| Ammo seller to Las Vegas killer arrested on federal charge (CNN) Douglas Haig, an Arizona man who says he sold tracer ammunition to the gunman in October's Las Vegas massacre, was arrested Friday on a charge of conspiring to manufacture and sell another type of ammunition -- armor-piercing bullets -- in violation of federal law. A criminal complaint alleges two unfired .308-caliber (7.62mm) rounds found in gunman Stephen Paddock's hotel room had Haig's fingerprints on them as well as tool marks from his workshop. The bullets in the cartridges were armor-piercing, with an incendiary capsule in the nose, the complaint says. The FBI on October 19 searched Haig's Mesa home and seized ammunition the agency says is armor-piercing, the complaint said. Haig did not have a license to manufacture armor-piercing ammunition, documents said. Police say Paddock, 64, opened fire on October 1 from his 32nd-floor room at Las Vegas' Mandalay Bay hotel onto a crowd attending a music festival, killing 58 people and shooting and injuring 422 others. More than 850 others suffered other injuries in the attack. Investigators say Paddock died of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. Douglas Haig's name was revealed in the release of search warrant records. Haig, 55, appeared in court Friday and was released on his own recognizance with specific conditions not spelled out in court proceedings. He is due in court again February 15 for a preliminary hearing. The maximum penalty for manufacturing illegal ammunition is five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Haig's attorney, Marc J. Victor, told CNN he had no comment. CNN affiliate KNXV caught up with Victor outside court, and the lawyer said he couldn't say anything because of the ongoing case. "My first obligation and only obligation is to my client," he told KNXV. The complaint Haig was publicly linked to the Las Vegas investigation Tuesday when a judge unsealed months-old police search warrant records that named him as a person of interest In a Friday morning news conference before his arrest, Haig, responding to the documents' release, said he sold tracer ammunition to Paddock at his home in September after they met at a gun show. Tracer ammunition has a pyrotechnic charge that, when fired, leaves an illuminated trace that can help a shooter have a more precise idea of where the bullet is going. Haig did not describe the ammunition as armor-piercing. Victor, at the same news conference at his Phoenix-area office, said the tracer ammunition that Haig sold Paddock "was not modified in any way ... from manufacturer's specs." But in Friday's criminal complaint, investigators say Haig and an associate also claimed they sold to Paddock other ammunition -- four or five 10-round packages of .308-caliber incendiary ammunition -- at a Las Vegas gun show in August. It's not clear from the complaint whether the two armor-piercing rounds with the incendiary capsule are from the packages Haig allegedly told investigators he sold Paddock at the gun show. The complaint also does not say whether Paddock fired any of the ammunition that he bought from Haig. Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Debris is scattered on the ground Monday, October 2, at the site of a country music festival held this past weekend in Las Vegas. Dozens of people were killed and hundreds were injured Sunday when a gunman opened fire on the crowd. Police said the gunman fired from the Mandalay Bay hotel, several hundred feet southwest of the concert grounds. It is the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history. Hide Caption 1 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Broken windows of the Mandalay Bay are seen early in Las Vegas on Monday. Police said the gunman fired on the crowd from the 32nd floor of the hotel. Hide Caption 2 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People cross a street near the Las Vegas Strip just after sunrise on Monday. Thousands were attending the music festival, Route 91 Harvest, when the shooting started. Hide Caption 3 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People embrace outside the Thomas & Mack Center after the shooting. Hide Caption 4 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Police arrive at the Sands Corporation plane hangar where some people ran to safety after the shooting. Hide Caption 5 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A woman cries while hiding inside the Sands Corporation plane hangar. Hide Caption 6 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Concertgoers dive over a fence to take cover from gunfire on Sunday night. Hide Caption 7 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Police take position outside the Mandalay Bay. Hide Caption 8 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A man lays on top of a woman as others flee the festival grounds. The woman reportedly got up from the scene. Hide Caption 9 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Hide Caption 10 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People are seen on the ground after the gunman opened fire. Hide Caption 11 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People run from the festival grounds. Hide Caption 12 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A woman is moved outside the Las Vegas Tropicana resort. Multiple victims were being transported to hospitals in the aftermath of the shooting. Hide Caption 13 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People are searched by police at the Tropicana. Hide Caption 14 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival An ambulance leaves the intersection of Las Vegas Boulevard and Tropicana Avenue. Hide Caption 15 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A man in a wheelchair is evacuated from the festival after gunfire was heard. Hide Caption 16 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Victims of the shooting are tended to in the street. Hide Caption 17 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Concertgoers help an injured person at the scene. Hide Caption 18 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People gather around a victim outside the festival grounds. Hide Caption 19 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A couple huddles after shots rang out at the festival. Hide Caption 20 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival An injured woman is helped at the Tropicana. Hide Caption 21 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Police and emergency responders gather at the intersection of Las Vegas Boulevard and Tropicana Avenue. Hide Caption 22 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A police officer takes position behind a truck. Hide Caption 23 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A crowd takes cover at the festival grounds. Hide Caption 24 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Police officers advise people to take cover in the wake of the shooting. Hide Caption 25 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival People tend to a victim at the festival grounds. Hide Caption 26 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Police stand at the scene of the shooting. Hide Caption 27 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A woman sits on a curb at the scene of the shooting. Hide Caption 28 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival Police are deployed to the scene. Hide Caption 29 of 30 Photos: Mass shooting at Las Vegas music festival A man makes a phone call as people run from the festival grounds. Hide Caption 30 of 30 Two law enforcement sources told CNN in October that Paddock, during the massacre, fired incendiary bullets at a 43,000-barrel fuel tank on the grounds of nearby McCarran International Airport in what investigators believe was a failed attempt to cause an explosion. Haig did not mention the incendiary rounds -- which are meant to ignite what they hit -- in Friday's news conference. Victor, his attorney, declined to comment about CNN's questions about the incendiary rounds. The complaint does not name Haig's associate. The law enforcement sources also said tracer rounds were found in Paddock's hotel room. But there was no evidence the tracer rounds were used during the attack, according to the sources, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about such details. Authorities have repeatedly said Paddock was the only shooter. Friday's charges do not allege that Haig knew of Paddock's intentions to kill in Las Vegas. Haig says he saw nothing suspicious Haig, an aerospace engineer and part-time ammunition reseller, said at Friday's news conference that he never saw anything suspicious in his brief interactions with Paddock. Paddock arrived at the seller's home in Mesa "very well-dressed, very well-groomed, very polite, very respectful," Haig said. "At no time did I see anything suspicious or odd or any kind of a tell, anything that would set off an alarm," he said. Haig also said that he received death threats after his name was revealed this week. He stressed that his sale made "no contribution" to the killings since Paddock didn't appear to have fired tracer rounds. "I hope today ends (the death threats) when people realize that I wasn't in collusion with Paddock -- that I was not in any way, shape or form associated with the horrible crime that he committed," Haig said. Timeline of sales Haig said he sold 720 rounds of surplus US military tracer ammunition to Paddock at his home in September after Paddock approached him or an associate at gun shows. JUST WATCHED Man who sold Vegas shooter ammo speaks out Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Man who sold Vegas shooter ammo speaks out 01:00 He held Friday's news conference to protect his reputation, he and his attorney said. They gave the following timeline: • Paddock first approached Haig's table at a Las Vegas gun show sometime last year but met another person who was behind the table. • Haig first met Paddock at a subsequent Phoenix gun show, where he was selling ammunition. • Paddock took Haig's business card because the seller didn't have the quantity of trace ammunition that he wanted. • Paddock later called Haig three times to arrange a sale at Haig's home. • In September, Paddock arrived at Haig's home, bought the tracer ammunition and drove away. The ammunition, he said, was: • 600 rounds of 7.62mm NATO, M62, tracer ammunition, manufactured by the Lake City Army Ammunition Plant in Independence, Missouri. • 120 rounds of 5.56mm M196 tracer ammunition, manufactured by the same plant. He said the 5.56mm rounds were in their original packaging. He did not comment on the 7.62mm rounds' packaging. Before the sale, Paddock told him "that he was going to go out to the desert and put on a light show" with the ammunition -- that he was "going to go out and shoot it at night with friends." Seller's reaction to massacre: 'Revulsion' Victor said police found his client's name and address on a box that Paddock had -- a box that Haig gave him to carry the tracer rounds he had bought. Haig said he learned of the massacre when authorities contacted him at work the next morning. "Revulsion," Haig said of his reaction. "Sickness. Horror that this man would do something like that." Haig spoke with investigators four times after the shooting, and has been "fully cooperative," Victor said. "This was a routine transaction to purchase a routine type of ammunition that is available in many different retail outlets throughout the state of Arizona," Victor said. "After that transaction, Doug had absolutely no further contact with Mr. Paddock." Death threats Haig said he's received death threats since the search warrant documents were released Tuesday. "One woman (was) screaming through my door that I should be killed and I should die," he told reporters at Friday's news conference. "It's been not a lot of fun, quite frankly." Haig added, "I had no contribution to what Paddock did. I had no way to see into his mind." Haig named as person of interest A Nevada judge on Tuesday unsealed police search warrant records -- prepared shortly after the shooting -- that mentioned two persons of interest in the case. The judge released the documents after CNN and other media outlets sued to obtain them. One person of interest, whom police had named previously, was the killer's girlfriend, Marilou Danley. Authorities subsequently cleared her publicly. The second name was redacted. But the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported it had a version of the search warrant that named, without redaction, Haig as that second person. The documents didn't explain why he was a person of interest. Las Vegas police officials told CNN the department couldn't comment on Haig or any names, and referred questions to federal authorities. Sheriff has said feds were investigating someone When the search warrant documents were released this week, Clark County District Court Judge Elissa Cadish allowed a small portion of those records to be redacted because "there is an ongoing investigation regarding charges against another individual, arising out of information obtained in connection with the ... shooting, but not directly related to the shooting." In response to a question from CNN in January, the Clark County sheriff, Joe Lombardo, said federal authorities are investigating a person in the case. That person could face federal charges not directly related to the shooting within the next 60 days, the sheriff said January 19. Lombardo didn't disclose the person's name, saying those details were "under federal grand jury disclosure" rules. On Friday morning, before his arrest, Haig answered a reporter's question about whether he believed he was that person. "No. I don't think it's me at all," Haig said. | |
| Number Of Puerto Rico Residents Without Clean Water And Electricity Keeps Rising In the wake of Hurricane Maria’s wrath, Puerto Rico remains devastated. Newest reports from the island territory now show that the number of residents without clean drinking water and electricity continues to rise, despite humanitarian efforts. Puerto Rico’s government has reported that roughly 10 percent of the islands 3.4 million United States citizens are without electricity Tuesday morning, an increase of about six percent from Monday. Yesterday, 84% of people in Puerto Rico had no power (per govt stats on status.pr). Today, it's gone up, to 90% without power. pic.twitter.com/5WnCA8mrhf — Jennifer Bendery (@jbendery) October 11, 2017 The island’s electrical grid was all but completely destroyed during Hurricane Maria, and many are still struggling without the most basic of necessities. This news comes just one day after Puerto Rico’s Governor Ricardo Rossello asked the federal government for an additional $4.6 billion in funding beyond the Trump administration’s request last week for $29 billion from Congress for relief efforts. “Puerto Rico has experienced a natural disaster of a magnitude not seen in over a century, and we are doing everything possible to address the needs of the American citizens of Puerto Rico during this time of crisis,” Rosselló wrote. “However, the unprecedented level of destruction, coupled with the almost complete shut-down of business in Puerto Rico, have made it impossible for us to meet the considerable human needs without the measures proposed above,” he added. The White House also announced Monday that it would allow a 10-day waiver temporarily blocking the Jones Act to expire. This is devastating news for those living in Puerto Rico, as foreign ships can no longer bring aid to the hurricane-ravaged island from U.S. ports. Officials still expect it to be six more months before electricity can be fully restored to Puerto Rico. As the days have become weeks, the weeks will become months, and survival will get more difficult. Many are now fleeing to the mainland United States just so that they can survive. The economy in Puerto Rico is at a standstill, and without clean drinking water, many are finding life too difficult should they remain on the island and isolated. | |
| Puerto Rico says to receive $16 bln in federal disaster aid By Nick Brown Feb 9 (Reuters) - Puerto Rico said on Friday it will receive $16 billion in federal aid under a disaster recovery package signed on Friday by U.S. President Donald Trump. That money includes nearly $7 billion announced on Wednesday and will help the bankrupt U.S. territory recover from September's Hurricane Maria, according to a statement on Friday from Governor Ricardo Rossello and Jenniffer Gonzalez, Puerto Rico's nonvoting member of the U.S. Congress. Rossello said on Wednesday that Puerto Rico would get $4.9 billion to shore up its near-insolvent Medicaid system and another $2 billion or so under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program to repair its destroyed electric grid. On Friday, Rossello and Gonzalez said the island would receive a total of $11 billion under CDBG, a program run by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The additional portion would be used to help local businesses and repair and build new homes, they said. In addition to a slow recovery from Hurricane Maria, its worst natural disaster in 90 years, Puerto Rico is navigating the largest bankruptcy in U.S. government history, with a combined $120 billion in bond and pension debt. The aid announced on Friday provides just a fraction of the $94.4 billion Rossello has said the island needs to recover from cataclysmic damage to its infrastructure and housing stock, although Puerto Rico is eligible to participate in other programs that could increase the aid to $45 billion, according to Friday's statement. Congress could also appropriate more money later. The governor has asked Congress for $46 billion in CDBG funding alone. Home damage in Puerto Rico, where the poverty rate is around 46 percent, was exacerbated by the existence of hundreds of thousands of sub-standard "informal" homes, which are typically built by the owners themselves, without permits and often in squatter communities. "The work carried out in Washington - together with resident commissioner Jenniffer González - was able to deliver the message of the urgency of an allocation of funds that meets the needs of the Island," the governor said in Friday's statement. The disaster aid package signed by Trump on Friday - around $90 billion in total - covers a number of major disasters, including Hurricanes Irma, Harvey and Maria, as well as the recent California wildfires. (Reporting by Nick Brown; Editing by Cynthia Osterman) Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. | |
| 3-D-printed guns put carnage a click away PEOPLE WHO are barred from purchasing firearms or want to own a gun that is illegal in the jurisdiction where they live may soon have an easy way to get around the law. All they would need to do is download a computer file and use a 3-D printer to stamp out a gun. No background check would weed out felons, those with mental illness, domestic abusers or possible terrorists. No serial number would allow police to trace a weapon used in a crime. And there would be no problem getting past metal detectors with a gun molded from high-quality plastic. Plans by a Texas organization to publish, starting Aug. 1, downloadable blueprints for 3-D-printed plastic firearms — so-called ghost guns — have rightly alarmed leading gun safety groups and law enforcement officials. Credit for this dangerous scenario — in which getting an AR-15-style rifle is just a matter of a few computer clicks — goes to the Trump administration for its inexplicable decision to settle a lawsuit it was on the verge of winning. The case involves Cody Wilson, founder of Defense Distributed, who sued the government in 2015 after the State Department under the Obama administration made him take down do-it-yourself gunmaking blueprints he had posted online, saying they violated export regulations governing military hardware and technology. Mr. Wilson, an avowed anarchist who hopes for a world in which governments can’t stop individuals from getting guns, claimed his First Amendment right to free speech was being violated. But he lost at every stage of litigation, including a refusal by the Supreme Court to review a decision that the code could not be published during the course of the lawsuit. So it was stunning — but not surprising, given this administration’s worship at the altar of gun rights — that the State Department elected last month to quietly settle the case. In addition to signing off on the public release of the 3-D printing tutorials, the State Department also agreed to pay nearly $40,000 of Mr. Wilson’s legal fees. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out how this senseless decision was reached, and whether groups such as the National Rifle Association were involved. It, along with Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, tried unsuccessfully Friday to get a federal court in Texas to block what it called a “troubling” and “dangerous” settlement. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was pressed about the issue Wednesday during his appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Why on earth would the Trump administration make it easier for terrorists and gunmen to produce undetectable plastic guns?” asked Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.). Mr. Pompeo promised to “take a look at it.” That’s not enough. Ghost guns are already a problem; they are used not just by lone shooters but as part of criminal enterprises. Releasing instructions for their manufacture, which now only circulate on the dark Web, will lead directly to the loss of more innocent lives. The administration should stop the State Department from going ahead with this foolhardy move, and Congress should act to plug the loopholes that these guns are designed to take advantage of. | |
| Cardinal Burke to Michael Matt: "Amoris Not An Exercise of Magisterium" (Now what?) Given that Pope Francis has, since that interview took place, attempted to make the Argentine bishops’ interpretation of AL 'magisterial'--an interpretation that allows public adulterers to receive Holy Communion--Cardinal Burke’s reply to my question on January 9th of this year would seem to take on new relevancy. In my interview of Raymond Cardinal Burke less than one year ago, I asked His Eminence to clarify what, exactly, is the level of authoritative weight of Pope Francis’s post-synodal exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. Now, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, made it very clear to the Catholic News Service on December 5 what the Pope is up to: “The fact that the pope requested that his letter and the interpretations of the Buenos Aires bishops be published in the AAS means that His Holiness has given these documents a particular qualification that elevates them to the level of being official teachings of the church. While the content of the pope’s letter itself does not contain teachings on faith and morals, it does point toward the interpretations of the Argentine bishops and confirms them as authentically reflecting his own mind. Thus together the two documents became the Holy Father’s authentic magisterium for the whole church.” What Cardinal Burke rightly describes as lacking in any magisterial weight whatsoever—and, in fact, in dire need of clarification and correction— has by papal fiat been declared magisterial, and thus binding on us all. Francis made it clear that the Argentine bishops’ interpretation of AL allowing public adulterers to receive Holy Communion “explains precisely the meaning of Chapter VIII of ‘Amoris Laetitia.’ There are no other interpretations.” I would imagine this outrageous overreach of papal authority on the Pope's part would make it ominously clear to Cardinal Burke that the time has come to issue his public correction of Pope Francis's erroneous teaching. The moment, it would seem, has come. Cardinal Burke, please and in God's Holy Name, we beg you to act now -- before Pope Francis succeeds in tearing the Church in half completely. We fear that your silence now, in the face of this latest papal travesty, may suggest consent to the claim that Amoris Laetitia is magisterial, and thus prove more damaging than if you had never raised your voice at all. We thank God for the courage you've shown in defending His Church thus far, and we pray he will continue to bless and protect you as you do what must now be done. | |
| New Virus With NO CURE Spreading: This Is WORSE Than The ‘Black Death’ A new virus for which medical officials have no remedy is spreading. The infectious disease also has a fatality rate of almost 90% making it much more deadly than the black death plaguing Madagascar. A deadly outbreak of a rare and highly fatal virus has broken out in eastern Uganda and five cases have already been identified, the World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed. The disease is known as the Marburg virus. It is similar to the Ebola virus and can be fatal in up to 88% of cases. The outbreak of the contagious and deadly Marburg virus disease in the Kween district of eastern Uganda was declared by the nation’s Ministry of Health back on October 19. Since then, five cases have been identified as international aid agencies, stretched thin by Madagascar’s black death outbreak, have rushed to deploy teams on the ground to control the recent outbreak. This news comes amid a surge in cases of plague in Madagascar, which is considered to be the “worst outbreak in 50 years” and now at “crisis” point. Marburg virus disease (MVD), which causes severe viral hemorrhagic fever, ranks among the most virulent pathogens known to infect humans, according to the World Health Organization. The WHO website reads: “Marburg virus disease is a rare disease with a high mortality rate for which there is no specific treatment. The virus is transmitted by direct contact with the blood, body fluids, and tissues of infected persons or wild animals (e.g. monkeys and fruit bats).” MVD also falls within the same family as the Ebola virus – the hemorrhagic fever that decimated West Africa and killed around 11,000 in 2014 and 2015. The outbreak is thought to have begun in September when a man in his 30s, who worked as a game hunter and lived near a cave with a heavy presence of bats, was admitted to a local health center with a high fever, vomiting, and diarrhea. The man’s condition deteriorated quickly and he failed to respond to antimalarial treatments. He died after being taken to another hospital, and a short time later, his sister in her 50’s also died of the same ailment. Emergency screening has begun at the Kenya-Uganda border in Turkana after all three members of the same family died of the disease in Uganda. Health workers have been asked to work with communities to stop the deadly Marburg outbreak from devastating communities in the rural region. Dr. Zabulon Yoti, a Technical Coordinator for Emergencies at the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Africa, said: “Community engagement is the cornerstone of emergency response.” He urged health officials to “work with the communities to build their capacity for success and sustainability” and develop a better understanding of the local customs and traditions. Early symptoms include fever, chills, headache, and myalgia (muscle pain). Several hundred people have been exposed to the virus as officials worry this outbreak could spread rapidly into regions already devastated by the ongoing black death outbreak. | |
