How passive faith in Western History as portrayed by public media and taught in public education to billions of souls are wrecked by two guy’s cursory review of Public Records.
Last month, illegal immigration at the United States-Mexico border soared to levels that the country has not seen since Fiscal Year 2014, when more than 51,500 illegal aliens tried to cross the border in April 2015.
In November 2018, there were close to 52,000 border crossings on the southern border, alone, marking the highest level of illegal immigration in the month of November since 2006.
The continuing rise of illegal immigration at the southern border indicates that Fiscal Year 2019 will see the biggest boom of illegal immigration in more than a decade, according to Princeton Researcher Steven Kopits.
In total, Kopits projects that there will be more than 600,000 border crossings next year — a level of illegal immigration that the country has not seen since Fiscal Year 2008, when total southwest border apprehensions exceeded 705,000.
This puts illegal immigration under Trump on track to double what border crossings were in Fiscal Year 2017, when about 310,000 illegal aliens attempted to cross into the U.S. from the southern border.
Spiraling illegal immigration to the country is set behind a backdrop of a White House and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, that have yet to convince House and Senate Republicans — who only have control of Congress for about a month — to fund Trump’s central campaign promise: A southern border wall.
At the same time of the rising illegal immigration totals, the U.S. is continuing to admit more than a million legal immigrants every year to take American jobs. The mass immigration scheme is a boon to real estate developers, who thrive on the booming populations in major cities, and employers who benefit from a flooded labor market with stagnant U.S. wages and displaced American workers.
The country’s mass immigration policy also has massive rewards for Democrats, who are set to import between seven to eight million new foreign-born voters solely from the process known as “chain migration,” and overall, an additional 15 million new foreign-born voters.
Facebook censored the following image of Santa Claus kneeling before the Baby Jesus — warning that the image “may show violent or graphic content.”
LifeSite News reports a second warning beneath the obscured image of Santa on bended knee, reverentially adoring the Christ Child states, “This photo was automatically covered so you can decide if you want to see it.”
This is what the original posting on Facebook looked like:
Source: via Infowars
A boy’s quest to throw snowballs legally in his town ended in victory on Monday, when trustees of Severance, Colo., agreed with a request from Dane Best, 9, to overturn a long-held ban on snowball fights. Best won the town board over with cold logic.
“Today’s kids need reasons to play outside,” Best said, according to member station Colorado Public Radio. “Research suggests that a lack of exposure to the outdoors can lead to obesity, ADHD, anxiety and depression.”
Speaking in front of a crowd of residents and media, Best told town trustees that because of the nearly 100-year-old ban, which classified snowballs as a type of missile, he couldn’t throw a snowball without worrying about breaking the law, or getting into trouble.
As he made his case, Best gave “a description of snowball fights (similar to dodgeball),” according to CPR’s Xandra McMahon, who posted a series of tweets from the meeting.
“I feel like half of this attendance is made up of kids,” McMahon wrote. “That’s a lot of 9-year-olds passionate about throwing snowballs.”
Best took up the cause when he learned about the law during a field trip to town hall this fall, according to the Greeley Tribune. Kyle Rietkerk, the assistant to the Severance town administrator, told the newspaper that staffers often mention the snowball ban to young visitors.
“All of the kids always get blown away that it’s illegal to have snowball fights in Severance,” Rietkerk said. “So, what ends up happening is they always encourage the kids with, ‘You have the power you can change the law.’ No one has.”
But Best took aim at the law, enlisting his elementary school classmates to write letters to the board. He and his family also researched laws in Severance, as he prepared for his presentation.
The board had its own questions for the snowball-fight enthusiast. According to the Tribune, Trustee Dennis “Zeke” Kane wondered, “Can we amend this ordinance to say that if you’re over 60, no one can throw a snowball at you?”
Best satisfied other, more serious, questions, agreeing with the board that kids should not throw snowballs with rocks in them — and that they should not target windows.
In the end, the trustees voted unanimously to agree with Best and overturn the ban, sparking a celebration in the town board chamber.
Afterward, Mayor Don McLeod met Best and other attendees outside, where he gave the boy the honor of throwing the first legal snowball within town limits. The second throw went to Best’s younger brother Dax — whom Dane has identified as his preferred opponent.
Update: As the giant cache of newly released internal emails has also revealed, Karissa Bell of Mashable notes that Facebook used a VPN app to spy on its competitors.
