Alleged Brussels Terrorist Osama Krayem Starred In Documentary About Successful Integration Of Immigrants

Alleged Brussels Terrorist Was Star Of Documentary About Successful Integration Of Immigrants – Breitbart

.

.
The Syrian-origin Swedish passport holder arrested in Belgium last week for his involvement in the Brussels bomb attacks is a former poster boy for Sweden’s efforts at integrating migrants into their society.

Now accused of murder, and captured on CCTV cameras carrying bags which contained the explosive devices which killed 32 civilians, Islamist Osama Krayem had once been hailed as a model of integration. A former employee of the city of Malmo, at the age of 11 Osama starred in a documentary about migrants in Sweden.

Both of Osama’s parents are Syrian migrants to Sweden, and have told tabloid Aftonbladet they wanted to see their son integrate into Swedish society. The family featured in a 2005 documentary called ‘Without Borders – A Film About Sport And Integration’, in which football-mad Krayem demonstrated how the Malmo football team had helped him settle into Swedish society.

The club had run an integration project, encouraging local migrant youth to play football. Club marketing manager Christer Girke said of the programme: “We wanted to show the importance of integration… the boys were to go to the association to see what the other Swedes did and get to know the [football] associations were important, how it can be a gateway to jobs and much more”.

At the time of the film’s release, he had told local media: “90 percent of our members have a migrant background, as this integration is something I think a lot about. With this project we want to take responsibility for the society we all be living in formed. And how we are formed as people”.

A school friend told the paper that he was “noticeable” by the fact he didn’t party or drink because of his religion. Even when Krayem started posting pictures of himself on Facebook with Islamic State flags and guns, his old friends didn’t think anything was wrong. One said he just thought Krayem was trying to be “cool”, and that was just what “young people are doing”.

Shot with a budget of £22,000, an opening-night review of ‘Without Borders; in Sydsvenskan hailed the “football mad sons” of the Krayem family – the central players in the film – as showing “the essential role of sport for integration”.

When Osama Krayem got a job with Malmo city council as a management intern, he may have been displaying the outward signs of assimilation that were expected of him, but what his employers did not know is that he was saving his salary to buy tickets to Syria. He worked for a year, before suddenly failing to turn up for work one day in 2014.

Osama had successfully joined the Islamic State and started posting pictures of his exploits on Facebook. A year later, Krayem has swapped the migrant enclave he had grown up in – Rosengard – for another. Traveling through Greece as a refugee, he came to reside in Molenbeek, Brussels, he took on took a leading role in organising the bomb attacks.

That superficially well integrated migrants could be plotting attacks or engaging in criminal activity is not a phenomenon limited to Sweden. Breitbart London reported in January on four “unaccompanied minor” migrants who sexually abused young girls at their new school shortly after arrival.

The headmistress of the school responsible for the boys, who abused girls as young as 14, said they were ““integrating themselves very well” into Austrian society.

.

.

California Parole Board Recommends Release Of Crazed Manson Family Killer Leslie Van Houten

Leslie Van Houten, Manson Family Member, Recommended For Parole – CNN

.

.
After 19 denials, Manson Family member Leslie Van Houten is a step closer to being free, after a parole board panel recommended her release, a spokesman for the California department of corrections said Thursday.

The full Board of Parole Hearings will review the decision during the next four months, then could send the case to California Gov. Jerry Brown, according to corrections spokesman Luis Patino.

Brown will have 30 days to decide whether to approve or deny the recommendation.

Van Houten and others were convicted for the 1969 murders of supermarket executive Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary. Van Houten was sentenced to death in 1971 but one year later the death penalty was overturned. Her first conviction was overturned, too, because her lawyer died before that trial ended.

She was tried twice more (one ended in a hung jury) and in 1978 was sentenced to life in prison.

In 1994, Van Houten described her part in the killings in a prison interview with CNN’s Larry King.

“I went in and Mrs. LaBianca was laying on the floor and I stabbed her,” said Van Houten, who was 19 at the time of the murders. “In the lower back, around 16 times.”

Van Houten reportedly has apologized to the LaBianca family.

She was not directly involved in the killings of five people at the home of film director Roman Polanski, near Hollywood. Among the victims that night was Polanski’s pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate.

Van Houten, 66, was convicted of being involved in the conspiracy of those killings and for the murders of the LaBiancas the next night.

She has been described as a model prisoner who worked with other inmates and who earned a college degree.

.

.

*VIDEO* Accused Serial Rapist/Former President Bill Clinton Clashes With ‘Black Lives Matter’ Racists

.

.

The Enormous Fraud Of The Iran Deal Is Catching Up With Obama (Fred Fleitz)

The Enormous Fraud Of The Iran Deal Is Catching Up With Obama – Fred Fleitz

.

.
After a recent surge in threatening behavior by Iran and reports that it may soon be given access to the U.S. financial system, the House Intelligence Committee opened an investigation into whether Obama officials misled Congress about the July 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the Joint Comprehensive plan of Action, or JCPOA). The “historic” deal, they said, would help bring Iran into the “community of nations” and lead to improved relations between Iran and the United States.

While this congressional investigation is a welcome development, it is too little and too late to reverse the Obama administration’s policy of offering any and all concessions – including over $100 billion in sanctions relief – to get a nuclear agreement with Iran. Most members of Congress thought the JCPOA was a bad deal; the majority of them voted against it last fall. But many now realize that this agreement is in fact an enormous fraud that is undermining Middle East and international security.

As I have explained here on National Review Online, in “Obama’s Iran Deal Is the Opposite of What He Promised the American People,” the negotiations that produced the JCPOA were an endless series of fallacies and deceptions. To get Iran to the negotiating table, the Obama administration foolishly agreed that the mullahs could continue to enrich uranium and develop advanced enrichment centrifuges. This means that the timeline for an Iranian nuclear weapon will shorten when the JCPOA is in effect, because Iran will all the while be improving its capability to produce nuclear fuel.

Obama officials made several misleading statements about the JCPOA last July that have come back to haunt them. These will be the focus of the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation.

One of the most controversial of these statements was President Obama’s and Secretary Kerry’s assertion that under this agreement, Iran agreed to comply with U.N. Security Council resolutions barring missile tests for eight years. But there is no language barring missile tests in the JCPOA; this provision is buried in a U.N. Security Council resolution (Resolution 2231) that merely endorsed the JCPOA.

Obama officials later clarified that although the JCPOA does not bar Iranian missile tests, existing U.N. and U.S. missile sanctions would remain in place. But this isn’t exactly true, either. After the International Atomic Energy Agency certified that Iran had taken certain steps to roll back its nuclear program (a certification the IAEA made in January this year), Resolution 2231 lifted previous Security Council missile sanctions and replaced them with much weaker language “calling” on Iran not to test missiles. According to diplomats cited by Reuters, this new formulation is not legally binding and cannot be enforced under Chapter Seven of the U.N. Charter, which deals with sanctions and authorization of military force. The Obama administration made no mention of this in its briefings to Congress on the JCPOA.

For its part, Iran says it never agreed to missile restrictions in the JCPOA and claims its missile tests do not violate Security Council resolutions because they are not designed to carry nuclear warheads. This is absurd. Iran’s missile program is widely believed to be a delivery system for nuclear warheads. If Iran were telling the truth, it would be the only nation in history without a nuclear-weapons program that nonetheless developed missiles with a range of 2,000 kilometers or more. Iran is not building long-range missiles to carry warheads full of dynamite or to fire monkeys into space.

Iran tested ballistic missiles last fall and last month. Written on the sides of some missiles recently launched were the words “Israel must be wiped off the earth.” Last week, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, responded to criticism of the missile tests by saying that Iran’s future is a world of missiles, not negotiations.

Congress is worried that the Obama administration, in an effort to make sure Obama’s “legacy” nuclear deal is not jeopardized, will refuse to take any significant action against Iran for its missile tests. Tellingly, the administration has studiously avoided saying that the missiles Tehran tested were capable of delivering nuclear weapons and that they violated any Security Council resolution. A joint letter sent last week to the U.N. Secretary General from the United States, the United Kingdom, and France said that Iran’s missiles tests were “inconsistent with” and “in defiance of” Resolution 2231 but did not refer to them as a violation.

Congress knows there was at least one secret side deal to the JCPOA that was not briefed to Congress as required by the Corker-Cardin Act. One side deal allowed Iran to inspect itself for evidence of past nuclear-weapons-related work; it was discovered when Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) and Representative Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.) questioned IAEA officials about the JCPOA during a meeting in Vienna last July. Another secret side deal appears to require the IAEA to dumb down its reports on Iran’s nuclear program and its compliance with the JCPOA.

Congressional investigators are also troubled that contrary to administration claims that the JCPOA has the strongest verification provisions in history, the IAEA is unable to visit military facilities because the Iranian parliament approved an alternative version of the deal last October that put these facilities off-limits. The Obama administration has not publicly responded to the Iranian parliament’s action.

One of Congress’s newest concerns about the JCPOA stems from reports that the Obama administration is considering giving Iran at least partial access to the U.S. financial system. As Ilan Berman wrote last week on NRO, the administration may be about to violate promises it made to Congress last summer that it would not give Iran access to U.S. financial institutions or allow it to engage in off-shore dollar transactions with U.S. banks. If so, this would represent another concession to Iran and a sign that Congress cannot trust anything Obama officials have said about the JCPOA.