| Newly Released Private Surveillance Footage From The Las Vegas Massacre Shows “Helicopter Hovering Overhead” During The Attack Newly released footage of the Las Vegas Massacre, captured by a private surveillance camera and recently released by Fox News host Tucker Carlson, has once again ignited the theory that helicopters were used during the horrific attack. Over the last month multiple videos have been released that many believe show helicopters either conducting an attack on the Vegas Strip or attempting to stop those that were and now, with this latest evidence release, that possibility seems all the more plausible. As Shepard Ambellas reported for Intellihub, “The [footage] is presumed to have been captured by a nearby business’s southward facing security camera which is located approximately 780 feet due east of the venue where the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival was held on Oct. 1. The tape was given to Fox News by an attorney who represents several shooting victims.” Amazingly, the surveillance camera captured what seems to show a “large amount” of wind and debris being kicked up by a nearby helicopter hovering above the attack and or taking part in it. “Astonishingly, between the times of 10:13 and 10:16 a good amount of debris can be seen being pushed downward and sideways in front of the camera,” Ambellas continued. “By 10:14 much larger crowds of people can be seen streaming through the area to escape the massacre going on,” Carlson reported. “You can see a large amount of wind and debris, apparently that is due to a helicopter hovering overhead.” The footage goes how to show two men attempt to help a victim who had apparently been shot, eventually resorting to covering up the body after they realized it was simply too late. Ambellas also reported on what his research indicates were documented helicopters in the air at the time. A quick review of flight records during that time reveals that a squadron of EC-130 Eurocopters departed from Maverick Leasing LLC at 10:12 p.m., several of which appear to have overflown the parking lot where the victim and debris were seen. However, the departure of the choppers and the fact that several of them overflew the parking lot does not explain all of the debris being kicked up from by a heavy downdraft, prop wash, possibly from a helicopter hovering in place much closer. In fact, the downdraft appears to be constant from 10:13-10:16 p.m. and not intermittent as if several choppers had just passed overhead. As I have reported in the past, multiple other videos taken on the night of the attack also seem to point to helicopters being used throughout the city. “Footage has emerged that may show muzzle flashes coming from the helicopter in what looks to be evidence that a team was firing into the crowd from the air on that fateful night,” read a report in The Daily Sheeple. “Despite claims by some that these are “strobes” it remains unlikely that this is the case, especially when you consider other footage of the helicopter taken on the night as well as research by a group of investigators who believe the first attack on October 1st was carried out from the air.” It is also important to keep in mind that there is footage of a still unidentified team loading up gear in a helicopter near the scene of the attack. “In what can only be described as a “WTF video” the following footage seems to literally show a team of unknown soldiers gearing up next to a helicopter near the Route 91 concert.” Additionally, Carlson also noted during the initial broadcast of the private surveillance footage that the owner of the camera was never approached by the FBI, who have so far never seen the footage, much less investigated it. While we may never know what actually happened during the Las Vegas Massacre, the fact remains that the official story has been proven, time and time again, to be absolutely false and in fact nothing more than a pathetic attempt at a cover-up. | |
| Assange Never Met Manafort. Luke Harding and the Guardian Publish Still More Blatant MI6 Lies The right wing Ecuadorean government of President Moreno continues to churn out its production line of fake documents regarding Julian Assange, and channel them straight to MI6 mouthpiece Luke Harding of the Guardian. Amazingly, more Ecuadorean Government documents have just been discovered for the Guardian, this time spy agency reports detailing visits of Paul Manafort and unspecified “Russians” to the Embassy. By a wonderful coincidence of timing, this is the day after Mueller announced that Manafort’s plea deal was over. The problem with this latest fabrication is that Moreno had already released the visitor logs to the Mueller inquiry. Neither Manafort nor these “Russians” are in the visitor logs. This is impossible. The visitor logs were not kept by Wikileaks, but by the very strict Ecuadorean security. Nobody was ever admitted without being entered in the logs. The procedure was very thorough. To go in, you had to submit your passport (no other type of document was accepted). A copy of your passport was taken and the passport details entered into the log. Your passport, along with your mobile phone and any other electronic equipment, was retained until you left, along with your bag and coat. I feature in the logs every time I visited. There were no exceptions. For an exception to be made for Manafort and the “Russians” would have had to be a decision of the Government of Ecuador, not of Wikileaks, and that would be so exceptional the reason for it would surely have been noted in the now leaked supposed Ecuadorean “intelligence report” of the visits. What possible motive would the Ecuadorean government have for facilitating secret unrecorded visits by Paul Manafort? Furthermore it is impossible that the intelligence agency – who were in charge of the security – would not know the identity of these alleged “Russians”. Previously Harding and the Guardian have published documents faked by the Moreno government regarding a diplomatic appointment to Russia for Assange of which he had no knowledge. Now they follow this up with more documents aimed to provide fictitious evidence to bolster Mueller’s pathetically failed attempt to substantiate the story that Russia deprived Hillary of the Presidency. My friend William Binney, probably the world’s greatest expert on electronic surveillance, former Technical Director of the NSA, has stated that it is impossible the DNC servers were hacked, the technical evidence shows it was a download to a directly connected memory stick. I knew the US security services were conducting a fake investigation the moment it became clear that the FBI did not even themselves look at the DNC servers, instead accepting a report from the Clinton linked DNC “security consultants” Crowdstrike. I would love to believe that the fact Julian has never met Manafort is bound to be established. But I fear that state control of propaganda may be such that this massive “Big Lie” will come to enter public consciousness in the same way as the non-existent Russian hack of the DNC servers. Assange never met Manafort. The DNC emails were downloaded by an insider. Assange never even considered fleeing to Russia. Those are the facts, and I am in a position to give you a personal assurance of them. I can also assure you that Luke Harding, the Guardian, Washington Post and New York Times have been publishing a stream of deliberate lies, in collusion with the security services. I am not a fan of Donald Trump. But to see the partisans of the defeated candidate (and a particularly obnoxious defeated candidate) manipulate the security services and the media to create an entirely false public perception, in order to attempt to overturn the result of the US Presidential election, is the most astonishing thing I have witnessed in my lifetime. Plainly the government of Ecuador is releasing lies about Assange to curry favour with the security establishment of the USA and UK, and to damage Assange’s support prior to expelling him from the Embassy. He will then be extradited from London to the USA on charges of espionage. Assange is not a whistleblower or a spy – he is the greatest publisher of his age, and has done more to bring the crimes of governments to light than the mainstream media will ever be motivated to achieve. That supposedly great newspaper titles like the Guardian, New York Times and Washington Post are involved in the spreading of lies to damage Assange, and are seeking his imprisonment for publishing state secrets, is clear evidence that the idea of the “liberal media” no longer exists in the new plutocratic age. The press are not on the side of the people, they are an instrument of elite control. | |
| Black Death: ‘It’s 100 % Likely’ It Spreads To The UK And A ‘Ticking Time Bomb’ Ready To Decimate The World The death toll in Madagascar due to the plague has jumped for the first time since health officials claimed the infection was in the beginning stages of control. With the new uptick in those who died, the fear that the disease will spread to the United Kingdom has been confirmed as “100 percent likely.” The plague death toll has now shown signs that it’s picking up speed again. Official figures reveal 165 people have now lost their lives in Madagascar’s “worst outbreak in 50 years.” Recent data shows a 15 percent jump in fatalities over just three days, coupled with scientists concerned that the black death has reached a “crisis” point. Ten other African countries have also been placed on high alert, warning that an outbreak could occur at any time. At least 2,034 people have been infected down by a more lethal form of the black death so far in the country, which lies off the coast of Africa, according to WHO statistics. Some experts fear the disease (which is so deadly because it is airborne) could mutate and become untreatable during this year’s outbreak – which is expected to blight Madagascar until April. Others worry the plague will go beyond mainland Africa and eventually reach the US, Europe, and Britain. The plague spreads easily and can kill within 48 hours. That would leave millions more vulnerable to the outbreak, and create a short supply of life-saving antibiotics. According to the Daily Mail, experts warn the outbreak of plague in Madagascar this year is being fueled by a strain more lethal than the one which usually strikes the country. This form of the pneumonic plague is airborne, easily spread by a cough or a sneeze, and has been responsible for two-thirds of all infections this year. The bubonic form of the plague, responsible for the “Black Death” in the 14th century strikes the country each year and infects around 600 people. But with over 2000 alread infected by pneumonic plague (and counting) health officials aren’t willing to quit sounding alarms just yet. Paul Hunter, a professor of health protection at the world-renowned University of East Anglia, was the first expert to predict the plague could travel across the sea. He previously said: “The big anxiety is it could spread to mainland Africa, it’s not probable, but certainly possible, that might then be difficult to control. If we don’t carry on doing stuff here, at one point something will happen and it will get out of our control and cause huge devastation all around the world.” There is always a risk with travel that the disease will spread globally, Hunter added. “We don’t want a situation where the disease spreads so fast it gets out of control. We are talking about it spreading in days rather than weeks.” But Hunter is adamant that a well-developed country could manage the plague should a global outbreak occur. Hopefully, most will never have to find out how well another country can manage this infection. A few health experts have warned that there is no threat to the UK, however, some have warned the plague outbreak will certainly spread to the region. Richard Conroy, the founder of Sick Holiday, has sent a chilling warning to UK authorities. Conway is saying it’s “only a matter of time” before the disease arrives on British soil. Conroy warned it is inevitable that the plague will spread due to the vast movement of people across the globe. “I believe that it’s 100 percent likely that plague will arrive in the UK once more – it’s just a question of ‘when’, not ‘if’. And it’s not an exaggeration to say that this is a real threat – a ticking time bomb that’s waiting to decimate the world,” Conroy continued. “With the current outbreak still remaining treatable with antibiotics, however, the current risk is low.” | |
| SNL Indian Comedian Silenced for "Offensive Jokes" at Columbia Andy Warhol was only half-right. In the future everyone will be the subject of social justice crybullying for 15 minutes. Also the Left killed comedy. This is what its corpse looks like. Saturday Night Live writer and comedian Nimesh Patel was pulled from the stage by event organizers after telling jokes that were criticized as racist and homophobic during his performance at cultureSHOCK: Reclaim, an event held by Columbia Asian American Alliance on Friday night. Patel, 32, was the first Indian-American writer for SNL, and has since been nominated for an Emmy Award for Outstanding Writing. Patel has previously performed on Late Night with Seth Meyers and opened for comedians such as Chris Rock. During the event, Patel’s performance featured commentary on his experience living in a diverse area of New York City—including a joke about a gay, black man in his neighborhood—which AAA officials deemed inappropriate. Patel joked that being gay cannot be a choice because “no one looks in the mirror and thinks, ‘this black thing is too easy, let me just add another thing to it.’” That's what Columbia snowflakes thought was offensive. I can't imagine what they would have made of Richard Pryor, or at this point even, Chris Rock. It's also a version of a Sammy Davis Jr joke about converting to Judaism. Which is now a hate crime. About 30 minutes into Patel’s set, members of AAA interrupted the performance, denounced his jokes about racial identities and sexual orientation, and provided him with a few moments for closing remarks. Comrades, these jokes you have been listening to are thought crimes! Patel pushed back on the officials’ remarks, and said that while he stood in solidarity with Asian American identities, none of his remarks were offensive, and he was exposing the audience to ideas that would be found “in the real world.” Before he could finish, Patel’s microphone was cut from off-stage, and he proceeded to leave. The real world? This is Columbia. For Sofia Jao, BC ‘22, problems with the performance resided not in the set, but with Patel’s closing remarks. “I really dislike when people who are older say that our generation needs to be exposed to the real world. Obviously the world is not a safe space but just accepting that it’s not and continuing to perpetuate the un-safeness of it… is saying that it can’t be changed,” said Jao. “When older generations say you need to stop being so sensitive, it’s like undermining what our generation is trying to do in accepting others and making it safer.” Patel is 32. I'm sure Patel felt very, like, accepted. | |
| Madagascar Hospitals On High Alert: ‘No One Is Safe’ From The Black Plague Travelers are being warned to keep their distance from areas of Madagascar affected by the bubonic plague. As the outbreak worsens, some doctors are even warning that “no one is safe” from the disease. The outbreak of the black plague in Madagascar has so far killed 97 people, and doctors are warning that it will be continuing to spread and worsen, meaning no one is safe. Health officials say the disease, which contributed to the deaths of more than 50 million people in Europe during the Middle Ages, has spread from rural areas to the more urban areas not usually affected. Hundreds of cases are reported on the tropical island every year, but experts are warning the epidemic is “much more dangerous” than in previous years. Officials have reported infections in 17 of the island nation’s 22 regions since the outbreak started in August. And the number of cases is growing by the day, said Elhadj As Sy, the secretary general of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) as the nation put all hospitals on high alert. The hospitals have also begun implementing preventative measures with attempts to stall the spread of the bacterial infection. The IFRC said it’s introducing the same “safe and dignified” burial methods used in West Africa during the 2014 Ebola epidemic. This helps cut the chain of transmission by preventing further infections through direct contact with infected corpses. Last week, less than 60 people had died and around 600 had been infected. Now, there are 911 confirmed cases in addition to the almost 100 deaths. While cases of bubonic plague occur in Madagascar nearly every year, the much more dangerous and deadly pneumonic plague has never been so prevalent. It arrived earlier than expected this year, and has become much more contagious with it being transmitted from person to person through the air. Pneumonic plague is the most life-threatening form of the infection caused by the manifestation of a Yersinia pestis bacterial infection. Although the black plague can be treated effectively with antibiotics, the incubation time of this bacteria is incredibly short. Death often occurs within 12-24 hours of becoming infected. The bubonic strain of the disease is spread through the bites of infected fleas, whereas the more contagious and deadly pneumonic type is spread through the coughing or sneezing of an infected person. Elhadj As Sy said that overcoming the epidemic would require long-term help, not “just intervening at the peak and then forgetting about it”. Dr. Manitra Rakotoarivony, Madagascar’s director of health promotion, said: “Normally, people who catch the plague live in poor areas, but people in every place in society are catching the disease.” Jimmy Whitworth, professor of International Public Health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, told The Sun: “It has been a long time since we have seen the plague in an urban environment. Although health officials have said that internationally, the threat is still fairly low, they’ve also said no one in Madagascar is safe, including travelers, spiking concerns over a possible global pandemic. | |
| America's Immigration Voice. Years ago numerous Indonesian Christians came illegally to the United States and submitted asylum applications. Those asylum applications were reviewed by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), the immigration courts. The claims were rejected as unsubstantiated and the illegal aliens ordered deported. However, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) declined to enforce those deportation orders, called Final Order Of Removal During the 10 or so years that the cases involving Indonesian Christians were free to remain in the United States, those illegal aliens did not make any effort to appeal their outstanding orders. Then the United States had an election, and the policy of not enforcing those and many other Final Orders of Removal was ended. Then suddenly, those illegal aliens claimed they were being denied an opportunity to file for asylum or were not receiving due process. They filed a case in the Federal courts and were assigned to a Kritarch, Patti Saris, who apparently thinks she runs immigration policy, even after aliens have had their day in court. Saris thinks she can usurp the Constitution of the United States based on her whims regarding immigration policy. Kritarch Patti Saris In her latest excursion into immigration enforcement policy, she decided that illegal aliens can't be held in custody for their return to their home country. BOSTON (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Wednesday ordered the release of an illegal immigrant who is among 47 Indonesians in New Hampshire challenging the Trump administration’s order to deport them. The man, Terry Rombot, had been allowed to remain under the terms of a 2010 deal with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement until this year, when President Donald Trump instructed ICE that all people living in the United States illegally were subject to deportation. [U.S. Judge Frees Indonesian Immigrant Held By Trump Order, by Nate Raymond, Reuters, November 1, 2017] First, let's deal with the misleading reporting. Rombot was not taken into custody based on any ICE policy of deporting all illegal aliens. Rombot was taken into custody because he had an outstanding Final Order Of Removal; that's a big difference and symptomatic of the lies from reporters like Raymond. Saris previously ordered a stay to the deportations. She is currently weighing whether she can order a longer delay to give the affected people time to renew their efforts to gain legal status. Now, with regard to Saris, she has no authority to interfere with the pre-deportation custody of an illegal alien with a Final Order Of Removal. Rombot was taken into custody because he was soon to be deported. There was no issue of Indonesia not accepting him nor of Indonesia not providing a travel document, so there was no question of him being held in custody longer than allowed in the St. Cyr decision that restricted custody of illegal aliens with Final Orders Of Removal who for whatever reason were unlikely to be successfully deported. She still thinks that she can review the underlying decision of the immigration court as well.In fact, Saris' actions appear to more akin to that of the Mexican kritarch Monica Herranz who aided an illegal alien to escape arrest by ICE when she let that illegal alien leave her courtroom through the exit to her judicial chambers. Saris is clearly scheming to help Rombot escape deportation by disappearing into the almost 1 million illegal aliens absconding from Final Orders of Removal Time for Congress to impeach Saris and to remove authority from lesser courts to review immigration law enforcement, detention, and deportation decisions. | |
| America's Immigration Voice. The Kurds have no friends but the mountains, is an old lament . Last week, it must have been very much on Kurdish minds. As their U.S. allies watched, the Kurdish peshmerga fighters were run out of Kirkuk and all the territory they had captured fighting ISIS alongside the Americans. The Iraqi army that ran them out was trained and armed by the United States. The U.S. had warned the Kurds against holding the referendum on independence on Sept. 25, which carried with 92 percent. Iran and Turkey had warned against an independent Kurdistan that could be a magnet for Kurdish minorities in their own countries. But the Iraqi Kurds went ahead. Now they have lost Kirkuk and its oil, and their dream of independence is all but dead. More troubling for America is the new reality revealed by the rout of the peshmerga. Iraq, which George W. Bush and the neocons were going to fashion into a pro-Western democracy and American ally, appears to be as close to Iran as it is to the United States. After 4,500 U.S. dead, scores of thousands wounded and a trillion dollars sunk, our 15-year war in Iraq could end with a Shiite-dominated Baghdad aligned with Tehran. With that grim prospect in mind, Secretary Rex Tillerson said Sunday , "Iranian militias that are in Iraq, now that the fight against ... ISIS is coming to a close ... need to go home. Any foreign fighters in Iraq need to go home." Tillerson meant Iran's Quds Force in Iraq should go home, and the Shiite militia in Iraq should be conscripted into the army. But what if the Baghdad regime of Haider al-Abadi does not agree? What if the Quds Force does not go home to Iran and the Shiite militias that helped retake Kirkuk refuse to enlist in the Iraqi army? Who then enforces Tillerson's demands? Consider what is happening in Syria. The U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, largely Kurdish, just annihilated ISIS in Raqqa and drove 60 miles to seize Syria's largest oil field, al-Omar, from ISIS. The race is now on between the SDF and Bashar Assad's army to secure the border with Iraq. Bottom line: The U.S. goal of crushing the ISIS caliphate is almost attained. But if our victory in the war against ISIS leaves Iran in the catbird seat in Baghdad and Damascus, and its corridor from Tehran to Baghdad, Damascus and Beirut secure, is that really a victory? Do we accept that outcome, pack up and go home? Or do we leave our forces in Syria and Iraq and defy any demand from Assad to vacate his country? Sunday's editorial in The Washington Post, "The Next Mideast Wars," raises the crucial questions now before us. Would President Trump be willing to fight a new war to keep Iran from consolidating its position in Iraq and Syria? Would the American people support such a war with U.S. troops? Would Congress, apparently clueless to the presence of 800 U.S. troops in Niger, authorize a new U.S. war in Syria or Iraq? If Trump and his generals felt our vital interests could not allow Syria and Iraq to drift into the orbit of Iran, where would we find allies for such a fight? If we rely on the Kurds in Syria, we lose NATO ally Turkey, which regards Syria's Kurds as collaborators of the PKK in Turkey, which even the U.S. designates a terrorist organization. The decision as to whether this country should engage in new post-ISIS wars in the Mideast, however, may be taken out of our hands. Saturday, Israel launched new air strikes against gun positions in Syria in retaliation for shells fired into the Golan Heights. Damascus claims that Israel's "terrorist" allies inside Syria fired the shells, to give the IDF an excuse to attack. Why would Israel wish to provoke a war with Syria? Because the Israelis see the outcome of the six-year Syrian civil war as a strategic disaster. Hezbollah, stronger than ever, was part of Assad's victorious coalition. Iran may have secured its land corridor from Tehran to Beirut. Its presence in Syria could now be permanent. And only one force in the region has the power to reverse the present outcome of Syria's civil war--the United States. Bibi Netanyahu knows that if war with Syria breaks out, a clamor will arise in Congress to have the U.S. rush to Israel's aid. "A failure by the United States to defend its allies or promote new political arrangements for (Syria and Iraq) will lead only to more war, the rise of new terrorist threats, and, ultimately, the necessity of more U.S. intervention." Closing its Sunday editorial the Post instructed the president:The interventionist Post is saying: The situation is intolerable. Confront Assad and Iran now, or fight them later. Trump is being led to the Rubicon. If he crosses, he joins Bush II in the history books. Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his books and are available from Amazon.com. Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of His latest book, published May 9, is | |
