Not to minimize the carnage, but when will the Brits quit blaming Japanese and Chinese people for the terror attacks in their country. They keep calling the terrorists “Asians”. They are not Asians, they are middle eastern Muslims. Today, another one decided to become their version of a drone strike and kill a bunch of innocent people.
It is currently known that:
- One woman was killed on Westminster Bridge after a number of pedestrians were mowed down by a car.
- Two more people were killed in the incident on the bridge.
- Another woman ended up in the Thames and was treated for serious injuries after being pulled from the water.
- A group of French schoolchildren were among those targeted on the bridge.
- The attacker jumped out the car and fatally stabbed police officer Keith Palmer in the grounds of the Palace of Westminster.
- The knifeman was shot dead moments later by another officer.
- Police are treating the incident as a terrorist attack.
Witness Jayne Wilkinson said: ‘We were taking photos of Big Ben and we saw all the people running towards us, and then there was an Asian guy in about his 40s carrying a knife about seven or eight inches long.
‘And then there were three shots fired, and then we crossed the road and looked over. The man was on the floor with blood.
‘He had a lightweight jacket on, dark trousers and a shirt. He was running through those gates, towards Parliament, and the police were chasing him.’
Her partner David Turner added: ‘There was a stampede of people running out. You saw the people and you thought ‘what the hell is going on’.’
Foreign Office minister Tobias Ellwood was among those who rushed to help the policeman who had been stabbed.
Mr Ellwood, who lost his brother in the Bali bombing, could be seen pumping the officer’s chest then standing above him, his hands and face smeared with blood.
Frazer Clarke, 25, from Burton-on-Trent, said: ‘We heard a loud bang and screaming and then I noticed some smoke. I thought it was a car crash.
‘I looked towards the front gate and people were running, a police officer and a fellow coming to the gate with two knives.
‘He was stabbing the police officer with the knives. He was wearing black tracksuit bottoms, a black of grey top and what looked like work boots. The police officer was stumbling and fell on the floor’.
There is video now, since Britain is one large CCTV nation and there will be more I’m sure. One video shows people jumping off the bridge into the very cold river to avoid being run down.
This is another terror attack in a nation full of terrorists. One of them is the London mayor, who is playing the part of “kitman.” He’s the first Muslim mayor and is literally the well dressed educated camel’s nose under the tent.
London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has already been controversial for his ‘openness’ towards Islamic immigrants with no plans what so ever to help assimilate them to Western culture. Well, with today’s attacks that left at least four dead and many injured, we are reminded of Sadiq Khan’s chilling remarks that terrorism is ‘part & parcel’ of living in a large city. Via DailyMail:
The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has said that living with terror attacks – like the one that hit New York at the weekend – is ‘part and parcel of living in a big city’.
Mr Khan told the Evening Standard: ‘It is a reality I’m afraid that London, New York, other major cities around the world have got to be prepared for these sorts of things.
‘That means being vigilant, having a police force that is in touch with communities, it means the security services being ready, but also it means exchanging ideas and best practice.’
It goes without saying that the majority of Londoners, or New Yorkers, or pretty much the population of ANY major city are NOT willing to accept terrorism as nonchalantly as Sadiq Khan has; the rise is terrorism across the Western world is a direct consequence of open immigration laws extending to countries that are known hotbeds of Islamic extremism and terrorism. Unfortunately, Sadiq Khan recently won re-election back in 2016 and Mayoral terms in London last for four years. One can only imagine that many Londoners are deeply regretting their last vote.
Seriously, what were you thinking Brits?
Turkey’s President Erdogan, is playing a game with Europe. Europe, being suicidal and stupid, is playing along. Erdogan has been pushing “migrant refugees” into Europe from the war torn area of Syria. He stopped when Europe paid him billions. Now he took the money and has threatened to start up the migration again. In addition, he tells the people already there to take over Europe through demographics. Europe is in deep sh*t. Everybody but the global elites knows this and cares. The globalists may know, but don’t care and they hold the power. It is curious why they want to undermine Europe, they will be some of the first who will die at the hands of the Islamists.
