We must assimilate to communicate. Cultures from foreign lands are welcome always, but not to replace the culture that WE have created and shared.
The World’s first government of Liberty and Freedom is WORTH fighting for the culture that birthed it.
The Judaeo – Christian philosophy based in Freedom of conscience is worth preserving and fighting for. The Forefathers fought for it and shed blood for it. We must preserve our uniqueness and TEACH that the United States of America, is the shinning city upon the hill. If we don’t TEACH it then, blood will be covered with it.
The United States is a gift from god almighty that we should be the hope of freedom to the WORLD!
The criminal complaint against Lieber alleges that he lied to both the government and Harvard. According to the complaint, Lieber was involved with the program from at least 2012 to 2017. His contract called for a salary as high as $50,000 a month, along with about $150,000 per year for living expenses and $1.5 million to establish a lab at the Wuhan University of Technology.
YOUR going to tell me that Harvard DIDN’T KNOW ? I find this highly unbelievable
HARVARD PROFESSOR’S ARREST RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT SCIENTIFIC OPENNESS
Until late last month, Charles Lieber lived the quiet life of an elite American scientist. His lab at Harvard University researched things like how to meld tiny electronics with the brain. In his spare time, he grew award-winning pumpkins in front of his house.
And then, on Jan. 28, the FBI came knocking on his door.
NOW LIEBER FACES CHARGES OF TRADING KNOWLEDGE FOR MONEY AND LYING ABOUT IT. PROSECUTORS ALLEGE HE SET UP A LAB IN CHINA IN EXCHANGE FOR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN PAYMENTS FROM THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT AND THEN DENIED KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE PAYMENTS TO U.S. INVESTIGATORS.
Lieber’s attorney, Peter Levitt, declined to talk to NPR about the allegations. But others watching the case say it raises important questions about ethics, scientific openness and possible racial profiling in an era of geopolitical tension.
“This is a big, big case,” says Frank Wu, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law who tracks Chinese espionage cases. “This is a case that’s all about U.S.-China relations. It’s about competition. It’s about how science should be done.”
The Lieber case centers on a Chinese recruitment program called the Thousand Talents Plan. It was started by the Chinese government in 2008, primarily as a way to draw Chinese researchers back to China, according to Michael Lauer, the deputy director of extramural research at the National Institutes of Health.
sounds like operation Paperclip to me
I doubt they cared if they were Chinese going BACK, rather, they just wanted people to conduct espionage
“The Chinese government wanted to bring back outstanding scientists to China, so as to develop their science and technology,” Lauer says.
Over time, the program began to recruit Western scientists as well. Researchers were asked to set up labs in China and spend at least part of their time doing work there, in exchange for grants and expenses paid. Some relocated to China, but others split their time between their home institutions and a Chinese university.
Such programs exist in other countries. Canada, for example, has had a 150 Research Chairs program that looks similar in many ways to the Thousand Talents Plan.
But the NIH has become aware of numerous ethical breaches related to the Chinese plan, Lauer says. Some researchers have submitted identical grant applications to both the NIH and Thousand Talents. Others have shared confidential grant applications from other researchers with their collaborators in China. And then there is the question of money: Researchers are failing to disclose the funding they receive from China to U.S. agencies like the NIH, as required by law.
“The types of behaviors that we are seeing are not subtle or minor violations,” Lauer says. “What we’re seeing is really quite egregious.”
The funding issues have already cost over a dozen researchers their jobs at institutions around the U.S. Lauer says the NIH is investigating about 180 other scientists, though many other participants appear to be conducting their work aboveboard.
The increased scrutiny by research agencies like NIH has been accompanied by a rise in criminal prosecutions by the Justice Department. In 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions launched what he called the China Initiative, a broad program to crack down on the transfer of U.S. knowledge to China. To date, the initiative has brought criminal charges against dozens of people and won several convictions for espionage.
These kinds of cases are not always straightforward, especially when fundamental research is involved. In spring 2015, Xi Xiaoxing, a physicist at Temple University in Philadelphia, was arrested and accused of sharing sensitive technology with his collaborators in China.
It later emerged that he never did. What’s more, he says, everything he did share was already public, because the findings of basic research aren’t secret. They’re published in scientific journals.
“Academic espionage is a contradiction,” Xi says. “There’s nothing to steal, you can just sit there and read your paper.”
Xi Xiaoxing was falsely accused by the government of transferring technology to Chinese collaborators.
The federal prosecutor who is pursuing the case against Harvard chemist Charles Lieber agrees.
“All the Thousand Talents program does is induce people who are doing research in the United States to come to China, and do the same research, by offering them money,” says Andrew Lelling, the United States attorney for the District of Massachusetts. “And that’s not illegal, per se.”
Every other country calls it espionage. These people are trying to smoke screen their treason
But Lelling says researchers have to disclose the money they receive to funding agencies and to their home university. That’s in part because federal research agencies don’t want to pay for the same science twice — in the U.S. and in China.
The criminal complaint against Lieber alleges that he lied to both the government and Harvard about his involvement in the Thousand Talents Plan. According to the complaint, Lieber was involved with the program from at least 2012 to 2017. His contract called for a salary as high as $50,000 a month, along with about $150,000 per year for living expenses and $1.5 million to establish a lab at the Wuhan University of Technology.
Harvard is just CTA (cover their asses)
Lieber set up the “WUT-Harvard Joint Nano Key Laboratory,” according to the complaint, without telling Harvard about it. The complaint says that when questioned by Harvard and investigators from the Department of Defense, which, together with the NIH, gave him nearly $18 million in grants, Lieber said, “He was never asked to participate in the Thousand Talents Program.” Lieber is currently out on a $1 million dollar bond.
A woman aboard an Air Canada flight from Montreal to Vancouver on Feb. 14 has tested positive for the novel coronavirus, the airline learned on Saturday.
“Air Canada was advised on Feb. 22 by health authorities that a passenger who flew from Montreal to Vancouver on Feb. 14 has since tested positive for COVID-19,” the airline said in a statement.
The BC Centre for Disease Control, which advised Air Canada about the passenger, is following up with passengers, the statement continued, “as per the standard procedure in such cases. Air Canada is working with public health authorities and has taken all recommended measures.”
On Feb. 20, British Columbia’s health minister and provincial health officer announced a woman in her 30s, who lives in the province’s Fraser Health region and recently returned from Iran, is presumed positive for the novel coronavirus, bringing the total number of cases in the province to six. The patient’s close contacts will be identified and contacted by public-health officials, said Adrian Dix and Dr. Bonnie Henry.
According to TVA Nouvelles, which obtained an internal memo distributed by the airline to employees to advise about the passenger, the BC health authority advised Air Canada it planned to contact all passengers seated within three rows of the woman. The risk is considered low enough that crew would not have to be isolated, but should monitor their health for a 14-day period and report any symptoms to a health professional.
According to TVA, the passenger’s journey had originated in Iran; on the flight from Montreal to Vancouver, she is said to have had a dry cough and mild flu symptoms.
“While we don’t confirm individual details, we can confirm that the individuals who sat near the person on the flights they travelled on and the flight crew will be contacted,” said Christine Ackerley of the province’s Public Health Services Authority.
Iran announced on Sunday the death toll from the virus was eight, higher than any country outside China. According to media reports, three deaths reported Sunday were among 15 new confirmed cases of the virus and the total number of infections was 43. There were also concerns about clusters in Italy and South Korea.
Just how is the coronavirus outbreak in China affecting global supply chains? How does this inform decisions and risk associated with offshoring manufacturing to China? And will the COVID-19 outbreak impact the phase one China trade deal? In this episode, we’ll sit down with Curtis Ellis, policy director with America First Policies. He was also a senior policy advisor with Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek.
but it’s not a Pandemic per the CDC
Coronavirus pandemic exploding across the globe: South Korea surpasses 600 infections, Italy declares national emergency, Japan infections skyrocketing, nearly 2,000 non-China infections worldwide and doubling every few days
(Natural News) While the communist-infiltrated World Health Organizationstill refuses to declare the coronavirus outbreak a “pandemic” — absurdly claiming there are no sustained local outbreaks outside of China — the truth about this accelerating infectious disease outbreak is rapidly starting to emerge from nations that aren’t fudging their numbers.
