Thursday, June 30, 2016

Sharia vs. America in Dearbornistan: Christian Evangelists Who were Assaulted by Arab Moslems, and Kicked Out of an Arab-American Street Festival by the Sheriff’s Department, While being Threatened with Arrest in 2012, After Carrying a Pig’s Head and Telling Dearborn Muslims They Would “Burn in Hell,” Have Agreed to Settle Their Lawsuit Against Wayne County and Members of Its Police Force

By Prince George’s County Ex-Pat

Islam: Hell on Earth

At the Detroit News.

Black Inventors Know No Limits: There’s: 1. The “Knockout Game” of Sucker-Punch Attacks; 2. Slashing White Women’s Faces; and 3. The New Rage, Forcing Bags of Feces Down White Women’s Pants! But NBC News Somehow Forgot to Give the Police Description of the Perp! (Video of the Crime!)

By Nicholas Stix

I thank the reader (Jerry PDX/GRA?) who anonymously posted this article to me.

Check out readers’ comments, before they get sent down the memory hole!

Second update: I went to several sites to get the video code, but either it wouldn't show up at all, or Firefox would refuse to enable it, warning that the video wasn't properly configured, and would steal my (and your) information. So, you'll have to hit one of the links, in order to view the video at a news site.

Update: Apparently, there were two such attacks on Monday, but the other attack was even worse--the raceless perp threw feces on a raceless white woman.

CBS News gives the real police description: “In that incident, a 33-year-old woman was walking along 91st Street between Madison and Park avenues around 2:25 p.m., when the suspect threw excrement at her.

The woman was hit in the face and torso, police said.

The suspect is described by police as a 40-year-old black [!] man, 6 feet tall and weighing 200 pounds with an Afro [!] hair style.”



“Man Violently Shoves Feces-Filled Bag Down Woman's Pants on Upper East Side: NYPD”
NBC New York

Police are looking for a man captured on video violently shoving a bag of feces down the pants of a woman walking on the Upper East Side Monday. (Published Thursday, June 30, 2016)

Police are looking for a man captured on video violently shoving a bag of feces down the pants of a woman walking on Manhattan's Upper East Side Monday.

The 27-year-old woman was walking on East 74th Street near First Avenue at about 6 p.m. when the man approached her from behind, grabbed her waist and shoved a bag of feces down her pants, police said.

He grabbed her buttocks, then ran away.

Surveillance video released by police Wednesday shows the suspect [sic] catching up to the victim as she walks while on her cellphone. He quickly grabs her from behind, and the startled victim tries to yank herself out of his grasp and pivots away from him.

[That’s not the “suspect,” it’s the perp. A suspect is someone the police have identified as a perp, but who has not yet been charged by prosecutors, and who still enjoys the presumption of innocence. The man in the video has not been identified, but he is 100% certainly guilty of the crime in question, i.e., the perpetrator. The MSM call perps “suspects” as part of their criminal assistance program.]

After a brief struggle, the suspect [sic] chucks off a pair of latex gloves, then flees, the video shows.

Police said the attack was random and the woman did not know the suspect.

[“Random” is unwitting, police racial code for a black-on-white hate crime.]

The suspect is described as about 40 years old, 6 feet tall and 200 pounds. Anyone with information is asked to contact Crime Stoppers at 800-577-TIPS.

[That was not the police description; NBC News racially censored it.]

Published 4 hours ago

CNN’s Brooke Baldwin is Celebrating Obama’s Order to Immediately Permit Sexual Psychopaths to Serve Openly in the American Military!

By Nicholas Stix

Baldwin keeps glowing over how "historic" the change is.

According to Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, at today’s press conference, there will be an 18-month wait required, before inducting the psychos into the military, to determine that their “genders” have “stabilized.” He said that “gender reassignment surgery” will depend on doctors’ judgments, as to what is “medically necessary.”

(Oddly enough, Carter insisted that the decision was his, when everyone in the room and watching on their TV sets knew that he'd had no say in it.)

First of all, there’s no such thing as gender, except in languages other than English. Second, these are sexual psychopaths. “Stabilizing” is not an option. (And how do you know what’s up with them, regardless of what they say?) Thirdly, they will sue, asserting that any waiting period is “discriminatory,” and they will win. And fourth, the idea of “medical necessity” doesn’t exist here. To speak of it is as insane as a person with a penis insisting that he’s a woman. In any event, the psychos who are “serving” their country will sue for their chop-chop, whenever they want it, and they will win that court battle, too.

Oh, what am I saying? There won’t be any court battles. The Queeragon will roll over, and give them whatever they demand.

All this is fine with the John Doe calling himself “Barack Obama,” since he lives for chaos.

Are Lena Dunham and Allegedly Violent Bicyclist Maegan Kurtz the Same Person?



Mass Obama Attack in Milwaukee: Police Somehow Provoked 100 Blacks into Rioting Against Them with Bricks, Fire Bombs, etc. (Colin Flaherty Video)

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

100 Black “Kids” Attack Police in Milwaukee


Posted by Colin “Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry” Flaherty on June 30, 2016.

October Came Early This Year: Democrats (i.e., Hillary Clinton) Unveil Scorched-Earth, Child Rape "October Surprise" Against Donald Trump, with Experienced Hoaxer “Lisa Bloom” as Their Propagandist

By Nicholas Stix

Hillary Clinton plays hardball. She knows that this is her last chance to win the presidency. Barack Obama stole the nomination from her in 2008, and at 68, she’s both too old for a third try, and that someone else would supplant her in The Party in the interim. And she knows that the history of her husband’s abuse of women, including Juanita Broaddrick’s charge that Bill Clinton raped her in Arkansas, is the biggest obstacle to her winning the White House. The only way Hillary can win the election, she believes, is to portray Donald Trump as a monster who abuses women, and thereby get the heat off of Bill as an abuser, and Hillary as his enabler and enforcer.

Enter Donald Trump as child rapist.

It’s really awful stuff. Hillary is not taking any chances.

Typically, Democrats roll out such hoaxes much closer to the general election, as “October Surprises.”

“Lisa Bloom” is a feminist hack lawyer whose birth name reportedly is “Lisa Read Bloom.” (However, I couldn’t find any reliable sources.) Her mother is Gloria Allred. Both are feminist hack attorneys. The only good thing you can say about either is that they are both ravishing, and “Bloom” is the spitting image of her mom.

That “Bloom” uses her mother’s maiden name makes no sense. Everyone in the lying business knows she’s Gloria Allred’s daughter. Indeed, they practice law together, and “Bloom” constantly gives credit to her mother.

Since “Lisa Bloom’s” father was reportedly her mother’s first husband (or was he?), Peyton Huddleston Bray Jr., and she was born in 1961, in the middle of her parents’ brief, two-year marriage (1960-1962), her birth name ought to be Lisa Bray. Maybe her adoption of her mother’s maiden name is some sort of feminist statement, as if her mother had birthed her through parthenogenesis.

Gorgeous feminists hate it when you mention their looks, but women much prefer lionizing beautiful feminists than homely ones. Gloria Steinem is a pompous airhead who couldn’t argue her way out of a paper bag, but she is a beautiful feminist, and thus has enjoyed greater popularity among women than the late Betty Friedan, who was a more intelligent but unattractive propagandist.

I wrote the comment below at the Huffington Post, in response to “Lisa Bloom’s” anti-Trump rant, which follows it:

Feminist garbage. Lisa Bloom is not providing journalism, even in the sense of an op-ed, unless you count thoroughly incompetent op-eds. She has provided an incompetent and despicable advocacy piece. There’s an old saying among lawyers: If you’re wrong on the law, pound the facts. If you’re wrong on the facts, pound the law. If you’re wrong on both, pound the table. “Lisa Bloom” is pounding the table with both fists.

The statute of limitations in New York passed 17 years ago. Lisa Bloom engages in special pleading, in demanding that we ignore the law.

