Saturday, August 10, 2019
we're not in kansas anymore;
The school district claims he wasn’t punished. But it dragged him out of class for the day and warned him not to correctly identify the biological sex of a classmate again.
Liberty Counsel said an Ohio school district backed down after the religious liberty law firm warned that it could not punish a sixth grader for disagreeing with classmates who said a boy with gender dysphoria was actually a girl.
According to the narrative by Liberty Counsel in a press release and subsequent fundraising pitch, the school uniformly referred to the gender-confused male (“Boy A”) as a girl and used female pronouns for him.
In a redacted letter to the school district, Liberty Counsel said Boy A had started publicly identifying as a female this spring. It became “heavily discussed at the school, particularly by a group of girls” in John’s classes who quickly started treating Boy A as a girl and frequently discussing his “transition” with him in art class...........https://www.thecollegefix.com/sixth-grader-dragged-out-of-class-for-saying-gender-confused-boy-is-a-boy/
The school district claims he wasn’t punished. But it dragged him out of class for the day and warned him not to correctly identify the biological sex of a classmate again.
Liberty Counsel said an Ohio school district backed down after the religious liberty law firm warned that it could not punish a sixth grader for disagreeing with classmates who said a boy with gender dysphoria was actually a girl.
According to the narrative by Liberty Counsel in a press release and subsequent fundraising pitch, the school uniformly referred to the gender-confused male (“Boy A”) as a girl and used female pronouns for him.
In a redacted letter to the school district, Liberty Counsel said Boy A had started publicly identifying as a female this spring. It became “heavily discussed at the school, particularly by a group of girls” in John’s classes who quickly started treating Boy A as a girl and frequently discussing his “transition” with him in art class...........https://www.thecollegefix.com/sixth-grader-dragged-out-of-class-for-saying-gender-confused-boy-is-a-boy/
the direction writer takes reminds me of the famous niemoller quote about 'first they came for the communists and since i wasn't a communist i didn't object..........' those in charge are attacking all of us intentionally and also unintentionally. soon things may come to a head and you will be wise to consider where that will leave you;
As politicians and anti-gun rights activists continuously chant, “we don’t want to take your guns,” behind the scenes — in just months — politicians have been working overtime to limit and remove your right to bear arms. These laws all started as a reaction to the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida last year and with every shooting since, they have sped up. And, like most politicians always do, they are not letting these tragedies go to waste. The problem has gotten so out of control that one US Congressman thinks there may be nothing we can do to stop the gun grabbers from abolishing the entire Second Amendment.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., told reporters this week that there is a political movement brewing in the US to overturn the Second Amendment in its entirety. Americans would no longer have a right to keep and bear arms.
Despite seeing the writing on the wall, Kinzinger is on board with much of the Republican base in the support of red flag laws.
Citizens who are targeted by these laws will be deemed guilty first and only after their guns are taken, will they have a chance to defend themselves in court. This is the de facto removal of due process and if history is any indicator, they will one day be used to disarm those who disagree with the state.
Under these red flag laws, family members or law enforcement officers can petition a judge to seize firearms from a person they think is a threat to themselves or others. The judge could then hold a hearing without the targeted person being present and grant a temporary order for 14 days.
Under the fifth and fourteenth amendments, due process clauses are in place to act as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.
In spite of what officials and the media claim, when a person is stripped of their constitutional rights, albeit temporarily, without being given the chance to make their own case based on what can be entirely arbitrary accusations, this is the removal of due process...........https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/us-congressman-warns-of-political-conspiracy-to-overturn-the-2nd-amendment-in-its-entirety/252084
As politicians and anti-gun rights activists continuously chant, “we don’t want to take your guns,” behind the scenes — in just months — politicians have been working overtime to limit and remove your right to bear arms. These laws all started as a reaction to the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida last year and with every shooting since, they have sped up. And, like most politicians always do, they are not letting these tragedies go to waste. The problem has gotten so out of control that one US Congressman thinks there may be nothing we can do to stop the gun grabbers from abolishing the entire Second Amendment.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., told reporters this week that there is a political movement brewing in the US to overturn the Second Amendment in its entirety. Americans would no longer have a right to keep and bear arms.
Despite seeing the writing on the wall, Kinzinger is on board with much of the Republican base in the support of red flag laws.
Citizens who are targeted by these laws will be deemed guilty first and only after their guns are taken, will they have a chance to defend themselves in court. This is the de facto removal of due process and if history is any indicator, they will one day be used to disarm those who disagree with the state.
Under these red flag laws, family members or law enforcement officers can petition a judge to seize firearms from a person they think is a threat to themselves or others. The judge could then hold a hearing without the targeted person being present and grant a temporary order for 14 days.
Under the fifth and fourteenth amendments, due process clauses are in place to act as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.
In spite of what officials and the media claim, when a person is stripped of their constitutional rights, albeit temporarily, without being given the chance to make their own case based on what can be entirely arbitrary accusations, this is the removal of due process...........https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/us-congressman-warns-of-political-conspiracy-to-overturn-the-2nd-amendment-in-its-entirety/252084
even if you don't own any sort of firearm, the following article aught to cause you to pause in your support of the latest crap coming from 'our' government in which any individual who wishes you harm can easily call a swat raid to fall upon you and your home;
Perhaps you've heard of the "prank" known as "swatting." Perhaps you're even aware of the "swatting" incident that turned deadly. It took place in Wichita, KS back in December of 2017.