The House Intelligence Committee will also review a growing list of other belligerent actions by Iran contradicting the Obama administration’s claim that the JCPOA will help bring Iran into the community of nations. On March 29, for instance, the U.S. Navy intercepted an Iranian ship in the Persian Gulf that was transporting 1,500 Kalashnikov assault rifles, 200 rocket-propelled grenade launchers and 21 .50-caliber machine guns that were probably en route to Houthi rebels in Yemen. The Washington Post reported Monday that there have been at least two similar seizures over the last two months.

In addition, since the nuclear deal was announced, Iran has increased its support for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s regime, giving financial support and supplying Iranian and Hezbollah fighters. And last week, the U.S. indicted five Iranians for cyber attacks against U.S. banks, NASDAQ, and a New York dam.

Perhaps the most stunning indictment of Iran’s belligerent behavior since the JCPOA was announced was an unprecedented April 3, 2016, Wall Street Journal op-ed by United Arab Emirates Ambassador to the United States Yousef Al-Otaiba, in which he said:
.

Sadly, behind all the talk of change, the Iran we have long known – hostile, expansionist, violent – is alive and well, and as dangerous as ever.

Iran’s destabilizing behavior in the region must stop. Until it does, our hope for a new Iran should not cloud the reality that the old Iran is very much still with us – as dangerous and as disruptive as ever.

.
President Obama said at last week’s nuclear-security summit that Iran is following the “letter” but not the “spirit” of the JCPOA by complying with the terms of the deal but testing missiles, continuing to call for the destruction of Israel, and supporting terrorism. The House Intelligence Committee investigation indicates that Congress rejects this ludicrous statement and wants a full accounting of what the White House really agreed to in the JCPOA and whether the Obama administration deliberately misled lawmakers.

The House Intelligence Committee’s investigation will not kill the JCPOA or lead to new sanctions against Iran. Its report might condemn Obama officials for misleading Congress, but these officials are certain to ignore the report. Nevertheless, this is an important investigation: If it exposes the JCPOA as a fraudulent agreement that has only exacerbated Iran’s destabilizing behavior, it will pave the way for a Republican president (if one is elected in November) to throw out the JCPOA entirely and begin the process of forging a better agreement with our European allies. The committee’s investigation also may give Americans a better understanding of what kind of legacy President Obama really earned from the JCPOA and his nuclear diplomacy with Iran.

.

.

*VIDEO* Bill Whittle: American Fascists

.

.

Your Daley Gator Leftist Dumbassery Update

University Student Is Ordered Not To Put Her Hand Up To Ask A Question Because She Would Be Violating Her Classmates’ ‘Safe Space’ – Daily Mail

.
……………………..

.
A student was almost kicked out of a meeting after she violated a ‘safe space’ by raising her arm at Edinburgh University.

Imogen Wilson wanted to make a point at Thursday’s student council session when she was told off by officials.

The vice-president for academic affairs at the university’s Student Association was accused of failing disabled students by not responding to an open letter.

She immediately raised her arm to disagree but was made the subject of a ‘ludicrous’ complaint and told not to make the gesture again.

Imogen was also warned for shaking her head during the meeting as it again breached the ‘safe space’ which is part of the university’s Student Association rules.

She told The Huffington Post: ‘…I raised my arms in disagreement, as we had contacted the writers of the letter and tried hard to organise a meeting. It was for that reason that a safe space complaint was made.’

Student Association policy says that council members should be respectful and considerate.

Section 6c of the safe space policy is defined as: ‘Refraining from hand gestures which denote disagreement or in any other way indicating disagreement with a point or points being made. Disagreements should only be evident through the normal course of debate.’

A vote took place to decide whether Imogen should be removed from the meeting after she was accused of breaking the rules.

The vote was in her favour: with 18 people for removal and 33 supporting her staying.

Imogen added: ‘I completely understand the importance of our safe space policy, and will defend it to the ground, but I did not think that was fair, and had it gone further I would have either left or argued against it.’

One student, a fourth-year, who wished to remain anonymous, said the complaint was ‘ludicrous’ and was an ‘abuse of the entire intent of safe space’.

‘We were having one of the most emotionally tense councils of the year, with the vote on the BDS [The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions] movement and people speaking who live in Palestine or are Israeli on both sides of the issue.

.

.

.
‘There was ample risk of there being an actual safe space issue taking place – an anti-semitic or Islamophobic comment for instance – but the whole debate was actually remarkably civil despite how emotional it was.’

First-year Edinburgh student Charlie Peters tweeted against the safe space policy and set up a petition against it. By yesterday afternoon it had 1,000 signatures.

‘Safe spaces now censor “inappropriate hand gestures” – my university is becoming pathetic,’ he told his Twitter followers.

The EUSA have been contacted by MailOnline for comment.

.

.

How A Biased Press Tried To Ignore The Hitlery Email Scandal

Clinton Email Scandal: How A Biased Press Tried To Ignore It – Investor’s Business Daily

.

.
Media Bias: The Washington Post led its Monday paper with a story titled “How Clinton’s Email Scandal Took Root.” What it revealed was that, left to the mainstream press, the story might never have hit the ground.

No one reading the Post’s 5,000-word account can come away thinking that the Clinton email scandal is unimportant.

The FBI now has 147 agents chasing down leads. A key person involved in the scandal has been granted immunity. Hillary Clinton – who has already been caught in several lies – might be questioned by federal agents. There are fairly obvious violations of the law, even if it’s just those governing record-keeping. And there were, and continue to be, concerns that national security secrets were compromised, or at least casually disregarded.

The story details, for example, the many high-level security concerns that officials had about her use of a private BlackBerry to do her emailing, to say nothing of her homebrew email server.

Clinton got a warning from a State Department security official in March 2009 that “any unclassified BlackBerry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving emails, and exploiting calendars.”

Clinton responded that she “gets it,” but as the Post reports, she “kept using her private BlackBerry – and the basement server.”

The Post deserves credit for devoting so much space to summing the entire saga up. And for exposing something the reporter and his editors probably never intended: The media’s negligence as the scandal unfolded.

While the New York Times was the first national media outlet to write about Clinton’s use of a private email account last March, the Post summation makes clear that the mainstream press had almost nothing to do with uncovering the truth or advancing the story.

* The Post notes that it was a nonprofit group called CREW that first cracked the story open, when the State Department responded to its FOIA request for Clinton’s State Department email addresses by saying “no records responsive to your request.”

* The much-ballyhooed House Select Committee on Benghazi discovered her use of a private email account after demanding copies of her email traffic around the time of the attack on the embassy.

* Private cybersecurity firm Venafi discovered how Clinton’s email server had been unencrypted for months. The company “took it upon itself,” the Post notes, to publish its findings on its own website.

* The public release of all Clinton’s State Department emails resulted not from pressure from NBC News, CNN or the New York Times, but from a FOIA request by a startup online news site called Vice News.

* Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, has been more aggressive than any media outlet in going after Clinton’s records, and as a result uncovered several damning emails, including a chain of emails showing how her staff was “taking steps that would help her circumvent” Clinton’s own promise of openness and transparency.

* And where has the “telling truth to power” press been during all this time? Sure, they’ve been passively sharing information when it came out – although often grudgingly and dismissively. But there are few elements of it that reporters themselves were responsible for breaking.

Normally, with a scandal this juicy and involving a would-be president, reporters would be falling over themselves to “advance the story.” But “normal” never seems to apply when a scandal involves a Democrat.

The FBI has 147 investigators focused on the Clinton email case. One wonders how many investigative reporters the New York Times, the Post, and all the other big media outlets have.

.

.

Cooper Union College Rewards Men In Dresses Who Vandalized Bathrooms With Campus-Wide “Degendered” Facilities

New York College Threatens Students Who Don’t Want To Pee With Person Of Opposite Sex – The College Fix

.

.
When Cooper Union student activists forcibly removed the gender identifiers on restrooms around the small campus last fall in the name of transgender solidarity, its acting president did nothing.

Now he’s rewarding their vandalism by making it policy.

Inside Higher Ed reports that the New York college has made all its restrooms gender-neutral and replaced the gendered signs with layout descriptions: “Restroom With Urinals and Stalls,” “Restroom With Only Stalls” or “Restroom Single Occupancy.”

Acting President Bill Mea is also warning students not to practice “gender policing” – that is, having the common reaction of surprise and discomfort when seeing someone of the opposite sex in a multi-user restroom.

He wrote to the community:
.

We have always been ahead of our time and we must continue being leaders on issues of social justice.

We, who are in positions of power, have the obligation to not only stand with those without power, but to stand in front of them, clearing a path for them to walk. I cannot change the outside world and how it treats transgender and gender non-conforming people, but I can change the Cooper Union environment to help everyone feel safe when they are inside our buildings. Please know that my decision comes from a personal sense of obligation to others, which is a reflection of my beliefs and, I believe, an extension of the beliefs held by our founder.

.
He said he didn’t put the names back on the restrooms after they were vandalized by activists “in order to see how we all reacted,” which was mostly no reaction. (Lesson to activists: If your rulebreaking is popular, you’ll get away with it.)

Mea hints that students could face disciplinary action if they make those of the opposite sex or transgender students feel uncomfortable in the newly “degendered” multi-user restrooms:
.

I also ask that none of us practice gender policing, where we attempt to restrict someone from using the same restroom we are using or make them feel uncomfortable for doing so. If you feel uncomfortable sharing a restroom, then the single-occupancy restrooms will now be available to you.

.
The policy doesn’t extend to locker rooms because Cooper Union doesn’t have any, Inside Higher Ed says.

Campus Pride, the LGBT college activist group, said Cooper Union was the first college it knew of that had made “every campus restroom in academic buildings gender inclusive.”