Lisa Bloom presents claims by an anonymous individual. Why is the claimant anonymous? Because of special pleading, which feminists demanded and got, and which violates the rights of men whom anonymous females then charge.

Lisa Bloom then presents claims by a second anonymous individual (Anon 2), who supposedly supports the first anonymous individual (Anon 1). This is witness laundering. The initial claim is just as dirty, when a second anonymous individual allegedly supports it.

Anon 2 supposedly requires anonymity, because she fears for her life, due to Trump being so powerful that he could have her killed. The argument is laughable, and also depends on special pleading, in order to violate the accused’s rights.

This anonymity claim also depends on a second basis of special pleading: The violation of the presumption of innocence. We have to assume that Trump is guilty of rape, in order to accept Anon 2’s claim to be fearing for her life.

But both females claim that Trump knows exactly who they are, which vitiates their claims to be in danger, if their identities were revealed.

The heart of Lisa Bloom’s “argument” is that Donald Trump has a history of making statements that feminists consider “offensive.” Her implicit argument is that the law should be violated with impunity, so that Trump can be punished, for making such remarks. That is totalitarian, but that’s the way feminism is.

Lisa Bloom is a feminist activist, who seeks to destroy the American legal system, by stripping men of all rights, in cases brought against them by females of all ages. The only thing that her above rant proves is her contempt for the law, and for men.

By the way, the Huffington Post has implicitly endorsed my criticisms of Lisa Allred Bloom, by deleting or blocking virtually all comments, and all that criticize her. In the eyes of both, criticism is immoral and harmful to women.

P.S. “Lisa Bloom” also makes a specious argument, on behalf of violating the statute of limitations: Two other judges have already done so. That’s akin to a criminal arguing, “I’m not the first one to do it,” and maintaining that the law should therefore be repealed.

That two judges violated the statute of limitations means that both were guilty of judicial misconduct, and should be removed from the bench and disbarred. A world in which unlawful conduct serves as legal “precedent,” is a world without law.

Pathetic double argument from authority: “Lisa Bloom” cites “Dr. Maya Angelou.” 1. No quote from Angelou would have any merit in a court case; and 2. Maya Angelou, who was a fraud in her own right, never earned a doctorate. “Lisa Bloom” added the fake title to Angelou’s name, to give Angelou’s empty words more authority.

Note, too, that “Lisa Bloom” asserts that Ivana Trump has denied that her husband ever raped her, because their divorce agreement requires it. That is nonsense on stilts. Mrs. Trump could have told reporters, “No comment,” when they asked about the charges she made in her divorce case. I tis also the case, though “Lisa Bloom” would have you believe otherwise, that women in high-priced divorce cases, routinely perjure themselves, often at the behest of their attorneys. Thus, I read several years ago, in the context of the Mia Farrow-Woody Allen custody case, in which Farrow asserted that Allen had sexually molested their son, that in as many as 50% of such cases, the mother charges the father with having molested their minor children.

Such charges are surely, in most cases, instances of perjury and the suborning of perjury. Many of these women and their lawyers belong in prison, rather than cleaning up. “Lisa Bloom” is a liar, and she supports liars, as long as they are pc.

Finally, “Lisa Bloom” is so despicably dishonest that she even penned a book supporting the Trayvon Martin Hoax, Suspicion Nation. She’s evil.

Why the New Child Rape Case Filed Against Donald Trump Should Not be Ignored
By Lisa Bloom
06/29/2016 01:17 pm ET | Updated 5 hours ago
Huffington Post
Legal analyst for NBC News and Avvo, attorney and bestselling author

An anonymous “Jane Doe” filed a federal lawsuit against GOP presumptive nominee Donald Trump last week, accusing him of raping her in 1994 when she was thirteen years old. The mainstream media ignored the filing.

          If the Bill Cosby case has taught us anything, it is to not disregard rape cases against famous men. Serious journalists have publicly apologized for turning a blind eye to the Cosby accusers for over a decade, notwithstanding the large number of women who had come forward with credible claims. And now history is repeating itself.

          In covering a story, a media outlet is not finding guilt. It is simply reporting the news that a lawsuit has been filed against Mr. Trump, and ideally putting the complaint in context. Unproven allegations are just that - unproven, and should be identified that way. (Mr. Trump’s lawyer says the charges are “categorically untrue, completely fabricated and politically motivated.”) Proof comes later, at trial. But the November election will come well before any trial. And while Mr. Trump is presumed innocent, we are permitted - no, we are obligated — to analyze the case’s viability now.

          No outsider can say whether Mr. Trump is innocent or guilty of these new rape charges. But we can look at his record, analyze the court filings here, and make a determination as to credibility - whether the allegations are believable enough for us to take them seriously and investigate them, keeping in mind his denial and reporting new facts as they develop.

          I have done that. And the answer is a clear yes. These allegations are credible. They ought not be ignored. Mainstream media, I’m looking at you.

    1. Consider the Context: Mr. Trump’s Overt, Even Proud Misogyny


The rape case must be viewed through the lens of Mr. Trump’s current, longstanding and well documented contempt for women. Men who objectify women are more likely to become perpetrators of sexual violence, just as one with a long history of overtly racist comments is more likely to commit a hate crime.

Mr. Trump has relished calling women “dogs,” “slobs” and “pigs,” and cyberstalked and derided journalist Megyn Kelly for having the temerity to ask him to defend his own words. He threw out the most misogynist of attacks, attempting to undermine her professionalism by accusing her of menstruating. He’s cruelly ridiculed the appearance of a female opponent (Carly Fiorina) and an opponent’s wife (Heidi Cruz). His campaign even openly acknowledged that it disqualified all women for consideration as his vice-president.

Mr. Trump has a long history of debasing women he’s worked with, crossing the line on a regular basis. He’s taken lifelong joy in objectifying women, including his proclamation: “Women, you have to treat ‘em like shit.”

          This cannot be ignored. Decades of abusive language does not make him a rapist. But it does show us who the man is: a callous, meanspirited misogynist who no sane person would leave alone with her daughter. As Dr. Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they really are, believe them.”

    2. More context: two prior sexual assault court claims have been made against Mr. Trump


But Mr. Trump has been accused of worse than just misogynist language. Two prior women have accused Mr. Trump, in court documents, of actual or attempted sexual assault. (Mr. Trump denies all the allegations.)

Under oath, Ivana Trump accused Mr. Trump of a violent rape

First was Ivana Trump, Donald Trump’s first wife, who said under oath in a 1989 deposition that he had violently attacked her, ripped out her hair and forcibly penetrated her without her consent. According to the Daily Beast, she claims he was wildly angry that she’d referred him to a cosmetic surgeon who had botched a “scalp reduction” job (to cover a bald spot) and caused pain in his scalp - hence the vindictive yanking on her hair. At the time Ms. Trump said she felt “violated” by the alleged “rape.”

A few years later, after their divorce was settled, Ms. Trump claimed that she did not mean the word “rape” in a “literal or criminal” sense.

Note: virtually every settlement of a case involving a high profile person paying money to a former spouse - or anyone - requires the person receiving the money to agree in writing to ironclad nondisparagement and confidentiality. In plain English: you promise to be quiet and not say anything bad about the party paying you money. This has been the case in hundreds of settlement agreements I have worked on over the years. Ms. Trump was almost certainly contractually prohibited after she signed from saying anything negative about Mr. Trump. And it is also common to attempt to “cure” prior negative statements with new agreed-to language - like, I didn’t mean it literally. (You didn’t mean forcible penetration literally?)

A business acquaintance accused Mr. Trump of sexual harassment and “attempted rape”

A second woman accused Donald Trump of sexual assault, in 1997. According to The Guardian, then thirty-four year old Jill Harth alleged in a federal lawsuit that Trump violated her “physical and mental integrity” when he touched her intimately without consent after her husband went into business with him, leaving her “emotionally devastated [and] distraught.” The lawsuit called the multiple acts “attempted rape.” Shortly thereafter she voluntarily withdrew the case when a parallel suit against Mr. Trump brought by her husband was settled. When The Guardian reached the woman in 2016 to ask whether she stood by her sexual assault allegations, she responded, “yes.”

