Extreme police reaction to unvaccinated toddler
In Arizona, police are on high alert for some very dangerous people. However, these typical suspects are not armed with automatic rifles or knives or grenades – these people of interest are even more dangerous because they potentially carry a possible weapon that could wipe out millions of people – deadly diseases and viruses. As people around the United States watch in horror, babies and children continue to spread dangerous conditions that could easily have been wiped out if parents had gotten their little ones vaccinated.
However, police in Arizona might have taken things too far when they raided a family’s home with guns drawn as they remove an unvaccinated child. In the video, police are caught breaking into the home after the family doctor learned that the parents had refused to vaccinate the child.
The two-year-old child had spiked a 105-degree fever, but the parents still refused to take the child to the emergency room. However, when the fever went away, the parents decided that an inconvenient trip to the hospital was not necessary – but the doctor felt otherwise.
That’s when four heavily armed police officers with the Chandler Police Department raided the family’s apartment in the middle of the night – breaking down the front door and removed the child at gunpoint because the two-year-old had not been vaccinated.
“All because of a fever. A fever! It’s absolutely ridiculous,” the mother’s lawyer, Nicholas Boca, told ABC 15. “That type of kicking your door in, with guns drawn… it should be reserved for violent criminals.”
State Representative Kelly Townsend has a history of encouraging parents to skip vaccinations for their children. She once called vaccination a form of communism, because it forces people to do something.
Townsend wrote on Facebook: “The idea that we force someone to give up their liberty (with a vaccine) for the sake of the collective is not based on American values but rather, Communist.”
However, when the police busted through this family apartment in the name of vaccinations, the Republican quickly stepped up to criticize the police and their response to the doctor’s “misdiagnosis.”
“This mother is nearly 9 months pregnant, and her baby will be born soon,” Townsend said in a Facebook post. “I have great concern that DCS will also take this infant over a misdiagnosis by the Dr., who thought the child might have meningitis when actually he had (a respiratory virus). This would have led to an unnecessary and potentially dangerous spinal tap of a two-year-old child. The parents were correct, the doctor was wrong.”
Because the Chandler police used excessive force when dealing with this case, people in Arizona are questioning whether the law even protects children. Townsend has written new legislation that would require police to have a warrant before they can remove children from their families at gunpoint and the threat of death.
The DCS has not commented on the story.
Do you think the Chandler police overreacted? Or should the police departments take the threat of unvaccinated children as seriously as they would armed criminals?
https://dailyheadlines.net/what-these-police-did-to-an-unvaccinated-toddler-is-absolutely-horrific/
****************************************What Arizona Audit Really Shows—and Why Election Officials Should Be Embarrassed
Critics of the forensic audit of Maricopa County, Arizona—including local election officials and many reporters—who are crowing that the audit confirms that President Joe Biden won the election in Arizona, either don’t understand the purpose of an audit or are trying to deliberately obscure the most worrying findings in the audit.
In fact, by concentrating on only one finding—that the hand recount essentially matched the machine count from last November—they are missing the forest for the trees. That is shown by misleading headlines such as that in The Washington Post: “Ariz. Ballot Report Affirms Biden Win and Lack of Fraud.”
No one doubts that the vote tabulation shows that Biden won the state. The fact, however, that the hand recount essentially matched the machine count from last November comes as no surprise to anyone with experience in election administration.
As a former county election official in two different states, I was involved in multiple recounts. Recounts almost always only show slight differences from the original ballot tabulation. The fact that the hand recount in Maricopa County matched the machine recount simply means that the computer scanners used to scan and tabulate paper ballots were working properly.
However, the key point all of the critics of the audit are missing is that a recount simply recounts the ballots that were cast—a recount does not investigate, examine, or review the legitimacy of those ballots.
A recount does not verify or check whether ballots were cast by registered voters who are actually deceased; who do not actually live where they claim to live; who cast multiple votes because they are registered more than once; or who are not entitled to vote even though they are registered because they are not U.S. citizens or are felons who have not yet had their right to vote restored.
A simple example illustrates this problem. If a homeowners’ association has an election and the new president wins with 51 out of 100 votes, a recount will no doubt confirm that she received 51 votes. But it will not reveal whether 10 of her 51 votes were cast by individuals who falsely claimed to live in the neighborhood when they actually live elsewhere.
Volume III of the Maricopa audit lists some disturbing findings. That includes 23,344 “mail-in ballots voted from a prior address”; 9,041 “more ballots returned by voter than received”; 5,295 “voters that potentially voted in multiple counties”; 2,592 “more duplicates than original ballots”; and 2,382 “in-person voters who had moved out of Maricopa County.”