Cooper Union’s move stands in contrast to the George Washington University law school’s decision to convert a multi-user men’s room to “all gender” but add a lock and encourage students to use it one at a time – a change that brought its own vandalism.

.

.

Obama Regime Censors Video Of French President Saying ‘Islamist Terrorism’

WH Censors French President Saying ‘Islamist Terrorism’ – MRC

The White House website has censored a video of French Pres. Francois Hollande saying that “Islamist terrorism” is at the “roots of terrorism.”

The White House briefly pulled video of a press event on terrorism with Pres. Obama, and when it reappeared on the WhiteHouse.gov website and YouTube, the audio of Hollande’s translator goes silent, beginning with the words “Islamist terrorism,” then begins again at the end of his sentence.

Even the audio of Hollande saying the words “Islamist terrorism” in French have, apparently, been edited from the video.

According to the official White House transcript of Hollande’s remarks, Hollande refers to “Islamist terrorism.” The audio of the bold text in brackets is missing from the video – the only point in the video were the audio is absent:

“We are also making sure that between Europe and the United States there can be a very high level coordination.

“But we’re also well aware that the roots of terrorism, [Islamist terrorism, is in Syria and in Iraq. We therefore have to act both in Syria and in Iraq, and this is what we’re doing within the framework of the coalition.] And we note that Daesh is losing ground thanks to the strikes we’ve been able to launch with the coalition.”

Watch the video of Hollande’s censored comment:
.

.
Pres. Obama has come under fire from Republicans for his refusal to say “radical Islam” when discussing terrorism and, again yesterday, he declined to do so.

Obama made three vague mentions of terrorism, citing the “hands of terrorism,” the “scourge of terrorism,” and “counterterrorism” in Thursday’s press event.

.

.

Federal Judge: Hitlery’s Email Stories “Constantly Shifting” – Obama Regime Showed “Bad Faith” Providing Records

Hillary Clinton Email Stories ‘Constantly Shifting,’ Judge Says – Washington Times

.

.
Former Secretary Hillary Clinton and her State Department colleagues have given “constantly shifting” stories about her secret email account, a federal judge said Tuesday, finding there’s evidence the Obama administration showed “bad faith” in how it followed open-records laws.

Judge Royce C. Lamberth said it remains to be seen whether the government did try to obfuscate matters, but said there’s at least enough smoke that Judicial Watch, the conservative interest group suing to get a look at all of Mrs. Clinton’s records, should be allowed to press for more details about how the State Department made its decisions.

“Plaintiff is relying on constantly shifting admissions by the government and the former government officials,” Judge Lamberth said.

Mrs. Clinton declined to use a State.gov email account during her term as secretary, instead using an email account tied to a server she kept at her home in New York.

All of her messages that concerned official business were supposed to be archived by the State Department, but she kept them, only returning them in December 2014, nearly two years after leaving office and only at the prompting of the House committee probing the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi.

That meant that during her four years in office and nearly two years afterward, the State Department was not searching those documents in response to open-records requests from Congress or the public.

Last month, the State Department finally finished processing more than 30,000 pages of Mrs. Clinton’s emails and made them public on the department’s Freedom of Information Act web page – a mammoth undertaking that has put a treasure trove of information in the public’s eye.

Judicial Watch and others argue that some 30,000 other messages Mrs. Clinton sent from her secret address during her time in office, but which she has deemed private business, should also be reviewed by the government.

The State Department told Judge Lamberth it never misled the public because it never said it was searching Mrs. Clinton’s emails in the first place. The department said that meant it wasn’t acting in bad faith when it responded to open-records requests.

Judge Lamberth, though, said more evidence is needed before those conclusions can be reached.

“The government argues that this does not show a lack of good faith, but that is what remains to be seen, and the factual record must be developed appropriately in order for this court to make that determination,” he said in a brief ruling.

The Justice Department declined to comment on Judge Lamberth’s ruling, which marks the third legal black eye for the Obama administration in recent weeks.

Last week, a federal appeals court said the Justice Department was turning the law on its head to protect the IRS from taxpayers, rather than to protect taxpayers from the IRS.

And another judge issued a “show cause” order demanding to know why the government appeared to conceal documents in an open-records case brought against a top Obama climate adviser. Judge Amit Mehta, who serves on the district court in Washington, D.C., along with Judge Lamberth, raised the possibility of punishing the administration for its actions.

Judge Lamberth’s decision Tuesday joins that of Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, also in the district court in Washington, who earlier this year granted discovery in another case brought by Judicial Watch against the State Department.

Judge Sullivan even said he was inclined to order the State Department to demand all of Mrs. Clinton’s emails – including the 30,000 or so messages she said were private business, not public records, that she sent from her secret account during her time in office.

Judge Lamberth said he’ll wait to see what Judge Sullivan decides before moving ahead with discovery in his own case.

.

.

*VIDEOS* Moonbat Takes A Swing At A Trump Supporter – Is Immediately Pepper Sprayed

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related video:

.

.

.

Democrat Governor Of New York Bans State Travel To North Carolina While Encouraging Visits To Cuba

NY Gov. Cuomo Bans State Travel To North Carolina But Encourages Cuba Visits – Washington Free Beacon

.

.
New York’s Democratic governor banned state travel to North Carolina this week, citing its residents’ supposed lack of equal protection under the law, weeks after he announced efforts to facilitate travel from New York to Cuba, which is ruled by a repressive communist dictatorship that routinely imprisons political dissenters.

“In New York, we believe that all people – regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation – deserve the same rights and protections under the law,” said Gov. Andrew Cuomo in announcing a ban on “non-essential” state travel to North Carolina.

The move came in response to a new North Carolina law that restricts gendered restrooms to people of their respective biological sexes.

New York will no longer sponsor official travel to North Carolina, but Cuomo himself has recently undertaken official travel to Cuba, and teamed up with JetBlue airlines to encourage travel to the island nation, where the government has imprisoned and tortured transgender people.

Attitudes towards gay and transgender individuals on the island have liberalized in recent years, but many say they are still “harassed and detained by police,” according to a January report from Public Radio International. “They also say they can’t get jobs.”

One transgender individual described her attitude:
.

And even with US and Cuba relations normalizing now, she still can’t bring herself to ever go back home.

“I suffered too much trauma in Cuba. It would cause me too much panic to return there. I wouldn’t go back, even for a short visit.”

Her resolve hardens when she looks down at her arm. The self-inflicted scars left from her life in Cuba’s prisons are a permanent reminder of a time when she could not be free — could no [sic] be herself.

.

.

Black Woman Gets In White Student’s Face Over His Dreadlocks (Video)

Woman Gets In White Student’s Face For Having Dreadlocks – Daily Caller

A video allegedly showing a woman at San Francisco State University verbally badgering a student for “cultural appropriation” has gone viral after being posted on YouTube Monday evening.
.

.
The woman can be heard telling the student, a white male, he can’t wear dreadlocks because “it’s [her] culture” and threatens to cut them off with scissors. The woman is identified in the YouTube as a “campus employee.”

After the student attempts to extricate himself from the woman’s grasp – “you have no right to tell me what I can wear on my head… stop touching me” – she pulls him back and says, “if you put your hands on me, you’re gonna learn.”

At the end of the video, she asks the cameraman “why are you filming this?” and shoves the lens after he responds, “for everyone’s safety.”

.

.

Your Daley Gator Why-Isn’t-Hillary-In-Jail-Yet Story O’ The Day

Bombshell: Clinton Foundation Donor’s Flight From Justice Aided By Hillary Allies – The Observer

.

.
Recent news reports indicate that the FBI is investigating former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for granting favors to her family’s foundation donors and for its systematic accounting fraud. In January, the Sunday Times of London cited former Judge Andrew Napolitano, a conservative libertarian and frequent Fox News guest, as saying that the FBI was taking evidence “seriously” and that Hillary “could hear about that soon from the Department of Justice.”

It’s hard to believe that the Obama administration and its hideously politicized Justice Department would ever indict Ms. Clinton, given that President Barack Obama picked her for secretary of state and its clear favoritism toward her in the presidential race. But there is massive evidence that shows financial abuses – including money laundering – at the Clinton Foundation and overwhelming evidence that donors were helped by Ms. Clinton.

To take one of so many examples, there’s the case of Clinton Foundation donor Claudio Osorio – who is now housed at a federal prison serving 12 years for fraud – who in 2010, with Ms. Clinton’s (and Bill Clinton’s) help, won a $10 million loan from the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.

The loan was granted to an Osorio firm called InnoVida, which was supposed to build houses in earthquake-ravaged Haiti. Instead, Osorio pocketed the money and used it to underwrite his lavish lifestyle and to pay off politicians. For political muscle, Osorio – who also had close ties to Jeb Bush, who sat on the board of a bank he owned – paid a lobbyist and major Hillary fundraiser named Jonathan Mantz.

And that leads me to another Clinton Foundation donor Ms. Clinton helped out who happened to use Mr. Mantz (who now runs Ms. Clinton’s presidential campaign Super PAC) and apparently with the same great effect: Gonzalo Tirado, a crooked Venezuelan financier.

Mr. Tirado was president of and ran Venezuelan operations for the famously corrupt Stanford Bank, which was headquartered in Antigua and was named for its American founder, Allen Stanford. He and Mr. Stanford came to be extremely close and “were like father and son,” one well-placed source told me.