| How Many Child Rapists Did a Sanctuary City Mayor Tip Off? The price of a sanctuary city for illegal aliens is paid in abused children. Just ask the abused children of Oakland. A sweep of Northern California by federal immigration officials this week, which was partly thwarted when the Oakland mayor sounded the alarm, nabbed a number of illegal immigrants convicted of a variety of serious and violent crimes. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials announced this week that the four-day raid led to the arrest of 232 illegal immigrants in the San Francisco Bay Area. Of those 232, 180 “were either convicted criminals, had been issued a final order of removal and failed to depart the United States, or had been previously removed” from the country and had come back illegally. The arrests included 115 who "had prior felony convictions for serious or violent offenses, such as child sex crimes, weapons charges and assault, or had past convictions for significant or multiple misdemeanors." The numbers might have been greater, but for the intervention of Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, who tweeted out a warning of the impending raid, tipping off others who might have been caught... "I did what I believe was right for my community as well as to protect public safety," Schaaf said Friday, according to NBC Bay Area. "People should be able to live without fear or panic and know their rights and responsibilities as well as their recourses." | |
| French Jewish woman’s killer found unfit to stand trial in 2nd evaluation The suspect in the alleged murder of a Jewish physician in Paris was not responsible for his actions, a second psychiatric evaluation has determined, contradicting an earlier assessment. The president of the CRIF umbrella of French Jewish communities protested the court’s decision to revisit the issue of suitability to stand trial of Kobili Traore, which the court pursued on its own initiative and not at the request of his defense. In January, Traore was determined to be fit to stand trial. He was placed in a psychiatric hospital for weeks after his arrest in the April 2017 killing of Sarah Halimi despite having no history of mental illness. Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up But a judge requested a second series of tests, which determined that the Malian immigrant was not able to stand trial, 20 Minutes reported Wednesday. “We do not understand the determination and procrastination that consistently seeks to turn this killer into a demented person, when he is a murderer whose presumed detention doesn’t even hide his hateful anti-Semitism,” CRIF’s Francis Kalifat wrote. A third evaluation will follow before the court finally reaches a decision. Traore, 28, is accused of torturing and killing Halimi while shouting about Allah and subsequently throwing her off the balcony of her Paris apartment. An aggravated element of a hate crime was added to Traore’s indictment following vocal protests by CRIF, which said that the omission of such charges may have part of a “cover up” by French authorities. Witnesses said Traore called Halimi a “demon” as he was pummeling her. Halimi’s daughter said following the murder that Traore called her, the daughter, a “dirty Jewess” two years before the killing when they passed each other in the building. | |
| MSM Using Kavanaugh Sex Scandal to Distract You From Real Reason He Shouldn’t Be Confirmed In July, President Donald Trump nominated D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Since then, there have been numerous allegations of sexual misconduct levied toward the Justice to be. Whether or not he is guilty of these allegations is left to be determined. However, it does serve as a great distraction from his actual constitution-hating and tyrannical tendencies. While Kavanaugh may be an ostensible supporter of the Second Amendment, his record indicates that he all but cannot stand the Fourth and he’s not that big a fan of the First either. While the allegations against Kavanaugh should certainly be investigated — no matter how they are being spun by the left and the right — he shouldn’t even be in this position based solely on his previous record. But no one is talking about this. Instead, the left and right are involved in a mudslinging orgy of victim shaming and kangaroo courts. take our poll - story continues below Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.? Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.? Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.? * John Bolton Richard Grenell Dina Powell Heather Nauert Ivanka Trump Email * Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. According to this Supreme Court nominee, he thinks it is just fine and dandy for police and government to track you, spy on you, and dig through your personal life — without a warrant. On multiple occasions, Kavanaugh has been the lone voice when it comes supporting the state’s rights to warrantlessly spy on its citizens. As Reason points out, in 2010 he dissented from the D.C. Circuit’s decision not to rehear a case in which a three-judge panel had ruled that police violated a suspected drug dealer’s Fourth Amendment rights when they tracked his movements for a month by attaching a GPS device to his car without a warrant. Kavanaugh claimed that putting a GPS tracking device on a person’s car without first obtaining a warrant was just fine because it didn’t constitute a “search” as defined by the Fourth Amendment. To Kavanaugh, bypassing the courts and tracking an individual without their consent is “constitutional.” In this line of thinking, the Fourth Amendment is not violated even if police trespass on someone’s physical property, or track someone’s cell phone. Luckily, he was the only judge on the panel to think this. In June, the Supreme Court ruled specifically on this case noting that collecting such information actually does constitute a search and therefore requires a warrant. But it gets worse. In 2015, Kavanaugh issued a statement strongly defending the NSA’s phone metadata collection program, arguing that it is “entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment.” To Kavanaugh, sweeping programs that collect information from innocent citizens’ phones are not in conflict with having the right to be free from unlawful search and seizure. Seriously. According to Kavanaugh, the Fourth Amendment allows for searches “without individualized suspicion” when the government demonstrates a “special need” that “outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty.” Exactly what this “special need” is that can constitute a Gestapo like police state surveilling its own citizens is a moving target that has already been proven to be abused over and over again. “The sacrifice of our personal liberty for security is and will forever be a false choice,” Senator Rand Paul said of Kavanaugh’s views on the disposable nature of the constitution. Kavanaugh “has no qualms about applying decades-old case law to the digital age, and he has endorsed the idea of a “counterterrorism exception” to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement,” said Liza Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty and National Security Program. While the left is calling for Kavanaugh to be executed over the sex abuse allegations and the right is attacking the alleged victims, others in Congress who see through the facade and media distraction are trying to draw attention to the fact that Kavanaugh is a champion of the police and surveillance state and an enemy to privacy. Representative Justin Amash does not have a vote on whether or not Kavanaugh will be appointed. However, this hasn’t prevented him from becoming the only Republican to speak out against the real reasons he should not be appointed to Supreme Court. “Privacy advocates must fight,” Amash tweeted. “There are many potential nominees with a conservative record on abortion, guns, and regulations. The only question is will the Senate confirm one who is really bad on the #4thAmendment, when so much is at stake in upcoming digital privacy battles.” Indeed, as technology increases, so does the desire of the state to use it to spy on us. The cases headed to the supreme court in the future over what constitutes an unconstitutional search will undoubtedly be vast in number and detrimental in deciding how much freedom and privacy Americans get to keep. As for if Kavanaugh gets appointed, Amash has some harsh words to those who are blindly supporting him based on party lines: “When Kavanaugh is on the Supreme Court, undermining our #4thAmendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures, it will be too late for others to join me.” Below is a video taken at the Mises Institute of Judge Napolitano explaining the implications of this enemy of the Fourth Amendment on the Supreme Court. Judge Andrew #Napolitano on Brett #Kavanaugh and the #PatriotAct At Mises University, Judge Andrew Napolitano breaks down some of the troubling parts of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's legal career. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/15-5307/15-5307-2015-11-20.htmlLong story short, #Kavanaugh is not a friend to civil liberties or the Constitution. He helped to uphold the UnConstitutional Patriot Act which of course paved the way for the Indefinte Detention provisions of the NDAA. Auburn, Alabama; 16 July 2018. Link to entire video: https://youtu.be/1uTR3qNW70w#StoptheNDAA Posted by People Against the NDAA on Tuesday, September 25, 2018 Article posted with permission from The Free Thought Project | |
| Ramadan Jihad 2018 Death Toll So Far Is 218 Another Ramadan is upon us, and the jihad death toll so far stands at 218 Infidels, murdered in 53 jihad attacks. Once again this year we see that Ramadan is quintessentially the month of jihad. A jihad group explained it back in 2012: “The month of Ramadan is a month of holy war and death for Allah. It is a month for fighting the enemies of Allah and God’s messenger, the Jews and their American facilitators.” Referring to a jihad attack that happened at that time, the message continued: “One of our groups aided by Allah managed to bomb a bus full of Jewish tourists, plunderers of holy lands, after careful tracking. The holy war is not confined to a particular arena and we shall fight the Jews and the Americans until they leave the land of Islam.” In contrast, President Trump issued a statement claiming that “Ramadan reminds us of the richness Muslims add to the religious tapestry of American life.” take our poll - story continues below Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? * Dianne Feinstein Maxine Waters Adam Schiff Chuck Schumer Kamala Harris Kirsten Gillibrand Keith Ellison Cory Booker Email * Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. So which is it? Does Ramadan remind us of “the richness Muslims add to the religious tapestry of American life,” or is Ramadan “a month of calamity everywhere for nonbelievers”? Islam’s core beliefs make it clear that the latter statement is closer to the truth. During Ramadan, Muslims are exhorted to renew and deepen their devotion to Allah. Hence it is a time when they’re supposed to grow more generous and kind toward their fellow Muslims. However, the Qur’an says: “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves” (48:29). If the Ramadan imperative is to become more devout, the Muslim who applies himself diligently to the Ramadan observance will simultaneously become more both merciful to his fellow Muslims and more severe against the unbelievers. Murdering infidels thus doesn’t contradict the spirit of Ramadan; it embodies it. The Kavkaz Center, a website operated by Chechen jihadists, explained in a 2010 article that the idea of Ramadan as a time for warfare against infidels went back to Muhammad’s time: “The month of Ramadan in the life of the Prophet (pbuh) and the righteous ancestors was a month of forthcoming. The greatest battles during the lifetime of the Prophet (pbuh) occurred in this blessed month, the month of jihad, zeal and enthusiasm.” Trump was, unfortunately, following the example of his two immediate predecessors when he claimed that “Ramadan reminds us of the richness Muslims add to the religious tapestry of American life,” and was severely misleading the American people. Ironically, even in doing this he is likely to fail to satisfy Muslims, or anyone. After all, after the Trump White House issued a similar statement last year, the Washington Post ran a lengthy piece in which several Muslims explained why the statement was unsatisfactory to them. Shadi Hamid of the Qatar-funded Brookings Institution declared: “Trump has so rarely recognized that American Muslims even exist, but this offers apparent proof that he is aware of our existence. Great! Putting all that context aside, it’s offensive and pretty much terrible.” Why? Because Trump had the temerity to mention jihad terrorism. Hamid continued: “We, as American Muslims, shouldn’t be defined solely in our relationship to bad things that we have nothing to do with. We’re also normal people who happen to be Muslim and to see us and our history in America so narrowly is plain out offensive.” What is actually offensive is that Hamid would try in this way to absolve the Muslim community of any responsibility to root out jihad terrorist from its midst. There is certain to be more jihad terrorism during this Ramadan, and some of it may be committed by Muslims in the U.S. Hamid, if he cared about this, would be confronting honestly the teachings of Islam that make Ramadan the month of jihad, and working to reform them. Meanwhile, it would be dangerous, suicidal folly for Infidels to pretend that Ramadan is not the month of jihad. And as our Ramadan willful blindness continues, more Infidels will die. Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer | |
| Lawyer: Ammo dealer saw nothing suspicious in Vegas gunman An Arizona man who sold ammunition to the gunman in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history was disturbed that he didn't spot any suspicious signs about his one-time customer, the man's lawyer said Wednesday. Douglas Haig had no reason to believe Stephen Paddock would launch the Oct. 1 shooting in Las Vegas that killed 58 people, attorney Marc Victor said. He said Haig wishes he could have figured out the intentions of Paddock but defends the sale of ammunition as legal. "He wishes there was some clue that could have identified him," Victor said. "There was just nothing." Meanwhile, the coroner in Las Vegas started releasing redacted autopsy records about the 58 people killed in the mass shooting at an outdoor concert. Records relating to Paddock were not being provided. The records were released Wednesday in response to a public records lawsuit filed by The Associated Press and Las Vegas Review-Journal. Haig was named as a "person of interest" in the investigation by mistake Tuesday when court documents were released nearly four months after the shooting. The documents did not disclose why authorities considered Haig a person of interest, and officials haven't said whether he has since been cleared of that designation. Victor said his client sold ammunition to Paddock once and doesn't believe they have communicated since. "He is as connected (to Paddock) as the guy who sold him a hamburger for lunch," Victor said. Las Vegas police and officials with the FBI, U.S. attorney's office in Nevada and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives each declined Wednesday to comment about Haig or the investigation. A law enforcement official told The Associated Press in October that Paddock bought 1,000 rounds of tracer ammunition from a private seller he met at a Phoenix gun show three weeks before the shooting. The official spoke anonymously because they weren't authorized to disclose case information. Tracer bullets contain a pyrotechnic charge that illuminates the path of fired bullets so shooters can see whether their aim is correct. Haig told the AP on Tuesday that he sold unspecified ammunition to Paddock. He also told "CBS This Morning" on Wednesday that he sold more than 700 rounds of ammunition to Paddock. "I couldn't detect anything wrong with this guy," he said of Paddock. The ammunition sale took place at Haig's home in Mesa, because he didn't have all the ammunition on hand that Paddock wanted while at the gun show. Victor said a box that Paddock used to carry ammunition out of Haig's house and bore his client's name was later found in the Las Vegas hotel where the attack was launched. It's unknown whether the ammunition Haig sold to Paddock was used in the attack. The lawyer said the type and quantity of ammunition Paddock bought from his client wasn't unusual. Robert Spitzer, an expert on firearms and the Second Amendment, said by and large there are no restrictions on the amount of ammunition a person can buy, but a large sale of tracer ammunition would certainly be unusual. Only six states in the U.S. have laws requiring that ammunition buyers pass a background check. Arizona and Nevada do not have such a requirement, nor do they mandate that dealers keep a record of ammunition transactions. "If you are in the business of selling anything, you are usually happy to make the sale, and there's nothing that says you need to write down this person's name or report the sale," said Spitzer, who is the chairman of political science at the State University of New York at Cortland. Victor said his client has cooperated with investigators who contacted him within 24 hours of the shooting and has spoken to them probably four or five times, though he hasn't talked to them in months. Haig describes himself as a senior engineer for Honeywell Aerospace in his biography on the professional and social media platform LinkedIn. Records show Haig also owns Specialized Military Ammunition LLC. The company's website says it sold tracer and incendiary ammunition but is now "closed indefinitely." Haig's name was blacked out in the more than 270 pages of search warrant records released by a Nevada judge to the AP, but remained on one page of documents provided to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. The newspaper published the name online. Clark County District Court Judge Elissa Cadish later ordered the full document not be published without redactions, but she acknowledged she couldn't order the newspaper to retract the name. Haig plans to hold a news conference Friday to discuss his interaction with Paddock. Garcia Cano reported from Las Vegas. Associated Press writers Ken Ritter in Las Vegas and Anita Snow in Phoenix contributed to this report. Billeaud reported from Phoenix. | |
| Muslim Dem IT Aides' Family Member Paid $45,000 After Hiring Attorney Specializing In Money Laundering Cases Abid Awan, a member of a family of highly paid Democratic IT aides, was awarded a $45,000 payout in court after he enlisted a high profile attorney specializing in money laundering cases to defeat his stepmother in a bitter dispute over his father’s life insurance policy. Awan removed the stepmother, Samina Gilani, as the longstanding beneficiary of the policy and replaced her with himself around the period of his father’s death, according to legal and insurance papers. The stepmother, Samina Gilani, also claimed in 2017 that Abid’s brother Imran Awan held her in “captivity” and wiretapped and extorted her, weeks after the House Office of Inspector General separately alleged that they made “unauthorized access” to congressmen’s data. take our poll - story continues below Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? * Dianne Feinstein Maxine Waters Adam Schiff Chuck Schumer Kamala Harris Kirsten Gillibrand Keith Ellison Cory Booker Email * Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Abid’s attorney James Bacon mocked the elderly, burka-clad widow, who does not drive and speaks only Uurdu. “She’s a wacko lunatic, what are you going to do?” he said just outside the courtroom doors as the judge took a break to deliberate. The Daily Caller News Foundation was present at the court hearing. Associates and relatives have long accused the family of green. “For the sake of money they would have done anything,” Gilani’s cousin, Syed Ahmed, told the Daily Mail. “There are possibilities that [Imran] or them might have been selling [House] information,” he added. (Syed Ahmed knew Abid well enough to loan him money, according to bankruptcy documents filed by Abid.) The FBI arrested Imran, the eldest of the three Awan brothers, at Dulles Airport trying to fly to Pakistan in July, and prosecutors charged him with fraudulently gathering money the prior winter to wire overseas, possibly in an attempt to flee the investigation into the family’s activities involving House computers. “Based on the suspicious timing of that transaction, Awan and [wife Hina] Alvi likely knew they were under investigation at that time” and “there are strong indications of flight in this case,” prosecutors wrote. Abid was making his own efforts to round up money at the same time via the life insurance policy. On Nov. 16, 2016, the brothers made a video of his bedridden father signing over ownership — but not changing the beneficiary — of his life insurance policy to Abid. Abid then used those rights to replace Gilani with himself as beneficiary. When his father died on Jan. 16, 2017, the youngest Awan brother, Jamal, attested on the death certificate provided to the insurance company that his father was divorced, a statement Gilani’s lawyer said would have kept her from the money. A Virginia court later ruled that Jamal’s statement about his marital status on the certificate was wrong. “Why is that even relevant?” Bacon said of Jamal’s misstatement at the March 7 court date. On Dec. 12, 2016, Imran and Alvi – who was also on the House payroll – began taking a series of withdrawals from banks, some of which federal prosecutors say occurred under fraudulent pretenses. In January 2017, Imran wired nearly $300,000 to Pakistan. Imran wired nearly $300,000 to Pakistan Jan. 18, according to the indictment. On Jan. 17, Abid filed notarized papers using those rights to replace Gilani with himself as beneficiary. The life insurance change’s timing seems to coincide with other moves by Abid to liquidate property and transfer it. Ten weeks prior, on Nov. 1, 2016, Alvi sold a house to Jamal for $620,000, netting another significant profit from the mortgage company. In addition to his primary residence, Abid owned the house where his mother and stepfather lived, and moved in after his death, with Gilani becoming homeless. Abid owned two homes despite a $1 million 2012 bankruptcy that might ordinarily have forced him to sell the second home to pay creditors. At that time, he filed forms “under penalty of perjury” that two houses were needed as “my spouse and I are legally separated under applicable non-bankruptcy law or my spouse and I are living apart other than for the purposes of evading the requirements.” However, his wife, Ukrainian-born Nataliia Sova – who also was on the House payroll – signed as a witness on the 2016 life insurance form as “spouse of Abid,” and they have been photographed living together. Gilani told TheDCNF the brothers were trying to use the life insurance policy as leverage to persuade her to sign a power of attorney giving them access to “assets of my late husband in Pakistan,” which were much more valuable than the $50,000 policy. Americo, the life insurance company, said there was “great doubt” about who the rightful policy holder was, given the allegations of fraud, and sent the decision to the courts to sort out on April 14, two months after the House sargent-at-arms banned the Awans for “suspicious activity.” Gilani alleged the brothers took her financial documents, a laptop, and her husband’s possessions. The only lawyer she could afford, she claimed, was Michael Hadeed, a business attorney who was convicted in 2010 of conspiracy and immigration fraud for helping aliens obtain green cards by setting them up with fake employment relationships. He lost his bar license for two years, according to Virginia State Bar documents. Hadeed did not introduce any evidence to the judge about a pattern of possible fraud by Abid, the timing of the move as it relates to the federal criminal case, or the mental capacity of the dying man to understand paperwork. Hadeed withdrew earlier allegations of fraud and asked the judge to try the case based solely on interpretation of contract language. After court, Hadeed told reporters Bacon had threatened to sue him for defamation. “I don’t want to subject myself to that,” he said outside court. “I don’t want to get myself in a lawsuit over this.” In court, Bacon badgered Hadeed. “Are you going to share any more info with them? I hope not. I hope you learned that lesson,” he said. “You have no control over [Gilani], do you? You’re like, talking to a wall,” he said of Gilani. Hadeed said three different signatures from Abid on financial documents did not match, and put a defiant Abid on the witness stand. Hadeed: Why do your signatures look different? Abid: My signatures are not very consistent, I’m just a human being… Hadeed: You were aware you were changing beneficiary from your father’s spouse to yourself? Abid: That was my father’s request… Hadeed: You’re not answering the question. Abid: I’m not very smart, so it takes a while sometimes… Judge: I don’t understand why the witness is having such trouble with the question. Your job is to answer the question. In court documents, Gilani alleged, “while he was admitted in hospital my telephone conversations were taped and some other recording devices were also installed/planted in my house … Imran Awan showed up and threatened me for me calling the police. [Imran] threatened that he is very powerful and if I ever call the police again [he] will do harm to me.” She said that Imran eventually agreed to remove the listening devices and did so in front of her. Based on Hadeed’s narrow legal argument about the life insurance contract’s language, the judge ruled that, “The son as the owner of the policy has the absolute right to change the beneficiary.” After Gilani retained a lawyer, Bacon had offered a settlement where they’d split the money, but Gilani declined it. The court awarded Abid the $50,000 life insurance payout, minus $5,000 that the insurance company took for its expenses in litigating the fraud allegations. “You should have taken the settlement. Now she’s not getting a penny,” Bacon said in court. “You’re not getting anything.” Gilani said after court that her conscience didn’t allow her to settle. “I didn’t do the deal because they had been adopting bad behaviors. I cannot agree to that. It wasn’t about the money,” she said. Article posted with permission from The Daily Caller News Foundation | |