In a nutshell, a "prankster" in California made a call to the 9-1-1 operator in Wichita, claiming he was being held hostage at a Wichita home, and that a murder had already occurred there. The caller thought the address he gave was that of an online gamer with whom he was involved in a feud, but that person had tricked him into giving police the address of Andrew Finch, who was not involved in the feud and was at home minding his own business.
Long story short, the Wichita SWAT team responded, and when Andrew Finch stepped out his front door to see what all the commotion was about, the officers, thinking he was the murderer and hostage-taker and that he was reaching for a weapon, shot him dead............https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/red_flag_laws_just_legitimize_swatting.html
Perhaps you've heard of the "prank" known as "swatting." Perhaps you're even aware of the "swatting" incident that turned deadly. It took place in Wichita, KS back in December of 2017.
In a nutshell, a "prankster" in California made a call to the 9-1-1 operator in Wichita, claiming he was being held hostage at a Wichita home, and that a murder had already occurred there. The caller thought the address he gave was that of an online gamer with whom he was involved in a feud, but that person had tricked him into giving police the address of Andrew Finch, who was not involved in the feud and was at home minding his own business.
Long story short, the Wichita SWAT team responded, and when Andrew Finch stepped out his front door to see what all the commotion was about, the officers, thinking he was the murderer and hostage-taker and that he was reaching for a weapon, shot him dead............https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/red_flag_laws_just_legitimize_swatting.html
you might consider the following satire, or realty, depending on where you're standing but it focuses on where we are here in the empire facing 'white supremacists' which we're told are assaulting 'our' government and its 'free consumers' who just can't get a break when going to walmart;
If
you enjoyed the global corporatocracy’s original War on Islamicist
Terror, you’re going to love their latest spinoff, The War on White
Supremacist Terror. It’s basically just like the old War on Terror,
except that this time the bad guys are all white supremacists, and
Donald Trump is Osama bin Laden … unless Putin is Osama bin Laden. OK,
I’m not quite sure who’s Osama bin Laden. Whatever. The point is, the
Terrorists are coming!
Yes,
that’s right, some racist psycho murdered a bunch of people in Texas, so
it’s time to “take the gloves off” again, pass some new kind of Patriot
Act, further curtail our civil liberties, and generally whip the public
up into a mass hysteria over “white supremacist terrorism.”
The New York Times Editorial Board is already hard at work on that front. In a lengthy op-ed that ran last Sunday, “We Have a White Nationalist Terrorist Problem,”
the Board proposes that we would all be safer if the government — but
presumably not the current government — could arbitrarily deem people
“terrorists,” or “potential terrorists,” or “terrorist sympathizers,”
regardless of whether they have any connection to any actual terrorist
groups, and … well, here’s what the Editorial Board has in mind.
“The resources of the American government and its international allies would mobilize without delay. The awesome power of the state would work tirelessly to deny future terrorists access to weaponry, money and forums to spread their ideology. The movement would be infiltrated by spies and informants. Its financiers would face sanctions. Places of congregation would be surveilled. Those who gave aid or comfort to terrorists would be prosecuted.”...........http://www.unz.com/chopkins/the-war-on-white-supremacist-terror/
Friday, August 9, 2019
you may, one day, have to consider this;
Many gun control advocates are asking why anyone would "need" 100 rounds of ammunition in the wake of deadly mass murder attacks, but Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) dismantled those arguments in one tweet. ........https://postnewsd2.blogspot.com/2019/08/republican-rep-massie-dismantles-who.html
Some have asked, “who needs 100 rounds?”
If 6 brave, trained, and alert police officers with professionally maintained weapons fired 58 rounds to subdue the Dayton shooter,
I’d say my wife deserves at least that many chances to protect herself and my kids when I’m not home.
10K people are talking about this
some truth about the empire and the mango mussolini and 'our' wars;
Whenever I criticize the foreign policy of the current US administration, I always get some pushback from Trump supporters who insist that this president is doing more good than harm by “fighting the Deep State” and, even more commonly, by “keeping us out of wars”.
This notion that Donald Trump is some kind of peace president, or even the notion that he puts any more inertia on the US war machine than his predecessor did, is contradicted by all facts and evidence we have available to us. Trump has not ended a single one of the wars his predecessors started, and has added dangerous escalations against Venezuela, Iran, and nuclear-armed Russia.
One of the difficulties in addressing this persistent myth, besides the obvious fact that everyone now lives in tightly cloistered information echo chambers of confirmation bias-feeding validation loops, is that the myth is in some ways bipartisan. Whenever Trump mumbles one of his empty appeals to non-interventionist principles, his supporters lap it up while half of the Democrats start attacking the president for being insufficiently hawkish. Trump’s talk about withdrawing from Syria is a perfect example of this; the troops are still there, but Dems attacked him for irresponsible “isolationist” behavior and his supporters got their fairy tale about their president ending wars. Everyone gets what they want, including the military-industrial complex that Trump pretends to oppose.............https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/08/09/the-persistent-myth-that-trump-opposes-war/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)