Confirmed infections in South Korea have exploded over the last 96 hours from just 30 cases to 602 confirmed cases. Local residents there are scrambling to purchase preparedness supplies, stripping shelves bare and leading to a sense of urgency. Some cities in South Korea have already taken on a “ghost town” vibe, with streets emptied and nearly all community functions shut down.
In Italy, confirmed cases have skyrocketed to 155 as an outbreak continues its exponential spread there, threatening all of Western Europe. A third death has been confirmed in Italy, and the Italian government has declared a national emergency. Italian officials, notably, are far more honest than U.S. officials in reporting these cases, even though they have so far failed to identify “patient zero” there, who may never be found.
Confirmed cases are exploding in Japan, too, which is no surprise given Japan’s criminally negligent handling of the Diamond Princess fiasco that ultimately led to thousands of potentially infected cruise passengers being released onto the streets of Tokyo.
Iran is also experiencing an explosion in deaths (now 8), and if the mainstream media’s “2% mortality rate” is to be believed, that would indicate there must be over 400 infected people in Iran, most of whom haven’t yet been identified (meaning they are spreading it to others).
Around the world, non-China infections are now doubling every 4 days or so, soaring to nearly 2,000 infections outside of China.
Here’s the current official count as of Feb. 23rd:
If this rate is sustained, there will be over 40,000 infections across the globe by the end of March.
The CDC appears to be covering up over 1,000 infections in the USA
As we documented 12 hours ago in this bombshell Natural News story, this is all taking place while the U.S. CDC appears to be actively engaged in a coordinated cover-up to withhold testing kits from U.S. hospitals and clinics, resulting in a situation where only 3 U.S. states are conducting any testing at all. That means 47 states are carrying out zero coronavirus testing, and the CDC itself has only tested 414 people in the entire nation. This, despite the fact that over 250,000 Chinese students attend U.S. universities, and unknown thousands traveled back to the United States after the recent Chinese New Year lockdown in Wuhan.
The CDC’s new strategy is to avoid testing anyone as a way to avoid reporting confirmed infections. In fact, the CDC has released a coronavirus testing flow chart that quite literally prohibits any testing of Americans who have been infected in the United States:
As you can see from the chart, any American showing symptoms but who didn’t travel from China and who doesn’t realize they’ve had any close contact with an infected person will NOT be tested for the coronavirus.
By definition, then, America will see zero “community outbreaks” since no testing is allowed for those who have been infected from community outbreaks.
This is what has allowed the CDC to continue claiming they see “no evidence of community outbreaks.” Of course they don’t. They’ve ruled out any testing that would reveal community outbreaks.
The actions of the CDC now border on criminal negligence, potentially costing the lives of tens of millions of Americans if the outbreaks which are already taking place in the United States are not honestly disclosed and dealt with.
U.S. government seems to be trying to “seed” coronavirus infections into Los Angeles
If the U.S. government were literally trying to cause a nationwide outbreak, they couldn’t have picked a better place to release the virus and watch it spread across Los Angeles, then the entire nation.
We are either dealing with unprecedented criminal negligence here or a deliberate campaign to spread the virus across America. Either way, the infections are mounting across America but the CDC refuses to test anyone who got infected in America.
As a result, this epidemic is exploding across the USA entirely unseen and unreported by the disastrously dishonest fake news media and the criminally-run Big Tech speech police that protect the “official” narrative.
If you want to live, follow Pandemic.news which features downloadable mp3 podcast files, videos, articles, science paper links and much more.
In the wee hours of a rainy Monday, more than a dozen buses sat on the tarmac at Tokyo’s Haneda Airport. Inside, 328 weary Americans wearing surgical masks and gloves waited anxiously to fly home after weeks in quarantine aboard the Diamond Princess, the luxury liner where the novel coronavirus had exploded into a shipwide epidemic.
But as the buses idled, U.S. officials wrestled with troubling news. New test results showed that 14 passengers were infected with the virus. The U.S. State Department had promised that no one with the infection would be allowed to board the planes.
A decision had to be made. Let them all fly? Or leave them behind in Japanese hospitals?
In Washington, where it was still Sunday afternoon, a fierce debate broke out: The State Department and a top Trump administration health official wanted to forge ahead. The infected passengers had no symptoms and could be segregated on the plane in a plastic-lined enclosure. But officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention disagreed, contending they could still spread the virus. The CDC believed the 14 should not be flown back with uninfected passengers.
“It was like the worst nightmare,” said a senior U.S. official involved in the decision, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations. “Quite frankly, the alternative could have been pulling grandma out in the pouring rain, and that would have been bad, too.”
The State Department won the argument. But unhappy CDC officials demanded to be left out of the news release that explained that infected people were being flown back to the United States — a move that would nearly double the number of known coronavirus cases in this country.
The tarmac decision was a pivotal moment for U.S. officials improvising their response to a crisis with few precedents and extraordinarily high stakes. Efforts to prevent the new pathogen from spreading have revealed the limits of the world’s readiness for an unprecedented public health emergency. In the worst-case scenario, covid-19, a flulike respiratory infection, could become a full-blown global pandemic.
Navigating the crisis has required delicate medical and political judgments. The decision to evacuate the Americans from the Diamond Princess came only after infections on the cruise ship spiked and passengers revealed their grim living conditions.
One lesson from that debacle is that cruise ships are like petri dishes.Thousands live in close quarters on a vessel never designed for quarantines. The crew continued to deliver food, and health workers moved throughout the ship. More than 600 of the 3,700 passengers and crew members have now tested positive for the virus and two older Japanese passengers have died.
With Japanese authorities isolating the passengers for weeks off the coast, the ship, operated by Princess Cruises, quickly developed the second-largest number of coronavirus cases on the planet outside of China — more than in Japan, Singapore, Thailand, the United States or all of Europe. Avoiding “another China” has been the goal of the World Health Organization for weeks, and then it happened anyway, in Yokohama harbor.
The treatment of the Diamond Princess passengers stands in stark contrast to what happened to those on another cruise ship, the Westerdam, who were greeted by the Cambodian prime minister with handshakes and flowers, and who later traveled widely. Only later did news come that one of the Westerdam passengers had tested positive for the virus.
That situation spurred fears that Westerdam passengers would spread the virus around the world. But no additional passengers have tested positive, and so far, no evidence has emerged they have widely seeded the virus.
The coronavirus (officially, SARS-CoV-2) is extremely contagious. Experts estimate that without protective measures, every infected person will spread it to an average of slightly more than two additional people. The disease has been fatal in roughly two out of 100 confirmed cases.
The Diamond Princess left Yokohama for a 15-day cruise on Jan. 20. One man from Hong Kong left the ship when it docked there five days later, and checked into a hospital. On Feb. 1, officials confirmed he was infected with the coronavirus.
Spencer Fehrenbacher, 29, an American studying for his master’s degree in China, signed up for the cruise with friends as a break between semesters. Just a couple of days in, they became alarmed about reports of the virus spreading in China.
In Vietnam, he came down with a fever. It lasted only 24 hours, but he feared he might have the virus. He decided not to get off at the next two stops, in Taipei and Okinawa, because he was afraid he’d wind up quarantined.
The ship sped back to Yokohama and docked Feb. 3. Japanese authorities told passengers they could not leave.
The next day, they mingled onboard. Many ate a buffet dinner, but the casino was closed and the evening show canceled. That night, the captain ordered passengers to return to their cabins and stay there until quarantine officers came to see them.
Over the next several days, test results trickled in: Dozens had become infected. Fehrenbacher kept fearing the worst.
“I was sitting there all day waiting for what I call the knock of doom on the door,” he said.
Fehrenbacher stayed in his room — every day, all day. He had a balcony and that was good enough. He started using the word “optimistic” when he spoke to friends and family, because “positive” carried a bad connotation.
He recorded a video and sent it to his brother to share with his family in case he was hospitalized and unable to communicate, or even died. “Mom, Dad, I love you, I miss you. I’m sure everything will be okay,” he recalled saying.
Five days after the ship reached port, the CDC wrote a letter to the American passengers saying that “remaining in your room is the safest option to minimize your risk of infection,” and adding, “We acknowledge that this situation is difficult.”
For nearly two weeks, the only way off the Diamond Princess was through illness, and a ride by ambulance to further isolation in a hospital.
Complaint to a congressman tips the balance
For some, the difficult situation became dire. By the score, people tested positive. Some 200 passengers were over the age of 80, at much higher risk of complications from the virus. The crew members, meanwhile, were forced to stay at their jobs.