Numerous other problems are listed, such as voters whose ballots were counted despite the fact that they registered to vote after the state deadline for registration had already passed.
These are serious potential problems that should be investigated by election officials with the involvement of law enforcement. For example, the individual voter files of the 5,295 “voters that potentially voted in multiple counties” should be pulled, and each voter should be investigated to determine if they have multiple registrations and, in fact, illegally cast more than one vote in the 2020 election.
In other words, all of the potential problems that the auditors found ought to be investigated to verify what actually happened in each case with each of these voters. That is the only way to determine whether there were 5,295 double votes cast in the election or whether some or none of these voters were, in fact, double registered. This claim might be found to be valid—on the other hand, an in-depth investigation might find that there is no validity to this claim or any of the other claims.
Contrary to what some seem to believe, the purpose of an audit is not to overturn an election. It is too late to do so. Every state has election laws that provide very short deadlines for a losing candidate to contest the outcome of an election. That deadline has long expired in Arizona and every other state.
Instead, audits are intended to determine whether voting machines worked properly; whether applicable state and federal laws and regulations were followed; whether the voter registration list was accurate and up-to-date and only allowed eligible individuals to vote; and whether all eligible voters were able to vote, that their vote was properly counted, and that their votes were not voided or nullified by fraud, mistakes, or errors.
The results of such an election audit can then be used to correct any compliance issues, to prosecute anyone who engaged in intentional misconduct that violates state or federal election laws, to change election administration procedures that led to errors and mistakes by election officials, and to provide legislators with the information they need to make needed amendments to election laws to make sure any problems that were found do not reoccur in future elections.
What is most disturbing about the reaction to the audit report is that so many seem to think that this is the end of the review process since the hand recount showed that Biden won and, thus, nothing else needs to be done. This attitude is especially disturbing in Maricopa County election officials, who from the very start have done everything they could to obstruct the audit and who are now claiming that since their “canvass” was accurate, they don’t need to do anything else.
That attitude is wrong. The audit seems to have revealed that sloppy, careless, and chaotic procedures were utilized in Maricopa County during the last election. Officials there have a duty to not only investigate all of the potential problems the audit found, such as potential multiple registrations by the same individual, but to correct their procedures and implement better training for their election workers to ensure that such problems, if confirmed, do not happen again.
Arizona law enforcement also has an obligation to investigate. Casting multiple ballots in the same election is a crime, as is registering and voting where you don’t actually reside. Failure of state election and law enforcement officials to fulfill their duties to investigate will reflect poorly on them.
Finally, opposing the conduct of election audits is unwise and unjustified. Audits are a routine occurrence in the business world for good reason. Conducting random or comprehensive audits after an election in every state should also be routine.
Contrary to the bizarre claim of election officials in Harris County, Texas, that audits are “an attack by officials on our communities’ trust in elections,” audits are a way of protecting voters, ensuring the security of the election process, and improving the confidence of the public in the integrity of elections.
***********************************************
The Symptoms of Our Insanity
Think for a minute. When did we become a nation of socialist AOCs wearing “Tax the Rich” dresses to $35,000-a-ticket celebrity galas, without mandatory masks, while being served by masked servants—a now tired script from the Obama birthday bash crowd to the grandees at the Emmys?
When did we discover that we must listen to oppressed billionaire Oprah from her $90 million Montecito estate commiserating with a billionaire Lebron or royal Meghan Markle about the racist white establishment? Is there anyone in the recent Washington intelligence and investigatory hierarchy who has not lied or feigned loss of memory under oath—a low bar that nevertheless excludes, among others, John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Robert Mueller, or Peter Strzok?
Did anyone just five years ago believe the following could possibly happen in America—and invoke almost no popular outrage from a somnolent public?
Item: The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, does not deny that: 1) he deliberately aborted the legal chain of operational command—that is, violated the law—by recalibrating established protocols for using nuclear weapons in times of crisis. And he says his interventions were based on his own diagnoses (after prompting from opposition leader, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi) that the commander-in-chief was crazy, and thus could be circumvented.