Mr. Stanford’s name may ring a bell as he was sentenced to prison for 110 years for committing an $8 billion Ponzi scheme. In 2006, the Hugo Chavez government was asked to investigate Mr. Tirado by scandal-plagued, pro-Wall Street New York Congressman Gregory W. Meeks, a member of the House Committee on Financial Services and a major recipient of cash and perks from jailbird Allen Stanford. Mr. Tirado was charged with tax evasion and theft, The Hill newspaper reported.

As I’ll detail below – and I uncovered this story with help from the National Legal and Policy Center, a Virginia-based watchdog group – Tirado soon fled for Miami to avoid prosecution and petitioned the State Department, through Mr. Mantz, for political asylum. It’s not clear if he won asylum – and he doesn’t seem to merit it as he had no record of political opposition to the Chavez government – but it is clear that he was allowed to remain in the U.S. and live a life of luxury.

(Mr. Tirado, who did not reply to a request for comment, has kept a low profile as of late. His last reported sighting came in 2014, when he unsuccessfully tried to commit suicide, or at least claimed he intended to kill himself.)

Incredibly, the Obama administration not only failed to help the Chavez government investigate Mr. Tirado, but it also indicted a legendary former DEA agent named Tom Raffanello, a one-time head of the DEA’s Miami office and the agency’s chief of congressional affairs during Bill Clinton’s first term as president.

Mr. Raffanello’s subsequent prosecution, which ended in abysmal failure, almost surely was prompted and abetted by Mr. Tirado, a secret FBI informant. Unsurprisingly, the vindicated Mr. Raffanello had few kind words for Mr. Tirado or Ms. Clinton during a recent interview.

“Tirado believed in buying influence,” Mr. Raffanello said of the crooked financier. “He wouldn’t give away 10 cents that he didn’t think he’d get back a dollar on. That was his entire philosophy.”

As for Ms. Clinton, he said that during her years in the Obama administration the “prevailing wisdom in Miami at the time, among people in high profile civil and criminal defense circles, was that giving money to the Clinton Foundation was very helpful. She was secretary of state and a potential future president. I’m sure that’s the same thinking now.”

(Ms. Clinton’s presidential campaign did not reply to a request for comment.)

Up until 2006, life was cushy for pampered, wealthy, jet-setting Gonzalo Tirado, who was running the Stanford Bank’s Venezuela operations. Events took a turn for the worse when an internal Stanford Bank audit discovered that he had fleeced about $5 million from the company.

Mr. Tirado’s actions did not sit well with Stanford, and the Venezuelan beat a hasty exit from his job. He soon opened a bank of his own and lured in a few local investors. His new enterprise went down the tubes, and the defrauded locals, who were very close to the Chavez government, looked to it for help, leading to an investigation of Mr. Tirado.

At the same time, the Chavez government was investigating Mr. Tirado at the behest of Stanford, through his hand-picked emissary, Congressman Meeks. (See this Wikileaked cable for more on the topic and on Mr. Tirado’s feud with the Venezuelan government.) That led to the filing of criminal charges against Mr. Tirado, as noted above. (The Venezuelan embassy in Washington did not reply to a request for comment.)

Mr. Tirado, apparently a conscienceless paranoid who felt no remorse for his actions, became convinced that Stanford Bank was monitoring his activities and tapping his phone and was the source of all of his troubles. Perhaps sensing he was in deep trouble, he fled Venezuela for Miami.

Mr. Tirado began spending money like a drunken sailor. He purchased at least two luxury estates in the Miami area. He also became a major investor in several companies, including a security firm called Command Consulting Group for which he recruited as a front man W. Ralph Basham, a former senior official with the Department of Homeland Security under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

Command Consulting Group, “an international security and intelligence consulting firm that provides advisory services to governments, corporations, and high net worth individuals,” according to its website, and whose top officials include a number of other former senior government terror and security veterans, is currently run out of an office in Washington. (Mr. Basham did not reply to a request for comment.)

As 2009 dawned, life could hardly have been better for the pampered Mr. Tirado. There was just one small problem: He needed to stay in the U.S. to avoid being sent back back to Venezuela, where he was sure to face trial and imprisonment. To stay in the U.S., Mr. Tirado needed the continued indulgence of the U.S. State Department.

Fortunately for Mr. Tirado, the U.S. government had been hostile to Venezuela ever since the South American nation of 31 million moved to the left in 2002, when Chavez was elected to the first of his three terms.

(Note and disclosure: Chavez died in 2013, and the country is now led by his former vice president, Nicolás Maduro. Despite its flaws, the country’s socialist government has made remarkable strides in bettering the lives of Venezuela’s poor majority. In 2004, I met Chavez as a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, and I consider him to be the greatest force for democratic change in modern Latin American history with the possible exception of Che Guevera.)

The George W. Bush administration had regularly conspired with the rancid political opposition, which Chavez displaced from power, and had sought to destabilize and overthrow the Chavez government with the help of local Venezuelan surrogates. Incoming President Barack Obama and his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, were rabid opponents of Chavez’s as well, but Mr. Tirado didn’t want to count on that alone.

Knowing how the corrupt U.S. political system works, he hired an American lobbyist, Jonathan Mantz, to game the asylum process for him while he took it easy and spent his loot in America.

Mantz then worked at BGR, the firm of Republican Haley Barbour, the famously overweight former Mississippi governor and one of the most prominent of all GOP lobby shops. He had previously worked as finance director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and for the laughably corrupt New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine.

Mr. Mantz, who had no real qualifications to be a lobbyist other than his ability to raise money – and who did not reply to a request for comment – had drummed up cash for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. Currently Mr. Mantz chairs Hillary’s 2016 Super PAC, Priorities USA Action. Mr. Tirado paid BGR $350,000.

Now sufficiently motivated, Mantz went to work lobbying Hillary’s State Department to let Tirado stay in Miami. Meanwhile, the crooked Mr. Tirado donated between $5,000 and $10,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to its website. As is its custom, the foundation does not state when the donation was made and declined to answer questions about the money it took from Mr. Tirado.

Coincidentally or not, Mr. Tirado was one four of Mr. Mantz’ clients who donated to the Clinton Foundation during his brief 16-month career as a lobbyist.

Now let’s discuss the story of former DEA agent Thomas Raffanello, at which point this story becomes even more outrageous.

Mr. Raffanello worked for the DEA for more than three decades. He left in 2004 and went to work as the head of security for the Stanford Bank. “We set up cameras to prevent bank robberies and generally provided security at bank offices and functions,” Mr. Raffanello told me last weekend during the course of several lengthy phone interviews. “I was based in Miami but had offices in Caracas, Quito, Antigua and a few other places.”

Mr. Raffanello said Allen Stanford “couldn’t balance a checkbook” and described him as “a spoiled billionaire.” When I asked him why he went to work for Stanford in the first place he said, “I did due diligence. I called several associates, including the former head of DEA in Miami before me and several former assistant U.S. attorneys who worked for him. No one ever gave me a bad word; they said he was eccentric but a straight shooter. Madeleine Albright worked for him, and the former president of Switzerland was one of his board members.”

Stanford Bank collapsed and was put into receivership in 2010, at which point Mr. Raffanello left the company. But well before then Mr. Tirado – who, a source told me, had become an FBI informant – had become convinced that Mr. Raffanello was the source for all of his problems with the Chavez government and its investigation into him. Hence, he began a smear campaign against Mr. Raffanello in Venezuela and the United States.

As I mentioned above, it was Congressman Meeks – who currently supports Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and who took in more money from Stanford than any single member of Congress other than Charles Rangel and Pete Sessions of Texas – who prompted the Chavez government to look into Mr. Tirado.

But the paranoid Mr. Tirado, certain Mr. Raffanello was to blame, paid Venezuelan writers to place stories saying Mr. Raffanello worked for the CIA, Mr. Raffanello told me. That led to the Chavez government questioning Mr. Raffanello for alleged corruption involving the Stanford bank, though it determined the allegations were groundless and never charged him.

“Venezuela is like Casablanca,” Mr. Raffanello said. “If you tell a story twice it becomes the truth. It became impossible for me to go to Venezuela because I feared I’d get picked up by law enforcement.”
.

“I thought I was going to get Shanghaied, but you can’t make something out of nothing.” – Thomas Raffanello.

.
Meanwhile, Mr. Raffanello said, Mr. Tirado told the FBI and the Justice Department that he was trying to arrange Mr. Tirado’s kidnapping and was spying on him. “The guy knows how to play the game, and he played it at a high level because he had plenty of money,” Mr. Raffanello said.

About a year after Mr. Raffanello left Stanford Bank, he was indicted by the Obama Justice Department for allegedly shredding Stanford Bank documents. The case went to trial in Miami in 2010. On February 10 of that year, as the jury was deliberating, Judge Richard Goldberg interrupted its deliberations and unilaterally acquitted Raffanello (and another defendant), saying the evidence against him was “substantially lacking.”

It is highly unusual for a person to escape conviction after being indicted by a federal grand jury, let alone for the government to be humiliated in court as it was in the Raffanello case. Stunned federal prosecutors begged the judge to at least allow the jury to render a verdict because the acquittal would prevent them from appealing a verdict.

The judge dismissed their plea, and Mr. Raffanello’s ordeal was over. “I thought I was going to get Shanghaied, but you can’t make something out of nothing,” he said.

To sum up here, a corrupt Venezuelan banker hired a lobbyist close to Hillary Clinton, made a donation to her family’s foundation and has been allowed to live in the United States without fear of prosecution in his homeland. At a time that Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, the Obama Administration staged what can only be described as a political prosecution of an honest man and long-time government employee.