In a court filing, according to a report, Ms. Harth alleged that while she and her husband were trying to do a business deal with Mr. Trump regarding a beauty pageant, he repeatedly propositioned her for sex and groped her, culminating in this frightening alleged incident:

Trump forcefully removed (Harth) from public areas of Mar-A-Lago in Florida and forced (her) into a bedroom belonging to defendant’s daughter Ivanka, wherein (Trump) forcibly kissed, fondled, and restrained (her) from leaving, against (her) will and despite her protests.” In the court document, she said that Trump bragged that he ”would be the best lover you ever have.”

Recently Donald Trump issued a statement that women’s claims of sexual harassment, documented in a lengthy New York Times investigation which included Ms. Harth’s lawsuit, were “made up.”

Jill Harth responded angrily on Twitter last week: “My part was true. I didn’t talk. As usual you opened your big mouth.” 

In other words, she is standing by her story.

    3. The new Jane Doe child rape claim against Mr. Trump is consistent with verifiable facts about Mr. Trump and his friend Jeffrey Epstein, and has a powerful witness statement attached to it.

A third woman accused Mr. Trump of rape very recently. According to the Daily Mail, a woman filed an April 2016 lawsuit claiming that when she was thirteen years old she was held as a sex slave to Mr. Trump and his friend Jeffrey Epstein. The woman claimed to have a witness, “Tiffany Doe,” to the incidents. She filed the case in pro per, that is, without the assistance of a lawyer.

The case was dismissed by the court for technical filing errors. She then obtained a lawyer and the case was modified and refiled in New York federal court, against Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein.

I’ve carefully reviewed this federal complaint. It is now much stronger than the one she filed on her own, which makes sense because she now has an experienced litigator representing her. Jane Doe says that as a thirteen year old, she was enticed to attend parties at the home of Jeffrey Epstein with the promise of money modeling jobs. Mr. Epstein is a notorious  “billionaire pedophile” who is now a Level 3 registered sex offender - the most dangerous kind, “a threat to public safety” — after being convicted of misconduct with another underage girl.

Jane Doe says that Mr. Trump “initiated sexual contact” with her on four occasions in 1994. Since she was thirteen at the time, consent is not an issue. If Mr. Trump had any type sexual contact with her in 1994, it was a crime.

On the fourth incident, she says Mr. Trump tied her to a bed and forcibly raped her, in a “savage sexual attack,” while she pleaded with him to stop. She says Mr. Trump violently struck her in the face. She says that afterward, if she ever revealed what he had done, Mr. Trump threatened that she and her family would be “physically harmed if not killed.” She says she has been in fear of him ever since.

New York’s five year statute of limitations on this claim - the legal deadline for filing — has long since run. However, Jane Doe’s attorney, Thomas Meagher, argues in his court filing that because she was threatened by Mr. Trump, she has been under duress all this time, and therefore she should be permitted additional time to come forward. Legally, this is calling “tolling” - stopping the clock, allowing more time to file the case. As a result, the complaint alleges, Jane Doe did not have “freedom of will to institute suit earlier in time.” He cites two New York cases which I have read and which do support tolling.

Two unusual documents are attached to Jane Doe’s complaints - sworn declarations attesting to the facts. The first is from Jane Doe herself, telling her horrific story, including the allegation that Jeffrey Epstein also raped her and threatened her into silence, and this stunner:

Defendant Epstein then attempted to strike me about the head with his closed fists while he angrily screamed at me that he, Defendant Epstein, should have been the one who took my virginity, not Defendant Trump . . .

And this one:

Defendant Trump stated that I shouldn’t ever say anything if I didn’t want to disappear like Maria, a 12-year-old female that was forced to be involved in the third incident with Defendant Trump and that I had not seen since that third incident, and that he was capable of having my whole family killed.

          The second declaration is even more astonishing, because it is signed by “Tiffany Doe”, Mr. Epstein’s “party planner” from 1991-2000. Tiffany Doe says that her duties were “to get attractive adolescent women to attend these parties.” (Adolescents are, legally, children.)

          Tiffany Doe says that she recruited Jane Doe at the Port Authority in New York, persuaded her to attend Mr. Epstein’s parties, and actually witnessed the sexual assaults on Jane Doe:

I personally witnessed the Plaintiff being forced to perform various sexual acts with Donald J. Trump and Mr. Epstein. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein were advised that she was 13 years old.

          It is exceedingly rare for a sexual assault victim to have a witness. But Tiffany Doe says:

I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the Plaintiff was forced to have with Mr. Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr. Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.

          Tiffany Doe corroborates, based on her own personal observations, just about everything in Jane Doe’s complaint: that twelve year old Maria was involved in a sex act with Mr. Trump, that Mr. Trump threatened the life of Jane Doe if she ever revealed what happened, and that she would “disappear” like Maria if she did.

          Tiffany Doe herself says that she is in mortal fear of Mr. Trump to this day:

I am coming forward to swear to the truthfulness of the physical and sexual abuse that I personally witnessed of minor females at the hands of Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein . . . I swear to these facts under the penalty for perjury even though I fully understand that the life of myself and my family is now in grave danger.

Given all this, and based on the record thus far, Jane Doe’s claims appear credible. Mr. Epstein’s own sexual crimes and parties with underage girls are well documented, as is Mr. Trump’s relationship with him two decades ago in New York City. Mr. Trump told a reporter a few years ago: “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it, Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

Powerfully, Jane Doe appears to have an eyewitness to all aspects of her claim, a witness who appears to have put herself in substantial danger by coming forward, because at a minimum Mr. Epstein knows her true identity.

Jane Doe has not granted any interviews, and we don’t know anything about her background, or Tiffany Doe’s, or the details of their stories. Much information needs to be revealed to fully assess this case. Perhaps they will be discredited on cross-examination. Perhaps they will recant. But if we’re going to speculate in that direction, we should speculate in the other direction as well. Perhaps Jane Doe and her lawyer will have more evidence and witnesses to corroborate her claim. Perhaps witnesses from Mr. Epstein’s notorious parties will come forward. We just can’t know any of that at this point.

But based on what we do know now, Jane Doe’s claims fall squarely into the long, ugly context of Mr. Trump’s life of misogyny, are consistent with prior sexual misconduct claims, are backed up by an eyewitness, and thus should be taken seriously. Her claims merit sober consideration and investigation.

We live in a world where wealthy, powerful men often use and abuse women and girls. While these allegations may shock some, as a lawyer who represents women in sexual abuse cases every day, I can tell you that sadly, they are common, as is an accuser’s desire to remain anonymous, and her terror in coming forward.

What do you call a nation that refuses to even look at sexual assault claims against a man seeking to lead the free world?

Rape culture.

We ignore the voices of women at our peril.

There’s Murphy’s Law, and then There’s the Law of Minority Outrage

Re-published by Nicholas Stix

I just came across this again, seven years after the fact. It was written by an anonymous reader.

March 9, 2009

“I think a corollary to Murphy's Law ought to be that if it is at all possible for NAMs* to take offense they will.”

[“NAMs”* refers to “non-Asian minorities.”]

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Chicago’s Bribe-Taking, White Uncle Tom Catholic Priest, Father Michael Pfleger: Don’t Complain About My Murderous, Black, Gangbanger Parishioners; What About Those Murderous, Upper-Middle-Class Liberal Whites Advocating for Public Parks?!

By Nicholas Stix

Pfleger perfectly fits his own definition of a gangster:

“Where I live, a self-appointed group that starts making calls for the neighborhood, they’re called a gang…. Tell me the difference between Friends of the Parks and the Gangster Disciples?”