“Obviously, the situation on the ground changed, and clearly there’s been more transmission than expected on the ship,” said Michael Ryan, a WHO executive director for health emergencies. “It’s very easy in retrospect to make judgments on public health decisions made at a certain point.”
On Feb. 12, U.S. officials briefed members of Congress in a closed-door hearing. Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.), a doctor, had also heard from a friend and fellow doctor, Arnold Hopland, of Elizabethton, Tenn., who was on the ship with his wife, Jeanie. Hopland told Roe about the deteriorating conditions.
“That tipped the balance,” said the senior administration official.
By Friday afternoon in Washington, there was agreement among all the agencies in the U.S. coronavirus task force to evacuate the Americans.
The State Department, through the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo, posted an urgent notice to U.S. citizens: Americans who wanted to leave needed to let the embassy know by 10 a.m. Saturday local time in Tokyo.
In all, 328 Americans disembarked from the ship in the early hours of Monday, Tokyo time. They boarded buses — and then were forced to wait, in the port, for more than two hours, according to two passengers. They couldn’t see out of the buses — the windows were covered.
Some began crying because they needed to use the bathroom, said Vana Mendizabal, 69, of Crystal River, Fla. The retired nurse had taken the cruise with her husband, Mario, 75, a physician.
“We just couldn’t understand why we were sitting there, loaded, and not going anywhere,” she said. “And we couldn’t get any answers.”
Eventually the buses arrived at the airport, and once again, everyone waited while top officials in Washington argued about the test results, according to a senior administration official.
“Nobody anticipated getting these results,” said another U.S. official involved in the evacuation.
During one call, the CDC’s principal deputy director, Anne Schuchat, argued against taking the infected Americans on the plane, according to two participants. She noted the U.S. government had already told passengers they would not be evacuated with anyone who was infected or who showed symptoms. She was also concerned about infection control.
Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who was also on the calls, recalled saying her points were valid and should be considered.
But Robert Kadlec, assistant secretary for preparedness and response for the Department of Health and Human Services and a member of the coronavirus task force, pushed back: Officials had already prepared the plane to handle passengers who might develop symptoms on the long flight, he argued. The two Boeing 747s had 18 seats cordoned off with 10-foot-high plastic on all four sides. Infectious disease doctors would also be onboard.
“We felt like we had very experienced hands in evaluating and caring for these patients,” Kadlec said at a news briefing Monday.
The State Department made the call. The 14 people were already in the evacuation pipeline and protocol dictated they be brought home, said William Walters, director of operational medicine for the State Department.
As the State Department drafted its news release, the CDC’s top officials insisted that any mention of the agency be removed.
“CDC did weigh in on this and explicitly recommended against it,” Schuchat wrote on behalf of the officials, according to an HHS official who saw the email and shared the language. “We should not be mentioned as having been consulted as it begs the question of what was our advice.”
She wrote that the infected passengers could pose “an increased risk to the other passengers.”
Schuchat declined to comment.
About an hour before the planes landed in California and Texas, the State Department revealed that the 14 evacuees had tested positive and did not mention the CDC.
Mendizabal, the retired nurse, said she learned about the infections only when she landed at Travis Air Force Base in California and talked to one of her five children, who had seen a news report.
“We were upset that people were knowingly put on the plane who were positive,” she said Wednesday in an interview from the military base. She said she and her husband had already completed 12 days of quarantine on the ship and both were healthy.
“I think those people should not have been allowed on the plane,” Mendizabal said. “They should have been transferred to medical facilities in Japan. We feel we were re-exposed. We were very upset about that.”
After the planes landed, the infected passengers were retested. On Thursday, the CDC confirmed that 11 were indeed positive and two tested negative. One passenger is still awaiting results.
Scientists are still trying to understand the virus. Some of its features, such as how long it can live on surfaces, are unknown. But experts say it is mainly spread by respiratory droplets produced by coughs and sneezes from an infected person. That person must be in close contact, usually defined as six feet.
“We still don’t have a good understanding of the risk posed by people who are infected but without symptoms,” said Jeffrey Duchin, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Washington.
Another ship gets a warm reception
Thousands of miles away, a different scene was playing out in Cambodia.
The Westerdam, a luxurious Holland America Line ship with 2,257 passengers and crew, spent days searching for a port amid fears that it might have infected passengers aboard — even though there was no evidence of it. The ship was turned away from five ports, including Guam.
The Westerdam finally was embraced Feb. 13 by Cambodia, a nation with close ties to China and whose authoritarian prime minister, Hun Sen, has used the coronavirus crisis to advance his country’s political interests.
Having lost a preferential trade arrangement with the European Union over human rights abuses, Hun Sen used the Westerdam as a vehicle to alter headlines and potentially improve relations with the West.
When the ship sailed into Sihanoukville last Thursday, he rolled out the red carpet. Without any protective gear — not even a mask or gloves — he greeted passengers as they disembarked, shaking their hands as he passed out bouquets of flowers.
U.S. Ambassador W. Patrick Murphy also went to the dock with his family to welcome passengers. Murphy wore no face mask or gloves, and maintained little distance between himself and jubilant, relieved passengers.
They filed off and dispersed to hotels, hundreds to the luxury Sokha in Phnom Penh, a little more than 100 miles away. There, some went out to dinner, assured by Cambodia and cruise ship officials that among the 20 people who were tested for the virus, none was positive. Others took a bus tour.
More than 700 headed for the airport and flights to homes around the world.
Suddenly, as if flash-frozen, the exodus from the Westerdam halted. Hundreds of passengers and crew were ordered to remain onboard. Others retreated to the Sokha hotel, where they were asked to stay in their rooms — a request some ignored, said Christina Kerby, 41, of Alameda, Calif., who had taken the cruise with her mother.
Kerby had spent Saturday relaxing at the hotel. She went for a swim, then out to dinner, publishing photos of her meal on Twitter for followers who had been tracking her ordeal over the previous two weeks.
“It was my afternoon to relax before a long trip home,” she said.
Kerby has received blowback on Twitter for going out in Phnom Penh. Back home in Alameda, her children’s preschool asked whether she might endanger other kids when she returns. The stigma of the virus is a new feeling, she said.
On Sunday, she awoke to find a note slipped under her door asking that she stay in her room.
“That, for me, was the moment I lost it,” said Kerby, who had been relentlessly optimistic during her cruise ship confinement. “As Americans, we’re very used to having agency over our own bodies and being able to come and go as we pleased.”
Now, health experts say, there is little to do but wait and see whether the Westerdam passengers spread the virus around the world. Some are skeptical they will see that, suggesting the single positive test result may have been erroneous.
“You would assume if one person got infected on any cruise, you would have a mini-outbreak,” said one U.S. official involved in the response. “Maybe she wasn’t positive.”
Based on what is known so far, Cambodia’s approach is preferable to quarantining people aboard a ship where the virus is spreading, said Saskia V. Popescu, senior infection prevention epidemiologist for HonorHealth, a hospital system in Phoenix.
But that requires educating passengers about reporting symptoms and self-isolating if necessary, and having public health authorities in home countries closely monitor those who have returned. It includes quickly tracing the contacts of anyone who develops the infection.
“I think we can say if you’re going to quarantine people, doing it on a cruise ship is not the best place,” Popescu said.
In an interview with The Washington Post, Phay Siphan, the Cambodian government spokesman, expressed no regrets on the handling of the Westerdam and its passengers.
“The ship was abandoned by the Earth,” he said. “We understood their predicament, and we knew we had to help them.”
A struggle to get home
Christina Kerby initially struggled to find a flight home from Cambodia.
“It literally is minute by minute over here,” she said Wednesday. “One minute, they think they have an agreement with a country to let us through and the next, people are being held at the airport.” She arrived in San Francisco on Thursday.
Fehrenbacher, the graduate student, described his room at Travis Air Force Base as surprisingly spacious. He was told that for 48 hours, he could not leave the room. To receive a meal from uniformed personnel, he must first put on a mask. He has never tested positive for the virus.
“I’m just trying to stay hydrated and optimistic about what the next 12 days are going to look like,” he said.
In Japan, meanwhile, the Diamond Princess is finally being vacated. On Wednesday, Japan released 443 people from the ship, saying they had completed their 14-day quarantines. Scores of its passengers, about 40 of them Americans, remain hospitalized with the infection.