| Former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States Accuses Pope of McCarrick Cover-up, Calls on Francis to Resign In this tragic moment for the Church in various parts of the world — the United States, Chile, Honduras, Australia, etc. — bishops have a very grave responsibility. I am thinking in particular of the United States of America, where I was sent as Apostolic Nuncio by Pope Benedict XVI on October 19, 2011, the memorial feast of the First North American Martyrs. The Bishops of the United States are called, and I with them, to follow the example of these first martyrs who brought the Gospel to the lands of America, to be credible witnesses of the immeasurable love of Christ, the Way, the Truth and the Life. Also, as this is an unprecedented moment in papal history, perhaps the unprecedented step of recalling Benedict XVI to the Chair of St. Peter should also be considered sooner rather than later, before this crisis gets any more out-of-control than it already is. May God save His Church MJM So serious is the cover-up that for the good of the Church and protection of the faithful, Archbishop Vigano has called on Pope Francis to resign. But before Francis resigns, we the Catholic faithful demand that he also remove from the College of Cardinals those who conspired even before the 2013 conclave to make Jorge Mario Bergoglio pope come hell or high water. He and the St. Gallen Group know exactly who they are. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's 11-page statement, released to the National Catholic Register, accuses Pope Francis of covering for McCarrick, ignoring the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on McCarrick, and also of making McCarrick a trusted counselor who became Francis's "kingmaker" when it came to American appointments and was highly instrumental in the Pope's decision to elevate far-Left bishops such as Blase Cupich of Chicago and Joseph Tobin of Newark to the College of Cardinals. Remnant Editor's Note: This could well mark the beginning of the end of the disastrous pontificate of Pope Francis. The former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused Francis of repealing sanctions imposed by Pope Benedict XVI on then-Cardinal McCarrick for sexual abuse. This is a charge most serious, perhaps without precedent in modern times. Bishops and priests, abusing their authority, have committed horrendous crimes to the detriment of their faithful, minors, innocent victims, and young men eager to offer their lives to the Church, or by their silence have not prevented that such crimes continue to be perpetrated. To restore the beauty of holiness to the face of the Bride of Christ, which is terribly disfigured by so many abominable crimes, and if we truly want to free the Church from the fetid swamp into which she has fallen, we must have the courage to tear down the culture of secrecy and publicly confess the truths we have kept hidden. We must tear down the conspiracy of silence with which bishops and priests have protected themselves at the expense of their faithful, a conspiracy of silence that in the eyes of the world risks making the Church look like a sect, a conspiracy of silence not so dissimilar from the one that prevails in the mafia. “Whatever you have said in the dark ... shall be proclaimed from the housetops” (Lk. 12:3). I had always believed and hoped that the hierarchy of the Church could find within itself the spiritual resources and strength to tell the whole truth, to amend and to renew itself. That is why, even though I had repeatedly been asked to do so, I always avoided making statements to the media, even when it would have been my right to do so, in order to defend myself against the calumnies published about me, even by high-ranking prelates of the Roman Curia. But now that the corruption has reached the very top of the Church’s hierarchy, my conscience dictates that I reveal those truths regarding the heart-breaking case of the Archbishop Emeritus of Washington, D.C., Theodore McCarrick, which I came to know in the course of the duties entrusted to me by St. John Paul II, as Delegate for Pontifical Representations, from 1998 to 2009, and by Pope Benedict XVI, as Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America, from October 19, 2011 until end of May 2016. As Delegate for Pontifical Representations in the Secretariat of State, my responsibilities were not limited to the Apostolic Nunciatures, but also included the staff of the Roman Curia (hires, promotions, informational processes on candidates to the episcopate, etc.) and the examination of delicate cases, including those regarding cardinals and bishops, that were entrusted to the Delegate by the Cardinal Secretary of State or by the Substitute of the Secretariat of State. To dispel suspicions insinuated in several recent articles, I will immediately say that the Apostolic Nuncios in the United States, Gabriel Montalvo and Pietro Sambi, both prematurely deceased, did not fail to inform the Holy See immediately, as soon as they learned of Archbishop McCarrick’s gravely immoral behavior with seminarians and priests. Indeed, according to what Nuncio Pietro Sambi wrote, Father Boniface Ramsey, O.P.’s letter, dated November 22, 2000, was written at the request of the late Nuncio Montalvo. In the letter, Father Ramsey, who had been a professor at the diocesan seminary in Newark from the end of the ’80s until 1996, affirms that there was a recurring rumor in the seminary that the Archbishop “shared his bed with seminarians,” inviting five at a time to spend the weekend with him at his beach house. And he added that he knew a certain number of seminarians, some of whom were later ordained priests for the Archdiocese of Newark, who had been invited to this beach house and had shared a bed with the Archbishop. The office that I held at the time was not informed of any measure taken by the Holy See after those charges were brought by Nuncio Montalvo at the end of 2000, when Cardinal Angelo Sodano was Secretary of State. Likewise, Nuncio Sambi transmitted to the Cardinal Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone, an Indictment Memorandum against McCarrick by the priest Gregory Littleton of the diocese of Charlotte, who was reduced to the lay state for a violation of minors, together with two documents from the same Littleton, in which he recounted his tragic story of sexual abuse by the then-Archbishop of Newark and several other priests and seminarians. The Nuncio added that Littleton had already forwarded his Memorandum to about twenty people, including civil and ecclesiastical judicial authorities, police and lawyers, in June 2006, and that it was therefore very likely that the news would soon be made public. He therefore called for a prompt intervention by the Holy See. In writing up a memo[1] on these documents that were entrusted to me, as Delegate for Pontifical Representations, on December 6, 2006, I wrote to my superiors, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone and the Substitute Leonardo Sandri, that the facts attributed to McCarrick by Littleton were of such gravity and vileness as to provoke bewilderment, a sense of disgust, deep sorrow and bitterness in the reader, and that they constituted the crimes of seducing, requesting depraved acts of seminarians and priests, repeatedly and simultaneously with several people, derision of a young seminarian who tried to resist the Archbishop’s seductions in the presence of two other priests, absolution of the accomplices in these depraved acts, sacrilegious celebration of the Eucharist with the same priests after committing such acts. In my memo, which I delivered on that same December 6, 2006 to my direct superior, the Substitute Leonardo Sandri, I proposed the following considerations and course of action to my superiors: - Given that it seemed a new scandal of particular gravity, as it regarded a cardinal, was going to be added to the many scandals for the Church in the United States, - and that, since this matter had to do with a cardinal, and according to can. 1405 § 1, No. 2˚, “ipsius Romani Pontificis dumtaxat ius est iudicandi”; - I proposed that an exemplary measure be taken against the Cardinal that could have a medicinal function, to prevent future abuses against innocent victims and alleviate the very serious scandal for the faithful, who despite everything continued to love and believe in the Church. I added that it would be salutary if, for once, ecclesiastical authority would intervene before the civil authorities and, if possible, before the scandal had broken out in the press. This could have restored some dignity to a Church so sorely tried and humiliated by so many abominable acts on the part of some pastors. If this were done, the civil authority would no longer have to judge a cardinal, but a pastor with whom the Church had already taken appropriate measures to prevent the cardinal from abusing his authority and continuing to destroy innocent victims. My memo of December 6, 2006 was kept by my superiors, and was never returned to me with any actual decision by the superiors on this matter. Subsequently, around April 21-23, 2008, the Statement for Pope Benedict XVI about the pattern of sexual abuse crisis in the United States, by Richard Sipe, was published on the internet, at richardsipe.com. On April 24, it was passed on by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal William Levada, to the Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone. It was delivered to me one month later, on May 24, 2008. The following day, I delivered a new memo to the new Substitute, Fernando Filoni, which included my previous one of December 6, 2006. In it, I summarized Richard Sipe’s document, which ended with this respectful and heartfelt appeal to Pope Benedict XVI: “I approach Your Holiness with due reverence, but with the same intensity that motivated Peter Damian to lay out before your predecessor, Pope Leo IX, a description of the condition of the clergy during his time. The problems he spoke of are similar and as great now in the United States as they were then in Rome. If Your Holiness requests, I will personally submit to you documentation of that about which I have spoken.” I ended my memo by repeating to my superiors that I thought it was necessary to intervene as soon as possible by removing the cardinal’s hat from Cardinal McCarrick and that he should be subjected to the sanctions established by the Code of Canon Law, which also provide for reduction to the lay state. This second memo of mine was also never returned to the Personnel Office, and I was greatly dismayed at my superiors for the inconceivable absence of any measure against the Cardinal, and for the continuing lack of any communication with me since my first memo in December 2006. But finally I learned with certainty, through Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, then-Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, that Richard Sipe’s courageous and meritorious Statement had had the desired result. Pope Benedict had imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis: the Cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living, he was forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance. I do not know when Pope Benedict took these measures against McCarrick, whether in 2009 or 2010, because in the meantime I had been transferred to the Governorate of Vatican City State, just as I do not know who was responsible for this incredible delay. I certainly do not believe it was Pope Benedict, who as Cardinal had repeatedly denounced the corruption present in the Church, and in the first months of his pontificate had already taken a firm stand against the admission into seminary of young men with deep homosexual tendencies. I believe it was due to the Pope’s first collaborator at the time, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, who notoriously favored promoting homosexuals into positions of responsibility, and was accustomed to managing the information he thought appropriate to convey to the Pope. In any case, what is certain is that Pope Benedict imposed the above canonical sanctions on McCarrick and that they were communicated to him by the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Pietro Sambi. Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, then first Counsellor of the Nunciature in Washington and Chargé d'Affaires a.i. after the unexpected death of Nuncio Sambi in Baltimore, told me when I arrived in Washington — and he is ready to testify to it— about a stormy conversation, lasting over an hour, that Nuncio Sambi had with Cardinal McCarrick whom he had summoned to the Nunciature. Monsignor Lantheaume told me that “the Nuncio’s voice could be heard all the way out in the corridor.” Pope Benedict’s same dispositions were then also communicated to me by the new Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, in November 2011, in a conversation before my departure for Washington, and were included among the instructions of the same Congregation to the new Nuncio. In turn, I repeated them to Cardinal McCarrick at my first meeting with him at the Nunciature. The Cardinal, muttering in a barely comprehensible way, admitted that he had perhaps made the mistake of sleeping in the same bed with some seminarians at his beach house, but he said this as if it had no importance. The faithful insistently wonder how it was possible for him to be appointed to Washington, and as Cardinal, and they have every right to know who knew, and who covered up his grave misdeeds. It is therefore my duty to reveal what I know about this, beginning with the Roman Curia. Cardinal Angelo Sodano was Secretary of State until September 2006: all information was communicated to him. In November 2000, Nunzio Montalvo sent him his report, passing on to him the aforementioned letter from Father Boniface Ramsey in which he denounced the serious abuses committed by McCarrick. It is known that Sodano tried to cover up the Father Maciel scandal to the end. He even removed the Nuncio in Mexico City, Justo Mullor, who refused to be an accomplice in his scheme to cover Maciel, and in his place appointed Sandri, then-Nuncio to Venezuela, who was willing to collaborate in the cover-up. Sodano even went so far as to issue a statement to the Vatican press office in which a falsehood was affirmed, that is, that Pope Benedict had decided that the Maciel case should be considered closed. Benedict reacted, despite Sodano’s strenuous defense, and Maciel was found guilty and irrevocably condemned. Was McCarrick’s appointment to Washington and as Cardinal the work of Sodano, when John Paul II was already very ill? We are not given to know. However, it is legitimate to think so, but I do not think he was the only one responsible for this. McCarrick frequently went to Rome and made friends everywhere, at all levels of the Curia. If Sodano had protected Maciel, as seems certain, there is no reason why he wouldn’t have done so for McCarrick, who according to many had the financial means to influence decisions. His nomination to Washington was opposed by then-Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re. At the Nunciature in Washington there is a note, written in his hand, in which Cardinal Re disassociates himself from the appointment and states that McCarrick was 14th on the list for Washington. Nuncio Sambi’s report, with all the attachments, was sent to Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, as Secretary of State. My two above-mentioned memos of December 6, 2006 and May 25, 2008, were also presumably handed over to him by the Substitute. As already mentioned, the Cardinal had no difficulty in insistently presenting for the episcopate candidates known to be active homosexuals — I cite only the well-known case of Vincenzo de Mauro, who was appointed Archbishop-Bishop of Vigevano and later removed because he was undermining his seminarians — and in filtering and manipulating the information he conveyed to Pope Benedict. Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the current Secretary of State, was also complicit in covering up the misdeeds of McCarrick who had, after the election of Pope Francis, boasted openly of his travels and missions to various continents. In April 2014, the Washington Times had a front page report on McCarrick’s trip to the Central African Republic, and on behalf of the State Department no less. As Nuncio to Washington, I wrote to Cardinal Parolin asking him if the sanctions imposed on McCarrick by Pope Benedict were still valid. Ça va sans dire that my letter never received any reply! The same can be said for Cardinal William Levada, former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, for Cardinals Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, Lorenzo Baldisseri, former Secretary of the same Congregation for Bishops, and Archbishop Ilson de Jesus Montanari, current Secretary of the same Congregation. They were all aware by reason of their office of the sanctions imposed by Pope Benedict on McCarrick. Cardinals Leonardo Sandri, Fernando Filoni and Angelo Becciu, as Substitutes of the Secretariat of State, knew in every detail the situation regarding Cardinal McCarrick. Nor could Cardinals Giovanni Lajolo and Dominique Mamberti have failed to know. As Secretaries for Relations with States, they participated several times a week in collegial meetings with the Secretary of State. As far as the Roman Curia is concerned, for the moment I will stop here, even if the names of other prelates in the Vatican are well known, even some very close to Pope Francis, such as Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio and Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, who belong to the homosexual current in favor of subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality, a current already denounced in 1986 by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then-Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. Cardinals Edwin Frederick O’Brien and Renato Raffaele Martino also belong to the same current, albeit with a different ideology. Others belonging to this current even reside at the Domus Sanctae Marthae. Now to the United States. Obviously, the first to have been informed of the measures taken by Pope Benedict was McCarrick’s successor in Washington See, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, whose situation is now completely compromised by the recent revelations regarding his behavior as Bishop of Pittsburgh. It is absolutely unthinkable that Nunzio Sambi, who was an extremely responsible person, loyal, direct and explicit in his way of being (a true son of Romagna) did not speak to him about it. In any case, I myself brought up the subject with Cardinal Wuerl on several occasions, and I certainly didn’t need to go into detail because it was immediately clear to me that he was fully aware of it. I also remember in particular the fact that I had to draw his attention to it, because I realized that in an archdiocesan publication, on the back cover in color, there was an announcement inviting young men who thought they had a vocation to the priesthood to a meeting with Cardinal McCarrick. I immediately phoned Cardinal Wuerl, who expressed his surprise to me, telling me that he knew nothing about that announcement and that he would cancel it. If, as he now continues to state, he knew nothing of the abuses committed by McCarrick and the measures taken by Pope Benedict, how can his answer be explained? His recent statements that he knew nothing about it, even though at first he cunningly referred to compensation for the two victims, are absolutely laughable. The Cardinal lies shamelessly and prevails upon his Chancellor, Monsignor Antonicelli, to lie as well. Cardinal Wuerl also clearly lied on another occasion. Following a morally unacceptable event authorized by the academic authorities of Georgetown University, I brought it to the attention of its President, Dr. John DeGioia, sending him two subsequent letters. Before forwarding them to the addressee, so as to handle things properly, I personally gave a copy of them to the Cardinal with an accompanying letter I had written. The Cardinal told me that he knew nothing about it. However, he failed to acknowledge receipt of my two letters, contrary to what he customarily did. I subsequently learned that the event at Georgetown had taken place for seven years. But the Cardinal knew nothing about it! Cardinal Wuerl, well aware of the continuous abuses committed by Cardinal McCarrick and the sanctions imposed on him by Pope Benedict, transgressing the Pope’s order, also allowed him to reside at a seminary in Washington D.C. In doing so, he put other seminarians at risk. Bishop Paul Bootkoski, emeritus of Metuchen, and Archbishop John Myers, emeritus of Newark, covered up the abuses committed by McCarrick in their respective dioceses and compensated two of his victims. They cannot deny it and they must be interrogated in order to reveal every circumstance and all responsibility regarding this matter. Cardinal Kevin Farrell, who was recently interviewed by the media, also said that he didn’t have the slightest idea about the abuses committed by McCarrick. Given his tenure in Washington, Dallas and now Rome, I think no one can honestly believe him. I don’t know if he was ever asked if he knew about Maciel’s crimes. If he were to deny this, would anybody believe him given that he occupied positions of responsibility as a member of the Legionaries of Christ? Regarding Cardinal Sean O’Malley, I would simply say that his latest statements on the McCarrick case are disconcerting, and have totally obscured his transparency and credibility. * * * My conscience requires me also to reveal facts that I have experienced personally, concerning Pope Francis, that have a dramatic significance, which as Bishop, sharing the collegial responsibility of all the bishops for the universal Church, do not allow me to remain silent, and that I state here, ready to reaffirm them under oath by calling on God as my witness. In the last months of his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI had convened a meeting of all the apostolic nuncios in Rome, as Paul VI and St. John Paul II had done on several occasions. The date set for the audience with the Pope was Friday, June 21, 2013. Pope Francis kept this commitment made by his predecessor. Of course I also came to Rome from Washington. It was my first meeting with the new Pope elected only three months prior, after the resignation of Pope Benedict. On the morning of Thursday, June 20, 2013, I went to the Domus Sanctae Marthae, to join my colleagues who were staying there. As soon as I entered the hall I met Cardinal McCarrick, who wore the red-trimmed cassock. I greeted him respectfully as I had always done. He immediately said to me, in a tone somewhere between ambiguous and triumphant: “The Pope received me yesterday, tomorrow I am going to China.” At the time I knew nothing of his long friendship with Cardinal Bergoglio and of the important part he had played in his recent election, as McCarrick himself would later reveal in a lecture at Villanova University and in an interview with the National Catholic Reporter. Nor had I ever thought of the fact that he had participated in the preliminary meetings of the recent conclave, and of the role he had been able to have as a cardinal elector in the 2005 conclave. Therefore I did not immediately grasp the meaning of the encrypted message that McCarrick had communicated to me, but that would become clear to me in the days immediately following. The next day the audience with Pope Francis took place. After his address, which was partly read and partly delivered off the cuff, the Pope wished to greet all the nuncios one by one. In single file, I remember that I was among the last. When it was my turn, I just had time to say to him, “I am the Nuncio to the United States.” He immediately assailed me with a tone of reproach, using these words: “The Bishops in the United States must not be ideologized! They must be shepherds!”Of course I was not in a position to ask for explanations about the meaning of his words and the aggressive way in which he had upbraided me. I had in my hand a book in Portuguese that Cardinal O’Malley had sent me for the Pope a few days earlier, telling me “so he could go over his Portuguese before going to Rio for World Youth Day.” I handed it to him immediately, and so freed myself from that extremely disconcerting and embarrassing situation. At the end of the audience the Pope announced: “Those of you who are still in Rome next Sunday are invited to concelebrate with me at the Domus Sanctae Marthae.” I naturally thought of staying on to clarify as soon as possible what the Pope intended to tell me. On Sunday June 23, before the concelebration with the Pope, I asked Monsignor Ricca, who as the person in charge of the house helped us put on the vestments, if he could ask the Pope if he could receive me sometime in the following week. How could I have returned to Washington without having clarified what the Pope wanted of me? At the end of Mass, while the Pope was greeting the few lay people present, Monsignor Fabian Pedacchio, his Argentine secretary, came to me and said: “The Pope told me to ask if you are free now!” Naturally, I replied that I was at the Pope’s disposal and that I thanked him for receiving me immediately. The Pope took me to the first floor in his apartment and said: “We have 40 minutes before the Angelus.” I began the conversation, asking the Pope what he intended to say to me with the words he had addressed to me when I greeted him the previous Friday. And the Pope, in a very different, friendly, almost affectionate tone, said to me: “Yes, the Bishops in the United States must not be ideologized, they must not be right-wing like the Archbishop of Philadelphia, (the Pope did not give me the name of the Archbishop) they must be shepherds; and they must not be left-wing — and he added, raising both arms — and when I say left-wing I mean homosexual.” Of course, the logic of the correlation between being left-wing and being homosexual escaped me, but I added nothing else. Immediately after, the Pope asked me in a deceitful way: “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” I answered him with complete frankness and, if you want, with great naiveté: “Holy Father, I don’t know if you know Cardinal McCarrick, but if you ask the Congregation for Bishops there is a dossier this thick about him. He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.” The Pope did not make the slightest comment about those very grave words of mine and did not show any expression of surprise on his face, as if he had already known the matter for some time, and he immediately changed the subject. But then, what was the Pope’s purpose in asking me that question: “What is Cardinal McCarrick like?” He clearly wanted to find out if I was an ally of McCarrick or not. Back in Washington everything became very clear to me, thanks also to a new event that occurred only a few days after my meeting with Pope Francis. When the new Bishop Mark Seitz took possession of the Diocese of El Paso on July 9, 2013, I sent the first Counsellor, Monsignor Jean-François Lantheaume, while I went to Dallas that same day for an