“Bribe-taking,” you ask? Father Pfleger took a $200,000 bribe from George Lucas in 2014, in exchange for supporting Lucas’ plan to build the George Lucas Museum of Narrative Arts, which was opposed by Friends of the Parks, and which Lucas is now reportedly not going to build in Chicago.

Pfleger here, here, here, here, here and here is a devotee of genocidal, black supremacist, Black Liberation Theology. Until 2004, he was with racist, black Chicago preachers Jeremiah Wright and James Meeks, one of the three leading supporters of the John Doe calling himself, “Barack Obama.”

Join in the fun at Countenance.

White Child Sex Slaves in Canada, Thanks to Syrian Rapefugees? Exclusive Investigative Report: Is Another Rotherham Underway in Nova Scotia? Twenty-Two-Year-Old Moslem, Syrian “Refugee” “Children” are Hitting on 13-14-Year-Old Canadian School Girls (Because They Failed with 14-15-Year-Old Girls!), and Aggressively Defying Teachers, While School Authorities Engage in Cover-Up on Behalf of the Invader/Rapists/Slavers


[Previously, at WEJB/NSU:

“Somali ‘Refugees,’ 14, Brutally Beat White Girl, 12, When She Refuses to be Their Sex Slave; One Attacker: She Attacked Me; His Father, Through Interpreter: It was Just ‘Kids being Kids’";

“Kidnapping, Gang-Rape, Torture—It’s SOP for Somali Moslems: Amanda Lindhout’s A House in the Sky;

“Moslem Scholar: As Captives and Slaves, White Women Must Accept being Raped by Moslems (Video)”; and

“Did You Know That Racist, Black Urban Gangs Travel Throughout the Midwest, Kidnapping Pretty, Pale, White Girls as Young as 13, and Turning Them into Sex Slave-Prostitutes?”]

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

EXCLUSIVE: “Refugee” men now “students” in NB school, “hitting on 14-15 year old girls”


Published on Jun 27, 2016 by RebelMedia.

Faith Goldy of reports: After my investigation into reports that migrant children in Nova Scotia were bullying other students, set up a tip line – – for parents whose children were also being bullied.

Using that tip line, a New Brunswick parents says there are migrant "children" at her child's school as old as 22. These adult males "with full beards" are "hitting on the 14-15 year old girls."

[Faith Goldy is actually undercutting her most powerful revelation. In her report, she says that when the 14-15-year-old girls (9th graders) rebuffed the Moslem men, the latter turned their sights to girls in the lower class, which would mean 13-14-year-old girls in the eighth grade. Goldy says that the men did better with the 13-14-year-old girls, which suggests they were raping them.] filed a freedom of information request to get to the bottom of this -- and over 2000 documents came in, and more are on the way. Emails between teachers reveal what’s going on in their classrooms, and what they say will shock you.

On Thursday, I'll present my full report, but throughout the week, more previews like this one will be posted. MORE:


As Our New Commander-in-Chief, Hillary Clinton Orders Her First Air Attack; Look Out Below (Ramirez Political Cartoon!)

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Breaking News: Moslem Attack at Istanbul Airport Has Left Almost 50 Dead!

ADL: Bull Connor and Other Southern Sheriffs were Right; Martin Luther King Jr. Baited Them into Violence

Continuing to follow the ADL’s logic, such as it is, Hitler was also “baited” into violence by, first, the Communists, and then the Jews.

The ADL notwithstanding, baiting white lawmen into violent responses was a conscious part of King’s strategy. Keep in mind that King was deliberately breaking the law. When one of his illegal demonstrations (e.g., taking over a city street without a permit), including demonstrators taunting, spitting on, and pelting white lawmen with bottles, did not provoke violence, King considered it a failure.

But to get back to the ADL, it clearly does not believe in the Bill of Rights. Matthew Heimbach’s pro-white, Traditionalist Worker Party was exercising its First Amendment freedoms to peaceably assemble and express its opinions. The ADL considers such acts “baiting,” which justify violence seeking to silence them.

Monday, June 27, 2016

AUGUSTA, Maine (NEWS CENTER) -- Police say two bystanders, legally armed with handguns, stepped in during a shooting incident at a Walmart in Augusta.

By Reader-researcher RC

"Augusta police say one of the men involved was injured. A bullet grazed the stomach of Kwiesha 'Reggie' McBride of Harlem, New York."

N.S.: This story can't possibly be true. Everyone knows that the "good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun" is a myth!


Even Dallas Fed Confesses: “This is a Recession”

By A Texas Reader


Another local restaurant closed recently. In a heavily trafficked shopping center, too. Middle to upper-middle-class neighborhoods surrounded it, but it still failed.

I see more panhandlers as well, especially in areas on the north side of Dallas, areas which heretofore never had panhandlers.

At David Stockman’s Contra Corner.

N.S.: As far as I can see, America has been in Great Depression II continuously, since at least August, 2008.

Sunday, June 26, 2016

F. Lee Bailey? I Thought You was Dead; Famed Defense Attorney F. Lee Bailey, Whose Legion of High-Profile Cases Includes the O.J. Simpson Murder Trial, Has Filed for Bankruptcy in Maine in an Effort to Discharge an IRS Debt of More than $5 Million

By Reader-Researcher RC

At the San Francisco Chronicle.


I just checked out my Blogger page, and it says that I have published 10,539 posts—at this blog alone—since March 16, 2006, and until a few years ago, I only occasionally blogged.

That’s a testament to something. Stupidity? No, I don’t like that interpretation. Insanity? That sounds even worse than stupidity.

Here’s what I like: Courage and perseverance. Don’t they beat the heck out of stupidity and insanity?

Please hit the PayPal “donate” button at the top, and make a generous donation of as much you possibly can, so that I can continue to be (insert positive adjectives of your choice).

Thanks, in advance!


Nicholas Stix

“Brexit is Proof that Trump Will be the Next President”: “Anti-Immigration” Message and Shift to the Right that Led to UK's Seismic Break with Europe Draws Parallels with Rise of The Donald

By Unknown Reader

N.S.: I just hunted fruitlessly after the identity of the buddy who sent me this headline and link. Sorry.

At the Daily Mail.

Orlando: More Democrat Logic (Graphic)

The Ultimate Argument for Why We Cannot Wait on More Gun Control Legislation!

Progress in America, from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama! (Graphics)

On Integrating Islam and Western Civilization (Infographic)

My understanding is that the first sentence had come later, and was moved in front of the rest of the quote, by whoever put together the quote box, or whoever he was quoting, but that the sentiments were all Samuel P. Huntington’s.

Guardian Lefty: Forget BREXIT; Resistance is Futile; Poison Pill Requirements Mean that Whatever You Do, We Win!

Bollocks. Leftists always produce sophistry, explaining how there is no possible alternative to their statist machinations.

The Election was Just Decided by … Free Tampons! (Not a Satire!)

Godwin's Law is One Jerk: Classic Dilbert Cartoon!

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix


By Scott Adams

Death is a Caberet! The Angel Merkel; Lotte Lenya and Anne Kerry Ford’s “The Pirate Jenny”; Bertolt Brecht and Kurt Weill; and Moslem Integration (Political Cartoon, Music Videos, German and English Lyrics!)

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

The end of this cartoon reminds me of “Die Seeräuber Jenny” (“The Pirate Jenny”) number from Die Dreigroschenoper (The Three Penny Opera), the 1928, Communist adaptation, by Bertolt Brecht and Kurt Weill, of Englishman John Gay’s The Beggar’s Opera, which I am convinced was its inspiration.

“The premiere was on August 31, 1928, in Berlin’s Schiffbauerdamm’s [Shipwright’s Dike] Theater.” [German Wikipedia, translated by Nicholas Stix.]

The embittered Jenny sings of what she will do when she’s in charge, and can have her revenge on the city in which she had been a lowly maid. To the question, “Whom shall we kill?,” She answers, in a stage whisper, “All.”