Mr. Raffanello has concluded this about Hillary Clinton’s campaign: “I learned a lot about her and her family when I was in the government, and how they are put together,” he said. “She is a person who will say and do anything in order to get elected president. I don’t think she’s going to win, but there’s nothing she won’t do while trying.”

.

.

Colorado School District Approves Circulation Of Satanic Literature To Students By Anti-Christian Nutjobs

Colorado School District To Begin Distribution Of Satanic Materials To Children – Big Government

.
…………….

.
After coming under fire from atheist groups for the distribution of free Bibles, the Delta County School District (DCSD) has approved the circulation of atheistic, secular and Satanic literature to middle and high school students.

Several atheist organizations, including The Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), Western Colorado Atheists and Freethinkers (WCAF) and the Satanic Temple, applied to distribute their literature as a challenge to the school district’s “open forum” policy that allows any group to distribute non-curricular literature to students, as long as it conforms to policy guidelines.

Kurt Clay, the Assistant Superintendent of the Delta School District, said if they are going to make literature for things such as Boy Scouts, 4H or other organizations available, they have to allow all types of information to be available to students.

“This is the other side of that,” explained Kurt Clay, the Assistant Superintendent. “The policy says we cannot discriminate what is handed out, we just have to follow the process.”

Certain exceptions exist, and the materials can’t advocate criminal behavior, violence or drug use, advertise commercial products, or be pornographic. The School District has appealed to this policy as a justification for distributing Gideon Bibles to students on school grounds during class hours.

In December, 2015, a Delta Middle School student complained about the offering of Gideon Bibles to students and the Western Colorado Atheist and Freethinkers said that the distribution of those bibles prompted their desire to distribute atheist material as well.

The distribution of the atheistic materials will take place on April 1, 2016. The proponents of the new materials say that they are offering Delta students an alternative way of thinking.

Some of the brochures to be offered to students include “Top 10 Public School State-Church Violations and How to Stop Them,” “What’s Wrong with the Ten Commandments?” and “The Satanic Children’s Big Book of Activities.”

Ann Landman with the Western Colorado Atheist and Freethinkers says the issue in play here is freedom of speech.

“Students are not only getting a lesson about the federal laws and our constitution, but also a different point of view that you can find around the world,” Landman contended.

But Western Colorado Atheist and Freethinkers have said that what they are really after is a change of policy, to separate religion and schools, and believe that by handing out provocative literature they will achieve this end.

The Delta School District has already stated that they are looking into revising their policy to continue providing materials that benefit students, but do not include material on religion or beliefs.

.

.

Your Daley Gator Our-Country-Is-Doomed Story O’ The Day

Fearful College Students Cry And Call For A Safe Space Because Someone Chalked “Trump 2016” On A Sidewalk – Daily Sheeple

.

.
You’re gonna think this came from The Onion, but I assure you it didn’t. This really happened here in America. This is the level we are at.

People are always talking about how they are afraid of terrorism. Or economic collapse. You know what I’m afraid of?

The younger generations of college students who have apparently been socially engineered to be complete and utter pansies who run crying to authorities any time someone disagrees with them and who beg to have everyone stripped of their First Amendment right to free speech because they apparently have the backbones of garden slugs.

These are the young adults of America’s “future”??

Look at this picture from the Emory Wheel, Emory University’s student-run newspaper:

.

.
You would think just by glancing at this that someone died.

Nope. This is a student response to someone chalking campus with “fear-inducing” pro-Donald Trump messages like… wait for it… “Trump 2016” on the campus of Emory University.

Check out this harrowing tale… if you dare!
.

The chalkings that generated such controversy appeared overnight throughout Emory’s campus. College junior Harpreet Singh said that, initially, he did not find the chalkings significant. “I saw one big one, ‘Trump 2016,’ so I thought it was an isolated incident and I didn’t think much of it,” he said. “I thought, ‘Okay, it’s just a guy who wants to write whatever he wants to believe in for his political campaign.’ I was like, ‘Okay, I’m fine with that, to a certain extent.’”

Singh reported having seen multiple chalkings that read “Trump 2016” between Cox Hall Bridge and the Dobbs University Center (DUC). “What I also saw on the steps near Cox [Hall] Bridge was ‘Accept the Inevitable: Trump 2016,’” he said. “That was a bit alarming. What exactly is the inevitable? Why does it have to be accepted?”

.
And THIS:
.

“I’m supposed to feel comfortable and safe [here],” one student said. “But this man is being supported by students on our campus and our administration shows that they, by their silence, support it as well… I don’t deserve to feel afraid at my school,” she added.

.
And also this:
.

“How can you not [disavow Trump] when Trump’s platform and his values undermine Emory’s values that I believe are diversity and inclusivity when they are obviously not [something that Trump supports]” one student said tearfully.

.
TEARFULLY??

This story, in all actuality, has nothing to do with Trump. Or even politics.

These are adult-aged manchildren and womenchildren who apparently cannot handle it when people have opinions that differ from their own, opinions which fall outside of the sphere of allotted politically correct opinions they have been propagandized and programmed with since their tiny tot days in the brainwashing centers that pass for American public schools these days.

Back to reality, we’re talking about CHALK.

Chalk writing on university sidewalks.

Chalk that disappears with the first hint of rain or eventually just wears off on its own.

Instead of getting their own chalk and writing their own message, or just simply ignoring someone who they disagree with politically, these college students began a protest and ran crying to the university president in fear trying to shut down free speech – a common scene on college campuses these days.

The students demanded that the university to publicly, officially disavow Trump (meaning, they wanted a university to openly take a political stance) and everything Trump stands for. The university would not because universities are not supposed to endorse political ideologies.

Here’s a picture of the meeting about it in the president’s office:

.

.
Look at how serious they are, as if sidewalk chalk is a real issue.

The university did respond by changing the campus chalking policy, however. Now if a student wants to write something on the sidewalk at Emory in chalk, they have to reserve the right through an online platform so it can be pre-approved.Way to uphold the First Amendment there, Emory.

In addition, the university is reviewing security footage to attempt to find the dastardly devil who dared to chalk “Trump 2016” on the sidewalk and terrorize these precious little snowflakes.

One wonders what happens to these “adults” once they leave the hallowed safe space that is their campus and they have to deal with the real world where no one cares if they are scared of chalk. A world where someone might – GASP! – put a “Trump 2016” sign in their own front yard, for example? A world where the news media might show pro-Trump rallies in the 2016 election coverage.

Do they fall down on the sidewalk and ball into a fetal position and weep? Drive their cars into a tree?? Do their heads explode like in the movie Scanners???

On a side note, these students are okay with seeing the words “Trump 2016” physically together without bursting into tears and cowering in fear so long as the word “stop” is with them.

Then that’s okay, apparently.

.

.
Notice the word “gently” in this paragraph… Better wrap up the meeting gently. Better not hurt these poor darlings by wrapping up the meeting like adults…

.

.

Your Daley Gator Islamic Terrorism/Leftist Incompetence News Roundup (Videos)

Brussels Bomber Was Deported From Turkey For Terror Offences Last June But Belgian Authorities Let Him Go, Turkish President Sensationally Claims – The Sun

.
…………….

.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has sensationally claimed that one of the Brussels bombers was arrested for terror offences and deported back to Belgium last June.

Erdogan claimed that Turkish authorities informed Belgium that the arrested man – believed to Ibrahim El-Bakraoui – was “a foreign fighter” but investigators allowed him to walk free because they couldn’t establish terror links.

The news raises yet more questions about the embattled Belgian security forces’ ability to prevent acts of terror being plotted and carried out in jihadi hotbeds in the country.

Speaking this afternoon, Erdogan said that Belgian authorities released the suspect despite Turkish warnings that he was “a foreign fighter” who had been captured on the border with Syria.

Erdogan did not identify the individual but NTV television named him as Ibrahim El Bakraoui, one of the two men who blew themselves up at Brussels airport.

He added that Belgian authorities had failed to confirm the suspect’s links to terrorism “despite our warnings” following his deportation.

Erdogan went on to say Belgian consular authorities were formally notified of his deportation on July 14, 2015. He added that he was then released by the Belgian authorities.

“Despite our warnings that this person was a foreign terrorist fighter, the Belgian authorities could not identify a link to terrorism,” he said at a news conference alongside visiting Romanian President Klaus Iohannis.

Erdogan said that the Netherlands were also implicated in the issue as the man had initially been deported to the Netherlands at his own request and the Dutch authorities informed.

He did not specify how he had been transferred from the Netherlands to Belgium where 31 people died in bomb attacks on Tuesday.

“I believe that we can work this out (the fight against terror) if world leaders form an alliance against terror. For that, we need to redefine global terror and terrorists,” Erdogan added.

Turkey has previously complained that Western countries did not heed warnings of the dangers posed by jihadists it had expelled back to Europe after arresting them on the Syrian border.

European officials have also urged Turkey to improve intelligence sharing and praised an increase in cooperation in recent months.

31 people were killed and 270 injured after a series of blasts in Zaventem airport, and an hour later a Metro station in Maalbeek.

One of the airport suicide bombers was named as Ibrahim El-Bakraoui, while his brother Khalid El-Brakraoui has been confirmed as the Metro attacker.

Both brothers were well known to police before the attacks, with Khalid even being hunted by Interpol.

But despite the international manhunt for the pair due to their links with last November’s Paris attacks, the pair appear to have been freely moving around Brussels.

There are also serious concerns over the ease with which Belgium-based jihadis have been able to escape despite huge manhunts.