international meeting on Bioethics. When he got back, Monsignor Lantheaume told me that in El Paso he had met Cardinal McCarrick who, taking him aside, told him almost the same words that the Pope had said to me in Rome: “the Bishops in the United States must not be ideologized, they must not be right-wing, they must be shepherds….” I was astounded! It was therefore clear that the words of reproach that Pope Francis had addressed to me on June 21, 2013 had been put into his mouth the day before by Cardinal McCarrick. Also the Pope’s mention “not like the Archbishop of Philadelphia” could be traced to McCarrick, because there had been a strong disagreement between the two of them about the admission to Communion of pro-abortion politicians. In his communication to the bishops, McCarrick had manipulated a letter of then-Cardinal Ratzinger who prohibited giving them Communion. Indeed, I also knew how certain Cardinals such as Mahony, Levada and Wuerl, were closely linked to McCarrick; they had opposed the most recent appointments made by Pope Benedict, for important posts such as Philadelphia, Baltimore, Denver and San Francisco. Not happy with the trap he had set for me on June 23, 2013, when he asked me about McCarrick, only a few months later, in the audience he granted me on October 10, 2013, Pope Francis set a second one for me, this time concerning a second of his protégés, Cardinal Donald Wuerl. He asked me: “What is Cardinal Wuerl like, is he good or bad?” I replied, “Holy Father, I will not tell you if he is good or bad, but I will tell you two facts.” They are the ones I have already mentioned above, which concern Wuerl’s pastoral carelessness regarding the aberrant deviations at Georgetown University and the invitation by the Archdiocese of Washington to young aspirants to the priesthood to a meeting with McCarrick! Once again the Pope did not show any reaction. It was also clear that, from the time of Pope Francis’s election, McCarrick, now free from all constraints, had felt free to travel continuously, to give lectures and interviews. In a team effort with Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga, he had become the kingmaker for appointments in the Curia and the United States, and the most listened to advisor in the Vatican for relations with the Obama administration. This is how one explains that, as members of the Congregation for Bishops, the Pope replaced Cardinal Burke with Wuerl and immediately appointed Cupich right after he was made a cardinal. With these appointments the Nunciature in Washington was now out of the picture in the appointment of bishops. In addition, he appointed the Brazilian Ilson de Jesus Montanari — the great friend of his private Argentine secretary Fabian Pedacchio — as Secretary of the same Congregation for Bishops and Secretary of the College of Cardinals, promoting him in one single leap from a simple official of that department to Archbishop Secretary. Something unprecedented for such an important position! The appointments of Blase Cupich to Chicago and Joseph W. Tobin to Newark were orchestrated by McCarrick, Maradiaga and Wuerl, united by a wicked pact of abuses by the first, and at least of coverup of abuses by the other two. Their names were not among those presented by the Nunciature for Chicago and Newark. Regarding Cupich, one cannot fail to note his ostentatious arrogance, and the insolence with which he denies the evidence that is now obvious to all: that 80% of the abuses found were committed against young adults by homosexuals who were in a relationship of authority over their victims. During the speech he gave when he took possession of the Chicago See, at which I was present as a representative of the Pope, Cupich quipped that one certainly should not expect the new Archbishop to walk on water. Perhaps it would be enough for him to be able to remain with his feet on the ground and not try to turn reality upside-down, blinded by his pro-gay ideology, as he stated in a recent interview with America Magazine. Extolling his particular expertise in the matter, having been President of the Committee on Protection of Children and Young People of the USCCB, he asserted that the main problem in the crisis of sexual abuse by clergy is not homosexuality, and that affirming this is only a way of diverting attention from the real problem which is clericalism. In support of this thesis, Cupich “oddly” made reference to the results of research carried out at the height of the sexual abuse of minors crisis in the early 2000s, while he “candidly” ignored that the results of that investigation were totally denied by the subsequent Independent Reports by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2004 and 2011, which concluded that, in cases of sexual abuse, 81% of the victims were male. In fact, Father Hans Zollner, S.J., Vice-Rector of the Pontifical Gregorian University, President of the Centre for Child Protection, and Member of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, recently told the newspaper La Stampa that “in most cases it is a question of homosexual abuse.” The appointment of McElroy in San Diego was also orchestrated from above, with an encrypted peremptory order to me as Nuncio, by Cardinal Parolin: “Reserve the See of San Diego for McElroy.” McElroy was also well aware of McCarrick’s abuses, as can be seen from a letter sent to him by Richard Sipe on July 28, 2016. These characters are closely associated with individuals belonging in particular to the deviated wing of the Society of Jesus, unfortunately today a majority, which had already been a cause of serious concern to Paul VI and subsequent pontiffs. We need only consider Father Robert Drinan, S.J., who was elected four times to the House of Representatives, and was a staunch supporter of abortion; or Father Vincent O’Keefe, S.J., one of the principal promoters of The Land O’Lakes Statement of 1967, which seriously compromised the Catholic identity of universities and colleges in the United States. It should be noted that McCarrick, then President of the Catholic University of Puerto Rico, also participated in that inauspicious undertaking which was so harmful to the formation of the consciences of American youth, closely associated as it was with the deviated wing of the Jesuits. Father James Martin, S.J., acclaimed by the people mentioned above, in particular Cupich, Tobin, Farrell and McElroy, appointed Consultor of the Secretariat for Communications, well-known activist who promotes the LGBT agenda, chosen to corrupt the young people who will soon gather in Dublin for the World Meeting of Families, is nothing but a sad recent example of that deviated wing of the Society of Jesus. Pope Francis has repeatedly asked for total transparency in the Church and for bishops and faithful to act with parrhesia. The faithful throughout the world also demand this of him in an exemplary manner. He must honestly state when he first learned about the crimes committed by McCarrick, who abused his authority with seminarians and priests. In any case, the Pope learned about it from me on June 23, 2013 and continued to cover for him. He did not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him and made him his trusted counselor along with Maradiaga. The latter [Maradiaga] is so confident of the Pope’s protection that he can dismiss as “gossip” the heartfelt appeals of dozens of his seminarians, who found the courage to write to him after one of them tried to commit suicide over homosexual abuse in the seminary. By now the faithful have well understood Maradiaga’s strategy: insult the victims to save himself, lie to the bitter end to cover up a chasm of abuses of power, of mismanagement in the administration of Church property, and of financial disasters even against close friends, as in the case of the Ambassador of Honduras Alejandro Valladares, former Dean of the Diplomatic Corps to the Holy See. In the case of the former Auxiliary Bishop Juan José Pineda, after the article published in the [Italian] weekly L’Espresso last February, Maradiaga stated in the newspaper Avvenire: “It was my auxiliary bishop Pineda who asked for the visitation, so as to ‘clear’ his name after being subjected to much slander.” Now, regarding Pineda the only thing that has been made public is that his resignation has simply been accepted, thus making any possible responsibility of his and Maradiaga vanish into nowhere. In the name of the transparency so hailed by the Pope, the report that the Visitator, Argentine bishop Alcides Casaretto, delivered more than a year ago only and directly to the Pope, must be made public. Finally, the recent appointment as Substitute of Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra is also connected with Honduras, that is, with Maradiaga. From 2003 to 2007 Peña Parra worked as Counsellor at the Tegucigalpa Nunciature. As Delegate for Pontifical Representations I received worrisome information about him. In Honduras, a scandal as huge as the one in Chile is about to be repeated. The Pope defends his man, Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga, to the bitter end, as he had done in Chile with Bishop Juan de la Cruz Barros, whom he himself had appointed Bishop of Osorno against the advice of the Chilean Bishops. First he insulted the abuse victims. Then, only when he was forced by the media, and a revolt by the Chilean victims and faithful, did he recognize his error and apologize, while stating that he had been misinformed, causing a disastrous situation for the Church in Chile, but continuing to protect the two Chilean Cardinals Errazuriz and Ezzati. Even in the tragic affair of McCarrick, Pope Francis’s behavior was no different. He knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator. Although he knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end; indeed, he made McCarrick’s advice his own, which was certainly not inspired by sound intentions and for love of the Church. It was only when he was forced by the report of the abuse of a minor, again on the basis of media attention, that he took action [regarding McCarrick] to save his image in the media. Now in the United States a chorus of voices is rising especially from the lay faithful, and has recently been joined by several bishops and priests, asking that all those who, by their silence, covered up McCarrick’s criminal behavior, or who used him to advance their career or promote their intentions, ambitions and power in the Church, should resign. But this will not be enough to heal the situation of extremely grave immoral behavior by the clergy: bishops and priests. A time of conversion and penance must be proclaimed. The virtue of chastity must be recovered in the clergy and in seminaries. Corruption in the misuse of the Church’s resources and of the offerings of the faithful must be fought against. The seriousness of homosexual behavior must be denounced. The homosexual networks present in the Church must be eradicated, as Janet Smith, Professor of Moral Theology at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, recently wrote. “The problem of clergy abuse,” she wrote, “cannot be resolved simply by the resignation of some bishops, and even less so by bureaucratic directives. The deeper problem lies in homosexual networks within the clergy which must be eradicated.” These homosexual networks, which are now widespread in many dioceses, seminaries, religious orders, etc., act under the concealment of secrecy and lies with the power of octopus tentacles, and strangle innocent victims and priestly vocations, and are strangling the entire Church. I implore everyone, especially Bishops, to speak up in order to defeat this conspiracy of silence that is so widespread, and to report the cases of abuse they know about to the media and civil authorities. Let us heed the most powerful message that St. John Paul II left us as an inheritance:Do not be afraid! Do not be afraid! In his 2008 homily on the Feast of the Epiphany, Pope Benedict reminded us that the Father’s plan of salvation had been fully revealed and realized in the mystery of Christ’s death and resurrection, but it needs to be welcomed in human history, which is always a history of fidelity on God’s part and unfortunately also of infidelity on the part of us men. The Church, the depositary of the blessing of the New Covenant, signed in the blood of the Lamb, is holy but made up of sinners, as Saint Ambrose wrote: the Church is “immaculata ex maculatis,” she is holy and spotless even though, in her earthly journey, she is made up of men stained with sin. I want to recall this indefectible truth of the Church’s holiness to the many people who have been so deeply scandalized by the abominable and sacrilegious behavior of the former Archbishop of Washington, Theodore McCarrick; by the grave, disconcerting and sinful conduct of Pope Francis and by the conspiracy of silence of so many pastors, and who are tempted to abandon the Church, disfigured by so many ignominies. At the Angelus on Sunday, August 12, 2018 Pope Francis said these words: “Everyone is guilty for the good he could have done and did not do ... If we do not oppose evil, we tacitly feed it. We need to intervene where evil is spreading; for evil spreads where daring Christians who oppose evil with good are lacking.” If this is rightly to be considered a serious moral responsibility for every believer, how much graver is it for the Church’s supreme pastor, who in the case of McCarrick not only did not oppose evil but associated himself in doing evil with someone he knew to be deeply corrupt. He followed the advice of someone he knew well to be a pervert, thus multiplying exponentially with his supreme authority the evil done by McCarrick. And how many other evil pastors is Francis still continuing to prop up in their active destruction of the Church! Francis is abdicating the mandate which Christ gave to Peter to confirm the brethren. Indeed, by his action he has divided them, led them into error, and encouraged the wolves to continue to tear apart the sheep of Christ’s flock. In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church, he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them. Even in dismay and sadness over the enormity of what is happening, let us not lose hope! We well know that the great majority of our pastors live their priestly vocation with fidelity and dedication. It is in moments of great trial that the Lord’s grace is revealed in abundance and makes His limitless mercy available to all; but it is granted only to those who are truly repentant and sincerely propose to amend their lives. This is a favorable time for the Church to confess her sins, to convert, and to do penance. Let us all pray for the Church and for the Pope, let us remember how many times he has asked us to pray for him! Let us all renew faith in the Church our Mother: “I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church!” Christ will never abandon His Church! He generated her in His Blood and continually revives her with His Spirit! Mary, Mother of the Church, pray for us! Mary, Virgin and Queen, Mother of the King of glory, pray for us! Rome, August 22, 2018 Queenship of the Blessed Virgin Mary Official translation by Diane Montagna. | |
| Swedish PM does not rule out use of army to end gang violence Sweden will do whatever it takes, including sending in the army, to end a wave of gang violence that has seen a string of deadly shootings, Prime Minister Stefan Lofven said in Wednesday. Sweden’s murder rate is relatively low in international terms, but gang violence has surged in recent years and Swedes are worried that the police are unable to cope. In 2016, the latest year for which official statistics are available, 106 people were murdered in Sweden, a country of 10 million. But Swedish TV reported there were over 300 shootings, mostly in turf battles between gangs over drugs, protection rackets and prostitution. Four people were shot dead in the first week of this year. One man died after picking up a hand grenade outside a subway station in a suburb of Stockholm. Law and order is likely to be a major issue in a parliamentary election scheduled for September with the populist, opposition Sweden Democrats linking public concern about the rising crime rate to a large increase in the numbers of immigrants. “It would not be my first option to bring in the military, but I am prepared to do whatever is necessary to make sure that serious, organized crime is stamped out,” Lofven told news agency TT. The government has promised police an extra 7.1 billion crowns ($880 million) through 2020, toughened laws on gun crimes and made it easier for the police to monitor private phone calls and emails, among other measures. But a report by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention shows increasing numbers of Swedes worried about crime with confidence falling in the police and the judicial system. “People are shot to death in pizza restaurants, people are killed by hand grenades they find on the street,” Sweden Democrat leader Jimmie Akesson said in parliament on Wednesday. “This is the new Sweden; the new, exciting dynamic, multicultural paradise that so many here in this assembly ... have fought to create for so many years,” he said sarcastically. | |
| Arizona Democrat Senate Candidate Kyrsten Sinema Refuses To Retract Saying It’s OK For Americans To Join Taliban Fox News reported recently that in a February 2003 radio interview, Green Party activist Ernest Hancock said to Kyrsten Sinema, who is now Arizona’s Democrat candidate for Senate: “As an individual, if I want to go fight in the Taliban army, I go over there, and I’m fighting for the Taliban, I’m saying that’s a personal decision.” Sinema responded: “Fine. I don’t care if you go and do that, go ahead.” And now she is doubling down. Probably she thinks that if she disavows these words now, she will be thought of as “Islamophobic” by a significant portion of her base. take our poll - story continues below Should military force be used to stop the caravan of migrants marching toward the U.S. border? Should military force be used to stop the caravan of migrants marching toward the U.S. border? Should military force be used to stop the caravan of migrants marching toward the U.S. border? * Yes, military force should be used. No, keep the military out of it. Email * Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. There is more. Fox News also reported that Sinema “promoted events at Arizona State University featuring a lawyer convicted for aiding an Islamist terror organization and its leader. Sinema, a co-founder of the activist group Local to Global Justice, invited people in a now-closed Yahoo group to attend two events with Lynn Stewart, both in 2003. At the time of the invite, Stewart had been charged with helping her former client Omar Abdel Rahman, a radical Egyptian spiritual leader of a terror group, to pass on secret messages to his followers to commit terror attacks.” The Left maintains that Islamic jihad terror is not a problem — it’s just a reaction to the evil deeds of the U.S. and Israel. “Islamophobia,” Leftists insist, is a much greater issue. This is the result: Useful Idiots such as Kyrsten Sinema end up promoting the likes of Lynne Stewart, who was convicted of aiding the jihad mass murder plotting of the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, who masterminded the 1993 World Trade Center. If you don’t recognize the reality, nature, and magnitude of the jihad threat, you may well end up abetting the jihad. Sinema is proof: the Left hates America, and considers “right-wing extremists,” a term all too often applied to American patriots, far more of a threat than jihad terrorists. It used to be that this fact was dismissed as hysterical hyperbole. Now it is becoming increasingly clear. Article posted with permission from Robert Spencer | |
| CNN's Don Lemon Contradicts Himself In Just One Sentence: "We Have to Stop Demonizing People ... White Men, Most Of Them Radicalized" Talk about an absolute hypocrite! However, it comes as no surprise from a hypocrite who works for a hypocritical, lying, fake news outlet like CNN. Don Lemon wanted to defend the "peaceful" migrants who are headed toward the US border to illegally enter the country against our immigration laws, but said that the "biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right." How can he contradict himself like that and not even bat an eyelid? In discussing the arrival of these migrants who obviously gotten incredible help along the way, busted through customs gates, and pushed at the Mexican border while committing all sorts of crimes against many they come in contact with along the way, Lemon said what is clearly not only racist but utterly insane. "We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them,” Lemon said. “There is no travel ban on them… there is no white guy ban.” take our poll - story continues below Should military force be used to stop the caravan of migrants marching toward the U.S. border? Should military force be used to stop the caravan of migrants marching toward the U.S. border? Should military force be used to stop the caravan of migrants marching toward the U.S. border? * Yes, military force should be used. No, keep the military out of it. Email * Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. He then said people need to stop thinking these people are a threat. “I keep trying to point out to people not to demonize any one group or any one ethnicity, but we keep thinking the biggest terror threat is something else,” Lemon said. No one is demonizing an ethnicity but Don Lemon. He is the one demonizing white men. How's that for hypocrisy? He's a useful idiot, propagandist snowflake. Demonizing the ideology behind Islamic jihad is not an ethnic issue. It's an ideological one that spans cultures, just like Don Lemon's and Chris Cuomo's statism. Demonizing those intent on violating the law and have demonstrated that they are doing it along the way and declaring that we will not allow such persons across our border is simply common sense, but you won't get common sense on CNN. Don Lemon thinks things like this, are just fine, and wants these people in the US. He just doesn't want white men here. There, I said it! Article posted with permission from The Washington Standard | |
| Coroner Defies Court Order: Won't Release Las Vegas Shooter's Autopsy Report Clark County Nevada Coroner John Fudenberg has determined to defy a court order from a district court judge to release the autopsy report of Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock. Though the order was issued on Tuesday, Fudenberg conferred with others and seems determined to not release the autopsy report until, as he said, it is "finalized," The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported, which sued for the autopsy report. Seriously, it's been four months already! The body has been cremated! The family finally got the remains in a box marked "evidence" over three months after the shooting and the autopsy report hasn't been finalized? Wait, were the same guys in the autopsy room that were there when the doctors and coroners examined John F Kennedy ? “I don’t believe this is consistent with what the court ordered,” said Las Vegas attorney Maggie McLetchie, who represents the Las Vegas Review-Journal and The Associated Press in their November action demanding the release of the reports. “They (the coroner’s office) have delayed this for too long, and whatever stage the coroner’s report on Paddock is in, it should be provided to the Review-Journal and Associated Press without further delay. No more games. Release the records.” “The court correctly recognized the presumption of public access to records, even when a mass tragedy occurs,” McLetchie added. “(The judge) also rejected arguments by the coroner’s office that there were any privacy interests with regards to the autopsy of Stephen Paddock, let alone any that outweighed the strong presumption of access to records in Nevada.” “The shooter’s body was cremated Dec. 21," said Review-Journal Editor-in-Chief Keith Moyer added. "How can the autopsy report not be ‘finalized’ when the body was cremated more than five weeks ago? The law is squarely on the side of the public’s right to open government.” That's exactly right! Something is rotten in Denmark! On top of that, we have questions as to whether the body was even that of Stephen Paddock, given the fact that certain elements of the Paddock in the preliminary police report, which mentioned the autopsy, are apparently at odds with the Paddock of other documentation. McLetchie has been trying to obtain as much information for the public as possible, including video of Paddock at the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino. However, she has been told by Las Vegas Metro Police Department attornies that they can't release that information until they finalize their investigation into other suspects which may also produce charges in the case. “The coroner’s office has fought to keep autopsy reports confidential,” the Review-Journal. The coroner was ordered on January 11 to pay nearly $32,000 in legal costs to the Review-Journal because it refused to release public records. While the preliminary report indicated the Paddock died of a gun shot wound to the head through the mouth, it's all the details that aren't given that seem to be problematic for the coroner to release. By the way, the toxicology report was not mentioned in the preliminary report. Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media | |