Lotte Lenya Singing “Seeräuber Jenny” (Pirate Jenny)


Uploaded on Jul 7, 2008 by rongcentury.

Lotte Lenya singing "Seeräuber Jenny" in the original 1931 film Die Dreigroschenoper (The Threepenny Opera). So intense in its simplicity!

Anne Kerry Ford Sings “Pirate Jenny” by Kurt Weill and Bertolt Brecht (2006)

Uploaded on Jan 12, 2007 by Raymond Singer.

Anne Kerry Ford (singer), accompanied by John Boswell (pianist), performs "Pirate Jenny", the Weill/Brecht classic from "The Threepenny Opera" at the Zalk Theater in Ojai, CA, November 2006.

Seeräuberjenny (Pirate Jenny )
Musik von Kurt Weill
Worte von Bertolt Brecht

Meine Herren, heute sehen Sie mich Gläser abwaschen
Und ich mache das Bett für jeden.
Und Sie geben mir einen Penny und ich bedanke mich schnell
Und Sie sehen meine Lumpen und dies lumpige Hotel
Und Sie wissen nicht, mit wem Sie reden.
Und Sie wissen nicht, mit wem Sie reden.
Aber eines Abends wird ein Geschrei sein am Hafen
Und man fragt "Was ist das für ein Geschrei?"
Und man wird mich lächeln sehn bei meinen Gläsern
Und man sagt "Was lächelt die dabei?"

Und ein Schiff mit acht Segeln
Und mit fünfzig Kanonen
Wird liegen am Kai.

Man sagt "Geh, wisch deine Gläser, mein Kind"
Und man reicht mir den Penny hin.
Und der Penny wird genommen, und das Bett wird gemacht!
Es wird keiner mehr drin schlafen in dieser Nacht.
Und sie wissen immer noch nicht, wer ich bin.
Und sie wissen immer noch nicht, wer ich bin.
Aber eines Abends wird ein Getös sein am Hafen
Und man frag "Was ist das für ein Getös?"
Und man wird mich stehen sehen hinterm Fenster
Und man fragt "Was lächelt die so bös?"

Und das Schiff mit acht Segeln
Und mit fünfzig Kanonen
Wird beschiessen die Stadt.

Meine Herren, da wird ihr Lachen aufhören
Denn die Mauern werden fallen hin
Und die Stadt wird gemacht dem Erdboden gleich.
Nur ein lumpiges Hotel wird verschont von dem Streich
Und man fragt "Wer wohnt Besonderer darin?"
Und man fragt "Wer wohnt Besonderer darin?"
Und in dieser Nacht wird ein Geschrei um das Hotel sein
Und man fragt "Warum wird das Hotel verschont?"
Und man wird mich sehen treten aus der Tür gehn Morgen
Und man sagt "Die hat darin gewohnt?"

Und das Schiff mit acht Segeln
Und mit fünfzig Kanonen
Wird beflaggen den Mast

Und es werden kommen hundert gen Mittag an Land
Und werden in den Schatten treten
Und fangen einen jeglichen aus jeglicher Tür
Und legen ihn in Ketten und bringen vor mir
Und mich fragen "Welchen sollen wir töten?"
Und an diesem Mittag wird es still sein am Hafen
Wenn man fragt, wer wohl sterben muss.
Und dann werden Sie mich sagen hören "Alle!"
Und wenn dann der Kopf fällt, sage ich"Hoppla!"

Und das Schiff mit acht Segeln
Und mit fünfzig Kanonen
Wird entschwinden mit mir.


You men always see me washing this glass,
And how I make your beds for you daily,
But you toss me a penny, and I'm always quick to thank,
Even though you see my rags and this shabby old hotel,
But you don't know to whom you're talking.
But you don't know to whom you're talking.
But one evening you'll hear shouting at the ports,
and you'll ask "What's all that shouting for?"
And you'll see me laughing to myself by my glass,
and you'll ask "What's she laughing about?"

And a ship with eight sails,
And with fifty canons,
Will lay by the docks...

You'll say "Go wash your glass, little girl,"
And you'll hand a penny to me.
And I'll take that penny and make your bed!
Because you won't be sleeping in it tonight...
And you still don't know who I am.
And you still don't know who I am.
But one evening there'll be a roar by the port,
And you'll ask "What's all that noise about?"
And you'll see me gazing out my window,
And you'll ask "What's she smiling about?"

And a ship with eight sails,
And fifty canons,
Will fire at the shore...

My Sirs, there you're laughter will stop,
Becuase the walls will fall,
And the city will be level with the ground,
And only one hotel is left unscathed,
And you'll ask "What special person lives there?"
And you'll ask "What special person lives there?"
And in this night there'll be a shouting around the hotel,
And you'll ask "Why was this hotel spared?"
And you'll see me step out in the morning,
And you'll say "that's who live's there?"

And a ship with eight sails,
And with fifty canons,
Will raise up her flag...

And by noon the men will come by the hundreds,
And into the shade will step,
And they'll catch any man who steps out the door,
And put them before me in chains,
And they'll ask me "Which one's should we kill?"
And this afternoon it will be silent at the ports,
And when they ask me who must die,
You'll hear me say "All of them!"
And when the heads fall I'll say "Whoops!"

And the ship with eight sails,
And fifty canons,
Will disappear with me...

Saturday, June 25, 2016

The Empire Strikes Back! Twitter Did It Again! Social Media Giant Retaliates, and Freezes Account of Writer on Its Enemies List for the Seventh Time, Since Its Anti-Free Speech Edict Went into Effect on June 3


[Previously: “How Twitter Beats Up on People on Its Enemies’ List.”]

By Nicholas Stix

That would be me.

That must be a very long list. I wonder if it’s as long as the list at the New York Times, which I’m also on, along with many others (i.e., many other lists, and many other whitelistees).

I was tempted to get cute and say, “Twit,” instead of “Twitter,” but that would have been futile. After all, less than hour before Twitter shut me down, I did just that, when I criticized Twitter for trying to ram homosexuality down our throats, and my minder immediately reported me and had me blocked.

Revival Planned of Robert Bolt’s Classic Play, A Man for All Seasons!

Rich Lowry to produce, David French to direct, Jay Nordlinger to re-write, starring George Will as Thomas More, and Donald Trump as Henry VIII!

This show must open prior to Tuesday, November 8, 2016. On November 8, Mssrs. Lowry, Nordlinger, French and Will will lose all usefulness to the Clinton re-election campaign.

Reconquistas Trespass vs. Donald Trump in Scotland?! (Photograph)

Hurray for WEXIT! George Will Has Left the Republican Party!

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

At tip ‘o the hate to my friend, Oak Park, Illinois journalist and blogger, Jim Bowman, author of, most recently, the absorbing, moving, funny memoir, Company Man: My Jesuit Life, 1950-1968, which will seem to some younger readers to be about a foreign country, centuries ago, but which actually takes place in the Land of Lincoln, not so long ago.

What does “conservative” George Will hope to conserve?

In order to appreciate George Will’s hatred for Donald Trump—or rather for the long ignored voters Trump represents—you have to understand that Will once hated Ronald Reagan, too. Will was against Reagan, before he was for him.

Back last August, when Will declared war on Trump, he waxed nostalgic for Reagan, but as a National Review reader pointed out, Will had long been a Reagan-hater.

Will had worked against Reagan, whom he demed “unelectable,” in 1976, and early in 1980. And, as MoFo Politics reminds us, Will has a history of being wrong on almost everything!

The Reagan Democrats, whom Will hates with a vengeance, gave America the Reagan years, Donald Trump as Republican nominee, and are the difference between the GOP possibly recapturing the White House, and both the Party and America—barring a bloody Civil War II—being lost forever.

Conservative columnist George Will says he's leaving GOP over Trump
By Daniella Diaz
Updated 4:23 P.M. ET, Sat June 25, 2016

Washington (CNN) Conservative commentator and columnist George Will says he is leaving the Republican Party because of Donald Trump -- and he's advocating that others do the same.