On Thursday, the State Department urged U.S. citizens to reconsider cruise ship travel to or within East Asia and the Asia-Pacific region.
Mahtani reported from Hong Kong. Simon Denyer in Tokyo, Meta Kong in Phnom Penh and William Wan and Alex Horton in Washington contributed to this report.
What you need to know about coronavirus
Updated February 22, 2020
The latest: New developments suggest coronavirus incubation could be longer than 14 days, as global infections rise. Meanwhile, experts fear that coronavirus will become a pandemic.
Mapping the spread of the new coronavirus: More than 25 countries have reported at least one case of coronavirus. Infections have been confirmed in France, India, Hong Kong, Japan, Nepal, Spain, Cambodia, Belgium, Singapore, Sweden, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Italy, Vietnam, Taiwan, Canada and Sri Lanka.
Bomb Threats Emailed To Multiple Jewish Community Centers Across New York
February 23, 2020 at 6:50 pm
ALBANY, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) – Gov. Andrew Cuomo confirmed multiple Jewish community centers across the state were emailed anonymous bomb threats on Sunday, prompting the JCC in the capital to be evacuated.
“We take every threat seriously,” said Cuomo. “It’s the threat that you don’t take seriously that turns out to be real.”
https://cbsloc.al/2TcCe5qCuomo said as many as 18 JCC centers had been targeted by the emailed threats.“When you threaten a JCC, it’s not just an anti-Semitic attack,” the governor said. “You have children who go to the JCC. You have gym facilities here. So, you are really threatening children.”
Bomb threats were made by email today against multiple Jewish Community Centers across NY.
At @AlbanyJCC, police evacuated the building, then declared it safe. An investigation into the threats is ongoing.
NY has zero tolerance for anti-Semitism — we won’t let hate & fear win.
Former DHS Employee,Phil Haney, Friend of Laura Loomer’s, Shot Dead Yesterday in Suspicious Death (Haney was Ordered to Scrub Records of Muslims w/Terror Ties 4 Obama Administration)-Coincidence? I think NOT
This is a direct quote from my friend Laura Loomer who just lost her friend, Phil Haney, yesterday. “This photo of me and Phil Haney was taken in Minnesota in 2018 when we were there investigating Ilhan Omar and Keith Ellison together. Phil was a brilliant mind an one of the most knowlegeable people I knew about Islamic jihad and Sharia. I learned a lot from him.
He was shot and killed in California less than 24 hours ago.
I don’t for one second believe this was random. Phil was a whistleblower who exposed how DHS was scrubbing names of Muslims with terror ties.
And he was about to release a lot more information as well.
We need to find out who killed him.
Phil was a whistleblower who exposed Islamic infiltration of the DHS.
This sounds like an absolute hit job.
I know Phil, and I know what he was working on.
He was murdered.”
Here is an article he wrote for The Hill titled, “DHS ordered me to scrub records of Muslims with terror ties.”
The Hill by Phil Haney-Amid the chaos of the 2009 holiday travel season, jihadists planned to slaughter 290 innocent travelers on a Christmas Day flight from the Netherlands to Detroit, Michigan. Twenty-three-year old Nigerian Muslim Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab intended to detonate Northwest Airlines Flight 253, but the explosives in his underwear malfunctioned and brave passengers subdued him until he could be arrested. The graphic and traumatic defeat they planned for the United States failed, that time.
Following the attempted attack, President Obama threw the intelligence community under the bus for its failure to “connect the dots.” He said, “this was not a failure to collect intelligence, it was a failure to integrate and understand the intelligence that we already had.”
Most Americans were unaware of the enormous damage to morale at the Department of Homeland Security, where I worked, his condemnation caused. His words infuriated many of us because we knew his administration had been engaged in a bureaucratic effort to destroy the raw material—the actual intelligence we had collected for years, and erase those dots. The dots constitute the intelligence needed to keep Americans safe, and the Obama administration was ordering they be wiped away.
After leaving my 15 year career at DHS, I can no longer be silent about the dangerous state of America’s counter-terror strategy, our leaders’ willingness to compromise the security of citizens for the ideological rigidity of political correctness—and, consequently, our vulnerability to devastating, mass-casualty attack.
Just before that Christmas Day attack, in early November 2009, I was ordered by my superiors at the Department of Homeland Security to delete or modify several hundred records of individuals tied to designated Islamist terror groups like Hamas from the important federal database, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS). These types of records are the basis for any ability to “connect dots.” Every day, DHS Customs and Border Protection officers watch entering and exiting many individuals associated with known terrorist affiliations, then look for patterns. Enforcing a political scrubbing of records of Muslims greatly affected our ability to do that. Even worse, going forward, my colleagues and I were prohibited from entering pertinent information into the database.
A few weeks later, in my office at the Port of Atlanta, the television hummed with the inevitable Congressional hearings that follow any terrorist attack. While members of Congress grilled Obama administration officials, demanding why their subordinates were still failing to understand the intelligence they had gathered, I was being forced to delete and scrub the records. And I was well aware that, as a result, it was going to be vastly more difficult to “connect the dots” in the future—especially beforean attack occurs.
As the number of successful and attempted Islamic terrorist attacks on America increased, the type of information that the Obama administration ordered removed from travel and national security databases was the kind of information that, if properly assessed, could have prevented subsequent domestic Islamist attacks like the ones committed by Faisal Shahzad (May 2010), Detroit “honor killing” perpetrator Rahim A. Alfetlawi (2011); Amine El Khalifi, who plotted to blow up the U.S. Capitol (2012); Dzhokhar or Tamerlan Tsarnaev who conducted the Boston Marathon bombing (2013); Oklahoma beheading suspect Alton Nolen (2014); or Muhammed Yusuf Abdulazeez, who opened fire on two military installations in Chattanooga, Tennessee (2015).
It is very plausible that one or more of the subsequent terror attacks on the homeland could have been prevented if more subject matter experts in the Department of Homeland Security had been allowed to do our jobs back in late 2009. It is demoralizing—and infuriating—that today, those elusive dots are even harder to find, and harder to connect, than they were during the winter of 2009.
Haney worked at the Department of Homeland Security for 15 years.
Here are videos of Laura Loomer confronting Keith Ellison and a second one of her confronting the Hamas Caucus. Phil worked with Laura on both. As a friend to Laura Loomer, I worry about her safety, but I know her well enough that her friend being murdered won’t slow her down, it will only motivate her to fight back harder. She’s running for Congress and some very dark forces want her silenced as well. PLEASE HELP THIS FIGHTER GET TO CONGRESS. IT DOESN’T MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE IN THE U.S. WE NEED HER IN CONGRESS BECAUSE SHE’S A FIGHTER FOR EVERYONE. PLEASE DONATE HERE > https://secure.lauraloomerforcongress.com/jr
Jewish journalist, Laura Loomer, made her name investigating corrupt politicians such as the Clintons, James Comey, Mad Max, and many others. She was the first reporter to investigate Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib before they were elected. She was deplatformed from Twitter for a post she made stating that Ilhan Omar was anti- Jew and pro Sharia. CAIR (Hamas) lobbied Twitter to remove her. Because a group of Saudi investors own a large chunk of Twitter stock, Loomer was booted from the platform. Facebook and Instagram did the same several months later. Loomer attempted to fight back, but the MSM and RINO’s were to PC to help her out. Michelle Malkin remained in support of her and called out the MSM. Loomer realized if she was going to effect change in this country, she would have to run for Congress to take the swamp head on. She announced a run for Congress last August in President Trump’s home district. https://secure.lauraloomerforcongress.com/jr
Loomer has filed lawsuits against Big Tech for bias against conservatives, monopolistic behavior through anti-trust, and election interference as they refuse to let her back on social media even as a candidate. Some might say, ‘This doesn’t affect me,’ but I’d say you’re wrong. Another post of mine is about a long term police officer in Florida who got suspended for ‘liking’ a post of his wife’s on Facebook that criticized Omar and Tlaib. Loomer has been suspended from more than just social media for being outspoked. She’s banned from Uber, Uber Eats, Lyft, PayPal, Venmo, GoFundMe, medium and several others. She also had her bank account at Chase Banks temporarily closed down. https://secure.lauraloomerforcongress.com/jr
On 12/28/19, President Trump retweeted a tweet of mine in support of her. This week he’s renting her emails out for fundraising. We’re hopeful that a full fledged endorsement is coming soon as he’s been taking incremental steps. Judge Jeanine, Michelle Malkin, Brandon Straka, Roger Stone, and the Limbaugh teams have endorsed her because of her relentless pursuit of the truth. If you want to help her, please donate anything you can afford. Small amounts are welcome and add up. Some videos below if you’re not familiar with Laura Loomer. https://secure.lauraloomerforcongress.com/jr
If you enjoy modern day thrillers, then I think you’ll like The Switch-Featuring Laura Loomer.