| Security Guard Jesus Campos Shot During The Vegas Massacre Raises New Questions About Official Narrative The infamous security guard at the Mandalay Bay Hotel, who was allegedly shot stopping the massacre in Las Vegas over a week ago is not listed or registered as such. Jesus Campos, who the narrative is constantly changing around, is still a source of mystery. So who is Jesus Campos? That burning question has bothered many since the release of his name, but there’s been no photograph of this alleged hero, even though we’ve already seen crime scene images of the guns Stephen Paddock allegedly dragged up to his 32nd-floor hotel room. The ever-changing narrative now though, seems to swirl around this unknown mystery security guard. At first, Campos, a guard at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, was hailed a hero for helping guide police to gunman Stephen Paddock’s room on the 32nd floor. Police said Campos was shot in the leg at the end of Paddock’s assault on concertgoers—potentially distracting the gunman and causing him to panic and kill himself. But now, questions have been raised after Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo revised the timeline and said Campos had actually been shot about 9:59 p.m. a (full six minutes before the mass shooting began at 10:05 p.m.) which means the guard could have instead led Paddock to start opening fire on the crowd for fear of being caught. Police have said it was difficult to identify the source of the bullets during the attack, and the confusion added more minutes to their lengthy response. But the revised timeline shows officers would have known where Paddock was before the mass shooting even started. Did Campos call 911? What happened during those six minutes? Much of Campos’s story and background remains a mystery. –Newsweek Campos’s co-worker Liliana Rodriguez started a GoFundMe account for him on October 3, explaining that he’d been shot while on “random patrol” and it could have been anyone of us. “Funds will be used to provide relief and financial support for him while he gets back on his feet,” Rodriguez’s online petition says. “This is a young man that I work with day in and day out. Any financial support would be appreciated for the time he would need to recover.” Strangely, a picture of Campos wasn’t displayed as part of the fund because Rodriguez indicated that “due to privacy from the media we do not feel comfortable publishing a photo.” There are obviously certain things that the FBI and other investigators seem intent on covering up. Their own narrative is quickly shattering. Las Vegas Metro Police Undersheriff Kevin McMahill explained more about Campos’s actions the night of the shooting, helping fill in some of what happened ahead of the attack, but unfortunately, it only added more questions and gave little in the way of answers. McMahill told KNPR, a local NPR affiliate, that Campos went up to the 32nd floor to investigate a door alarm. While on the 32nd floor, he found that a stairwell door was jammed and radioed down to maintenance. Campos heard a drilling sound and thought it was odd. A maintenance worker came up to the 32nd floor. As the pair started talking, Paddock began firing through the door of his room, first with a single-fire gun and then with a rapid-fire rifle. Police have said that when Campos radioed what happened, it helped them track where Paddock was holed up – so why change the narrative to make it even more unbelievable? And still, none of this explains why Campos is not registered as a security guard either, and why the timeline is being changed publically. What exactly do they want us to believe? Article posted with permission from SHTFPlan | |
| Kavanaugh Battle Brews The Left’s continuing success in delaying a confirmation vote on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court reveals its malicious agenda to block the nominee from sitting on the high court when its new term begins Monday, October 1. Democrats had Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford’s never-credible accusations of sexual abuse -- including possible attempted rape -- in hand way back in the summer. They deliberately refused to bring up the allegations, as weak and ridiculous as they are, at Kavanaugh’s Senate confirmation hearings because they didn’t want to have a rational discussion. They wanted to hurl the wild claims like a grenade at the last minute to blow up the process. And so far it appears they’re succeeding. If Kavanaugh isn’t in place a week from Monday, the Supreme Court will begin hearing cases in its new term shorthanded. The high court normally has a complement of nine justices but with Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement July 31, which cleared the way for Kavanaugh’s nomination, there have only been eight justices in place. Roughly speaking there is a 4-to-4 liberal to conservative ideological split on the court. Democrats would prefer to drag the confirmation process into the next Congress where they hope to take control from Republicans. Election Day is November 6. The GOP currently controls the Senate, which has the final say on judicial nominations, by an uncomfortably close margin of 51 to 49. Christine Blasey Ford’s lawyers are trying to game the system. They know that Senate Judiciary Committee rules require Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to provide a full week’s notice for a hearing. So, if, for example, the committee followed the rules and agreed Friday (today) to a hearing, the soonest it could be held would be next Friday, the final business day before the Supreme Court’s new term begins. Of course, lawyers are masters of delay, and social justice warrior-lawyers hoping to torpedo President Trump’s agenda have an added incentive to drag the confirmation process out as long as possible. New demands and fake emergencies are bound to arise from Ford’s legal team. It was unclear at press time if the public hearing scheduled for Monday into the allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh would go forward. Kavanaugh informed the committee he was willing to testify Monday. “I continue to want a hearing as soon as possible, so that I can clear my name," he wrote in a letter. Ford's lawyer Debra Katz told the Judiciary Committee her client "wishes to testify, provided that we can agree on terms that are fair and which ensure her safety." Another Ford attorney reportedly said Wednesday that there are “multiple witnesses” who need to testify. "A hearing on Monday is not possible and the Committee's insistence that it occur then is arbitrary in any event,” Katz wrote in a letter. “Dr. Ford has asked me to let you know that she appreciates the various options you have suggested. Her strong preference continues to be for the Senate Judiciary Committee to allow for a full investigation prior to her testimony.” GOP lawmakers are figuring out how to respond to Ford’s request, the San Diego Union-Tribune reports: Late Thursday, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the Judiciary Committee chairman, said that his staff had discussed the issue with Ford’s attorney earlier in the day and that he would consult with his fellow committee members about the next move. Ford’s offer also increased the pressure on several key moderates — particularly GOP Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — whose votes will probably be needed to put Kavanaugh on the high court. Both were already facing heavy pressure from abortion rights groups concerned that Kavanaugh, a staunch conservative and longtime GOP attorney, might vote to restrict access to abortion. The sexual assault allegation, which the nominee has denied, has upended his seemingly sure-bet confirmation and only increased the stakes for the key lawmakers. Chairman Grassley had imposed a Thursday deadline for Ford to submit testimony after her team said Tuesday she wasn’t willing to testify until the FBI investigates her sexual abuse allegations against Kavanaugh. Left-wingers such as Hillary Clinton and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) echoed Ford’s demand. The demand for an FBI probe is “utter nonsense,” former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova said earlier this week. Ford “really doesn’t want to testify,” he said. “Because when she does, she is going to look like the loon she is. She may very well believe everything she’s saying, and that is one of the signs of lunacy, believing something that isn’t real.” And her lawyer is “even loonier.” Besides, diGenova explained, the eleventh-hour sexual abuse claim leveled against Kavanaugh is a non-federal matter and in this case the alleged assault hasn’t even been clearly outlined by the alleged victim. Ford didn’t report it to anyone for decades and isn’t even certain when or where it happened, so the FBI can’t investigate the matter “because there is nothing to investigate.” Kavanaugh has already undergone six FBI background checks and the agency has ruled out investigating Ford’s allegation of drunken groping at a teenagers’ party 36 years ago. Ford’s request for an FBI probe is “clearly a desire to delay proceedings,” diGenova said. President Trump is taking the high road and is avoiding attacking Ford, which isn’t a risky move given how obviously unbalanced the accuser is. Ford is already doing an excellent job destroying herself without Republican assistance. At the White House on Wednesday, President Trump said it would be "wonderful" if Ford testifies and "unfortunate" if she does not. He indicated he was keeping an open mind about the allegations but that it was "very hard for me to imagine anything happened" between her and the nominee. "I think he's an extraordinary man – I think he's a man of great intellect, as I've been telling you, and he has an unblemished record," Trump said. "This is a very tough thing for him and his family and we want to get over it but at the same time we want to give tremendous amounts of time. If she shows up that would be wonderful – if she doesn't show up that would be unfortunate." CBS News reports that Judge Kavanaugh's wife, Ashley Kavanaugh, has received multiple threats. “The text of three emailed threats, obtained by CBS News, were obscene and violent in nature. CBS News has confirmed that the U.S. Marshal's Service has assigned a protective detail to Kavanaugh's family,” the news website reports. The high-stakes behind-the-scenes jockeying over the confirmation process continues. | |
| Here We Go Again - Leaked Documents: White House Planning Regime Change In Iran Don't say you were not warned, America. Apparently, the US didn't learn from its first dealings in regime change decades ago and is now prepared to give it another shot, according to leaked documents. Don't get me wrong here. I'm not for the government of Iran. I despise Islam and I despise the ideology of Muhammad and his devout followers. Overall, the people of Iran are probably some decent people, but those in leadership have issues, but that is something for the people there to deal with. Iran is not an actual threat to the united States. However, the US seems hell-bent on continuing to put its nose into other countries politics, including seeking to change its government while hypocritically pointing at other countries for trying to manipulate our own political system. take our poll - story continues below Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician? * Dianne Feinstein Maxine Waters Adam Schiff Chuck Schumer Kamala Harris Kirsten Gillibrand Keith Ellison Cory Booker Email * Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. The Washington Free Beacon reports: The Trump administration is examining a new plan to help Iranians fighting the hardline regime in Iran following America's exit from the landmark nuclear deal and reimposition of harsh economic sanctions that could topple a regime already beset by protests and a crashing economy, according to a copy of the plan obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. The three-page white paper being circulated among National Security Council officials in the White House offers a strategy by which the Trump administration can actively work to assist an already aggravated Iranian public topple the hardline ruling regime through a democratization strategy that focuses on driving a deeper wedge between the Iranian people and the ruling regime. The plan, authored by the Security Studies Group, or SSG, a national security think-tank that has close ties to senior White House national security officials, including National Security Adviser John Bolton, seeks to reshape longstanding American foreign policy toward Iran by emphasizing an explicit policy of regime change, something the Obama administration opposed when popular protests gripped Iran in 2009. The regime change plan seeks to fundamentally shift U.S. policy towards Iran and has found a receptive audience in the Trump administration, which has been moving in this direction since Bolton—a longtime and vocal supporter of regime change—entered the White House. Ah, yes, John Bolton. While I applaud Bolton for his willingness to call Islamic jihadis just that, I am not so naive as to consider that his membership in the Council on Foreign Relations has no effect in this decision. "The ordinary people of Iran are suffering under economic stagnation, while the regime ships its wealth abroad to fight its expansionist wars and to pad the bank accounts of the Mullahs and the IRGC command," SSG writes in the paper. "This has provoked noteworthy protests across the country in recent months." Well, why is that? It's due to sanctions imposed by the likes of the US. As has been pointed out before, sanctions hurt the people, not the governments that lead them and then those same governments use the effects to propagandize the people against those who are ordering the sanctions. I'm not saying the Iranian government is good, but it is Iran's government. Honestly, I see a ton of corruption and warmongering in our own government that rivals some of that of governments that America stands against. Still, as was pointed out by Matt Agorist, Bolton told an audience of the Grand Gathering of Iranians for Free Iran: “There is a viable opposition to the rule of the ayatollahs, and that opposition is centered in this room today. I had said for over 10 years since coming to these events, that the declared policy of the United States of America should be the overthrow of the mullahs’ regime in Tehran. The behavior and the objectives of the regime are not going to change, and therefore the only solution is to change the regime itself. And that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!” And again, this really has nothing to do with the US. One source close to the White House who has previewed the plan told the Free Beacon that the nuclear deal, also known as the JCPOA, solidified the Iranian regime’s grip on power and intentionally prevented the United States from fomenting regime change. “The JCPOA purposefully destroyed the carefully created global consensus against the Islamic Republic,” said the source, who would only speak to the Free Beacon on background about the sensitive issue. “Prior to that, everyone understood the dangers of playing footsie with the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism. It’s now Trump, Bolton, and [Mike] Pompeo’s job to put this consensus back in place.” The source told the Beacon that Bolton is “acutely aware of the danger the Iranian regime poses to the region.” “John is someone who understands the danger of Iran viscerally, and knows that you’re never going to fundamentally change its behavior—and the threats against Israel and the Saudis especially—until that revolutionary regime is gone,” the source said, adding that “nothing’s off the table right now if Israel is attacked.” OK, I get they may pose a danger, but let's look at the reality here. Those they pose a danger to, namely Saudi Arabia and Israel can both fend perfectly well for themselves and have demonstrated that ability to do it. There is no need for the US to be involved in it in any way. Why should we be fighting a battle or encouraging, funding, and I'm quite sure arming, a rebellion? Where is that authorized in our Constitution? Simple. It isn't. I care little for the Saudi government as they help push Sharia and is the land where many of the 9-11 hijackers came from. The Iranian government I care for even less, but out of each of those, which one should America have dealt with militarily following 9-11? Both, if you're going to go by information that we have a record on. Why can't America focus on it's own issues and solve those? It's because we are too busy trying to police the world, keeping the spotlight off of those in our government who are attacking our rights and spending us into more and more debt. And lest you think this is about the nuclear deal. It isn't. “The problem is not the Iran nuclear deal it’s the Iranian regime,” the source told the Beacon. “Team Bolton has spent years creating Plans B, C, and D for dealing with that problem. President Trump hired him knowing all of that. The administration will now start aggressively moving to deal with the root cause of chaos and violence in the region in a clear-eyed way.” Bolton says it will be accomplished in the next six months. I don't doubt it. This will probably end up being another Ukraine situation, something we just don't need to be in, and yes, I know, I'll be called a liberal but honest readers who have followed me for some time know that's not the case. Notice some things that are taking place in Iran that the plan speaks about. “More than one third of Iran’s population is minority groups, many of whom already seek independence,” the paper explains. “U.S. support for these independence movements, both overt and covert, could force the regime to focus attention on them and limit its ability to conduct other malign activities.” “The probability the current Iranian theocracy will stop its nuclear program willingly or even under significant pressure is low,” the plan states. “Absent a change in government within Iran, America will face a choice between accepting a nuclear-armed Iran or acting to destroy as much of this capability as possible.” President Trump did made clear earlier in the week that we must make efforts to differentiate between the people of Iran and its ruling regime. Well, I agree, but that gets real messy when you start intervening in this manner. “Any public discussion of these options, and any messaging about the Iranian regime in general, should make a bright line distinction between the theocratic regime along with its organs of oppression and the general populace,” according to the plan. “We must constantly reinforce our support for removing the iron sandal from the necks of the people to allow them the freedom they deserve.” But the Trump administration has spoken out on other countries where the people want their independence. Remember the Kurds? How about the people in the Catalan region of Spain? No support for those people, and why? Cause it's not part of the agenda. I say if the Iranian people want their freedom, let them first free themselves from the bondage of Islam, and then let the passion that burns inside men to be free rise up as it did in our forefathers due to the teachings fo the Holy Scriptures and stand and fight. Then, they will be in a position to ask for aid, but only then. | |
| Facebook Lifts Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov’s 9/11 Ban [Editors' note: To best understand why Facebook would ban Jamie Glazov on 9/11 in the first place, pre-order Jamie's new book, Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us: HERE. The book illustrates how the Jihadist Psychopath has, with the help of the Left, successfully built his totalitarian plantation in the West -- on which the political and cultural establishment is now enslaved and dutifully following his orders. Jamie outlines the frameworks of this tyrannical plantation and how those who are trapped on it, and yearn for freedom, can best escape.] Frontpage editors are happy to announce our free speech victory: Facebook has lifted Frontpage editor Jamie Glazov's 30-day ban on Facebook, apologizing and saying that the block was a “mistake”. We have no doubt, of course, that no “mistake” had actually occurred in this matter and that the ban has only been lifted because of the publicity that we engaged in -- and received. While it is a positive development that Facebook has lifted the ban on Jamie (for now), this story is crucial to amplify now more than ever, seeing that Facebook, and all of leftist-run social media, is, at this moment, clearly accelerating its totalitarian attack on the free speech of conservatives. (See Jamie's video on this whole surreal affair HERE). A brief recap of Jamie's story: on Sept. 11, the 17th Anniversary of the 9/11 terror strike, Facebook's Unholy Alliance masters informed Jamie that he was suspended from Facebook for 30 days due to his posting of his article, 9 Steps to Successfully Counter Jihad, which Facebook informed him violated their "community standards." This suggested, of course, that giving advice on how to prevent another 9/11, and all other Jihadist attacks against America, is now against Facebook’s ‘community standards’. (Read the whole story HERE.) Frontpage and Jamie immediately publicized this tyrannical behavior of Facebook. Then, yesterday, on Sept. 13, Facebook notified Jamie that it had made a mistake and that it was lifting his block. It goes without saying that this retraction and surrender by Facebook occurred only because of the wide publicity that Jamie's banning had received. And we are immensely grateful for all the massive support that was given to us across the Internet, including especially from Breitbart, PJMedia, WorldNetDaily and Thomas Lifson at American Thinker. Leading brave conservative figures such as Michelle Malkin and Laura Loomer also stood up for Jamie, tweeting about his ban -- and to them we send our heartfelt appreciation. Jamie is, of course, no stranger to social media censorship -- especially of the insane variety. The Counter Jihad Coalition's (CJC) Facebook page, which Jamie helped run with CJC President Steve Amundson, was removed a few years ago with absolutely no explanation. The CJC is a human rights and pro-national security group that is dedicated to protecting America and the West from Jihad -- and Muslim and non-Muslim people from Sharia oppression. The question remains: why would Facebook remove such a page, let alone in such a fascistic manner -- and never explain why? In April earlier this year, Jamie was suspended from Facebook for posting screenshots of a Muslim's threat to him on the platform. Then, in May, his Twitter account was temporarily suspended and he was forced to delete tweets he posted which directly quoted Islamic religious texts. His account was suspended for violating Twitter’s rules relating to “hateful conduct.” It is "hateful conduct", apparently, to reference what Islamic texts themselves say. Indeed, Frontpage's editor had simply referred to Sahih Bukhari’s texts discussing Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha when she was six years old (7.62.88) and to Qur'anic Suras that mandate the Hijab for women (24:31; 33:59) and sanction sexual slavery (4:3; 33:50). One thing we know for sure is that, despite this lifting of Jamie’s ban, Facebook and the leftist totalitarians in other social media venues and in the culture at large will continue their unrelenting effort to suffocate dissent and conservative voices. On Facebook, many brave conservative truth-tellers continue to be censored in myriad ways; these individuals include Anni Cyrus, Bosch Fawstin, Mark Lutchman and, of course, Diamond & Silk. The case of #WalkAway leader Brandon Straka is especially disturbing: he was recently banned by Facebook for the crime of announcing that he would be interviewed by Alex Jones. Prager U has had its videos mysteriously disappear off of Facebook and then, only after vociferous protest, re-appear. Facebook is, of course, just one terrain of this leftist brownshirt-style assault on free speech. Everyone knows by now, for instance, what has happened, in the most Orwellian sense, to Alex Jones and InfoWars on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. Leading scholar of Islam and JihadWatch.org Director Robert Spencer, meanwhile, is not just a target at Facebook, where his referrals are down 90% from what they once were; he has been banned by Patreon at the behest of MasterCard -- and MasterCard has yet to respond to his lawyer’s letter. GoFundMe has also banned Spencer because of a smear by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) hate machine. Speaking of Mastercard, the David Horowitz Freedom Center just recently won a major battle with the credit card, defeating well-financed leftwing groups that are trying to run the Center out of business and suffocate free speech in America. The Freedom Center emerged victorious, but it is clear that leftist hate groups such as the SPLC and Color of Change.org are preparing new attacks against the Freedom Center and other conservative groups and individuals 24/7. To be sure, the Left's attacks on the David Horowitz Freedom Center continue unabated: just recently a hit piece in the Washington Post smeared a stand-up noble gentleman like Florida Gubernatorial Candidate Republican Ron DeSantis, libeling David Horowitz in the process. The article stated falsely and maliciously that Horowitz's Restoration Weekend, that DeSantis had attended, was somehow “a racially charged event” -- a vicious lie that Frontpage has exposed and for which the Washington Post is still to apologize and issue a retraction. (To learn why David Horowitz is one of the central targets of the Left, make sure to watch this video). Thus, we clearly gauge that there is no disgusting and venomous level to which the Left will not stoop in its destructive agenda. Yes, Frontpage editor Jamie Glazov has had his ban lifted at Facebook, but this is clearly only a brief reprieve for him on that platform -- and it is only, obviously, a very tiny space in the Stalinist Left's war on America and on everything on which it stands. At this dire moment, we all need to amplify our voices in defense of free speech. And we need to adamantly defend all the truth-tellers at the very moment they come under attack. We also need to contact our representatives and to call for a Congressional investigation into this pernicious assault by the fascist Left on our liberties. The battle for America -- and for the West -- is on. [Editors' postscript: Please make sure to FOLLOW Jamie Glazov on Facebook as well as on Twitter (@JamieGlazov) to strengthen his social media strength in the face of the Left's vicious war on free speech. Thank you!] | |