In a speech at a Federalist Society luncheon Friday, he told the audience, "This is not my party," according to PJ Media, a conservative news website.

[You’re darned tootin,’ it’s not your party! That’s one thing we can agree on.]

The Pulitzer Prize winner confirmed to PJM in an interview after his speech that he had left the party and was now "an unaffiliated voter in the state of Maryland" before switching the subject.

PJM reported that Will cited House Speaker Paul Ryan's endorsement of Trump is one of the reasons why he decided to leave the party. Will didn't say whether he'd vote for either Democratic presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton or a third-party candidate, such as Libertarian Gary Johnson.

Will, who worked on President Ronald Reagan's 1980 campaign, also said at the luncheon that Trump as president with "no opposition" from a Republican-led Congress would be worse than Clinton as president with a Republican-led Congress.

When asked by PJ Media about his message to conservatives regarding Trump, Will responded, "Make sure he loses. Grit their teeth for four years and win the White House."

[It was recently reported that this is the strategy of the “NeverTrump” slutservatives who are working to help Hillary Clinton win the presidency. It doesn’t seem to occur to them that this is it, and that if Trump loses, it’s all over for the GOP. A President Hillary Clinton would turn so many criminal foreign invaders into “citizens” that the Democratic Party would be guaranteed a one-party dictatorship in perpetuity.]

CNN efforts to reach Will were not immediately successful Saturday.

Will has long been a harsh critic of Trump. Just earlier this month, he told Fox News that Trump is a "real amateur in politics."

[As opposed to Mitt Romney, whom Will predicted four years ago to win in a “landslide” against “Obama.”? Then I guess we need more amateurs.]

“He seems to confuse the enthusiasm of the crowds in front of him at the moment in the high school auditorium with the larger electorate,” he said. "Whereas, in fact, crowds are definitionally not a representative selection of the American people."

[What a stupid thing to say. First of all, Trump is packing stadiums, and second of all, if Will were right, Trump would never have won the Republican nomination. Trump’s nomination victory proves, definitionally, that his crowds are a representative selection of Republican voters. As for the American people, no political crowd is a representative selection of them, so that criticism was irrelevant.]

And this is not the first time the conservative has broken with Republican Party orthodoxy. In 2009, he wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post calling on the United States to get out of Afghanistan, which received criticism from his party.

Drudge: More Trouble in EU Paradise



Wikipedia Co-Founder: Fake Encyclopedia was Almost Immediately Taken Over by “Trolls” at Its Inception in 2001, with the “Inmates Running the Asylum” Since at Least 2002


When you see this symbol, think, “Danger ahead!”

Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales has long been the face of intellectual fraud, but is he now also the face of knuckle-dragging racism?

[The greatest exposé ever written about The Pretend Encyclopedia:

“‘Wikipedia on Race’: My American Renaissance Exposé.”

A list of other articles on The Pretend Encylopedia follows the article below.]

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger says website has been 'taken over by trolls'
46-year-old says he walked away from the internet phenomenon in 2001 because 'the inmates were running the asylum'
By Paul Gallagher
Thursday 12 November 2015

Sanger went on to establish the rival 'free knowledge project' Citizendium

Wikipedia’s co-founder has said that mob rule and anti-elitism ruined the website he helped set up leading to “inmates running the asylum”.

Larry Sanger said that he walked away from the internet phenomenon just one year after it began life in 2001 because it quickly became “taken over by trolls”.

The 46-year-old went on to establish Citizendium, a rival “free knowledge project” where user generated content would have to be approved by editors with minimum levels of qualifications, such as college diplomas or degrees.

“Wikipedia never solved the problem of how to organize itself in a way that didn’t lead to mob rule,” the Ohio-based internet project developer told “On the one hand, it isn’t a mob at all. It’s highly organized and structured and there’s a lot of rules, so it seems like the very opposite of that, right?

“But on the other hand, the way that the community is organized isn’t codified or decided upon in any type of constitutional way. So there might be some people who selectively apply rules according to positions that other people take on their pet issues. And that’s inherently unfair, right?

“I think a small amount of that goes on. A lot of the behaviours that people associate with so-called social justice warriors today, I remember seeing back in 2001, 2002, with the new arrivals.

Mr Sanger says he would have insisted on a more academic system of approving articles

“I don’t want to be in the business of Wikipedia-bashing anymore. But I do think it has a root problem that’s social. People that I would say are trolls sort of took over. The inmates started running the asylum.”

Fellow Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, who still oversees the website, was one of three founders of a free online encyclopaedia called Nupedia when he brought Mr Sanger on board to develop the project. The latter’s background in philosophy, especially the theory of knowledge, was seen as critical to its development.

Having synthesised emerging “wiki” technology, a website which can be edited directly from the web browser, by anyone, Mr Sanger came up with the name Wikipedia. He also wrote its founding documents and spent the next 14 months as the site’s sole paid editor and philosophical leader.

“People that I would say are trolls sort of took over. The inmates started running the asylum”

Larry Sanger

If he could go back to his time at Wikipedia again Mr Sanger would have insisted on a more academic system of approving articles and edits as “credible” – but he said a lack of leadership meant it never happened.

He told “But by the time the new recruits arrived—the anarchist crowd, as I called it at the time—all that stuff became deeply unpopular. Because there wasn’t anyone who was really leading the project, including Jimmy Wales—he just sort of let the thing run itself after I left—there needed to be a way for new ideas to be proposed and voted on by the community.

“And right now, I think Wikipedia is sort of stuck, and has long been stuck. They’re very slow to adapt, because they don’t have any community-approved mechanism for proposing and approving new changes. So there needed to be a constitutional system for doing that. And I think it could have been added, but never was.”

The English Wikipedia currently has almost 27 million users who have registered a username. Of these almost 130,000 could be classified as “Wikipedians”, volunteer contributors who write and edit Wikipedia articles, having edited a page over the last 30 days and more than half of them (53 per cent) are aged 29 or under.

Although the rival homepages look similar, Citizendium has only published almost 17,000 articles in English compared to Wikipedia’s five million plus.

Although he has often berated the website over its accuracy Mr Sanger said he remained “moderately proud” of his role in Wikipedia’s history.

“I always sort of felt like we just got lucky with the right idea at the right time, and we had a reasonably successful implementation of the idea,” he said. “A lot of the success of Wikipedia was exactly what we hoped and dreamed. And some of the policy choices that we made were definitely the right ones. I think the neutrality policy is absolutely instrumental, for example. The changes that we made to the way that wikis work was instrumental. So we definitely did some right things that we can take credit for. But I don’t know."

A spokesperson for the Wikimedia Foundation said: “Wikipedia has been edited by millions of people around the world who have contributed more than 35 million articles across 291 languages. These volunteers make up a vast, diverse community that can’t be defined by any single set of characteristics. No single group controls Wikipedia -- editors come from a variety of backgrounds, and each person has unique reasons for editing.”


Charles Ewing

The domination of Wikipedia by SJWs is noticeable on any politically-charged page. For example, the entry on climate change nowhere mentions the RSS satellite data, even though that is one of the half dozen global temperature series.

Try adding it. The change disappears within five minutes. That's because RSS shows no warming since 1998. There are people paid by the green lobby to watch Wikipedia constantly and make sure only the approved narrative survives.

Mario Tabone-Vassallo

I agree there are inherent dangers with Wikipedia but there are greater ones with the proposed alternative. Plato asked a question some 2,400 years ago that is still unanswered: Who is going to 'guard' the 'guardians'?

Nicholas Stix

Plato asked that question about the ideal government, not about knowledge. So, let me guess. You heard about this smart come back from Plato, and you pull it out of your back pocket all over the place, mostly where it’s completely inappropriate. Aren’t you a bloody genius!