TAGS LAURA LOOMER FOR CONGRESS THE SWITCH LOOMERED PRESIDENT TRUMP MICHELLE MALKIN JUDGE JEANINE RUSH LIMBAUGH CORRUPTION IN AMERICA ISLAM IN AMERICA
Whats Happening in our schools is not a NEW idea, nor is it organic
Communists, many years ago, decided to give up on the notion of a full Communist take over. They decided that if they could not win, they would just change the way things were without changing what it was called. But they DO change what it’s called when they change it a little. One good example is, when HISTORY class was changed to Social Studies.
Facebook Post Shows Banned Book
to Teach Students Anal, Bondage, Sex
Involving Blood in Sex-Ed Class
The startling book was banned from being used by teachers.
by LIONEL Du CANE
January 13, 2020
When parents try to get in to talk to these Educators, they are kicked out.
Parents are DISCOURAGED from participating in their children’s schooling from about middle school and onward. Note, that most PARENT – TEACHER days are no longer done by middle and high school
THEY DON’T WANT US THERE!
They double talk like the liars they are. They want to punish parents for NOT reinforcing the UN-education while saying that they want parents participation. Participation ONLY if the parent wants their propaganda, but if the parent disagrees or has a gripe about one thing or another. They are told to hit the road.
Wisconsin Parents Sue To Keep Schools From Hiding Their Kids’ Gender Dysphoria
Wisconsin’s second-largest school district won’t back off a policy of keeping minor students’ transgender experimentation secret from their parents despite a new lawsuit filed Tuesday.
When President Trump ticks off his accomplishments since taking office, he frequently mentions his aggressive makeover of a key sector of the federal judiciary — the circuit courts of appeal, where he has appointed 51 judges to lifetime jobs in three years.
In few places has the effect been felt more powerfully than in the sprawling 9th Circuit, which covers California and eight other states. Because of Trump’s success in filling vacancies, the San Francisco-based circuit, long dominated by Democratic appointees, has suddenly shifted to the right, with an even more pronounced tilt expected in the years ahead.
Trump has now named 10 judges to the 9th Circuit— more than one-third of its active judges — compared with seven appointed by President Obama over eight years.
“Trump has effectively flipped the circuit,” said 9th Circuit Judge Milan D. Smith Jr., an appointee of President George W. Bush.
To assess the early impact of these appointments, The Times interviewed several judges on the 9th Circuit. Some either declined to discuss their colleagues or inner deliberations or refused to be quoted by name, saying they were not authorized to speak about what goes on behind the scenes.
To be sure, some of the new appointees to the 9th Circuit have quickly won the respect of their colleagues. But the rapid influx of so many judges — most without judicial experience — has put strains upon the court and stirred criticism among judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents.
“Ten new people at once sends a shock wave through the system,” a 9th Circuit judge said.
Among those who have caused the most consternation is Judge Daniel P. Collins, a former federal prosecutor and partner of a prestigious law firm.
Some judges said that in the early months of his tenure, Collins has appeared oblivious to court tradition. He has sent memos at all times of the night in violation of a court rule and objected to other judges’ rulings in language that some colleagues found combative, they said.
Collins also moved quickly to challenge rulings by his new colleagues, calling for review of five decisions by three-judge panels, and some of the calls came before Collins even had been assigned to his first panel, judges said.
Active judges vote on the calls behind the scenes, and the public becomes aware of a failed effort only when dissents are later filed by the judges who favored reconsideration. Judges said it was unprecedented for a new jurist to try to overturn so many decisions in such a short period of time. The court has so far rejected most of Collins’ calls.
“Collins has definitely bulldozed his way around here already in a short time,” one 9th Circuit judge said. “Either he doesn’t care or doesn’t realize that he has offended half the court already.”
Collins did not respond to a request for an interview.
Democratic appointees still make up the majority of active judges — 16 to 13. But the court also has judges on “senior status” who continue to sit on panels that decide cases. Senior status rank gives judges more flexibility but allows them to continue to work, even full time.
Of the senior judges who will be deciding cases on “merits” panels — reading briefs and issuing rulings — 10 are Republicans and only three are Democratic appointees, Smith said.
“You will see a sea change in the 9th Circuit on day-to-day decisions,” Smith predicted.
The biggest change will come in controversial cases that test the constitutionality of laws and the legal ability of presidents to establish contentious new rules. The 9th Circuit is weighing challenges to Trump on a wide array of issues, from immigration to reproductive rights, and the rightward tilt is likely to make it easier for the president to prevail.
Only two of the 9th Circuit appointees have prior judicial experience — Bridget S. Bade and Danielle Hunsaker. They also are the only women among the court’s new judges. Three are Asian Americans — one an openly gay man who has two children with his husband. The other five are white men. Several went to the nation’s top universities.
The American Bar Assn. rated six of the 10, including Collins, “well qualified,” the group’s highest rating for circuit judge candidates. Three received the lower “qualified” rating, and one, Lawrence VanDyke, was found to be “not qualified.”
Though conservative, the Trump appointees to the 9th Circuit are not monolithic. Two Trump appointees — Bade, a former federal court magistrate, and Mark J. Bennett, a former attorney general of Hawaii — are regarded by their colleagues as experienced and collegial.
Trump appointee Eric D. Miller also has drawn positive reviews from both Democratic and Republican appointees. Before his appointment, Miller headed up the appellate division of a major law firm.
“I think he will be a good judge,” a 9th Circuit veteran said.
But Trump appointee Judge Ryan D. Nelson rattled other members of the court when he suggested during a hearing in August that the 9th Circuit remove a respected San Francisco district judge, Edward M. Chen, from a case. The 9th Circuit rarely takes cases away from district judges and only in extreme situations.
Chen, a former ACLU lawyer, was serving as a federal magistrate when Obama elevated him to the district court. Nelson complained about him during a hearing on a case in which Chen imposed an injunction on a Trump plan to take away protected status from many immigrants.
“You can reverse Ed Chen from time to time, but to suggest from the bench that are you are going to reassign” a case is “off the reservation,” one longtime 9th Circuit judge said. “Ed is an extremely well respected judge.”
Another veteran called Nelson’s suggestion “beginner stuff.”
“When he is in a china shop, he doesn’t walk around with caution,” the judge said.
Nelson, an Idaho lawyer who worked as general counsel for a wellness consumer goods company, did not respond to a request for comment.
Ninth Circuit Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw, a Clinton appointee, noted that most of the Trump appointees are still in transition, with the heat of the political process of Senate confirmation not far behind them. She said she was optimistic the 9th Circuit would continue to be collegial.
Another judge predicted that even the hard-charging Collins, educated at Harvard and Stanford, “will mellow.”
“I think he will be fine, though he will never be a go-along-get-along guy,” the judge said.
The behind-the-scenes tensions over Collins spilled into public last month in an order rejecting a call, presumably made by Collins, to reconsider a panel’s decision. The panel had upheld a lower court’s ruling in favor of suppressing evidence from a tribal officer’s search of a vehicle on a public highway. The highway ran through tribal land.
Collins, dissenting from the court’s refusal to reconsider, was joined by three judges, two Trump appointees and one appointed by President George W. Bush.
Collins called the panel’s decision “deeply flawed,” “plagued” by legal error and marked by “confused analysis.”
Two Democratic appointees whose ruling Collins wanted reversed wrote that even in the genre of such dissents, Collins’ was was an “outlier.”
“It misrepresents the legal context of this case and wildly exaggerates the purported consequences of the panel opinion,” wrote Judge Marsha S. Berzon, a Clinton appointee, and Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz, an Obama appointee.
“This case involves an unusual factual scenario and a technical issue of Indian tribal authority,” they said. “It certainly does not present a ‘question of exceptional importance’ meriting en banc consideration.”