| British Labor Party: We Banned Pamela Geller, Now Let’s Ban Trump, Too The Guardian reported Thursday that “Chris Bryant, a senior Labour backbencher,” has written to British prime minister Theresa May, urging her to “issue an official ban on Donald Trump from entering the UK on the grounds he is condoning fascism and his presence is ‘not conducive to the public good.'” When Western historians look back at the 21st century, the Geller-Spencer ban in the U.K. will be viewed as one of that once great nation’s darkest moments and a low point for freedom. It was the victory of Islamic law over Western law, sharia over freedom. This because Trump retweeted three videos showing Muslims being violent. Bryant, a former Foreign Office minister, supported this madness by pointing to…me. He cited the cases of two U.S. far-right bloggers, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, who were banned by May in 2013 from entering the U.K. I was going to be among a group of freedom-fighters – a true rainbow coalition of human rights activists from all over the world (a Hindu princess had been set to join us) – to honor the memory of Lee Rigby, the British soldier who had been murdered on a London street in broad daylight by an Islamic jihadist on May 22, 2013. We planned to pay our respects to Lee Rigby by placing a wreath at his memorial, in his memory and in memory of his service. We planned to bring the Stars and Stripes, as well as British and Danish flags, and participate in Armed Forces Day memorial commemorations at the Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich, where Rigby served. For this, we were banned. When Prime Minister Theresa May, who was the head of the Home Office when she banned us and was thus directly responsible for the ban, threw us under the bus in order to satiate savages who threatened violence, did she really think she or anyone would be safe? Safe by surrender? When did they ever work in the history of humankind? The über-left pol citing the Geller-Spencer ban in the U.K. to ban Trump was inevitable. It’s like the Geller ban on ads on buses and subways in every major American city: the Catholic Church just tried to run ads on buses in Washington, D.C., and discovered that it couldn’t because of the ban on all political ads that was enacted in order to prevent my ads from running. Once you sanction the silencing and persecution of one, inevitably, you’ve sanctioned it for all. It’s open season on the opposition. Who decides what’s good and what’s forbidden in a totalitarian society? The totalitarians. The worldwide howl at Trump’s retweets of videos tweeted out by a British politician is further proof of the Islamization of the West. It speaks to how deeply and far and widely sharia has been normed and accepted by Western elites. The videos in the retweets are authentic and have circulated for years. They’re neither “far-right” nor “Islamophobic”; they’re just factual. Once again the media are blaming the messenger instead of dealing with Islamic violence. Trump didn’t add any rhetoric to his tweets. He retweeted authentic videos. (The Dutch media now claim that one of them doesn’t depict Muslim migrants being violent, as was claimed. Even if this is true, Muslim migrant violence is a grim and increasingly common reality in Europe.) If Muslims sincerely condemn jihad terror and sharia oppression, they shouldn’t oppose him. In a letter to May, Bryant wrote: “I am writing to you to ask you and the home secretary to take immediate action to ban the president of the United States, Donald Trump, from entering the United Kingdom, due to his apparent support for far-right groups in this country. In retweeting Jayda Fransen’s posts, it is absolutely clear to me that President Trump is supporting and condoning fascism and far-right activity. This activity has frequently taken the form of violence on our streets. Ms Fransen herself has a long history of racism and Islamophobia, some of it criminal. Many of the people you have rightly banned from entering the UK were guilty of less than this.” “Fascism.” By that Bryant means “defending British values.” While admitting numerous jihad preachers, Britain is keeping out the voices of sanity that would call that nation back to a path that would secure freedom for her children and her children’s children instead of a path to national suicide. And now a call to ban the president of the nation that saved their nation from extinction not 70 years ago. The full story of my being banned from the UK for standing against jihad, and much more, is in my new book, FATWA: Hunted in America . Get the book. Buy it for friends. Educate those around you. Article posted with permission from Pamela Geller | |
| Deadly Plague Could MUTATE And Become Untreatable As It Spreads Globally The pneumonic plague has already infected 2,000 in Madagascar and killed 143 in the country’s worst outbreak in 50 years. But health officials are now warning the deadly bacteria could mutate and become untreatable as it spreads across the globe. Coupled with the high likelihood that this disease could spread globally by an infected traveler getting on a plane to Europe or America, health officials are now warning that the strain of plague which has already killed more than 140 Madagascar could mutate and become untreatable. Professor Paul Hunter has warned that, while it would be rather easy for an advanced country to contain the disease in its current form, he fears that it could evolve into something far more dangerous. Hunter, who is a disease expert at the University of East Anglia, told the Daily Star: “If it reaches the UK, Europe or the US it would be similar to the Ebola outbreak. We would have a few isolated cases but it shouldn’t spread like it has in Madagascar.” But he had more to add. “As with any disease, it’s a real worry that it mutates and become untreatable,” Hunter said. So far, the majority of the recent cases of the black death have the been pneumonic plague, a more deadly form of the bubonic plague which devastated Europe’s population in the 1300s. While the bubonic plague is spread through the bites of infected fleas, pneumonic plague is spread through the air, usually by coughing. Airborne infections are difficult at best to control. Symptoms of the plague include a very high fever, coughing (potentially coughing up blood), and headaches. Ten African nations have already been put on alert that the plague could easily spread to their region of the globe. The plague can be fatal 24-48 hours after infection, but antibiotics will take care of the infection. Schools and universities have been closed with a ban issued on public gatherings, such as the tradition of “dancing with the dead” which has been partially blamed for the disease’s spread. The current outbreak is also highly unusual as it has affected urban areas increasing the risk of transmission, according to the World Health Organization. WHO has delivered 1.2 million doses of antibiotics to fight the disease while the Red Cross has been training hundreds of volunteers on the island to publicize preventative measures. | |
| America's Immigration Voice. Candidate Donald Trump may have promised to extricate us from Middle East wars, once ISIS and al-Qaida were routed, yet events and people seem to be conspiring to keep us endlessly enmeshed. Friday night, a drone, apparently modeled on a U.S. drone that fell into Iran's hands, intruded briefly into Israeli airspace over the Golan Heights, and was shot down by an Apache helicopter. Israel seized upon this to send F-16s to strike the airfield whence the drone originated. Returning home, an F-16 was hit and crashed, unleashing the most devastating Israeli attack in decades on Syria. Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu says a dozen Syrian and Iranian bases and antiaircraft positions were struck. Monday's headline on The Wall Street Journal op-ed page blared: "The Pentagon and State Department have already condemned Iran and thrown their support behind Israel. The question now is whether the Trump administration will go further. ... Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (has) affirmed that the U.S. seeks not only to ensure its allies' security but to deny Iran its 'dreams of a northern arch' from Tehran to Beirut. A good way to achieve both objectives would be back Israel's response to Iran's aggression--now and in the future." Op-ed writers Tony Badran and Jonathan Schanzer, both from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, The FDD is an annex of the Israeli lobby and a charter member of the War Party. Chagai Tzuriel , who heads the Israeli Ministry of Intelligence, echoed the FDD: "If you (Americans) are committed to countering Iran in the region, then you must do so in Syria--first." Our orders have been cut. Iran has dismissed as "lies" and "ridiculous" the charge that it sent the drone into Israeli airspace. If Tehran did, it would be an act of monumental stupidity. Not only did the drone bring devastating Israeli reprisals against Syria and embarrass Iran's ally Russia, it brought attacks on Russian-provided and possibly Russian-manned air defenses. Moreover, in recent months Iranian policy--suspending patrol boat harassment of U.S. warships--appears crafted to ease tensions and provide no new causes for Trump to abandon the nuclear deal Prime Minister Hassan Rouhani regards as his legacy. Indeed, why would Iran, which, with Assad, Russia and Hezbollah, is among the victors in Syria's six-year civil war, wish to reignite the bloodletting and bring Israeli and U.S. firepower in on the other side? In Syria's southeast, another incident a week ago may portend an indefinite U.S. stay in that broken and bleeding country. To recapture oil fields lost in the war, forces backed by Assad crossed the Euphrates into territory taken from ISIS by the U.S. and our Kurd allies. The U.S. response was a barrage of air and artillery strikes that killed 100 soldiers. What this signals is that, though ISIS has been all but evicted from Syria, the U.S. intends to retain that fourth of Syria as a bargaining chip in negotiations. In the northwest, Turkey has sent its Syrian allies to attack Afrin and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has threatened Manbij, 80 miles to the east, where U.S. troops commingle with the Kurd defenders and U.S. generals were visible last week. Midweek, Erdogan exploded: "(The Americans) tell us, 'Don't come to Manbij.' We will come to Manbij to hand over these territories to their rightful owners." The U.S. and Turkey, allies for six decades, with the largest armies in NATO, may soon be staring down each other's gun barrels. Has President Trump thought through where we are going with this deepening commitment in Syria, where we have only 2,000 troops and no allies but the Kurds, while on the other side is the Syrian army, Hezbollah, Russia and Iran, and Shiite militias from Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan? Clearly, we have an obligation not to abandon the Kurds, who took most of the casualties in liberating eastern Syria from ISIS. And we have a strategic interest in not losing Turkey as an ally. But this calls for active diplomacy, not military action. And now that the rebels have been defeated and the civil war is almost over, what would be the cost and what would be the prospects of fighting a new and wider war? What would victory look like? Bibi and the FDD want to see U.S. power deployed alongside that of Israel, against Iran, Assad and Hezbollah. But while Israel's interests are clear, what would be the U.S. vital interest? What outcome would justify another U.S. war in a region where all the previous wars in this century have left us bleeding, bankrupt, divided and disillusioned? When he was running , Donald Trump seemed to understand this. COPYRIGHT 2018 CREATORS.COM Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his books and are available from Amazon.com. Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of His latest book, published May 9, is | |
| A Dismal Record: Why Are They Destroying the Nuns? The meeting covered Carmels of the Teresian, Discalced, reform from Germany, five areas of Spain, three from France, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, Croatia and the Holy Land [1] . The reports from each region showed that many of the provisions found in Cor orans were already in place: federations with broad powers, including financial control and combined formation courses, “religious assistant” priests appointed by the federation and overseeing individual monasteries and superiors giving up their authority to the federations. Given that this was 2009, it is clear that the plans to force all contemplative monasteries in the world into this disastrous European mould were well under way long before Pope Benedict was even considering resigning. Today I’ve received an interesting document issued by the Carmelite Order in Europe following a meeting of the “Federations of Discalced Carmelite Nuns of Europe & the Holy Land” in Avila, February 2009. As a snapshot of the current condition of Carmelite monastic life after it had been completely “federated,” it paints a depressing picture; but as a demonstration of what “federations” are likely to achieve once Cor orans is implemented universally, it clangs in the mind like a funeral bell. Reconciled to managed extinction The report shows average ages of nuns between 65 and 80, “infirmary Carmels,” nuns in state nursing homes, entire communities living in care facilities and half the Carmels with no one in formation. Solutions offered are equally uniform: heaped-up bureaucracy, common formation courses between monasteries developed by “religious psychologists,” ever more powers handed to federations. This is federated Carmelite monastic life under Pope Francis’ New Paradigm of fully implemented VaticanTwoism. Very little is said of any efforts being made to increase vocational outreach using the internet or through diocesan contacts. And perhaps most telling of all, not one word is offered of applying any systematic religious solutions; no one is suggesting increased prayer or fasting, Rosary campaigns or novenas in what has to be the Carmelite Order’s most desperate hour. Nothing is said of increased intensity of devotion to the charism, study of the foundress or returning to sources, still less of strengthening the Carmelites’ traditional independent self-governance or reconsidering the wisdom of “the path taken”. Indeed, in one case in Spain, the sisters themselves advocate abandoning traditional Teresian autonomy altogether. The report from Great Britain notes: “18 Carmels have closed in the last 40 years. There have been two amalgamations in recent years and another one involving three Carmels is in process. Two communities at present are living together in one monastery as a temporary measure.” The case of the Netherlands is downright bizarre; sisters so old that even the federation structures are breaking down. Only one fully autonomous functioning Carmel still exists in the Netherlands, and the remains of four entire communities are living in a single care home run by religious brothers. But in this situation, the “solution” undertaken has been an elaborate bureaucratic reshuffle, including gaining approval from Rome, for “a completely new structure,” whose main task, no doubt, will be the making of funeral arrangements and disposing of library books. The atmosphere is weirdly resigned – one federation report recommended simply “forgetting the numbers” – with many notes of mutual congratulation over “unity,” the creating of “links” and the “building of trust” and “dialogue” between communities. The report from Belgium – federated in 1997, average age 73 with one sister in formation for 11 monasteries – states tersely that their biggest problem is “ageing” but under “possible solutions” says only, “We want to continue along the path we have begun.” It is only in the report from Croatia where the problem changes abruptly from aging nuns and no vocations to too many vocations with not enough room[2]. It is also notable that it is only in the Croatian report that Christ gets a direct mention. Federation of Croatia & Bosnia-Herzegovina: 82 nuns in 5 convents, with an average age of 47, and eleven in formation. This outlier differs from the Western European federations in several respects, notably that it was only federated in 2002. But the effects of the federating/formation courses are already being felt: “Nowadays, two monasteries have difficulty because of a lack of vocations.” Path taken: Have made a foundation in Albania; however this community is not federated. From the beginning, our Association has organized formation courses for the younger sisters as well as courses of permanent formation. Each year, we have one or two seminars, which are also the occasion to the meeting of the Council of the Association. The duration is 3 to 4 days and they take place every time in a different Monastery of the Association. We invite the sisters of other Carmelite convents friends to our formation courses: sisters from Albania, Slovenia and Bulgaria. Present Problems: In general, in our Association the vocations continue growing, but there are differences between the monasteries. Nowadays, two monasteries have difficulty because of a lack of vocations. Possible solutions: We do all what is in our hands in the area of the vocational promotion, collaborating in this way with Christ who calls by his Spirit. These self-generated reports were made in response to a questionnaire set out for the meeting. All speak of nothing but bureaucratic responses: shared “formation courses,” meetings of superiors, amalgamations and suppression of houses and finally “care homes” and houses given over entirely as infirmaries. A tale of controlled, systematized extinction. ~~~ Federation: Germany date when erected: 1980 number of convents: 14 number of nuns: 178 solemnly professed: 170 in formation[3]: 8 average age: 66 Path taken: for 15 years they have organized formation courses: on-going & initial formation, and for formators. Meetings for prioresses. Present problems: have got very old. Some sisters are in care-homes run by Franciscans. Different sisters have volunteered to help there. Possible solutions: two convents intend to amalgamate. ~~~ Federation: Spain – Castile Burgos Date when erected: 1978 Number of convents: 20 Number of nuns: 245 Solemnly professed: In formation: 9 Average age: between 64 Path taken: they have worked on communion and systematic formation of the communities. They have established a formation-house for new vocations and held a month long intensive course according to the ratio, given by the same sisters of the federation. In 2004 they established a Carmelite infirmary to help the communities. Courses have been organized to accompany the youngest sisters of the federation, given by a religious psychologist. Present problems: ageing of the sisters and a lack of vocations; we have not arrived at any practical conclusion in the way of amalgamations-restructuring though attempts have been made. The incorporation of sisters from other countries without due discernment in some cases. Possible solutions: we are making enquiries. ~~~ Federation: Spain - Catalonia Date when erected: 1993 Number of convents 4 Number of nuns: 60 Solemnly professed: In formation: none Average age: 71 What has been done: there has been one suppression and two convents have amalgamated Present problems: ageing of the sisters and a lack of vocations. We need outside help. ~~~ Federation: Spain - Navarre Date of erection: 1994 Number of convents:16 Number of nuns: 229 Solemnly professed: In formation: 10 Average age: 69 What has been done: there has been work on formation: each year, a course on on-going formation and one for those recently professed. There have been 3 suppressions and 3 amalgamations. Work will continue in this area, in order to keep a balance within the communities, based on the present communities and the new vocations. Present Problems: Ageing of the communities, resulting in weakening of life in all its facets. It is not easy to express the reality. A lack of vocations is with us as a reality in everyday life. Moreover, the high number of Carmels makes difficult to maintain all presences. Possible Solutions: It is completely necessary to assume the way of the restructurings, in order to live what is essential, forgetting the numbers. The challenge to grow in confidence and communion should lead us to downgrade the famous and untouchable autonomy because, to a daughter of Saint Teresa, the really important thing is to look for HIM and to live in obedience. Another of our challenges is caring [for] the ecclesial presences. We think this is the way will lead us to recreate from the interior the Charism of the Mother Teresa. ~~~ Federation: France - Toulouse Bordeaux Date when erected: 1955 Number of convents: 20 + 1 abroad, Athens Number of nuns: 274 Solemnly professed: 268 In formation: 6 Average age: 70,6 What has been done: There have been 1 amalgamation & 6 suppressions. The federal priority is the formation. There has been a lot of work in formation: for prioresses, formators & initial. Also with the extern sisters. The infirmary Carmel was closed due to the difficulty of finding a prioress and other personnel. The sisters have gone to other Carmels, except some who have gone to state geriatric homes. ~~~ Federation: Italy - Lombardy Date when erected: 1996 Number of convents: 16 Number of nuns: 220 Solemnly professed: 209 In formation: 11 Average age: 65 Present problems: there are big differences between the various convents. The number of vocations has diminished quickly and the numbers increased of those who have left during formation and during the first years of solemn profession. Nonetheless there have not been amalgamations or suppressions. In some convents old age is a real concern. Possible Solutions: They are working on formation through courses. Also on communion between the communities. There are meetings of the Council with the communities. We are ready to accept sisters who cannot be cared for in their own communities. However, this has not been accepted because they do not want to be separated. The strangest report came from the Netherlands where, for a single surviving autonomous monastery and an average age of 81, resources were mobilised to create “a completely new structure,” complete with approval from the Congregation for Religious: Federation: Netherlands Date when erected: 1971 Number of convents: 6 Number of nuns: 73 Solemnly professed: 73 In formation: .... Average age: 81 [NB, the bold was in the original.] What has been done: 13 Dutch Carmels and one in Iceland have united in a Federation. This has created a close communion from the beginning. Everyone has collaborated in the process of amalgamations and suppressions. Present Problems: Only one Carmel functions fully autonomously in the Netherlands. 4 communities are in a care-home run by the Brothers of the Immaculate Conception. Another Carmel was renewed in 1990. At the original Carmel an infirmary wing has been added for those sisters who require nursing; it is run by Franciscan sisters. With the passing of time the Assembly of the Federation has transferred tasks to the President of the Federation, according to the faculties described in the statutes, in particular regarding our mutual solidarity. Also, with the passing of the years, the Congregation for Religious has placed responsibility directly into the hands of the Council of the Federation. Finally, the autonomous Carmels have asked help from the Federation in order to protect their interests. Due to our very advanced age in the Netherlands we have reached the moment when a General Assembly is no longer possible. We are left with the problem that in the communities there are no sisters who can or who want to be prioresses or council sisters. The structure of the Federation that we have had till now is thus no longer possible. Possible solutions: The Federation Council, the Religious Assistant, together with a canon lawyer of the Dutch Conference of Religious, have worked hard on a completely new structure, in which in its first draft the autonomy of the Carmel has been constantly kept in mind. We began from three points: 1)Maintenance of the formal autonomy of the Carmels that still exist, but with the chance to transfer tasks gradually to the council of the Federation. 2)Appointment of The Federal board or Federal Council of the Federation, preferably appointed by the Superior General. The team will consist of a president and vice-president who are members of one of the convents, appointed to functions, and of three people who are members, or not, of one of the convents. 3)A Supervisory council, also to be appointed periodically by the Superior General, which will be made up of three members, whose president will be, preferably, a member of a religious institute, preferably of the Carmelite Order and appointed to functions. This council sees itself as a supervisory body and to give advice that will more or less replace the Assembly of the Federation. In October 2008, the President, the Religious Assistant and a Lawyer were in Rome where they explained the proposals. They had meetings with Fr. General and with the Congregation for Religious. These were open meetings that helped us to clarify matters. An important concern was that they would allow us to use lay people on the Federal Council of the Federation and the Supervisory council. We were aware that we were not dealing with a simple matter, but we think that, in view of our present situation today, we do not have much choice. It is important to continue to protect the interests of our Federation in the most responsible and careful way, so that all the sisters, even those advanced in years, can continue to live their life in Carmel. Definitive permission came at the 25th of February. ~~~ Given this incredible picture of a Carmelite Order in the last rattle of its death throes, the rest of the summaries of speeches given at the meeting in Avila read as outright surreal, leaving us to wonder if any of these people are attached in any way to reality. Sr. Enrica Rosanna, the representative of the Vatican’s Congregation for Religious told them that the “two great challenges to our contemplative life” are “the challenge of globalization and the challenge of irrelevancy.” She warned the nuns against bringing vocations from other countries to keep their monasteries alive, dropping a hint about what now seems to be a particular obsession of the Congregation. Cor orans would take this subject up definitively in 2018: The nuns were exhorted to “stay awake to welcome the dawn” of a bright new future: “These are difficult and uncertain times, but it is also the time to stay awake as the new dawn is already announcing itself.” “Our aim must be to be open to the future. We should not forget that we are following in the tradition of Teresa of Jesus and in the tradition of all those who have followed in her footsteps. It is a wide road that opens up before us. We must be women of hope and faith. We must always believe that God is the one who directs history. From this derives our task, to be creative and, at the same time, faithful (creative fidelity).” [emphasis in the original.] While there can be no doubt that the impending total extinction of the Carmelite Order in Western Europe was foremost in the minds of the nuns present, it seems that the issue was simply not addressed out loud by the representatives of the bureaucracy. Instead, Sr. Enrica, after this bizarre and cryptic comment, spoke of the “problems and difficulties that we can encounter” in discernment of mostly non-existent vocations, including “consumerism, modern means of communication, difficulties in creating a stable personality, autonomy of the young, the need to be always supported, the ideology of subjectivism.” What are these people smoking? Given that this was three years or more from the abdication of Benedict and the installation of the New Paradigm of Francis/Kasper, one wonders what this “new dawn” was actually about. Perhaps a useful question for one of the nuns present could have been, “A ‘new dawn’ of what, exactly?” This kind of coded language has been popular with the progressivist faction in the Church since the 1960s, when the expectation was for the installation of a totally new Church. Was Sr. Enrica somehow anticipating the fulfillment of those hippie-era dreams in the years to come? It is certainly clear from Francis’ first acts as pope that he had dealing with conservative and Traditionalist nuns high on his list of priorities. His first appointment, no more than three weeks after the Conclave was Jose Rodrigues Carballo, the Religious Congregation’s Secretary and – given the scandal that erupted on his leaving them – the financial wrecking ball of the Franciscan Friars Minor. The first task Francis gave Carballo was the demolition of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. Certainly