Much of it is true. I have noticed this with the ascendancy of Putin. Wikipedia had a precise description of fascist societies, that fit Putin's Russia 100%, as well as other fascist societies throughout history, people started quoting this, and the whole entry was recently reorganised to erase the description. Not a simple edit, a wholesale rework by Russian trolls ... The inmates have taken over.


Oh great, "elitist" academics running the asylum instead, looks like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. I'll stick to Wiki and Google combination thanks.

Nicholas Stix

If you care about knowledge, you care about truth and about clear communication, e.g., how to properly use quotation marks. That makes you an elitist.

But you’re no elitist, no sir. Then why do you “stick to Wiki and Google,” instead of just making up your own lies?

[More on The Pretend Encyclopedia, at WEJB/NSU:

Wikipedia: Openness Through Lockdown”;

“Wikipedia and the Importance of being Ignorant”;

“Race Hustler Alert at Wikipedia! Someone Has been Making Mischief Regarding Maurice Clemmons’ Lakewood Massacre”;

“Baloo: Wikipedia Nation”;

“Wikipedia’s Censors are Hard at Work, Ensuring That Readers Do Not Learn about Crimes Committed by Members of ‘Protected Classes’ Against Members of ‘Non-Protected’ Classes”;

“Yet Another Wikipedia Cover-Up!”;

“Editor Laments: Anonymous Ideological Thugs Rule Wikipedia Now”;

“Nadine Gordimer’s Racism, and Wikipedia’s Attempt to Cover It Up”;

“What is Wrong with Wikipedia?”;

“Guaranteed Dishonesty: The Wikipedia Method”;

“Wikipedia Turns Racist, Premeditated, First-Degree Murder of a San Francisco PD Sergeant into a Case of ‘Alleged Attempted Murder’”;

“Dangerous, Racist Organization Seeks to Fill Its Moneybags at the Expense of Deluded, Deceived Saps”;

The Pretend Encyclopedia (aka Wikipedia) Turns 15, but the Racial Socialist Goons Who Have Taken It Over Have Caused the Number of Editors to Dwindle Since 2007”;

“Another Former Wikipedia Editor Chimes in on The Pretend Encyclopedia; and

“Black Activists: Wikipedia Racially Discriminates Against Blacks!”]

Friday, June 24, 2016

BREXIT's "Political Earthquake" in England--the Ruling Elites Refused to Acknowledge the Tremors, or to "Listen to the People on Immigration," Just Like in America

"And as the repercussions of the political earthquake reverberate through the nation–indeed the continent–Whitehall may be facing questions as to why it did not listen to the people on immigration–a massive and integral part of the debate for many.

"Much of the evidence suggests immigration was one of the main reasons why many leavers voted to quit . . ."

“It all ends in tears: David Cameron stands down in the wake of historic Brexit vote with emotional resignation speech as rival Boris Johnson makes first pitch to take over”
24 June 2016
Daily Mail

I thank the friend who sent me this story.

SEE EU Later! Check Out the Historic Front Page of London's Daily Sun


Secretary Clinton, Someone’s on the Phone for You; He Says It’s a Matter of Life and Death (Powerful Graphic)

Can You Stand It?! Watch Hillary Clinton Lie for 13 Minutes Straight (Amazing Video!)



Published on Jan 29, 2016 by Michael Armstrong.

Hillary, the inevitable liar.

See the Historic Daily Mirror BREXIT Result Cover!

Freddie “Grifter” Gray Case: Officer Caesar Goodson Acquitted on All Counts!

The Baltimore Sun: Freddie Gray Case: Officer Caesar Goodson Not Guilty on All Counts
Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

Thanks to my friend and partner-in-crime, David in TN, who asks,
How about charging Malicious Prosecution?

State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby should be charged and disbarred, but we know that no such thing will happen.

A lot of right-of-center observers claimed that Mosby indicted the Baltimore Six out of fear of the mob. That’s ridic. Mosby didn’t fear the mob, she and her husband, Councilman Nick Mosby, led the mob!

The good news is that black Circuit Judge Barry Williams has so far acquitted Baltimore City policemen Edward Nero and Caesar Goodson of all charges, in two bench trials. The bad news is that Judge Williams permitted the trials to go on at all. As he admitted in the Goodson trial, the prosecution provided no facts, but instead required that he make assumptions. But when the prosecution charges someone with no basis to the charges, the judge is obligated to dismiss all charges with prejudice, so that that the trial is shut down, and the defendant(s) cannot be recharged for the alleged crimes in question.

Document: Full Verdict in the Trial of Officer Caesar Goodson [PDF]

Freddie Gray case: Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. not guilty on all charges
By Justin Fenton and Kevin Rector
June 23, 2016, 6:54 p.m.
The Baltimore Sun

The Baltimore judge overseeing the trials of the six police officers indicted in the death of Freddie Gray on Thursday acquitted the officer facing the most serious charges, delivering a broad rebuke of a case that he said lacked evidence.

Officer Caesar Goodson Jr., 46, who was driving the transport van in which Gray sustained fatal injuries, became the second officer cleared in the high-profile case. Circuit Judge Barry Williams, in a bench trial, found Goodson not guilty on charges that included second-degree depraved-heart murder and three counts of manslaughter.

The acquittal throws the rest of the cases into jeopardy, as the other officers charged face similar but lesser accusations. Legal observers said Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby, who drew widespread praise and also condemnation after charging the officers in May 2015, must now re-evaluate the remaining cases.

[She’ll do no such thing.]

Prosecutors had alleged Goodson deliberately threw the shackled, but unrestrained Gray around the back of the van by giving him a "rough ride." Williams said the state lacked evidence and was asking him to make assumptions.

"As the trier of fact, the court can't simply let things speak for themselves," Williams said.

After the verdict, Goodson's attorneys patted him on the back, and a group of about 10 family members including Goodson's father hugged and wiped away tears. One man grabbed and kissed the top of Goodson's head and then raised his palms to the ceiling.

Goodson embraced supporters, including Officer Edward Nero, who was acquitted last month, and Officer Garrett Miller, whose charges are pending. His attorneys said he and his family were prevented from commenting due to a gag order in place until all six cases have concluded. The gag order also bars prosecutors from discussing the case.

The verdict drew mixed reaction. Outside the downtown courthouse where dozens had gathered, many expressed frustration at the not-guilty verdicts. Meanwhile, there were calls from supporters of the officers for the remaining charges in the case to be dropped.

Tessa Hill-Aston, president of the Baltimore NAACP, called the verdict very disappointing and said it shows flaws in the system. [Like what? The inability to railroad innocent policemen?] She said many were expecting the Goodson case to be the one in which prosecutors had the best chance of a conviction.

"We have to go back to the drawing board here in Baltimore and Maryland with rules and regulations and laws that affect the police behavior," she said, "because it's clear that they can do action that we feel is not correct, but in the courtroom ... is not a criminal act."

The city police union called on Mosby to "reconsider her malicious prosecution" of the officers and said she was wasting taxpayer money.

"It is time to put this sad chapter behind us and move forward in a positive manner," FOP President Gene Ryan said. "We must all come together to make Baltimore a safe place to work and raise a family."

Gray's family was "enormously frustrated," attorney William "Billy" Murphy said at an evening news conference with Gray's mother and stepfather. [Why? They got $6.4 million in taxpayer blood money they had no right to, much more than they earlier got in a lead paint scam.] They support Mosby, who Murphy called "one of the most courageous prosecutors" in the country and said "she is fighting for a just cause."

The family, who received a $6.4 million civil settlement, is "still waiting for justice, whatever that is," Murphy said.

Gray, 25, died on April 19, 2015, one week after his arrest. His death touched off citywide [riots] protests against police brutality, and his funeral was followed by rioting, looting and arson. The six officers involved in Gray's arrest and transport were criminally charged soon after.