The 9th Circuit court has been dominated by Democratic appointees for decades. In 1978, a federal law created 10 new judgeships on the court, allowing President Carter to fill them all. The liberal Carter appointees were followed by judges named by three Republican presidents and two Democrats.
Clinton’s and Obama’s appointees were not uniformly liberal, however, and the 9th Circuit has been growing more moderate. One study, examining the years 2010 to 2015, found that the 9th Circuit was the third most reversed by the Supreme Court, following the Ohio-based 6th and Georgia-based 11th circuits.
Still, with Democratic nominees heavily outnumbering Republicans, there were usually enough votes to overturn conservative decisions by three-judge panels.
Smith predicted the full effect of the Trump appointees won’t be seen until 2021, when they will be carrying full caseloads.
But even now Democratic appointees are likely to be more reluctant to ask for 11-judge panels to review conservative decisions because the larger en banc panels, chosen randomly, might be dominated by Republicans, judges said.
That happened in July after a panel of the three Republican appointees upheld a Trump ruling denying federal family planning funds to clinics that referred women for abortions. A Democratic appointee called for en banc review, and a majority voted in favor. But the randomly selected 11-member panel had a majority of Republican appointees, including two named by Trump.
The 9th Circuit is by far the largest in the federal appeals court in the nation, and its judges are scattered over nine states.
Some judges elect to work alone with their staffs in offices or courthouses near their homes. Most 9th Circuit veterans have yet to have had any experience with the new appointees, and it could take years before they serve on a panel with each of them.
Trump appointed the successors to the late Judges Stephen Reinhardt and Harry Pregerson, two of the most liberal circuit judges in the nation and filled other slots created by Republicans who opted to take senior status.
The new appointees include Patrick Bumatay, the openly gay former prosecutor, and Daniel A. Bress, a former partner at the Washington, D.C., office of Kirkland & Ellis. The ABA rated both qualified. During a hearing in January on challenges to Trump’s immigration policies, Bress appeared ready to side with Trump.
The others are Kenneth Kiyul Lee, a partner in the Los Angeles office of Jenner & Block LLP, who received a well-qualified rating and VanDyke, a former solicitor general of Nevada and a federal deputy assistant attorney general.
In rating VanDyke unqualified for the job, the ABA wrote: “Mr. VanDyke is arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice, including procedural rules.” VanDyke cried during his confirmation hearing when attempting to rebut criticism that he might be unfair to the LGBTQ community.
Trump’s rapid transformation of the circuit courts — three others went from a majority of active judges appointed by Democrats to Republican majorities — was accomplished with the support of Senate Republicans.
Nominations of appellate judges may no longer be blocked by filibuster, and Republican Senate leaders have declined under Trump to follow the practice of allowing an appointee’s home-state senators to veto the president’s choice.
“Trump has set all records for the number of appellate appointees,” said University of Richmond law Professor Carl Tobias.
The federal appeals courts are just one rung below the Supreme Court, and federal judges serve for life.
Though some 9th Circuit veterans expressed unease at the inexperience of some of the new judges, 9th Circuit Judge Consuelo Callahan said they would grow into the job.
“Both President Obama and President Trump appointed quite a few young people with really exceptional credentials, but not necessarily judicial experience,” said Callahan, appointed by President George W. Bush.
The monsters that can watch a mother pleading for her helpless children must be brought to justice. These HOSPITAL, so called HOSPITAL, must be SHUT DOWN. Any HOSPITAL that can watch this happen, is NOT a HOSPITAL, it’s a sick nightmare. The people working in this demonic institution should be in prison. They WATCHED and waited for death of humans struggling and BEGGING to be helped. They deserve to face their time in a court. AND be judged INDIVIDUALLY!!!!!!!! There should not be an excuse of FOLLOWING orders. Sociopaths are made of these.
THIS is NOT Healthcare!!!
Born Alive At 22 Weeks 5 Days, My Twins Were Denied Treatment, Denied Their Right To Life, By Amanda Finnefrock
As a military wife, I’d been through my husband being deployed to Afghanistan as I cared for our young daughter. We have always been very patriotic, loved our country, and so we made a sacrifice to serve the nation we love. It was quite a challenge for us, but for both my husband and I, it pales in comparison to what we endured, how we were violated, when an American hospital here on U.S. soil refused medical treatment for our twins when they were born prematurely. They were treated worse than you’d treat your enemies. . . .
My husband and I had been married 7-1/2 years with two daughters when we found out we were pregnant. At around 16 weeks, we went for an ultrasound and I told the sonogram technician that I’d been extra nauseous and that I’d read that this could be a sign I was pregnant with twins, and sure enough, there were my twins! I was over the moon. My husband and I cried, and our daughters were overjoyed as well. I have a video of them in the room with us exclaiming, “I can’t believe there are two babies!”
At about 20 weeks, I started getting sick with migraines and felt like I was having labor pains. I called the Riverside Methodist Hospital clinic in Columbus, Ohio, who told me this was all normal since I was pregnant with twins. However, it got much worse over the next two weeks, until Saturday morning, June 24, 2017, when I woke up in a pool of blood. I was scared and horrified. I immediately called the on-call resident at the hospital who told me to come right in. On the way there, I remember crying to my husband, saying, “It’s too soon, they’re not going to do anything to save them.” But my husband assured me, “It’s a hospital, they won’t just let them die. They’ll do everything in their power.”
When we got there, we went into a triage room where they brought in an ultrasound machine. When the resident was done with the ultrasound, she had a weird look on her face, then said, “They’re perfectly fine. They’re bouncing around.” But then she directed my husband to hold my hand, and point blank told us, “They’re going to die. Babies at this age don’t survive.”
The resident explained that I was in premature labor, which can happen when you’re pregnant with multiples. At that time, I was at 22 weeks and 2 days. Still bleeding, I was admitted to the hospital and brought into another room.
A neonatologist came in to consult with me that same day. At first, I thought he was a chaplain because he kept urging me to give my children to God, but I persisted that if my children were born alive, I wanted the hospital staff to do everything they could to keep my babies alive — full, aggressive treatment. He told me it was inhumane to try and that babies born this early could have a lot of issues. But these were risks as parents which we were willing to take, and that should be our decision — not theirs. The doctor finally told me that if I were to make it to 22 weeks and 5 days, they would do everything that they could and that he’d be there in the room with us. I have this written assurance in my medical file.
However, he informed me that if I delivered prior to 22 weeks, 5 days gestation, there’d be “no assessment” of my boys (which was never explained to me what that means), and that there would be no attempt to resuscitate them.
The evil that this HOSPITAL is capable of is beyond anything one could imagine. Even a passerby is charged with leaving the scene of a crime, if they don’t call for help and see that there has been an accident or that someone is in need of medical assistance. People KNEW these babies were ALIVE and breathing and no ONE did anything? This is beyond cruel and unusual for a MOTHER to witness and is in a hospital that has equipment to do something and they do NOTHING?? WORSE – they are monsters that nightmares are made of. This is not a hospital! THIS IS A PLACE OF HORRORS!!!!!!
But I had the assurance of treatment if I could make it another three days, and that is all I focused on. Still, every time a nurse or any hospital staff came into my room, I begged them to assure me that they’d treat my boys if I delivered them prior to the promised mark.
My priest came to see me the night of 22 weeks, 4 daysand prayed with me and anointed me. I felt at peace that I could definitely hold out another day and that my sons were going to receive treatment.
The next day, labor began. I was in tremendous pain, yet was refused an epidural. My mom was with me, but my husband was not able to make it to the hospital in time.
Despite making it to that critical point in gestation set out by the hospital, Riverside Methodist staff still told me as I labored that the boys were coming too early and that its neonatal intensive care unit would not attempt to aid my sons. My heart was in my stomach. It was a nightmare. I just couldn’t believe it. Here I was in labor, preparing to welcome my sons, and the staff all left except for one nurse on a computer who wouldn’t even look at me. ——————–me——————-
So, they lied too. The DEVILS LIED!!!!!!! If you had been told that you would not be getting any help, then would you not have gone to another hospital? How does a HOSPITAL get away with REFUSING CARE?
I put lullaby music on my phone and lay my phone on my stomach. My mom and I knew what was about to happen. We were told by the hospital staff that they’d be born dead or would only breathe for a moment, and I wanted them to be comforted as they came into this world. It was me showing them the love of their mother.