this record of the European Carmelites’ meeting is jammed with hints that Cor orans was on the way. On the final day of the meeting, the “theme for the day” was offered by then-Father General Luis Arostegui: “Government: the need for change. Autonomy and Association; autonomy and Fr. General; other solutions to government.” The devolution of authority of superiors of individual monasteries to federations was obviously on someone’s mind, as was a plan to see to it that monasteries change superiors frequently: “Essential autonomy can fail due to the relationships within the community: abuses by permanent superiors who decide on the freedom and decisions of the community,” the Father General warned. And there were certainly hints that a general re-organisation of structures of authority was in the works. A common tactic of politicians who want to initiate changes is to “ask questions” rather than make suggestions, and Arostegui asked some very leading questions indeed in this closing address: “Who discerns the existence or not of vital autonomy; is it the community or chosen people? “Are there instances that work well within the Church which balance autonomy in a way that can be helpful in these situations? “At the time of St. Teresa she was an example of someone balanced. Stability is one reason [for autonomy], but is stability understood in such a way that it can obstruct the spirit of mission and your availability to the Order and to the Church? “The valiant and prophetic initiative of Pope Pius XII to create Associations and Federations opened up contemplative life, though it was also thought that it could harm cloister and autonomy. Can such essential autonomy continue as it is? “50 years ago there was stability. How do we conceive today the relationship between autonomy and Federation-Association and between autonomy and Fr. General? “Could there be other forms of government?” Following the Father General’s address are notes from the language groups, including the following: “While some communities do not want their autonomy to be touched, and have certain fears of ‘external’ interference, others want a more moderate and flexible autonomy that, without going to the Congregation would have a juridical form, where the President with her Council can intervene in extreme cases that today we watch with pain, our hands tied. Though we want these legal channels to be established, it must remain clear what the limits of the Federation Council are, in order to avoid abuses of power on the part of the same.” “...The absence of vital autonomy is also noticed when… the same person remains prioress for years.” “...We need criteria that expand number 203 of our Constitutions and clarify vital autonomy. We perceive that there is a shortage of authority figures. We do not want new figures but rather those that already exist (Associations, [federation] Presidents, Provincials...) be empowered in a legal way (canonically) to help communities in difficulty, for the mission to discern, to counsel, to accompany.” “...We are also concerned for those communities not affiliated to Federations, we see that we should be close to them.” Maybe this summary document of 2009 can give us an idea what to expect from Rome in 2018, now that the “progressivist” faction in the Vatican is in the ascendancy and is free to act without restriction. What comes clear comparing this document to Cor orans is that the Vatican’s machinery has long been at work forcing a uniform and essentially bureaucratic, heavily authoritarian and legalistic vision of contemplative life on anyone who fails sufficiently to resist it. And with the statistics offered at this meeting we can see clearly where this road leads. So many Catholics in the last 40 years assumed that under the “conservatives” John Paul II and Benedict XVI at least the Vatican was “onside.” At least in Rome they understood the terrible threat of the Bolshie VaticanTwoist revolutionaries. But this report of 2009 shows a clear picture of a Roman congregation determined to see the revolution through to its inevitable conclusion. _____________________ [1] An aside that will perhaps be noteworthy to traditionalist readers is the little comment in the report on the difficulty of having a liturgical observance between all the disparate nations represented at the meeting. “Eucharist and Lauds in Spanish. Fr. Isidore D’Silva had prepared a booklet with the liturgy for each day. Each psalm was in a different language, and was prepared by the corresponding liturgical group. However, having the text in front of us made it easier to follow the recitation in other languages. The end result was that we could all join in the liturgy. We were all united in the praise of the Spirit who had brought us there together from different languages and nations.” [2] Solution: new foundations, the spreading of the Carmelite charism into new territories. [3] This includes all sisters up to final profession, not just postulants and novices. | |
| GOP report: Obama admin worked to allow Iran to exchange billions to bypass sanctions Washington (CNN) Senate Republicans on Wednesday accused the Obama Administration of secretly trying to give Tehran access to the US financial system to convert billions of dollars in assets into Euros as part of the Iran nuclear deal. A report released by Republican senators on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigation said the Obama administration didn't tell Congress that it sought access for Iran and, in its eagerness to clinch the nuclear deal, was trying to dodge sanctions that remained in place following the 2016 agreement. "The Obama administration misled the American people and Congress because they were desperate to get a deal with Iran," said Sen. Rob Portman, the Ohio Republican who chairs the subcommittee and opposed the Iran deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The accusations were rejected by Obama administration officials who said Republicans are trying to make a one-time effort to meet obligations under the nuclear deal sound like an attempt to give Iran broad access to the US financial system. They said the Republican senators never interviewed former Obama administration officials involved, and noted that no Democrats were involved. The story "is widely overblown," said Jarrett Blanc, the former State Department coordinator for Iran deal implementation at the State Department. Iran deal reverberations The report and the former officials' response highlight how controversial the Iran deal continues to be, even after President Donald Trump's May 8 decision to leave the international pact. That move continues to roil relations with European allies who are sticking with the Iran deal. They appealed to the US on Wednesday to exempt them from sanctions as they continue to do business with Tehran. But one goal behind report's release, according to an official familiar with its contents, is to make clear that the US is not likely to be open to exemptions of any kind. "As the United States begins to re-impose sanctions on Iran and Iranian entities, our European allies must understand and appreciate that doing business with Iran is no longer permissible," the source said. The report focuses on $5.7 billion from Iranian oil sales that were frozen in Oman's Bank Muscat in that country's currency, the rial. Rials are pegged to the US dollar and are difficult to convert. But as part of the nuclear deal, Iran was promised access to overseas reserves of its own funds that had been frozen by sanctions. To access the rials, Iran wanted to convert them briefly into dollars and then Euros. JUST WATCHED Bolton: US will impose all pre-deal Iran sanctions Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Bolton: US will impose all pre-deal Iran sanctions 03:05 The majority report by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigation says that the US Treasury, at the instruction of the US State Department, granted a license to convert the $5.7 billion briefly into American dollars so it could be converted into euros. The exchange was legal, the report notes. Officials at Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control asked two US banks to work as intermediaries and execute the transaction, but they declined, citing concern over potential regulatory backlash and a ding to their reputations. Emails reviewed in the investigation show that OFAC officials worked to encourage banks to take part in the deal by proposing to bring in senior officials. "I agree it would be a good idea to have (Treasury Secretary Jack) Lew engage (the US bank). If they refuse we can suggest (Secretary of State John) Kerry will call, which will drive them nuts," an email from a US government official said. After Treasury officials were examining whether the Iran deal's relevant sanctions permit currency exchange of rials to dollars, the report says a Treasury official wrote in an email, "Yikes. It looks like we committed to a whole lot beyond just allowing the immobilized funds to settle out." A legal transaction But in the end, Treasury officials concluded that the transaction was legal. The report said they decided that the terms of the JCPOA were "consistent with Iran's position, allowing the Government of Iran to engage in 'transfers,' 'foreign exchange (including Rial related transactions),' and the 'purchase or acquisition by the Government of Iran of US bank notes.'" The source familiar with the report said that Congress asked the Obama administration directly about such a license, but that the administration was under no legal obligation to provide the licenses to Congress. The Republican report argues that in pushing for the license to go forward, Obama officials were violating financial and oil-related sanctions imposed on Iran stemming from the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979 and trying to give Iran access to the US financial system. They pointed to a number of Obama officials, including Lew, who said in congressional testimony that Iran was not granted access to the US financial system. Lew said in 2015 that Iran "will continue to be denied access to the [US's] financial and commercial market." Treasury's acting under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence during the Obama administration, Adam Szubin, claimed that "Iranian banks will not be able to clear US dollars through New York, hold correspondent account relationships with US financial institutions, or enter into financing arrangements with US banks." JUST WATCHED Pompeo lays out US list of demands for Iran Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Pompeo lays out US list of demands for Iran 02:40 Blanc argued that the administration was transparent with Congress, referencing Lew's own testimony. "As Secretary Lew said in the testimony quoted in the report: 'Part of the agreement was to give Iran access to money that it has a right to. We will work on making that happen.' There were regular staff level briefings in much more detail," Blanc said. "(T)his is the kind of work the US Government needs to do every day to make our sanctions regimes effective without creating such burdens on allies and partners that they are pushed to work around our financial dominance," Blanc said. A former administration official told CNN that reports suggesting they were planning to restore Iran's access to the US financial system "were absolutely false," that the license was "totally in line with our well-known obligations under the deal." That source pointed out that the license "did not authorize Iran to conduct commercial transactions denominated in US dollars. It did not allow Iran to conduct commercial transactions in foreign currencies via the US banking system. It did not allow Iranian parties to open accounts or correspondent accounts at US banks. It did not allow Iran to send funds to the US or receive funds from the US. And it did not allow Iran access to US investments or markets." The GOP report offers recommendations on how best to proceed with its relationship with Iran. Recommendations include further informing Congress about future negotiations with Iran, requiring the Treasury Department to give notice of specific licenses, reviewing all Iran deal-related licenses, and increasing policing of US sanctions policies. | |
| MS-503 Gang Member Apprehended by Border Patrol Agents In Arizona YUMA, Ariz. – Yuma Sector Border Patrol agents arrested a gang member belonging to the Mara Salvatrucha-503 Gang early Monday morning. At 6:30 a.m. Monday, Yuma Station agents responded to a call for assistance at Carver Park from the Yuma Police Department. After agents interviewed the subject, it was determined that the 20-year-old El Salvadoran national was illegally in the United States. He was arrested and transported to Yuma Station. Agents positively identified the subject as Jose Rodriguez-Lopez and noted a MS-503 Gang tattoo across his chest. Rodriguez-Lopez claimed to have previously been a member of, MS-503, a branch of MS-13, a gang that originated in El Salvador and is notorious for extreme violence and bloodshed. Rodriguez-Lopez had no record of any criminal or immigration arrests in the United States. He was processed for immigration violations. | |
| THE OPPORTUNITIES AND RISKS OF TRUMP'S IRAN INITIATIVE Originally published the Jerusalem Post. On Friday, US President Donald Trump initiated an important change in US policy toward Iran. No, in his speech decertifying Iran’s compliance with the nuclear accord it struck with his predecessor Barack Obama, Trump didn’t announce a new strategy for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, or stemming its hegemonic rise in the Middle East, or limiting its ability to sponsor terrorism. Trump’s move was not operational. It was directional. In his address Friday, Trump changed the policy dynamics that dictate US policy on Iran. For the first time since 2009, when Obama backed the murderous regime in Tehran, spurning the millions of Iranians who rose up in the Green Revolution, Trump opened up the possibility that the US may begin to base its policies toward Iran on reality. Trump began his remarks by setting out Iran’s long rap sheet of aggression against America. Starting with the US embassy seizure and hostage crisis, Trump described Iran’s crimes and acts of war against America in greater detail than any of his predecessors ever did. Trump’s dossier was interlaced with condemnations of the regime’s repression of its own people. By merging Iran’s external aggression with its internal repression, Trump signaled a readiness to drive a wedge – or expand the wedge – between the authoritarian theocrats that rule Iran and the largely secular, multiethnic and pro-Western people of Iran. Trump then turned his attention to Iran’s illicit ballistic missile program, its sponsorship of terrorism, including its links to al-Qaida, its aggression against its neighbors, its aggressive acts against maritime traffic in the Straits of Hormuz, and its bids to destabilize and control large swaths of the Middle East through its proxies. It is notable that these remarks preceded Trump’s discussion of the nuclear deal – which was the ostensible subject of his speech. Before Trump discussed Iran’s breaches of the nuclear deal, he first demonstrated that contrary to the expressed views of his top advisers, it is impossible to limit a realistic discussion of the threat Iran constitutes to US national security and interests to whether or not and it what manner it is breaching the nuclear accord. This was a critical point because for the past two years, US discourse on Iran has focused solely on whether or not Iran was complying with Obama’s nuclear pact. By placing the nuclear deal in the context of Iran’s consistent, overarching hostility and aggression, Trump made it self-evident that no US interest is served in continuing to give Iran a free pass from congressional sanctions. After accomplishing that goal, Trump turned his attention to how Iran is actually breaching the letter and spirit of the nuclear pact. Only then, almost as an afterthought, did he announce that he was decertifying Iranian compliance with the nuclear deal, setting the conditions for the renewal of congressional sanctions on Iran and opening the floodgates of congressional sanctions on Iran in retaliation for the full spectrum of its aggressive and illicit acts against the US, its interests and allies. By empowering Congress to prohibit economic cooperation with Iran, Trump put the Europeans, Chinese and Russians on notice that they may soon face a choice between conducting business with the US and conducting business with Iran. After putting them on notice, Trump discussed the possibility of improving Obama’s nuclear accord. Among other things, he suggested expanding the inspection regime against Iran’s nuclear installations and canceling the so-called “sunset” clause that places an end date on the restrictions governing certain components of Iran’s nuclear advancement. Trump’s address has the potential to serve as the foundation of a major, positive shift in US policy toward Iran. Such a shift could potentially facilitate the achievement of Trump’s goals of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, containing its regional aggression and empowerment and defeating its terrorist proxies. Unfortunately, it is also likely, indeed, it is more likely, that his words will not be translated into policies to achieve these critical aims. Trump’s decision to transfer immediate responsibility to Congress for holding Iran accountable for its hostile actions on the military and other fronts is a risky move. He has a lot of enemies, and the nuclear deal has a lot of supporters on Capitol Hill. Obama would have never been able to implement his nuclear deal if Senator Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, hadn’t agreed to cast the Constitution aside and ignore Obama’s constitutional duty to present the nuclear deal to the Senate for ratification as a treaty. Over the past week, Trump and Corker have been involved in an ugly public fight precipitated by Corker’s announcement that he will not be seeking reelection next year. Today Corker has nothing to restrain him from scuttling Trump’s agenda. If he wishes, out of spite, Corker can block effective sanctions from being passed. And he may do so even though the implications for his Senate colleagues would be dire and even though doing so would render him an unofficial protector of Iran’s nuclear program. What is true for Corker is doubly true for the Democrats. Leading Democratic senators like Robert Menendez, Ben Cardin and Chuck Schumer, who opposed Obama’s Iran deal may now feel that as opponents of the Trump administration, they are required to oppose any change to the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act. Indeed, given the rise of radical forces in their party it is likely that they would rather give Iran a free pass for its anti-American aggression and nuclear proliferation than work with Republicans on Capitol Hill and in the White House. Then again, by framing the issue of Iran’s threat to America as he did, and by transferring responsibility for reinstating sanctions and passing further sanctions on Iran to Congress, Trump opened up the possibility that Congress will conduct substantive – rather than personal – debates on Iran. And the more substantive those debates become, the further away the US discourse will move from the mendacious assumptions of Obama’s Iran policy – that the Iranian regime is a responsible actor and potential US ally, and that there is nothing inherently aggressive or problematic about Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program. The second major risk inherent in Trump’s approach is that he will get his way; that the Europeans, Russians and Chinese and the Iranians will agree to improve the nuclear deal. The problem here is not obvious. Clearly, it is better if the deal is amended to delete the sunset clauses and expand the inspections regime. Yet even an amended, improved deal will still serve as a shield to Iran’s nuclear program. An improved deal won’t destroy Iran’s centrifuges. It won’t take away Iran’s enriched uranium. It won’t destroy Iran’s nuclear installations. And it won’t bring down the regime which by its nature ensures all of these things will remain a menace to the US, its allies and international security as a whole. So long as the US continues to maintain a policy based on the false view that all that is necessary to destroy the threat of a nuclear armed Iran is a combination of the nuclear deal and economic sanctions, it will continue to ensure that Iran and its nuclear program remain a major threat. Distressingly, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley, the most outspoken supporter of decertifying Iranian compliance in the Trump administration, told NBC on Sunday that the US intends to remain in the nuclear deal. To understand what must be done we must return to Trump’s speech and its strategic significance. By taking a holistic view of the Iranian threat – grounded in a recognition of the inherent hostility of the regime – Trump opened up the possibility that the US and its allies can develop a holistic policy for confronting and defeating Iran and its proxies. If the Iran deal and sanctions are two components to a larger strategy rather than the entire strategy, they can be helpful. A wider strategy would target Iran’s regional aggression by weakening its proxies and clients from Hezbollah and Hamas to the regimes in Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon. It would target the regime itself by empowering the ayatollahs’ domestic opponents. It would pin down Iranian forces by arming and otherwise assisting the Iraqi Kurds to defend and maintain their control over their territory along the Iranian border while strengthening the ties between Iranian Kurds and Iraqi Kurds. Friday, Trump created the possibility for such a strategy. It is up to members of Congress, and US allies like Israel and the Sunni Arab states to help Trump conceive and implement it. If they fail, the possibility Trump created will be lost, perhaps irrevocably. | |
| U.S. judge frees Indonesian immigrant held by Trump order A U.S. judge on Wednesday ordered the release of an illegal immigrant who is among 47 Indonesians in New Hampshire challenging the Trump administration’s order to deport them. SPONSORED Rombot, part of a wave of Indonesian Christians who fled their country following deadly riots in 1998, learned of the policy change when he appeared for an Aug. 1 check-in with ICE and was arrested. “He walks out of the courthouse right now,” Chief U.S. District Judge Patti Saris said after concluding that Rombot’s detention violated his rights. He walked out of the U.S. District Court in Boston in his blue jail scrubs, without a chance to change into street clothes. Rombot’s lawyers said he was arrested despite a 2015 letter from ICE saying he would have a chance to prepare for an “orderly” departure. The judge cited that letter during Wednesday’s hearing in holding that Rombot’s detention despite ICE’s previous guidance violated his due process rights under the U.S. Constitution. “This is what intent was, that he would be given the opportunity to leave under his own steam and not under shackles,” she said. Outside the courtroom, Rombot said: “I just want to say thank you to my attorney, my pastor and all of my friends.” The U.S. Attorney’s office is considering an appeal, a spokeswoman said. ICE officials said the arrangement had always been a temporary one and that the agency always had discretion to deport the people covered by the arrangement. The Indonesians are part of an ethnic community of about 2,000 people clustered around the city of Dover in New Hampshire’s seacoast region. Members of the group and advocates say they fear they could face discrimination or violence if forced to return to the world’s largest Muslim-majority country. Their cause has drawn the support of Republican Governor Chris Sununu and New Hampshire’s all-Democratic congressional delegation, including U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen. Saris previously ordered a stay to the deportations. She is currently weighing whether she can order a longer delay to give the affected people time to renew their efforts to gain legal status. | |
| Ex-Sailor Pardoned By Trump, Sues Obama And Comey For NOT Prosecuting Hillary The former Navy sailor pardoned by President Donald Trump after serving a year in federal prison for taking photos of classified sections of his submarine filed a lawsuit on Monday against Obama administration officials. The ex-sailor is alleging that he was subject to unequal protection of the law and cites Comey and Obama’s willingness to not prosecute Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama and former FBI director James Comey let Hillary off the hook before the election, while Kristian Saucier served hard time. Saucier says that that action was “unfair” and “unequal” compared to the corruption and criminal activity of Hillary Clinton. Saucier told Fox News he was scapegoated by Obama officials who found themselves under fire for not aggressively responding to Clinton’s handling of classified information through her private email servers. According to Fox News, Saucier’s federal lawsuit alleges that the United States government was “overzealous” in prosecuting him for “mishandling classified information” while going easy on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for more serious violations of the same law. Saucier’s lawsuit names as defendants former President Barack Obama, former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who led the inquiry into Clinton’s email account. “I could have just taken the pardon by President Trump and gone on with my life,” Saucier said to Fox News, adding that he feels an obligation to get to the truth of what he sees as a double standard that let Clinton get off scot-free. “The U.S. Constitution clearly states that all citizens are born with inalienable rights to be free from persecution by the government,” Saucier said. “My conviction and subsequent sentence for a minor military infraction compared to the treatment of politically connected individuals is a glaring example of a violation of the rights of all Americans to have equal protection under the law.” The former Navy sailor is acting as his own attorney after the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court New York barred his lawyer, Ronald Daigle, from practicing for one year. The court’s move came just as Daigle was helping Saucier prepare to file the lawsuit, prompting the navy sailor to accuse New York officials of trying to hinder his court fight against Obama, Comey, and others. –Fox News Saucier said that he realizes he had erred in taking the photos of the submarine, which he said he wanted to show only to his family so that they could see where he worked. He has also lashed out at Obama officials, saying that his prosecution was politically motivated, prompted by sensitivity about classified information amid the scandal involving Clinton’s emails. |