The internal documents, made public as part of a cache of documents released by UK lawmakers, show just how close an eye the social network was keeping on competitors like WhatsApp and Snapchat, both of which became acquisition targets.
Facebook tried to acquire Snapchat that year for $3 billion — an offer Snap CEO Evan Spiegel rejected. (Facebook then spent years attempting, unsuccessfully, to copy Snapchat before finally kneecapping the app by cloning Stories.)
Facebook’s presentation relied on data from Onavo, the virtual private network (VPN) service which Facebook also acquired several months later. Facebook’s use of Onavo, which has been likened to “corporate spyware,” has itself been controversial.
The company was forced to remove Onavo from Apple’s App Store earlier this year after Applechanged its developer guide lines to prohibit apps from collecting data about which other services are installed on its users’ phones. Though Apple never said the new rules were aimed at Facebook, the policy change came after repeated criticism of the social network by Apple CEO Tim Cook. –Mashable
A top UK lawmaker said on Wednesday that Facebook maintained secretive “whitelisting agreements” with select companies that would give them preferential access to vast amounts of user data, after the parliamentary committee released documents which had been sealed by a California court, reports Bloomberg.
The documents – obtained in a sealed California lawsuit and leaked to the UK lawmaker during a London business trip, include internal emails involving CEO Mark Zuckerberg – and led committee chair Damian Collins to conclude that Facebook gave select companies preferential access to valuable user data for their apps, while shutting off access to data used by competing apps. Facebook also allegedly conducted global surveys of mobile app usage by customers – likely without their knowledge, and that “a change to Facebook’s Android app policy resulted in call and message data being recorded was deliberately made difficult for users to know about,” according to Bloomberg.
In one email, dated Feb. 4, 2015, a Facebook engineer said a feature of the Android Facebook app that would “continually upload” a user’s call and SMS history would be a “high-risk thing to do from a PR perspective.” A subsequent email suggests users wouldn’t need to be prompted to give permission for this feature to be activated. –Bloomberg
The emails also reveal that Zuckerberg personally approved limiting hobbling Twitter’s Vine video-sharing tool by preventing users from finding their friends on Facebook.
In one email, dated Jan. 23 2013, a Facebook engineer contacted Zuckerberg to say that rival Twitter Inc. had launched its Vine video-sharing tool, which users could connect to Facebook to find their friends there. The engineer suggested shutting down Vine’s access to the friends feature, to which Zuckerberg replied, “Yup, go for it.”
“We don’t feel we have had straight answers from Facebook on these important issues, which is why we are releasing the documents,” said Collins in a Twitter post accompanying the published emails. –Bloomberg
We don’t feel we have had straight answers from Facebook on these important issues, which is why we are releasing the documents.
— Damian Collins (@DamianCollins) December 5, 2018
Thousands of digital documents were passed to Collins on a London business trip by Ted Kramer, founder of app developer Six4Three, who obtained them during legal discovery in a lawsuit against Facebook. Kramer developed Pikinis, an app which allowed people to find photos of Facebook users wearing Bikinis. The app used Facebook’s data which was accessed through a feed known as an application programming interface (API) – allowing Six4Three to freely search for bikini photos of Facebook friends of Pikini’s users.
Facebook denied the charges, telling Bloomberg in an emailed statement: “Like any business, we had many of internal conversations about the various ways we could build a sustainable business model for our platform,” adding “We’ve never sold people’s data.”
A small number of documents already became public last week, including descriptions of emails suggesting that Facebook executives had discussed giving access to their valuable user data to some companies that bought advertising when it was struggling to launch its mobile-ad business. The alleged practice started around seven years ago but has become more relevant this year because the practices in question — allowing outside developers to gather data on not only app users but their friends — are at the heart of Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal.
Facebook said last week that the picture offered by those documents was misleadingly crafted by Six4Three’s attorneys. –WaPo
“The documents Six4Three gathered for this baseless case are only part of the story and are presented in a way that is very misleading without additional context,” said Facebook’s director of developer platforms and programs, Konstantinos Papamiltiadis, who added: “We stand by the platform changes we made in 2015 to stop a person from sharing their friends’ data with developers. Any short-term extensions granted during this platform transition were to prevent the changes from breaking user experience.”