Paris attacker Salah Abdesalem vanished during one police raid last before being captured.

And there appears to have been no trace of Najim Laachraoui since his suitcase nail failed to explode at Brussels airport yesterday morning.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related articles:

.
ISIS Trains 400 Fighters To Attack Europe In Wave Of Bloodshed – Associated Press

The Islamic State group has trained at least 400 fighters to target Europe in deadly waves of attacks, deploying interlocking terror cells like the ones that struck Brussels and Paris with orders to choose the time, place and method for maximum chaos, officials have told The Associated Press.

The network of agile and semiautonomous cells shows the reach of the extremist group in Europe even as it loses ground in Syria and Iraq.

The officials, including European and Iraqi intelligence officials and a French lawmaker who follows the jihadi networks, described camps in Syria, Iraq and possibly the former Soviet bloc where attackers are trained to target the West. Before being killed in a police raid, the ringleader of the Nov. 13 Paris attacks claimed he had entered Europe in a multinational group of 90 fighters, who scattered “more or less everywhere.”

But the biggest break yet in the Paris attacks investigation – the arrest on Friday of fugitive Salah Abdeslam – did not thwart the multipronged attack just four days later on the Belgian capital’s airport and subway system that left 31 people dead and an estimated 270 wounded. Three suicide bombers also died.

Just as in Paris, Belgian authorities were searching for at least one fugitive in Tuesday’s attacks – this time for a man wearing a white jacket who was seen on airport security footage with the two suicide attackers. The fear is that the man, whose identity Belgian officials say is not known, will follow Abdeslam’s path.

After fleeing Paris immediately after the November attacks, Abdeslam forged a new network back in his childhood neighborhood of Molenbeek, long known as a haven for jihadis, and renewed plotting, according to Belgian officials.

“Not only did he drop out of sight, but he did so to organize another attack, with accomplices everywhere. With suicide belts. Two attacks organized just like in Paris. And his arrest, since they knew he was going to talk, it was a response: ‘So what if he was arrested? We’ll show you that it doesn’t change a thing,'” said French Senator Nathalie Goulet, co-head of a commission tracking jihadi networks.

Estimates range from 400 to 600 Islamic State fighters trained specifically for external attacks, according to the officials, including Goulet. Some 5,000 Europeans have gone to Syria.

“The reality is that if we knew exactly how many there were, it wouldn’t be happening,” she said.

More than four sources with access to tallies of fighters tasked with Europe attacks independently corroborated the numbers of fighters who trained for specific attacks in Europe, including some who have spoken to fighters directly. Others have cross checked information regarding fighters leaving or returning.

Two of the suicide bombers in Tuesday’s attacks, Belgian-born brothers Ibrahim and Khalid El Bakraoui, were known to authorities as common criminals, not anti-Western radicals until an apartment one of them rented was traced to Abdeslam last week, according to Belgian state broadcaster RTBF. Similarly, an Algerian killed inside that apartment on March 15 had nothing but a petty theft record in Sweden – but he’d signed up as an Islamic State suicide bomber for the group in 2014 and returned to Europe as part of the Nov. 13 plot.

In claiming responsibility for Tuesday’s attack, the Islamic State group described a “secret cell of soldiers” dispatched to Brussels for the purpose. The shadowy cells were confirmed by the EU police agency, Europol, which said in a late January report that intelligence officials believed the group had “developed an external action command trained for special forces-style attacks.”

French speakers with links to North Africa, France and Belgium appear to be leading the units and are responsible for developing attack strategies in Europe, said a European security official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss briefing material. He is also familiar with interrogations of former fighters who have returned to Europe. Some were jailed after leaving IS while others were kicked out of the terror group, and they include Muslims and Muslim converts from all across Europe.

Fighters in the units are trained in battleground strategies, explosives, surveillance techniques and counter surveillance, the security official said.

“The difference is that in 2014, some of these IS fighters were only being given a couple weeks of training,” he said. “Now the strategy has changed. Special units have been set up. The training is longer. And the objective appears to no longer be killing as many people as possible but rather to have as many terror operations as possible, so the enemy is forced to spend more money or more in manpower.”

Similar methods had been developed by al-Qaida but IS has taken it to a new level, he said. Another difference is that fighters are being trained to be their own operators – not necessarily to be beholden to orders from the IS stronghold in Raqqa, Syria, or elsewhere.

Several security officials have said there is growing evidence to suggest the bulk of the training is taking place in Syria, Libya and elsewhere in North Africa.

In the case of Tuesday’s attacks, Abdeslam’s arrest may have been a trigger for a plot that was already far along.

“To pull off an attack of this sophistication, you need training, planning, materials and a landscape,” said Shiraz Maher, a senior research fellow at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at Kings College in London, which has one of the largest databases of fighters and their networks.

“Even if they worked flat out, the attackers in Brussels would have needed at least four days,” said Maher, who has conducted extensive interviews with foreign fighters.

The question for many intelligence and security officials is now turning to just how many more fighters have been trained and are ready for more attacks.

A senior Iraqi intelligence official who was not authorized to speak publicly said people from the cell that carried out the Paris attacks are scattered across Germany, Britain, Italy, Denmark and Sweden. Recently, a new group crossed in from Turkey, the official said.

On Wednesday, Turkish authorities said one of the Brussels suicide attackers, Ibrahim El Bakraoui, was caught last June near the Syrian border and deported to the Netherlands, with Ankara warning Dutch and Belgian officials that he was a “foreign terrorist fighter.” But he was released from Dutch custody due to lack of evidence of involvement in extremism.

Belgian Justice Minister Koen Geens said Wednesday that authorities had no reason to detain El Bakraoui because he was “not known for terrorist acts but as a common law criminal who was on conditional release.”

The latest new name to surface this week, Najim Laachraoui, turned out to be the bombmaker who made the suicide vests used in the Paris attacks, according to French and Belgian officials. Attackers used an explosive known as Triacetone Triperoxide, or TATP, made from common household chemicals. DNA evidence indicates he died on Tuesday in the suicide attack on the airport, two officials briefed on the investigation told AP.

Fifteen kilos of TATP were found in an apartment linked to the Brussels attackers, along with other explosive material.

The unidentified man seen on security footage wearing a white jacket and black hat at the Brussels airport on Tuesday remains at large, a fugitive link in a chain still being forged.

.
————————————————————————————————–

.
Brussels Bombers Did Plan To Attack Nuclear Power Station As Police Uncover 12 Hours Of Footage Jihadists Filmed Outside A Plant Director’s Home – Daily Mail

The Brussels terrorists were preparing an attack on a nuclear power plant and had recorded 12 hours of reconnaissance footage, it has been reported.

The ISIS cell were spying on the Belgian’s nuclear power chief, possibly as part of a kidnap plan to force him to let them into an atomic facility, according to newspaper Derniere Heure.

Hours of film of the home of the Research and Development Director of the Belgian Nuclear Programme were discovered in an apartment in Brussels raided by anti-terrorist police following the attack in Paris.

The footage confounded investigators at first – as it showed the entrance to the director’s home in Flanders, an area outside the capital.

But detectives made the chilling deduction that the group was attempting to gain entry to an atomic facility after watching all 12 hours of footage, which included images of a local bus.

Armed troops were sent to defend French and Belgian nuclear facilities following the discovery and both countries nuclear programmes were put on the highest state of alert.

Reports of the plan first emerged as early as February and was at that time linked back to the cell responsible for the Paris attacks.

The footage was discovered ‘as part of seizures made following the Paris attacks,’ a Belgian prosecutor said, refusing to divulge the individual’s identity ‘for obvious security reasons’.

At the time, Belgium’s federal agency for nuclear control stressed the importance of not revealing the name of the person involved so as ‘not to endanger the enquiry or nuclear security’ or indeed the person involved and their family.

The images were captured by a camera hidden in nearby bushes and recovered by two suspects who left the area in a vehicle with the lights off, Derniere Heure reported.

However, reports in February did not publicly name Ibrahim and Khalid El Bakraoui – the brothers we now know are responsible for the Brussels bombings – as the creators of the footage.

The claims give further credence to the links now established, at least publicly, between the Paris and Brussels bombings.

The bombings in the Belgian capital on Tuesday which killed 31 people are now believed to have been carried out because the authorities were closing in on the fugitive members of the terror cell.

.
————————————————————————————————–

.
Belgian Terrorists Can Still Enter U.S. Without A Visa – Washington Free Beacon

Leading lawmakers identified Belgium as a hotspot for terrorism months ago and are warning that many of the radicalized individuals living there are still able to travel to the United States without first obtaining a visa and undergoing thorough security checks.

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told the Washington Free Beacon Tuesday afternoon that current flaws in the U.S. visa waiver program – which facilities travel to the United States from partner nations including Belgium – have created a loophole that could permit radicalized individuals to legally enter the United States with minimal background checks.

DeSantis is warning of these flaws on the heels of deadly mass terrorist attack in Brussels on Tuesday that has killed at least 30 and wounded hundreds more.

“The visa waiver reform, this is something we have been perusing and the [Obama] administration has brushed us off at every turn,” DeSantis said, explaining that current policy does not mandate more strenuous checks on individuals identified as coming from terrorist hotspots, such as the small Belgian town of Molenbeek, which has emerged as a principal training site for jihadists.

“It’s the case that if those folks are citizens of Belgium they qualify for the visa waiver program and can hop on a plane and get here,” he added. “Clearly, that is not adequate given what happened.”