And 2), in freelancing style, Milley, on more than one occasion, called the top figure of the Chinese Communist People’s Liberation Army, General Li Zuocheng. He reportedly announced that his own country was currently in crisis (experiencing “messy” democracy), reassuring the Chinese that if he, Milley, the newfound autokrator, sensed there was any chance of hostile and aggressive action on the part of his own country, then on his own initiative he would tip off the Chinese in advance. And far from resigning or being fired for his Strangelovian efforts, Milley would then be hailed as a hero by the popular media and progressive civil libertarians. In other words, for the Left, it is as if Burt Lancaster’s movie character, Air Force General James Mattoon Scott, was the real hero of Seven Days in May.
Milley has also become the Zelig or Forrest Gump of our times. He turns up at almost all our recent military melodramas and disasters. Milley appears variously in the photo-op/federal troops/tear-gas spoof, the virtue-signaled rumored resignation, the talking referent in anonymously sourced books, puff-piece op-eds, and backgrounder quotes, the Inspector Javert of “white rage,” the student of How To Be An Antiracist, the Afghanistan progress reassurer, the “righteous” drone striker, the adjudicator between January 6 “coups” and 120 days of “penny packet protests” costing $2 billion-dollars in riot and arson destruction and 28 deaths, the Article 88 violator, the reductio ad Hitlerum promulgator, and the underappreciated but rumored polymath bibliophile.
To understand Milley’s gambit, imagine Admiral Ernest King, some time in November 1941 secretly contacting his Japanese imperial counterpart, Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, to warn him and the Japanese high command that Admiral King felt President Roosevelt was both too trigger happy for a Pacific war, and was also increasingly infirm and unsteady.
And thus, King would step forward to promise Admiral Yamamoto and the Japanese military grandees that if he felt there was any possible aggressive or peremptory presidential order against Japan, King would tip him off first.
Note that critical contemporaries had complained both that Roosevelt was pining for a pretext for war with Japan and that his closed circle had hidden many of his serious health challenges from the public—and note also that the chances that a President Roosevelt or Trump would have ever staged a preemptive attack on a belligerent neutral were—absolutely zero.
Item: The United States military in the middle of the night abandoned the largest air base in Central Asia, after investing hundreds of millions of dollars in retrofitting the vast complex, as part of a hasty end to a 20-year presence in Afghanistan.
In the last few remaining hours of our withdrawal, Americans would skedaddle to the airport, lose 13 soldiers to a suicide bomber, while guarding our final escape route, retaliate for the killing by accidentally blowing up a civilian relief worker and killing 10 of his family and friends including 7 children, wait almost 2 weeks to disclose said disaster, abandon a $1 billion embassy, dismiss 8,000 NATO allied troops in Afghanistan to fend for themselves, leave behind for Taliban terrorists some $80 billion worth of weaponry and training investment in their usage, fly into the United States some 100,000 unvetted, unvaccinated Afghan refugees in the midst of a pandemic, while leaving behind among the Taliban thousands of Afghans loyal to the U.S. mission—and likely 100-200 Americans.
Is malleable General Milley in the chain of command when he wishes to interrupt operational protocols about nuclear weapons, or to call to warn the Chinese military, but then he is not when he mysteriously becomes only a Joint Chiefs “advisor” without any operation control of or responsibility for the greatest military defeat and humiliation of the last half century?
Item: In the fiscal year 2021-22, how could an anticipated two million illegal aliens simply swarm the border, illegally cross it, continue to reside in the United States illegally, and do so in a time of a pandemic without either a COVID-19 test or vaccination? Who has unilaterally decided that U.S. executive officials could forsake their oaths to enforce existing laws, and simply decide to nullify American immigration law?
Are we a neo-Confederacy in which the nullification of federal law is now normal, whether at the border or in some 550 sanctuary jurisdictions? Most of the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens have headed northward in response to the wink-and-nod open borders advocacy of Joe Biden and his brag that he had stopped all construction of the supposedly impractical replacement and new sections of the border wall—whose current cessation point doubled as the start-off point of the current mass influx.
Item: The nominal head of the COVID-19 administration task force has been forced to admit under oath that he directed the U.S. government to route, through a close associate and third-party medical group, hundreds of thousands of dollars of American research funding to the Chinese Communist-controlled Wuhan virology lab, the likely ground zero of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Yet Dr. Anthony Fauci would strenuously deny under oath that such funding enhanced gain-of-function virology research, despite clear evidence and agreement in the scientific community that it did. Fauci, in addition, would concede that for over a year he has denied any connection between the pandemic and ongoing efforts at the Wuhan lab where the Chinese military played a prominent role in overseeing viral research.