Kramer was ordered by a California state court judge on Friday to surrender his laptop to a forensic expert after he admitted giving the UK committee the documents. The order stopped just short of holding the company in contempt as Facebook had requested, however after a hearing, California Superior Court Judge V. Raymond Swope told Kramer that he may issue sanctions and a contempt order at a later date.
“What has happened here is unconscionable,” said Swope. “Your conduct is not well-taken by this court. It’s one thing to serve other needs that are outside the scope of this lawsuit. But you don’t serve those needs, or satisfy those curiosities, when there’s a court order preventing you to do so.”
Trouble in paradise?
As Facebook is now faced with yet another data harvesting related scandal, Buzzfeed reports that internal tensions within the company are boiling over – claiming that “after more than a year of bad press, internal tensions are reaching a boiling point and are now spilling out into public view.”
Throughout the crises, Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who maintains majority shareholder control, has proven remarkably immune to outside pressure and criticism — from politicians, investors, and the press — leaving his employees as perhaps his most important stakeholders. Now, as its stock price declines and the company’s mission of connecting the world is challenged, the voices inside are growing louder and public comments, as well as private conversations shared with BuzzFeed News, suggest newfound uncertainty about Facebook’s future direction.
Internally, the conflict seems to have divided Facebook into three camps: those loyal to Zuckerberg and chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg; those who see the current scandals as proof of a larger corporate meltdown; and a group who see the entire narrative — including the portrayal of the company’s hiring of communications consulting firm Definers Public Affairs — as examples of biased media attacks. –Buzzfeed
“It’s otherwise rational, sane people who’re in Mark’s orbit spouting full-blown anti-media rhetoric, saying that the press is ganging up on Facebook,” said a former senior employee. “It’s the bunker mentality. These people have been under siege for 600 days now. They’re getting tired, getting cranky — the only survival strategy is to quit or fully buy in.”
A Facebook spokesperson admitted to BuzzFeed that this is “a challenging time.”
The picture emerging from California’s election is grotesque. How again did Democrats engineer their strange midterm victory in Orange County and in other traditionally Republican areas? In that election, apparently winning Republican candidates were all unseated as the ballots just kept arriving, and arriving, and arriving, until the results flipped. Each and every time. And no such flips happened for Republicans, just Democrats, after they learned that Republicans were winning. And Democrats say it’s just ‘counting all the votes.’
Welcome to ballot-harvesting.
https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law/status/1069052240256819200 Which is why it’s illegal almost everywhere in the world. California, on the other hand, back in 2016, passed AB1921, a law that actually permits it. Anyone can turn in ballots now, no questions asked, no chain of custody required. Back at the time, Democrats were hollering about low turnout and how getting more turnout was a priority, even though they were running a one-party state at that time, as they are now. They painted themselves as all concerned about ‘democracy’ given the low rates of turnout in their districts, many of which were known as ‘rotton boroughs‘ full of non-citizen voters. But what they really had in mind was ‘ballot harvesting.’ Most of the attention at the time from Republicans was focused on the involuntary registration of voters through the Department of Motor Vehicles, which has led to what was feared: the registration of illegal immigrants. But the bigger thing was going on on the outside, with the mail-in ballots nobody asked for and the apparent real purpose for these unasked for and unwanted ballot, which was … ballot-harvesting.
I sign up for every party mail list in order to read what all political sides are thinking, so I get lots of Democratic Party mail, including polls of members, which I answer, probably horrifying Democrats who open such returned polls, as I tell them to get rid of Obamacare. If they want to know what I think, I tell them. Could the fact that I am on those lists be the reason why I got a mail-in ballot when everyone else in my household gets sample ballots and goes to the polls on election day? Despite my Republican registration, it sure sounds like it.
This signals a grotesquely changed electoral landscape. Turns out the mail-in ballots are all that matters now, because all anyone has to do is harvest, and keep harvesting them, until Democrats get the result they want. I wrote about those lingering questions in the recent midterm here.
‘Count all the ballots!’ has been the Democrat rallying cry. Yet in reality, it was their defense of this sneaky little project, making anyone who doesn’t like it someone who wants to disenfranchise people.