The Obama administration “even takes the position it’s safer to allow someone to come in on a visa waiver than make them get one, it’s kind of crazy,” DeSantis said. You’re not going to be able to have intelligence on everyone there because there are so many potential recruits. It’s a clear vulnerability.”

What is worse, DeSantis said, is that the Obama administration has been lax about deporting individuals who overstay their visas, meaning that a radicalized person could disappear in America as they plan a potential attack.

“There’s no enforcement once they get here,” DeSantis said. “Hundreds of thousands of people come over and then overstay” their visas. “You are not going to be removed under current policy under this administration.”

DeSantis and other lawmakers first labeled Belgium as a hotspot for ISIS terrorists in the aftermath of the 2015 attacks in Paris. At least five of the Paris attackers were French nationals, two of whom had been living in Belgium. Another one of the terrorists was a Belgian national.

Citizens from both countries are still able to freely travel to the United States under the visa waiver program, which facilitates travel between the American and a host of foreign countries.

“At least six of the Paris attackers could have attempted to enter the country under this program,” DeSantis said in December, during a congressional hearing on the visa waiver program’s flaws.

Molenbeek in particular “is a hellhole that is filled with Belgian national Islamic radicals who qualify to travel to the U.S. without a visa under the visa waiver program,” DeSantis warned during the hearing.

DeSantis said on Tuesday that following the attack in Paris, he realized that the United States is vulnerable from threats in Europe, in addition to those from Syria and other terror strongholds.

“The problem was not just people coming from Syria,” he explained. “There was a major vulnerability from places in Europe and this Molenbeeck neighborhood was one of the most egregious that I had seen.”

The Department of Homeland Security acknowledged on Tuesday that Belgium is still a part of the visa waiver program, and that policy has not shifted in the wake of the attack.

“Though we do not require Belgian citizens to have a visa to travel here for business or tourism purposes, both the Transportation Security Administration and U.S. Customs and Border Protection have procedures in place to identify and prevent travel here from Belgium by individuals of suspicion,” Jeh Johnson, DHS secretary, said in in a statement on Tuesday.

“All travelers arriving in the United States are vetted against the U.S. Terrorist Screening Database, regardless of whether they arrive with a visa or an Electronic System for Travel Authorization,” Johnson said. “We continually evaluate whether more screening is necessary, particularly in light of today’s attacks.”

Asked about these screening methods, DeSantis cast doubt on the United States’ ability to thoroughly vet these individuals, explaining that gaps in U.S. intelligence cannot account for the large number of radicalized Europeans.

.
————————————————————————————————–

.
Columbia University Op-Ed Claims Belgians Are To Blame For Brussels Attack – Daily Caller

A student at Columbia University has authored an editorial saying Belgians deserve to be blamed for Tuesday’s Islamic terrorist attack in Brussels because their society is a front of “Islamophobia.”

“Columbia’s vigils and memorial services allow us to mourn victims and condemn terrorism,” writes student Brian Min in the Columbia Daily Spectator. “Moving forward, however, they should condemn not only terrorism, but also the specific Islamophobic attitudes and policies that facilitated the recent attacks.”

Min, a freshman planning to study French as well as women, gender, and sexuality studies, argues that the Brussels attack and other terrorist attacks, are “usually not arbitrary events without any justification – they often are responses to institutionalized hate and oppression.”

“Belgium remains the only other country in the world besides France to have a national ban of full-face veils,” Min says. “Employers too often get away with discriminating against Muslim employees. It comes as no surprise that the municipality Molenbeek – the site of one of the explosions – has an unemployment rate of more than 25 percent where the majority of Muslim youths are denied equal access to the labor and housing market.”

Despite his remarks, Min claims he is not condoning terrorism, because “hate should never be used to fight against hate.”

Min then argues in favor of repurposing vigils and other mourning events for political purposes, saying they should be used to denounce specific policies he disagrees with.

“[I]t is not enough for vigils and memorial services to broadly condemn Islamophobia and other forms of hatred that helped breed terrorist attacks,” he says. “They should also verbally denounce the specific forms of Islamophobia and hatred in relation to targeted nations and their policies of institutionalized discrimination, such as Belgium’s ban on full-face veils. In order to fight against Islamophobia and hate crimes that dramatically increase after major tragedies like the Brussels attacks, we must localize the specific Islamophobic policies and attitudes that helped to facilitate such attacks.”

Despite Min’s argument, there’s ample reason to believe Belgium is not a strong center of Islamophobia. For instance, in 2013 a Belgian man was sent to jail for hate speech for tearing up a Quran near some Muslims, and the country’s hate speech legislation has been interpreted as generally restricting any rhetoric that is overly hurtful towards Muslims.

.
————————————————————————————————–

.
Enough With The Teddy Bears And Tears: It’s Time To Take Our Civilization Back – Raheem Kassam

Teddy bears, tears, candles, cartoons, murals, mosaics, flowers, flags, projections, hashtags, balloons, wreaths, lights, vigils, scarves, and more. These are the best solutions the Western world seems to come up with every few months when we are slammed by another Islamist terrorist attack. We are our own sickness.

Since the world learned of the dozens dead, hundreds injured, and hundreds of thousands affected by Monday’s attack on the NATO and European Union capital, we have seen an outpouring of what is commonly known as “solidarity”.

This word – most commonly associated with hard-left politics, trades union activism, socialism, and poseur indie rock bands – has come to mean very little in reality. In effect, “standing in solidarity” with someone now means that you have observed the situation, changed your Facebook profile picture accordingly, and patted yourself on the back.

And if like dead bodies Facebook profile pictures lost heat, it would be accurate to say that the Tricolores that adorned the social media profiles of many had hardly become cold before we were all changing the colours of the bands on the flags. From blue to black. From white to yellow. The blood red remains.

Because nowadays, teddy bears are the new resolve. They symbolise everything we have become in response to our way of life being threatened, and our people being slaughtered on our streets: inanimate, squishy, and full of crap.

Our security services and our police, hamstrung by political correctness, are just as interested (or more?) in rounding up Twitter “hate speech” offenders than criminal, rapist, or terrorist migrants. Our borders are as porous as our brains. We refuse to realise that there are now literally millions of people amongst us who hate us. Who hate our way of life, and who will, one day, dominate our public life.

But of course, such statements are dismissed as fear-mongering, alarmist, or “out of touch with reality”. As if the data doesn’t exist, or the demographics aren’t shifting quickly enough to notice.

As if vast parts of our towns and cities haven’t become ghettos, or no-go zones, or hubs of child grooming activity, or terrorism.

As if mosques, schools, prisons, and universities aren’t used as recruiting grounds for radicals.

As if the blood of our countrymen hasn’t even been spilled at all.

Instead, we will now think deeply about how we can “reach out” to these populations. How we can “co-exist” and “be tolerant” of one another. As if toleration – which is actually the permittance of what is not actually approved or desired – is a healthy aspiration for a society.

It is as if we model our countries on the practice of bending over and “taking one for the team”, chastising those who fail to “tolerate” the most barbaric traditions of alien cultures. It is everything this cartoon – obviously branded “racist” – suggests.

“But come on, Raheem, not all immigrants, or Muslims, are criminals, or rapists… you’re not!”

Yeah – and look at me. Excoriated daily by Islamists on Twitter. Why? Because I’ve integrated and I love my country. Because I refuse to believe that an Islamic caliphate is the best thing for Britain, or anywhere, quite frankly. Where is my white (or brown) knight? Where are the voices of the moderate Muslim world defending me?

Not that I need protection, or defence, but some people aren’t as hard headed or resolved as I am.

Thusly, the albeit minority evil amongst British Muslims is thriving because good Muslims are doing nothing. At some point, we have to question why. I’m not sure most people are ready for the answers to that one.

So continue to sit there with your head in your hands. Mourning only to make yourself feel better. Missing people you never knew. Exclaiming, as the most immature of minds does: “Why can’t we all just get along?”

Expressing sympathy is no bad thing. But to be truly sympathetic towards someone under attack, one must be chivalrous, gallant, and unafraid.

Watching someone getting raped, and tweeting your solidarity with them is not enough. Human nature and goodness calls upon us to intervene. To assist. To free someone from their torture, and to save them from their demise.

It is not enough to scrawl “no fear” on a post it note, and stick it onto some £3 flowers.

We must be fearless in electing leaders who we feel will best keep us safe. It is one of the few areas of our lives in which we should be able to feel comfortable. We pay our taxes, you keep us safe.

If not, then we must arm ourselves. If our governments refuse to protect us, or even begin to use the tools with which we empower them against us: surveillance, counter-terror laws, detention, then we will need to take the law back into our own hands. We cannot be afraid of doing so. It is where our societies all sprung from.

The defence of ourselves as individuals. The defence of our families, our properties, our means of production, our communities, and our neighbours.

It is why arms sales to individuals has shot up since the migrant crisis in Europe. Many Germans are losing their faith in their elected leaders to protect them. The same applies in Sweden, and in Austria. Some people refuse to take being wiped out laying down. How quaint.

It is also time to start to make serious, wide-reaching demands of our politicians on the subject of immigration and Islamism.

When U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump said what he said about a temporary ban on Muslim immigration, the tolerance lobby went into overdrive: full condemnations across the board from politicians – including presidents and prime ministers, across the media sphere, and you will recall the House of Commons debating a petition to ban the man from the country.

Now even the most politically correct of Hollywood luvvies is asking: is he really that wrong on this?

Because Mr. Trump has thought in a cycle longer than his potential presidency: what does the Western world look like in 20, 30, 50 years? What kind of societies do we leave to our children?