During the eight-day trial, prosecutors alleged Goodson had five chances to render aid to Gray after his neck was broken in the back of the van, which they said demonstrated a "depraved heart." There was a mix of frustration, calls for patience and pressure to drop the remaining cases against police officers Thursday as Baltimore processed the news that Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. was acquitted of all charges related to the death of Freddie Gray.

Troy Clay, 22, of Pigtown, was visibly shocked...

There was a mix of frustration, calls for patience and pressure to drop the remaining cases against police officers Thursday as Baltimore processed the news that Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. was acquitted of all charges related to the death of

They also said Goodson was the direct cause of the injuries, driving the van in a reckless manner that threw him in the back of the van's steel cage, shackled but unrestrained by a seat belt. As a certified field training officer, prosecutors said Goodson knew Police Department rules better than most officers but disregarded them.

[The prosecutors lied. The new rules were only three days old, and had not yet been disseminated to Goodson or the rank and file.]

The defense sought to raise questions about the timeline of Gray's injuries, placing them later in the van's journey and therefore minimizing the opportunities Goodson had to intervene. Both sides called medical experts who presented conflicting testimony.

Judge Williams, a former city prosecutor who investigated police misconduct for the Justice Department, said there were five "equally plausible scenarios" for when Gray was injured. He quoted the state medical examiner who performed Gray's autopsy, who said, "We don't have any evidence one way or the other."

Williams repeatedly cited the testimony of the prosecution's medical witnesses – that Gray's injuries would have been progressive, and that he could have talked, moved his head and held himself up at various points along his transport – to suggest that it would have been difficult for Goodson to tell if Gray was injured.

After he was acquitted in all charges, Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. was patted on the back by his attorneys as he still stood at the trial table in the courtroom.

After the verdict, Goodson's attorneys patted him on the back, and a group of about 10 family members, including Goodson's father, hugged and wiped away tears. One man grabbed and kissed the top of Goodson's head and then raised his palms to the ceiling. 
Goodson embraced supporters, including Officer Edward Nero, who was acquitted last month, and Officer Garrett Miller, whose trial is pending. Goodson's attorneys said a gag order prohibits him and his family from talking publicly until all six cases have concluded. The gag order also bars prosecutors from discussing the case.

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said Goodson will remain suspended by the Police Department and now faces an administrative review. In Maryland, the results of such cases are not revealed to the public. With Goodson's acquittal, however, his pay will immediately be restored, and he may apply for more than a year of back pay. His annual salary in 2015 was $72,540.

The verdict drew mixed reaction. Outside the downtown courthouse, where dozens of protesters had gathered, many expressed frustration. Meanwhile, supporters of the officers called for the remaining charges in the case to be dropped.

Tessa Hill-Aston, president of the Baltimore NAACP, said she was disappointed in the verdict and that many thought the Goodson case presented the best chance for prosecutors to secure a conviction against one of the officers. She said the outcome exposed flaws in the justice system.

"We have to go back to the drawing board here in Baltimore and Maryland with rules and regulations and laws that affect the police behavior," she said, "because it's clear that they can do action that we feel is not correct, but in the courtroom … is not a criminal act."

Freddie Gray case: Live updates after verdict in Officer Goodson trial

The city police union called on Mosby to "reconsider her malicious prosecution" of the officers and said she was wasting taxpayer money.
"It is time to put this sad chapter behind us and move forward in a positive manner," FOP President Gene Ryan said. "We must all come together to make Baltimore a safe place to work and raise a family."

Gray's family was "enormously frustrated," attorney William "Billy" Murphy said at an evening news conference with Gray's mother and stepfather. They continue to support Mosby, he said, calling her "one of the most courageous prosecutors" in the country who is "fighting for a just cause."

The family, which received a $6.4 million civil settlement from the city, is "still waiting for justice, whatever that is," Murphy said.

Resignation over Goodson verdict, and the larger problems raised by death of Freddie Gray

Gray, 25, died on April 19, 2015, one week after his arrest. His death touched off citywide protests against police brutality, and his funeral was followed by rioting, looting and arson. The six officers involved in Gray's arrest and transport were criminally charged within days.

During the trial, prosecutors alleged Goodson didn't secure Gray in a seat belt and had five chances to render aid to Gray after his neck was broken in the back of the van; they said his failure to give aid demonstrated a "depraved heart."

They also said Goodson caused the injuries, driving the van in a reckless manner that tossed Gray around the back of the van's steel cage. As a certified field training officer, prosecutors said, Goodson knew Police Department rules regarding transport safety better than most officers but disregarded them.

The defense sought to raise questions about the timeline of Gray's injuries, saying he was hurt late in the van's journey, minimizing the opportunities Goodson had to intervene. Both sides called medical experts, who presented conflicting testimony.

Officer Caesar Goodson's family in courtroom for not-guilty verdict

Williams, a former city prosecutor who investigated police misconduct for the U.S. Justice Department, said there were five "equally plausible scenarios" for when Gray was injured. He quoted the state medical examiner who performed Gray's autopsy, who said, "We don't have any evidence one way or the other."

Williams repeatedly cited the testimony of the prosecution's medical witnesses — who said that Gray's injuries would have been progressive, and that he could have talked, moved his head and held himself up at various points along his transport — to suggest that it would have been difficult for Goodson to tell if Gray was injured.

"This injury manifested itself internally," Williams said. "That is one of the key issues here. If the doctors are not clear as to what would be happening at this point in time, how would the average person or officer without medical training know?"

Deputy State's Attorney Michael Schatzow laid out his "rough ride" theory in his opening statement.

Prosecutors identified an unexplained stop of the van as a key moment. Goodson pulled over but did not notify dispatchers, then asked for assistance from another officer. Schatzow said it could be inferred that Goodson had hurt Gray, perhaps worse than he intended, and sought help.

Williams called "rough ride" an "inflammatory term" that is "not to be taken lightly," and said the state had failed to prove such a ride was given to Gray.

"In order to show a rough ride, there must be evidence," Williams said.

Prosecutors said Goodson knew he should have put a seat belt on Gray, while defense attorneys said Goodson deferred to other officers —
including a supervisor — who had taken more active roles in Gray's arrest.

Williams said the only time the prosecution proved that Goodson had neglected his duty to secure Gray with a seat belt was at the van's fourth stop.

"The failure to seat-belt may have been a mistake or it may have been bad judgment, but without showing more than has been presented to the court concerning the failure to seat-belt and the surrounding circumstances, the state has failed to meet its burden to show that the actions of the defendant rose above mere civil negligence," Williams said.

The judge repeatedly mentioned the higher burden to prove criminal negligence, compared to civil negligence.

After three trials, prosecutors have been unable to secure a conviction on any count. The first trial, of Officer William Porter, ended in a hung jury and mistrial last December. The second, of Nero, ended last month with the officer being acquitted of all charges by Williams in a bench trial.

A juror in Porter's trial told The Baltimore Sun that the jury voted 11-to-1 to acquit Porter of manslaughter but had been leaning toward convicting him of lesser counts before deciding they were deadlocked.

In pursuing the charges against the officers, prosecutors won a victory in the state's highest court earlier this year when the Court of Appeals ruled that officers charged in the case can be called to testify under immunity against their co-defendants. As a result, to guard against the officers' testimony being used against them, two of the upcoming trials — of Porter and Miller — must be handled by a new team of prosecutors.

The next trial, of Lt. Brian Rice, who is charged with manslaughter, is scheduled to begin July 7. The other officers' trial dates are: Miller, July 27; Porter, Sept. 6; and Sgt. Alicia White, Oct. 13.

All of the officers have pleaded not guilty.
Baltimore Sun reporters Jessica Anderson and Alison Knezevich contributed to this article.

Thursday, June 23, 2016

BREXIT Update: 51.1% Say Leave!

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix


Referendum of the United Kingdom's membership of the European Union
Last updated Jun 23 at 11:27 PM

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
65.4% Reporting

Remain a member of the European Union

Leave the European Union