These CARE givers are NOT CARE GIVERS – they are DEATH SQUADS!!!!!
I couldn’t see over my stomach, but I heard my mom gasp and through tears, I asked what was wrong, because I thought she was going to tell me he was stillborn, but instead, she said Emery had landed on the edge of the table and was “in his sac” and was moving! She yelled for help. The nurse in the corner did nothing. Finally someone else from the hospital came in, opened the amniotic sac, and then handed him to me.
this person “nurse” should be charged with medical negligence and negligent
I was in shock that he was alive. Emery was perfect, just smaller. I was astonished by what I was seeing. He was moving his hands and his feet. I didn’t expect that. I was caught way off guard. I began pleading with the hospital staff to treat him. I have video footage of me begging them, “Promise me you’ll do something.” They told me that the neonatologist was on her way in.
A neonatal nurse did come in, but just wrapped Emery in a blanket, put him under a heat lamp for a couple of minutes, and opened his mouth. Then he was handed back to me.
Emery did not merely “breathe for a moment” as they assured me would be the case. He survived for about 45 minutes, laying in my arms as I was helpless to secure him any further care from anyone else. I was horrified as his breathing began to slow down and he began gasping for air. I pleaded even more fervently for help, but there was just one nurse sitting in the room. I asked her, “Why are you even in here if you’re not going to help?”, and she replied,
“I am here to call the time of death.”
I was both distraught and absolutely furious. This was unconscionable!
THIS is a MONSTER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is the name of this medical none person? – She should be in JAIL !!!!!!
This is a sociopath – a person who would sit there and watch this poor baby and do NOTHING? This HOSPITAL should be CLOSED !!!! It’s a HELL HOLE !!!!
Crying, I cradled Emery in my arms with all the love I had, until he stopped breathing, and his body became lifeless and cold. The nurse confirmed his death. My mother and I continued taking turns holding him.
I asked the nurse what I could expect next. I didn’t feel like I was in labor at this point. My sons were fraternal twins, so was there a possibility my body would hold off for a couple of more days? I wanted to know that Elliot might have the chance to be treated and wouldn’t be left to die like Emery was.
these monsters are not MEDICAL personnel they are demons from hell and this was an experience in HELL
However, a couple of hours later, I began to contract again, and I felt trapped, knowing I’d likely have the same tragic ending. This time, there were several staff members in the delivery room, including a doctor who came in and delivered Elliot, cut the cord, and laid him on my chest.
Elliot was bigger than Emery. Not only was he breathing, like Emery, but he was also kicking a lot and crying — it’s even noted in my hospital records that he was crying. I was really hopeful that Elliot would get treated because he was so vibrant. However, I could see that they weren’t going to treat him, so I begged them for treatment, but no one assessed his needs and just like Emery, he wasn’t provided any medical care. As if I was being a burden to them, I was scolded, “Just stop and let it happen.”
by who? BY who? were you scolded? What monster? This MONSTER with no name MUST be summoned to pay for their cruelty and inhumanity!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You have suffered, in literal hell, and these DEMONS have NERVE to SCOLD!!!!
SUE!!!!!!!!! For the cruel and unusual HORROR that you were put threw and the babies didn’t have to DIE!!!!!!!!!!!
About 10 minutes after Elliot was born, a “cuddle cot” was brought into the room, and I asked what it was for. I was told that it was to cool him and to keep his body from decomposing. Again, I was outraged — “But he’s not dead!” I exclaimed. Even still, while trying to cherish the time I had with him while he’s alive, they refused to remove it from the room. Though the cuddle cot looked like a bassinet, to me, it was like bringing in a coffin as I’m holding my living baby.
——————–me——————- Elliot lived for two and a half hours while they did nothing.His decline was different than Emery’s. About 10 minutes before he passed away, Elliot began to bleed out of his ears, nose and mouth, and his body became limp. I was completely horrified and we were both left helpless to do anything.
Though I repeatedly begged the staff to help or assess my babies, I was told they were born too young. However, medical articles prove they were not born too young, though I did not have this information at the time.
After my sons passed away, I made it my personal mission to find out the truth about everything that happened that day, from the truth about statistics of survival, and what this means for other families put in my position. I want to spread awareness and create change through legislative efforts to make sure that no child suffers in the manner that my sons did. I am working with a state senator on Emery and Elliot’s legislation here in Ohio, and I now work to get two other bills introduced and passed here in Ohio as well: Simon’s Law (so doctors cannot place a DNR – Do Not Resuscitate – order on a child without parental consent) and the Good Faith Medical Act (so hospitals must inform patients of their futility policies in advance.)
Please sue this hospital for the cruel and unusual monsters that that you had the misfortune of meeting in such a traumatic time!!! And they ADDED to the the horrors that were already being unfolded
In July, 2005, The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in the case of Preston v Meriter that the hospital (which received federal funds) violated the federal Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA)by refusing to screen baby Bridon after he was born at 23 weeks, 2 days. That’s just 4 days past the gestational age of my sons and more than a dozen years earlier, when there weren’t as many medical advances as there are now for the treatment of micro premies. By the time I was sent this article, I’d already missed the one year statute of limitations for medical malpractice lawsuits in Ohio — another law I’d like to see changed. So there is no legal recourse within the court system for me to get justice for Emery and Elliot like Bridon’s parents got for him, but in some way, it gives me a bit of satisfaction knowing that federal law was in fact violated when they failed to assess my sons.
THOSE monsters that sat there should be called to account!!!!!!
The British Association of Perinatal Medicine updated its guidelines to recommend that babies born at 22 weeks should be treated, citing that 1/3 of them survive in the U.K.. In the BBC article, you’ll see the photo of Ruben and Jenson Powell who in August, 2018, became the youngest surviving pre-term twin boys born in Britain at 22 weeks and six days — they were just one day further than my sons, but the difference is that they were given a chance by doctors.
For those who watched the last State of the Union Address, you may recall President Trump introducing Ellie Schneider, the two year old girl in the gallery who was born at 21 weeks 6 days – 6 days earlier than my sons. The hospital where she was born has a 50% survival rate for children born before 24 weeks.
The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002, signed into law by President Bush, extends legal protection to an infant born alive after a failed abortion attempt. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, SB 311, was introduced in 2019 “to prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.” But we need a law to make it clear that children born alive as early as Ellie Schneider are given equal protection, equal treatment, the equal opportunity for survival — whether they survived an abortion or their mothers wanted them to live, like I did mine.
The idea that we need a law the EXTENDS the SAME protection to babies that are WANTED as babies that are born in an ABORTION attempt, is unbelievable.
Emery and Elliot deserved a chance at life, as does every human being on this earth. Please join me in advocating for these children! You never know when this could be your child or your grandchild.
BIO: Amanda Finnefrock is a wife, mother, patients rights activist and now a blogger for Save The 1, and resides in the Columbus, Ohio area. Watch the powerful video footage of Amanda pleading for care as Emery and Elliot fight for life:
In addition to a bevy of candidates running for office, Republican primary voters will get a chance to vote on 10 propositions that could have a major impact in deciding which issues merit attention from the Texas Legislature in 2021.
Each primary election year, the governing body of the Texas GOP puts a handful of measures on the ballot as a poll of the party faithful. While the outcome of this election isn’t as impactful as the constitutional amendments election that Texans often participate in following the Texas Legislature’s time in Austin, this opinion poll ahead of the legislative session is intended to help guide policy debate when lawmakers do convene.
“Keep in mind that this is an opinion poll of Republican voters and not a policy referendum. When you vote YES or NO, you are telling us what you think should happen. You are not voting to make a law but merely saying you agree or disagree with the statement.”
The 10 Republican Party primary ballot propositions are as follows:
Texas should not restrict or prohibit prayer in public schools.
Texas should reject restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms.
Texas should ban the practice of taxpayer-funded lobbying, which allows your tax dollars to be spent on lobbyists who work against the taxpayer.
Texas should support the construction of a physical barrier and use existing defense-grade surveillance equipment along the entire southern border of Texas.
Texas parents or legal guardians of public school children under the age of 18 should be the sole decision makers for all their children’s healthcare decisions including, but not limited to, psychological assessment and treatment, contraception, and sex education.
Texas should ban chemical castration, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and genital mutilation surgery on all minor children for transition purposes, given that Texas children as young as three (3) are being transitioned from their biological sex to the opposite sex.