Do we leave cities with soldiers on patrol. With “peace” signs scrawled onto bomb-struck buildings? Or do we leave them safe places, with real promise for the future. Like our parents, or at least our parents’ parents, left us.

In order to confront this question, we have to get to the root cause of the problem. There is too much immigration, or at least, not enough hand-picked immigration, into the Western world today.

People of my age had no choice that our post-war leaders felt the heavy hand of post-colonial guilt on their shoulders, and decided to open up our countries, and flood us with “diversity”.

But we do have a choice to not make the same mistakes again. And we have a duty to correct the ones that were made.

And yes, that does mean exactly what you think it means. It means ending mass migration. It means smashing apart ghettos and no go zones. It means repealing laws that allow for Sharia councils. It means asserting what it means to be British, or European, or American, without fearing a backlash from the political left, or the media classes who scarcely see a face my colour let alone darker.

Let them riot. Let them cry.

I would far rather be subjected to ceaseless “direct action” by the scourges of my own society than import others.

At least if my fellow countrymen are deplorable, I won’t get called a racist for pointing it out.

So put down the teddy bears, burst the balloons, and let’s start demanding again that our countries are safe and civilised. And if we can’t find people who’ll make that happen for us… let’s do it ourselves.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related videos:

.


.

.

.

.

.

.

Judge Orders IRS To Turn Over Secret List Of Conservative Groups It Targeted – Accuses Government Of Acting In Bad Faith

Court Rebukes IRS For Tea Party Targeting, Orders Release Of Secret List – Washington Times

.

.
A federal appeals court spanked the IRS Tuesday, saying it has taken laws designed to protect taxpayers from the government and turned them on their head, using them to try to protect the tax agency from the very tea party groups it targeted.

The judges ordered the IRS to quickly turn over the full list of groups it targeted so that a class-action lawsuit, filed by the NorCal Tea Party Patriots, can proceed. The judges also accused the Justice Department lawyers, who are representing the IRS in the case, of acting in bad faith – compounding the initial targeting – by fighting the disclosure.

“The lawyers in the Department of Justice have a long and storied tradition of defending the nation’s interests and enforcing its laws – all of them, not just selective ones – in a manner worthy of the Department’s name. The conduct of the IRS’s attorneys in the district court falls outside that tradition,” Judge Raymond Kethledge wrote in a unanimous opinion for a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. “We expect that the IRS will do better going forward.”

Justice Department officials declined to comment on the judicial drubbing, and the IRS didn’t respond to a request for comment on the unusually strong language Judge Kethledge used.

The case stems from the IRS‘ decision in 2010 to begin subjecting tea party and conservative groups to intrusive scrutiny when they applied for nonprofit status.

An inspector general found several hundred groups were asked inappropriate questions about their members’ activities, their fundraising and their political leanings.

The IRS has since apologized for its behavior, but insisted the targeting was a mistake born of overzealous employees confused by the law rather than a politically motivated attempt to stifle conservatives.

Tea party groups have been trying for years to get a full list of nonprofit groups that were targeted by the IRS, but the IRS had refused, saying that even the names of those who applied or were approved are considered secret taxpayer information. The IRS said section 6103 of the tax code prevented it from releasing that information.

Judge Kethledge, however, said that turned the law on its head.

“Section 6103 was enacted to protect taxpayers from the IRS, not the IRS from taxpayers,” he wrote.

Edward Greim, a lawyer at Graves Garrett who is representing NorCal Patriots, said they should be able to get a better idea of the IRS‘ decision-making once they see the list of groups that was targeted.

“What we’ll be able to see is how, starting in the spring of 2010, with the first one or two groups the IRS targeted, we’ll be able to see that number grow, and we’ll even be able to see at the tail end their possible covering up that conduct,” he said.

He said they suspect the IRS, aware that the inspector general was looking into the tax agency’s behavior, began adding in other groups to try to muddle the perception that only conservatives were being targeted.

Tuesday’s ruling is the second victory this year for NorCal Patriots.

In January U.S. District Judge Susan J. Dlott certified their case as a class-action lawsuit, signaling that she agreed with NorCal Patriots that the IRS did systematically target hundreds of groups for special scrutiny.

Certifying the class allows any of the more than 200 groups that were subjected to the criteria to join the lawsuit. But until the IRS complies with the appeals court’s ruling this week, the list of those groups is secret.

Now that the class has been certified, the case moves to the discovery stage, where the tea party groups’ lawyers will ask for all of the agency’s documents related to the targeting and will depose IRS employees about their actions.

The lawyers hope they’ll be able to learn details Congress was unable to shake free in its own investigations.

The Justice Department has concluded its own criminal investigation into the IRS and said the targeting was the result of bad management. But investigators said they found no criminal behavior, and specifically cleared former IRS head Lois G. Lerner, saying her fellow employees said she tried to correct the problems when she learned of them.

Republicans dismissed that investigation as a whitewash by the Obama administration.

.

.

Democrat Lawmaker’s Daughter And Her Boyfriend Staple Opponent’s Forehead, Smash Him With Beer Bottle

Daughter Of Democrat Lawmaker & Boyfriend Arrested After Stapling Opponent’s Forehead, Smashing Him With Beer Bottle – Gateway Pundit

Illinois Democrat candidate Robert Zwolinski was attacked by supporters of Democrat Cynthia Soto last week.

The attackers smashed a bottle over his head and put a staple in his forehead.

.

.
Zwolinski was assaulted outside his campaign office in Chicago.

.

.
On Thursday Rep. Cynthia Soto’s daughter and her boyfriend were arrested for the attack.

ABC7 reported:
.

Illinois Rep. Cynthia Soto’s daughter and another campaign volunteer are accused of attacking aspiring politician Robert Zwolinski, who ran against Soto in the Democratic primary this week.

Jessica Soto and Bradley Fichter, both 26, are each charged with three felony counts of aggravated battery in connection with the assault on the 30-year-old man.

The suspects’ attorney, Frank Avila, said his clients were volunteers for Cynthia Soto’s re-election campaign and that Jessica Soto is the incumbent’s daughter.

.

.
Illinois Rep. Cynthia Soto’s daughter and another campaign volunteer are accused of attacking aspiring politician Robert Zwolinski. (ABC 7)

.

.

‘Transgender’ Conditioning Is ‘Child Abuse’ (Matt Barber)

‘Transgender’ Conditioning Is ‘Child Abuse’ – Matt Barber

.

.
George Orwell famously wrote, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

For those tethered to biological reality, the self-evident truth that, prior to birth, people develop either “XY” or “XX” genetic markers and, as such, are objectively, and shall forever remain, either male or female, is as plain as blue is blue or pink is pink.

Indeed, notwithstanding the politically driven “LGBT” agenda that pretends otherwise, those who suffer with “gender dysphoria” disorder will stay, as born, either male or female, whether or not they play dress up, sterilize themselves and destroy healthy reproductive organs.

Hence, it’s of little surprise that, tragically, of those who put themselves through this imaginary “transition,” 41 percent will subsequently attempt suicide.

Still, this “progressive” socio-political scheme moves quickly from merely pitiable and delusional to ghastly and abusive when children are the targets – when selfish adults exploit sexually confused young people by feeding their “gender” delusion and pumping them full of dangerous hormones, or otherwise surgically mutilating and sterilizing them for life via so-called “gender reassignment surgery.”

In order to address the growing momentum of this harmful, gender-bending, pseudo-scientific quackery, a number of America’s leading medical experts on the subject have finally weighed in. “The American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality,” they warn.

This child-health advocacy group has released a report that determines, among other things:

1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder.

“The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species,” they observe. “This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sexual differentiation (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.”

2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one.

Let’s take it a step further. The “gender” phenomenon is, in the larger sense, an artificial and anti-theist-tainted social construct. It’s an overt act of fist-shaking rebellion against the laws of nature and nature’s God.

And it’s dangerous.

Johns Hopkins Hospital was the pioneer in “gender reassignment surgery.” It now refuses to perform these discredited cosmetic procedures. Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the hospital’s former psychiatrist-in-chief and current distinguished service professor of psychiatry, is among those who participated in the ACPeds report. He has noted in the past that, as even the left-leaning APA reluctantly acknowledges, transgenderism is a “mental disorder” and that the idea of a “sex change” is “biologically impossible.” “People who identify as ‘feeling like the opposite sex’ or ‘somewhere in between’ do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women,” determines ACPeds.

3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking.

“When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such,” notes the report. “These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V). The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.”

4. Puberty is not a disease, and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous.

“Reversible or not, puberty-blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child,” notes ACPeds.

5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98 percent of gender confused boys and 88 percent of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.

And so what do we call a physician or a parent who takes a gender-confused boy, with a 98 percent chance of full recovery, and severely and irrevocably harms that child with dangerous hormones or sterilization surgery?

We should be calling them what they are: criminals.

To its credit, the ACPeds report goes on to identify this so-called “gender ideology” for exactly what it is: “Child abuse.”

6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.

So much for the Hippocratic Oath: “Practice two things in your dealings with disease: either help or do not harm the patient.”

Gender ideology is anathema to good medicine and sound science.

7. Rates of suicide are 20 times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT–affirming countries.

“What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88 percent of girls and 98 percent of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?” the report asks.

8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse.

“Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to ‘gender clinics’ where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will ‘choose’ a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.”

There you have it. “Gender ideology” is child abuse – empirically and irrefutably. Isn’t it high time, at least where minors are concerned and as a matter of public policy, that we begin treating it as such?

If such abuse were associated with anything other than the “LGBQT” political special interests, we already would have.

.

.