It’s a lie. It’s not about counting all the ballots in the slightest, it’s about selectively counting the ballots of only voters who fill in the Democratic slots. The Democratic operative who called herself ‘Lulu’ in the video clip wanted to collect only the ballot of the voter in the household who had no party affiliation, not the ballots of the Republicans, so it wasn’t about counting all the ballots, it was about counting all the Democratic ballots and the ballots of those on the fence who could be muscled into voting Democrat. She after all, offered to ‘help’ that voter, which we all know means the ballot would be filled out a certain way. Oh and here’s another goodie in this: Ballots can be harvested and mailed even on election day, when the counts are happening and Democrats can see which candidates are performing weakly. The operatives can be dispatched like flying monkeys to those districts to intrude on the private spaces of voters who maybe didn’t want to vote or who were planning to go to the polls in the evening, and ‘harvest’ those votes. And you can bet a certain number of those ballots would be cast by people who were afraid of consequences if they didn’t vote the way that ballot harvester standing at the door wanted them to vote. After all, the harvesters, by coming to the homes, signaled they knew where the voters lived, and theoretically, many of these voters could have been illegal immigrants registered whether they liked it or not by the DMV to vote. Oh, and could the operative have steamed open the ballots to see how those people voted and make sure they were delivering the votes? With zero chain of custody rules, they certainly could.
The specter of involuntary registration, combined with ballot harvesting on the other end really does present some selective voting as well as fraud opportunities. This is the kind of thing that went on in Daniel Ortega’s Nicaragua, where the elections were denounced as fraudulent and unfair by global electoral monitors, which may well be where the California Democrats got the idea.
Democrats have yelled for years about turnout and this was what they came up with. They’ve effectively ended the right to abstain, which up until now, has been an acceptable choice, and like commie place they are effectively making voting compulsory for people who don’t want to vote. Lefties have been yelling for years about turnout, and this is the result: ballot-harvesting, the actual thing they had in mind.
Republicans didn’t know about it. Now they do, and now they will have to set up their own ‘ballot-harvesting’ teams for the next election, collecting only Republican ballots just as Democratic operatives collect only Democratic ballots from people who can’t be bothered to go to the polls, or who have a mail-in ballot they didn’t ask for sitting on their dining room tables.There should be quite some competition for people who aren’t registered to any party, with each side considering those ballots their very own and rushing to ‘harvest’ them first. Pity those guys.
But what we have here is a real corruption of democracy, the end of choice in whether to vote, and the selective ‘harvesting’ of votes as now the new ground game. In the era of 3-D and other high-tech printers, and a very badly run electoral operative, the prospect of ballot stuffing is there, too, now that anyone can turn in ballots with zero chain of custody rules.
It’s not democratic, it’s the sort of thing dictatorships in badly run impoverished countries do, and hey, what a coincidence, California leads the nation in poverty. It’s also the kind of thing United Nations observers and the international community’s usually liberal electoral integrity commissions condemn. Where’s the condemnation for this clearly outrageous practice going on in California and on track to get very, very worse?
A Michigan woman who was rejected for a heart transplant by an area hospital because she couldn’t afford the after care has raised more than $30,000 on GoFundMe after her story went viral.
Shortly before Thanksgiving, 60-year-old Hedda Martin received a letter from the Spectrum Health Richard DeVos Heart and Lung Transplant Center recommending that she undertake a “fundraising effort” to raise $10,000 needed to pay for the immunosuppressive drugs necessary to ensure that her body accepts the new heart. After Martin shared it on Facebook, a copy of the letter was posted to Twitter, where it was swiftly picked up by Congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others.
According to her GoFundMe page, Martin developed congestive heart failure following aggressive chemotherapy treatments for breast cancer back in 2005. The $10,000 recommended by the hospital would cover 20% of her copays for the treatment.
“The transplant team does not want to ‘waste’ a vital organ if she cannot afford heart rejection drugs. Understandably,” Martin’s son wrote on her GoFundMe page. “However, they are not even willing to put her on the list knowing it would still give her time to raise money over a year or so through family”
In statement to Splinter, the hospital acknowledged that ability to pay is a factor when determining who receives potentially life saving transplants.
“While it is always upsetting when we cannot provide a transplant, we have an obligation to ensure that transplants are successful and that donor organs will remain viable. We thoughtfully review candidates for heart and lung transplant procedures with care and compassion, and these are often highly complex, difficult decisions,” the organization said. “While our primary focus is the medical needs of the patient, the fact is that transplants require lifelong care and immunosuppression drugs, and therefore costs are sometimes a regrettable and unavoidable factor in the decision-making process.”
Martin’s GoFundMe Page had raised over $30,000 as of this evening…
Please pray for Hedda Martin