At various times during the pandemic, Fauci would praise the role of the Chinese government in dealing with the plague, dismiss initially the need for a travel ban to prevent spread of the virus, urge Americans not to wear masks, to wear masks, and at times even to wear two masks. And at 80 years of age, he would become the revered COVID-19 icon who sought to protect us from the virus that likely originated in a top-security Wuhan virology lab, possibly the product of a human-engineered, gain-of-function experiment which was partly funded through likely advocacy of—Dr. Fauci himself.
Item: The U.S. government will mandate that all federal employees and soldiers must be vaccinated to retain their tenures even though such a requirement of U.S. citizens does not apply to the hundreds of thousands of aliens entering the country illegally. Moreover, after the “science” has finally established that naturally acquired immunity from prior COVID-19 infections is superior to protection offered by vaccination, it nonetheless still requires those with superior levels of immunity to be vaccinated.
The administration promised to release from the military and fire from the government any soldier or worker with natural immunity who refused to become vaccinated. If the government’s position is that naturally acquired immunity is superior to vaccinated immunity, but nonetheless it still requires additional vaccinated immunity, will such a mandatory, double-indemnity policy also require vaccinated Americans to get needed additional superior immunity through exposure to COVID-infection? Who is better protected from the virus—those who recovered from COVID-19 (according to the CDC, 1 in 3, or over 100 million Americans were infected) but are not vaccinated, or those vaccinated but who havenever had COVID?
Item: As the U.S. national debt edged toward $30 billion, as annual budgets continued to run over $1 trillion in the red annually, as annual inflation is headed toward a per annum increase of 6-8 percent, and as the U.S. economy faces historic shortages of workers, in part because of generous unemployment stipends, the Biden Administration unveiled the most dramatic growth in U.S. spending and expansions of social services in the last half-century.
Is the idea that raising taxes even higher to pay for some of the even more gargantuan spending means that it is not really spending because the government is nearing the limits of realistic borrowing, and now proposes to hike taxes to pay for a bit of the huge deficit agendas?
Item: The president of the United States now most often lectures the country on two themes: one, for the rich to “pay their fair share,” when he proposes huge new increases in taxes and spending; and two, “systemic racism” and the need to address white privilege by reparatory action.
How then can it be that he reportedly has used loopholes and then legal tax manipulation to have welched out on some $500,000 of prior income taxes to shield his past, vast multimillion-dollar income, no doubt some of it gained when, as the “big guy” of Hunter Biden’s emails, he purportedly received “10 percent” of his son’s multimillion-dollar chronic grifting?
And how can the president berate the affluent for using their privilege to warp the system when his own son is currently hocking bad, paint-by-numbers art to wannabe and mostly foreign lobbyists seeking favors from the well-known Biden, Inc. quid pro quo apparat?
If the president is convinced of the pathologies of white racism, might he first promise to cease and desist from his serially racialist language in which he calls one of his African-American subordinates “boy,” demeans black journalists with put-downs such as “you ain’t black” and “junkie,” has called the former president of the United States the first “clean” and “articulate” black presidential candidate in history, revved up audiences with his racist “Corn Pop” sagas in which mighty young Joe Biden took on inner-city thugs with his custom-made chain, and warned a group of black professionals that Mitt Romney would “put y’all back in chains”?
Was it from this font of such serial racism, that young Hunter Biden, familiar with the use of the N-word obscenity, agreed with his similarly racist procuress cousin (who warned the libidinous Hunter “I can’t give you f***ing Asian sorry. I’m not doing it”) that a “domesticated foreigner is fine. No yellow”?
Is the president simply warning others who are not racists and tax avoiders about the dangers of bias and not paying their fair share, since he knows from his and his family’s own first-hand trafficking in racism and tax avoidance that neither is good for the country?
What explains these insanities that are insults to the American people’s intelligence? Did Americans go mad because of the perfect storm of COVID-19, the quarantine, recession, riots, looting and arson of 2020, the wild November election, the post-election hysterias and riot, and the Biden-socialist Faustian bargain?
Or do these symptoms of long-standing illnesses arise from the media and university, where the twins of incompetence and ideology ruined the critical consciousness of an entire generation of young minds?
Or is the culprit the affluent, bicoastal woke professionals, who, as both narcissists and projectionists, feel the consequences of their own ideology should never apply to themselves, while fobbing off their own sins onto others as a way of squaring the circle of their own illiberality?
There is only one bright spot for the moment: perhaps the Chinese, Russians, North Koreas, and Iranians see us as so crazy, weird, and self-loathing that they have no idea what our best and brightest nihilists might do. And for now, they all are trying to determine the relative deterrence of a nuclear-armed, wacky social-justice nation led by a president who, by any past measure of what is required daily of the commander-in-chief, is not really president at all.