Texans should protect and preserve all historical monuments, artifacts, and buildings, such as the Alamo Cenotaph and our beloved Alamo, and should oppose any reimagining of the Alamo site.
Texas election officials should heed the directives of the Office of the Governor to purge illegal voters from the voter rolls and verify that each new registered voter is a U.S. Citizen.
Bail in Texas should be based only on a person’s danger to society and risk of flight, not that person’s ability to pay.
Texas should limit our state legislators’ terms to 12 years.
The first day of early voting in the Texas GOP primary is February 18, with Election Day concluding on Tuesday, March 3.
Cary Cheshire is the Vice President of Texans for Fiscal Responsibility. A 6th Generation Texan, Cary attended Texas A&M University was active in a number of conservative causes including Ted Cruz’s Senate campaign. He has also worked on campaigns to elect conservatives to Congress and the Texas Legislature. Cary enjoys college football, genealogy research, and the occasional craft beer.
In 2017, the total cost of illegal immigration for the United States – at the federal, state, and local levels – was approximately $116 billion.
FAIR arrived at this number by subtracting the tax revenue paid by illegal aliens – about $19 billion – from the total economic impact of illegal migration, $134.9 billion.
In 2013, the estimated total cost of illegal migration was approximately $113 billion. So, in under four years, the cost has risen nearly $3 billion.
Evidence shows that the tax payments made by illegal aliens fail to cover the costs of the many services they consume.
A large percentage of illegal aliens who work in the underground economy frequently avoid paying any income tax at all.
Many illegal aliens actually receive a net cash profit through refundable tax credit programs.
A continually growing population of illegal aliens, along with the federal government’s ineffective efforts to secure our borders, present significant national security and public safety threats to the United States. They also have a severely negative impact on the nation’s taxpayers at the local, state, and national levels. Illegal immigration costs Americans billions of dollars each year. Illegal aliens are net consumers of taxpayer-funded services and the limited taxes paid by some segments of the illegal alien population are, in no way, significant enough to offset the growing financial burdens imposed on U.S. taxpayers by massive numbers of uninvited guests. This study examines the fiscal impact of illegal aliens as reflected in both federal and state budgets.
The Number of Illegal Immigrants in the US
Estimating the fiscal burden of illegal immigration on the U.S. taxpayer depends on the size and characteristics of the illegal alien population. FAIR defines “illegal alien” as anyone who entered the United States without authorization and anyone who unlawfully remains once his/her authorization has expired. Unfortunately, the U.S. government has no central database containing information on the citizenship status of everyone lawfully present in the United States. The overall problem of estimating the illegal alien population is further complicated by the fact that the majority of available sources on immigration status rely on self-reported data. Given that illegal aliens have a motive to lie about their immigration status, in order to avoid discovery, the accuracy of these statistics is dubious, at best. All of the foregoing issues make it very difficult to assess the current illegal alien population of the United States.
However, FAIR now estimates that there are approximately 12.5 million illegal alien residents. This number uses FAIR’s previous estimates but adjusts for suspected changes in levels of unlawful migration, based on information available from the Department of Homeland Security, data available from other federal and state government agencies, and other research studies completed by reliable think tanks, universities, and other research organizations.
The Cost of Illegal Immigration to the United States
At the federal, state, and local levels, taxpayers shell out approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. That amounts to a tax burden of approximately $8,075 per illegal alien family member and a total of $115,894,597,664. The total cost of illegal immigration to U.S. taxpayers is both staggering and crippling. In 2013, FAIR estimated the total cost to be approximately $113 billion. So, in under four years, the cost has risen nearly $3 billion. This is a disturbing and unsustainable trend. The sections below will break down and further explain these numbers at the federal, state, and local levels.
Total Governmental Expenditures on Illegal Aliens
Total Tax Contributions by Illegal Aliens
Total Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration
The Federal government spends a net amount of $45.8 billion on illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children. This amount includes expenditures for public education, medical care, justice enforcement initiatives, welfare programs and other miscellaneous costs. It also factors in the meager amount illegal aliens pay to the federal government in income, social security, Medicare and excise taxes.
The approximately $46 billion in federal expenditures attributable to illegal aliens is staggering. Assuming an illegal alien population of approximately 12.5 million illegal aliens and 4.2 million U.S.-born children of illegal aliens, that amounts to roughly $2,746 per illegal alien, per year. For the sake of comparison, the average American college student receives only $4,800 in federal student loans each year.
FAIR maintains that every concerned American citizen should be asking our government why, in a time of increasing costs and shrinking resources, is it spending such large amounts of money on individuals who have no right, nor authorization, to be in the United States? This is an especially important question in view of the fact that the illegal alien beneficiaries of American taxpayer largess offset very little of the enormous costs of their presence by the payment of taxes. Meanwhile, average Americans pay approximately 30% of their income in taxes.
Taxes collected from illegal aliens offset fiscal outlays and, therefore must be included in any examination of the cost of illegal immigration. However, illegal alien apologists frequently cite the allegedly large tax payments made by illegal aliens as a justification for their unlawful presence, and as a basis for offering them permanent legal status through a new amnesty, similar to the one enacted in 1986. That argument is nothing more than a red herring.
FAIR believes that most studies grossly overestimate both the taxes actually collected from illegal aliens and, more importantly, the amount of taxes actually paid by illegal aliens (i.e., the amount of money collected from illegal aliens and actually kept by the federal government). This belief is based on a number of factors: Since the 1990’s, the United States has focused on apprehending and removing criminal aliens. The majority of illegal aliens seeking employment in the United States have lived in an environment where they have little fear of deportation, even if discovered. This has created an environment where most illegal aliens are both able and willing to file tax returns. Because the vast majority of illegal aliens hold low-paying jobs, those who are subject to wage deductions actually wind up receiving a complete refund of all taxes paid, plus net payments made on the basis of tax credits.
As a result, illegal aliens actually profit from filing a tax return and, therefore, have a strong interest in doing so.
Even though the costs of illegal immigration borne by taxpayers at the federal level are staggering, they only pale in comparison to the fiscal burden shouldered by taxpayers at the state level. Most government taxes and fees remitted to government by Americans are paid in forms other than income taxes submitted to the IRS on April 15th. There are city and state income taxes, fuel surcharges, sales and property taxes, etc…. States and localities also bear the main burden for costs associated with public education, city and county infrastructure, and local courts and jails.
A further complication is the fact that, while barred from many federal benefits, state laws allow illegal aliens to access many state-funded social welfare programs. Because so little data is collected on the immigration status of individuals collecting benefits, it is difficult to determine the rate at which illegal aliens use welfare programs. However, based on the average income of illegal alien households, it appears they use these programs at a rate higher than lawfully present aliens or citizens.
STATE AND LOCAL SPENDING
The combined total of state and local government general expenditures on illegal aliens is $18,571,428,571 billion. The services referenced in this section are supported directly by the payment of city and state taxes and related fees. At the state level, examples of general expenditures would be the costs of general governance, fire departments, garbage collection, street cleaning and maintenance, etc. The state, county or municipality — or even a special taxing district in some situations — may provide some of these services. In most cases, localities offer more services than the state. By FAIR’s estimate, there is approximately a 65 percent to 35 percent cost share between local and state governments.
The estimate of general expenditure services received by illegal alien households, beyond the specific outlays mentioned in the sections above, excludes capital expenditures and debt servicing. The calculation for each state is based on the state’s annual operating budget, reduced by the amount covered by the federal government. That expenditure is then reduced further based on the relative size of the estimated population of illegal aliens and their U.S.-born minor children. As noted in our population estimate, this means states like California, Texas, Florida, New York, etc., with larger illegal alien cohorts, will bear larger shares of these costs.
Offsetting the fiscal costs of the illegal alien population are the taxes collected from them at the state and local level. Many proponents of illegal immigration argue that the taxes paid to the states render illegal aliens a net boon to state and local economies. However, this is a spurious argument. Evidence shows that the tax payments made by illegal aliens fail to cover the costs of the many services they consume.
Illegal aliens are not typical taxpayers. First, as previously noted in this study, the large percentage of illegal aliens who work in the underground economy frequently avoid paying any income tax at all. (Many actually receive a net cash profit through refundable tax credit programs.) Second, and also previously noted, the average earnings of illegal alien households are considerably lower than both legal aliens and native-born workers.