in Robinson’s position would be so out of touch that they think prospective law students are driving automobiles that can cover a whole semester of tuition at an American law school!

That’s right, future 1Ls, don’t get too used to your Jaguar XKR. Don’t become too attached to your Lexus hybrid. You’ll need to sell your luxury automobile to pay for law school. D’uh!

Sorry, I’m still flabbergasted that the president of the American Bar Association openly admitted to being a complete joke.

When the story broke the other day, I had the good fortune of being in Washington, D.C., at the annual conference of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS). The law school at the University of California – Irvine invited me to speak to law school professionals and deans about how law schools could better use (or avoid) social media.

And let me tell you, law school professionals — the people who have to deal with the perception of general ABA incompetence on a day-to-day basis — were not at all happy with William Robinson’s comments….

I asked about ten public relations or communications professionals about Robinson’s comments. Nobody would go on the record with me. It was kind of funny; nobody would even go on the record to say “no comment.” At least Bill Robinson won’t be dragged through the press by member institutions for his insensitive remarks.

But that doesn’t mean they didn’t have opinions. When I asked people, I heard, “I can’t believe he said that,” or “Great, the ABA makes my job more difficult, AGAIN.” There was disbelief and a bunch of grumbling, especially as the news percolated around the conference in the morning.

But as the day wore on, people had an opportunity to reflect more on Robinson’s statements. Said one PR person for a top 100 law school:

It’s frustrating because he has a point worth making. The information is out there… and law students… everybody in these times, have to take advantage of the information that is out there….

But who was the person that even let him do that interview and say those things?

Frustrating is how a couple of other people described Robinson:

The conversation about the cost of law school and what to do about it has been going on for years. It is… frustrating for Robinson to come in and preach about what is, at best, one part of the problem.

But perhaps the most telling comment was from a person representing a relatively new law school:

At my law school, we are [long spiel about the heroic attempts his law school has made to keep tuition down]. We want people to know what they’re getting into financially, and make smart decisions with loans and debt….

What was your question? Robinson? Yeah, don’t care.

Well played, anonymous sir. Robinson’s comments might have been insensitive, out-of-touch, and incorrect — but who cares? It’s not like any other ABA president has done anything to help control the cost of law school tuition. It’s not like any law school administrator or dean is thinking about the ABA and their new smack-talking president when they present their projected budgets to the presidents of their universities.

Robinson’s words might sting and might make him look like an idiot, but they carry the force and effect of a Jon Huntsman campaign ad.

Let me put it this way: I wanted to talk to people about William Robinson, but nobody wanted to talk to me about him. The law school administrators wanted to talk about what law schools were doing — not the latest dumbass missive from the ABA.

Law School Professionals Want Bill Robinson to Put a Sock in It « Above the Law: A Legal Web Site – News, Commentary, and Opinions on Law Firms, Lawyers, Law School, Law Suits, Judges and Courts