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=13779&omhide=true
*******************************************'Facebook is a lie-disseminating instrument of civilizational collapse': Steve Jobs' widow's magazine accuses social media giant of being a 'hostile foreign power'
The Atlantic, the magazine and multi-platform publisher run by a company owned by Steve Jobs' widow, is heaping brutal criticism on Facebook, including calling it an 'instrument of civilizational collapse.'
The essay is making a rough week for the social media giant even worse.
Executive Editor Adrienne LaFrance referred to Facebook as a 'hostile foreign power' and was heavily critical of CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a column titled The Biggest Autocracy on Earth published Monday.
LaFrance cited 'its single-minded focus on its own expansion; its immunity to any sense of civic obligation; its record of facilitating the undermining of elections; its antipathy toward the free press; its rulers’ callousness and hubris; and its indifference to the endurance of American democracy.'
'Facebook is a lie-disseminating instrument of civilizational collapse,' she adds. 'It is designed for blunt-force emotional reaction, reducing human interaction to the clicking of buttons. The algorithm guides users inexorably toward less nuanced, more extreme material, because that’s what most efficiently elicits a reaction. Users are implicitly trained to seek reactions to what they post, which perpetuates the cycle.'
'Facebook executives have tolerated the promotion on their platform of propaganda, terrorist recruitment, and genocide. They point to democratic virtues like free speech to defend themselves, while dismantling democracy itself.'
Laurene Powell Jobs, the widow of Apple founder Steve Jobs who inherited his $21billion fortune, owns The Atlantic via her company The Emerson Collective. Emerson acquired a majority stake in The Atlantic in 2017.
Executive Editor Adrienne LaFrance (pictured referred to Facebook as a 'hostile foreign power' and was heavily critical of CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a column titled The Biggest Autocracy on Earth published Monday +4
Executive Editor Adrienne LaFrance (pictured referred to Facebook as a 'hostile foreign power' and was heavily critical of CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a column titled The Biggest Autocracy on Earth published Monday
LaFrance adds in the piece that as it develops a currency system based off blockchain payments, Facebook is close to achieving all of the things that represent nationhood: land, currency, a philosophy of governance, and people.
'Regulators and banks have feared' that Diem, the currency system Facebook is developing, 'could throw off the global economy and decimate the dollar.
LaFrance refers to Facebook users across the globe as 'a gigantic population of individuals who choose to live under Zuckerberg's rule.'
'Zuckerberg has always tried to get Facebook users to imagine themselves as part of a democracy,' she writes. 'That’s why he tilts toward the language of governance more than of corporate fiat.'
She adds that Facebook is looking into launching an oversight board that appears an awful lot like a legislative body.
This all leads her to define the company and its billions of users as 'a foreign state, populated by people without sovereignty, ruled by a leader with absolute power.'
Jobs, who was married to the Apple co-founder for 20 years before he died in 2011 from neuroendrocrine cancer, is the 35th-richest person in the world, according to Forbes.
Jobs invests and conducts philanthropic activities through Emerson Collective, while also advocating policies on education, immigration, climate, and cancer research and treatment.
The magazine is run day-to-day by editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg.
The column continues what's been a bad week of press for Facebook.
Earlier this week, the company announced that it will be scrapping its plans for a kid friendly version of Instagram after the company faced backlash for ignoring research that revealed the social media platform harmed the mental health of teenage girls.
Meanwhile, a whistleblower who released files that prove the social media giant knows it is toxic to its users is set to reveal her identity on CBS's 60 minutes on Sunday.
The former employee leaked the notorious 'Facebook Files' including tens of thousands of pages of internal company documents that revealed the firm was aware Instagram could be harmful to teenage girls.
They also show the social media giant, which has long had to answer to Congress on how its platform is used, continued to rollout additions to Instagram that propagated the harm, even though executives were aware of the issue.
Ultimately, LaFrance sees very little hope for toppling Facebook unless collective action is taken.
'Could enough people come together to bring down the empire? Probably not,' she writes. Even if Facebook lost 1 billion users, it would have another 2 billion left. But we need to recognize the danger we’re in. We need to shake the notion that Facebook is a normal company, or that its hegemony is inevitable.'
'Perhaps someday the world will congregate as one, in peace ... indivisible by the forces that have launched wars and collapsed civilizations since antiquity. But if that happens, if we can save ourselves, it certainly won’t be because of Facebook. It will be in spite of it.'
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment