David Wood scrolls through a list of documented attacks by Muslims during 2020, explaining that the political Establishment is doing all that it can to conceal news of such attacks.
[Also note: Joe Biden is going to lift the travel ban from Jihadist countries, he’s going to dramatically ramp up the importation of Muslims through the secretive “Refugee Resettlement Program,” he’s going to essentially open the borders of the United States to allow anyone who will walk across (or fly into the country and not leave), and he will offer all types of expensive government welfare to the people who will be surging into the country.]
A Gateway Pundit article explains that Kamala Harris told a made-up story about herself in an interview with Elle Magazine, where she claimed that she fell out of her stroller at a civil rights march, telling her mother that she wanted “Fweedom.”
Here is the actual excerpt:
Senator Kamala Harris started her life’s work young. She laughs from her gut, the way you would with family, as she remembers being wheeled through an Oakland, California, civil rights march in a stroller with no straps with her parents and her uncle. At some point, she fell from the stroller (few safety regulations existed for children’s equipment back then), and the adults, caught up in the rapture of protest, just kept on marching. By the time they noticed little Kamala was gone and doubled back, she was understandably upset. “My mother tells the story about how I’m fussing,” Harris says, “and she’s like, ‘Baby, what do you want? What do you need?’ And I just looked at her and I said, ‘Fweedom.’”
I never will forget a moment in Birmingham when a white policeman accosted a little Negro girl, seven or eight years old, who was walking in a demonstration with her mother. “What do you want?” the policeman asked her gruffly, and the little girl looked him straight in the eye and answered, “Fee-dom.” She couldn’t even pronounce it, but she knew. It was beautiful! Many times when I have been in sorely trying situations, the memory of that little one has come into my mind, and has buoyed me.
[Note: Harris is likely eventually going to be the President of the United States, since Biden most likely won’t last long as President due to health issues. It is a bad situation.]
A Breitbart article explains that Twitter has permanently banned the account of Donald Trump, with the online service making a false claim of Trump using it to “incite violence,” despite the fact that Trump was not actually doing that.
Trump was the President Of The United States— I think he never should have been maintaining a presence in such a peanut gallery in the first place, especially when doing so was an endorsement of those companies even after they showed time and again that they have corrupt bias! He should have simply had a quality official White House blog, and he should have only used it to communicate properly. Trump often used Twitter to communicate in a divisive manner.
Twitter is just some random service on the internet, and I think such companies should have the right to censor if they want to. People should be aggressively boycotting such companies in favor of better ones such as Parler if they don’t agree with how they are censoring.
I think the underlying infrastructure of the internet and financial institutions should not be allowed to censor or deny services to people, but other services that are simply sitting on top of the internet such as Twitter should mostly have the right to do what they want to do.
What happened at the Capitol today was a shame and a tragedy. I was watching the live feed of what was happening with the conflict, and almost all of the people attending were peaceful.
Much of the media is fraudulently attempting to claim that Trump was inciting people to storm the Capitol building— Does anything in his speech look like he was trying to do that? Of course not.
Mike Pence is a coward and traitor for refusing to make the decision about the contested electoral votes. The proof of election fraud is absolutely legitimate, things would have worked out great today if he just did his job properly. Even if he was somehow being threatened into doing what he did, he still had an obligation to do the right thing.
It will be interesting to see what happens, I hope things will be ok. I’m often annoyed by Trump’s behavior, but he is very preferable to Biden nonetheless.
It is also interesting to see that Georgia’s congresswoman Kelly Loeffler “changed course” on her pledge to object to the Electoral College vote due to the (VERY few) people who caused problems. When Congress reconvened, she ACTUALLY SAID: “When I arrived in Washington this morning, I fully intended to object to the certification of the electoral votes … However, the events that have transpired today have forced me to reconsider and I cannot now, in good conscience, object.” — In other words, the fact that the votes were stolen is not the criteria she is using for her objection to it!
Noah Nicholas Perry, who represents the East Flatbush area of Brooklyn. Image from Wikipedia.
A bill has been introduced in the New York Assembly by Noah Nicholas Perry that mandates quarantines, removing people from their homes, and forcing vaccinations on people in that state. The law even applies to suspected cases of “communicable diseases who are potentially dangerous to the public health,” as well as simply people who have come into contact with such people.
Following is the actual text from the bill. I have highlighted the text and capitalized it in places for emphasis. Note point #12 near the end of the bill where it mandates forcibly vaccinating people:
2021-2022 Regular Sessions
I N A S S E M B L Y
(PREFILED)
January 6, 2021 ___________
Introduced by M. of A. PERRY -read once and referred to the Committee on Health
An act to amend the public health law, in relation to the removal of cases, contacts and carriers of communicable diseases who are potentially dangerous to the public health.
The people of the state of New York, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. The public health law is amended by adding a new section 2120-a to read as follows:
§ 2120-a. Removal and detention of CASES, CONTACTS and CARRIERS who are or may be a danger to public health; other orders.
1. The provisions of this section shall be utilized in the event that the governor declares a state of health emergency due to an epidemic of any communicable disease.
2. Upon determining by clear and convincing evidence that the health of others is or may be endangered by a case, contact or carrier, or SUSPECTED case, CONTACT or CARRIER of a contagious disease that, in the opinion of the governor, after consultation with the commissioner, may pose an imminent and significant threat to the public health resulting in severe morbidity or high mortality, the governor or his or her delegee, including, but not limited to the commissioner or the heads of local health departments, may order the removal and/or detention of such a person or of a group of such persons by issuing a single order, identifying such persons either by name or by a reasonably specific description of the individuals or group being detained. Such person or group of persons shall be DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY OR OTHER APPROPRIATE FACILITY OR PREMISES designated by the governor or his or her delegee and complying with subdivision five of this section.
3. A person or group removed or detained by order of the governor or his or her delegee pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall be detained for such period and in such manner as the department may direct in accordance with this section.
4. Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of this section:
(a) A confirmed case or a carrier who is detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall not continue to be detained after the department determines that such person is no longer contagious.
(b) A SUSPECTED case or SUSPECTED CARRIER who is detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall not continue to be detained after the department determines, with the exercise of due diligence, that such person is not infected with or has not been exposed to such a disease, or if infected with or exposed to such a disease, no longer is or will become contagious.
(c) A person who is detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section as a CONTACT of a confirmed case or a carrier shall not continue to be detained after the department determines that the person is not infected with the disease or that such contact no longer presents a potential danger to the health of others.
(d) A person who is detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section as a contact of a suspected case shall not continue to be detained:
(i) After the department determines, with the exercise of due diligence, that the suspected case was not infected with such a disease, or was not contagious at the time the contact was exposed to such individual; or
(ii) After the department determines that the contact no longer presents a potential danger to the health of others.
5. A person who is detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall, as is appropriate to the circumstances:
(a) Have his or her medical condition and needs assessed and addressed on a regular basis, and
(b) Be detained in a manner that is consistent with recognized isolation and infection control principles in order to minimize the likelihood of transmission of infection to such person and to others.
6. When a PERSON OR GROUP is ordered to be detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section for a period not exceeding three business days, such person or member of such group shall, upon request, be afforded an opportunity to be heard. If a person or group detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section needs to be detained beyond three business days, they shall be provided with an additional commissioner’s order pursuant to subdivisions two and eight of this section.
7. When a person or group is ordered to be detained pursuant to subdivision two of this section for a period exceeding three business days, and such person or member of such group requests release, the governor or his or her delegee shall make an application for a court order authorizing such detention within three business days after such request by the end of the first business day following such Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, which application shall include a request for an expedited hearing. After any such request for release, detention shall not continue for more than five business days in the absence of a court order authorizing detention. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, in no event shall any person be detained for more than SIXTY DAYS without a court order authorizing such detention. The governor or his or her delegee shall seek further court review of such detention within ninety days following the initial court order authorizing detention and thereafter within ninety days of each subsequent court review. In any court proceeding to enforce an order of the governor or his or her delegee for the removal or detention of a person or group issued pursuant to this subdivision or for review of the continued detention of a person or group, the governor or his or her delegee shall prove the particularized circumstances constituting the necessity for such detention by clear and convincing evidence.
8. (a) A copy of any detention order of the governor or his or her delegee issued pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall be given to each detained individual; however, if the order applies to a GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS and it is impractical to provide individual copies, it may be posted in a conspicuous place in the detention premises. Any detention order of the commissioner issued pursuant to subdivision two of this section shall set forth:
(i) The purpose of the detention and the legal authority under which the order is issued, including the particular sections of this article or other law or regulation;
(ii) A description of the circumstances and/or behavior of the detained person or group constituting the basis for the issuance of the order;
(iii) The less restrictive alternatives that were attempted and were unsuccessful and/or the less restrictive alternatives that were considered and rejected, and the reasons such alternatives were rejected;
(iv) A notice advising the person or group being detained that they have a right to request release from detention, and including instructions on how such request shall be made;
(v) A notice advising the person or group being detained that they have a right to be represented by legal counsel and that upon request of such person or group access to counsel will be facilitated to the extent feasible under the circumstances; and
(vi) A notice advising the person or group being detained that they may supply the addresses and/or telephone numbers of friends and/or relatives to receive notification of the person’s detention, and that the department shall, at the detained person’s request and to the extent feasible, provide notice to a reasonable number of such people that the person is being detained.
(b) In addition, an order issued pursuant to subdivisions two and seven of this section, requiring the detention of a person or group for a period exceeding three business days, shall:
(i) Advise the person or group being detained that the detention shall not continue for more than five business days after a request for release has been made in the absence of a court order authorizing such detention;
(ii) Advise the person or group being detained that, whether or not they request release from detention, the governor or his or her delegee must obtain a court order authorizing detention within sixty days following the commencement of detention and thereafter must further seek court review of the detention within ninety days of such court order and within ninety days of each subsequent court review; and
(iii) Advise the person or group being detained that they have the right to request that legal counsel be provided, that upon such request counsel shall be provided if and to the extent possible under the circumstances, and that if counsel is so provided, that such counsel will be notified that the person or group has requested legal representation.
9. A person who is DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY, or other appropriate facility or premises, shall not conduct himself or herself in a disorderly manner, and SHALL NOT LEAVE OR ATTEMPT TO LEAVE SUCH FACILITY OR PREMISES until he or she is discharged pursuant to this section.
10. Where necessary and feasible under the circumstances, language interpreters and persons skilled in communicating with vision and hearing impaired individuals shall be provided.
11. The provisions of this section shall not apply to the issuance of orders pursuant to § 11.21 of the New York City health code.
12. In addition to the removal or detention orders referred to in subdivision two of this section, and without affecting or limiting any other authority that the commissioner may otherwise have, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE MAY, IN HIS OR HER DISCRETION, ISSUE AND SEEK ENFORCEMENT OF ANY OTHER ORDERS THAT HE OR SHE DETERMINES ARE NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO PREVENT DISSEMINATION OR TRANSMISSION OF CONTAGIOUS DISEASES or other illnesses that may pose a threat to the public health including, but not limited to, orders requiring any person or persons who are not in the custody of the department to be excluded; to REMAIN ISOLATED OR QUARANTINED AT HOME or at a premises of such person’s choice that is acceptable to the department and under such conditions and for such period as will prevent transmission of the contagious disease or other illness; to require the testing or medical examination of persons who may have been exposed to or infected by a contagious disease or who may have been exposed to or contaminated with dangerous amounts of radioactive materials or toxic chemicals; to REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE TO COMPLETE AN APPROPRIATE, PRESCRIBED COURSE OF TREATMENT, PREVENTIVE MEDICATION OR VACCINATION, including directly observed therapy to treat the disease and follow infection control provisions for the disease; or to require an individual who has been contaminated with dangerous amounts of radioactive materials or toxic chemicals such that said individual may present a danger to others, to undergo decontamination procedures deemed necessary by the department. Such person or persons shall, upon request, be afforded an opportunity to be heard, but the provisions of subdivisions two through eleven of this section shall not otherwise apply.
13. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to permit or require the forcible administration of any medication without a prior court order.
WHAT DO NEW YORKERS THINK ABOUT TRUMP, MAYOR DE BLASIO, AND GOVERNOR CUOMO?
I lived in New York City in the 1990’s and early 2000’s, and it was a great and peaceful place to be. New Yorkers generally have liberal attitudes, but it is usually in a healthy self-sustaining way that is not irrational or dysfunctional.
In the above video most New Yorkers who are asked about Trump say that they strongly dislike him. Trump unfortunately does often say stupid and needlessly divisive things, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that people think that way about him. I think most people aren’t so much opposed to his policies but rather to his mannerisms that allows the media to get away with villainizing him. If he simply communicated properly he would be very popular in New York as well as everywhere else. I do think he is very preferable to Biden though, in any event.
It would be interesting to see New Yorkers asked what they think about mayor de Blasio and governor Cuomo, but I have not really found similar videos that do that. Those politicians have been consistently implementing harmful leftist agendas, however they don’t really communicate in an odious manner so they mostly get away with it, despite the fact that many New Yorkers are fed up with the situation in that city.
A Chicago Teachers Union leader is being criticized for pushing to continuine the policy of remote schooling and threatening to strike while she is vacationing in the Caribbean.
Sarah Chambers, who is on the CTU’s executive board and serves as its vice president, has been claiming that it is not safe for Chicago public schools to reopen for the new year due to the COVID pandemic, however she has been making those statements while vacationing in Puerto Rico, which is a country that supposedly has 110,000 cases of COVID.
Chambers has been posting pictures of her vacation to her Instagram account, commenting about how empty the tourist areas are:
On the same day that she made the above post, she wrote: “Hearing of an educator revolution happening. Tons of members are emailing their admin: I’ll be asserting my right to continue to work in a safe remote environment on January 4th, 2021. I have signed the pledge, along with over 8,000+ union educators to continue to work remotely.”— Referring to 8,000 Chicago teachers in her union who are threatening to strike if the schools reopen in January.
What is also problematic is the fact that teachers such as Chambers are often leftist extremists who teach harmful disinformation even when they are working. I can’t imagine how frustrating it must be for well-informed students to have to sit through what they know is corrupt leftist propaganda. I’m curious about how teachers such as Chambers would reply if they were told the truth about issues with the “Black Lives Matter” organization and global warming, for example.
Actually I think “homeschooling” would be a most ideal option, however that is not really practical for most people. Perhaps like-minded parents could pool their resources to organize grass-roots independent “homeschool clusters” in order to save their kids from being exposed to harmful leftist Establishment agendas in areas where it is particularly problematic.
Footage was recorded in Gatineau, Quebec that shows police raiding a man’s home after a neighbor reported that the man was hosting six people in his house, which was one more person than the mandated limit of five.
Le Journal de Montreal reported that the police initially intended to simply give a notice to end the gathering, but the people refused to do so, leading to the police apprehending the man and fining them $1,546 per person.
I feel bad for the people who live in the English Commonwealth countries. Remember when leftist celebrities in the U.S. would always say “I’m going to move to Canada, where I can be free”!? There is a significant extra layer of tyranny in those countries.
An anti-lockdown activist Debbie Hicks was arrested at her home in Gloucester, England after recording and broadcasting the empty interior of the Gloucester Royal Hospital.
In the video she made while wandering the hospital, she said: “We’ve been put in Tier 3, for this? It’s a disgrace. I’ve seen less than 20 people. It’s completely dead in an empty hospital with wards shut down and the lights off. … Where are all the people dying and where is the mutant virus? I can’t see the evidence and neither can the public watching. We’ve been robbed of Christmas for this.”
The police then apprehended her in her home the next day, which her husband recorded.