ANKARA (AFP) – President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Friday urged Turks resident in Europe to have five children, telling the millions strong diaspora community “you are Europe’s future.”
Turkey and Europe are locked in a bitter spat after Germany and the Netherlands blocked Turkish ministers from holding rallies to campaign for a ‘yes’ vote in next month’s referendum on expanding Erdogan’s powers.
Erdogan has repeatedly accused EU states of behaving like Nazi Germany over what he sees as discrimination against Turks, in comments that have caused outrage across the continent.
“From here I say to my citizens, I say to my brothers and sisters in Europe… Educate your children at better schools, make sure your family live in better areas, drive in the best cars, live in the best houses,” said Erdogan.
“Have five children, not three. You are Europe’s future.”
“This is the best answer to the rudeness shown to you, the enmity, the wrongs,” he added in a televised speech in the city of Eskisehir, south of Istanbul.
Some 2.5 million Turkish citizens resident in Europe are eligible to vote in elections in their homeland. But millions more people living in EU states have Turkish origins.
Their leadership is getting good innocent people, Europeans, killed every day by people who are not Europeans. It is a war. A serious Crusader level, clash of cultures, war. And the people who know they are war will win.
Which means Europe is doomed UNLESS the Europeans change leadership.
Remember, the key here is how many, in what concentration vs how little dispersed. That’s how armies win battles.
Okay, this is a little bit funny. Mexicans are flooding Canada. Suddenly, they aren’t as critical anymore.
Remember when the Prime Minister, “Kid” something…oh yeah Trudeau, said that his nation was an inclusive nation which would never turn anyone away? Well, it turns out their laws are tougher than ours and they just aren’t used to having waves of illegals walk across the border. Now they are experiencing it firsthand and suddenly.
Canada’s border authorities detained more Mexicans in the first 67 days of 2017 than they did annually in any of the three previous years, according to statistics obtained by Reuters.
The spike comes immediately after Canada’s federal government lifted its visa requirement for Mexican citizens in December.
Many Mexicans looking north have shifted their focus from the United States to Canada as President Donald Trump vows to crack down on America’s undocumented immigrants, about half of whom are Mexican. On Friday, Reuters reported, immigration judges were reassigned to 12 U.S. cities to speed up deportation.
The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) said it detained 444 Mexican nationals between Jan. 1 and March 8, compared with 410 for all of 2016, 351 for 2015, and 399 for 2014.
The CBSA can detain foreign nationals if it is believed they pose a danger to the public, if their identity is unclear or if they are deemed unlikely to appear for removal or for a proceeding.
The number of Mexicans turned back at the airport has risen, too – to 313 in January, more than any January since 2012 and more than the annual totals for 2012, 2013 and 2014.
With the visa requirement lifted, all that Mexicans need to come to Canada is an Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA), obtainable online in a matter of minutes. But they cannot work without a work permit, and the eTA does not guarantee entry.
Canada issued 72,450 travel authorizations to Mexican citizens between Dec. 1, 2016, and March 10, 2017 – a significant increase compared with a similar period when visas were required.
Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Minister Ahmed Hussen has said his department is monitoring the situation.
“It would be premature to draw conclusions or to speculate on future policy at this point,” Hussen’s spokeswoman, Camielle Edwards, wrote in an email Friday evening.
Plus, the “immigrants” are just wandering across the border, through the fields and into small towns.
On Tuesday, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police said another 22 people had walked across the border and into Canada over the weekend; 19 of them on Saturday and three on Sunday.
“They’re not crossing at the actual point where there’s an immigration and customs offices,” said Rita Chahal of the Manitoba Interfaith Immigration Council. “They’re walking through prairie fields with lots and lots of deep snow. In Europe we’re seeing people in boats; now just imagine a prairie flatland and snow for miles and miles.”
Ahhhh…reality sucks and Karma is a bitch.
Remember when all the liberals said Donna Brazile would never lie about helping HRC cheat in her run against Bernie? Remember how upset and outraged Donna was at the idea, even though WikiLeaks had just released the hacked emails proving that she did it? Remember how the Left screamed that the Right was chasing yet another conspiracy theory?
Well that’s done.
One of the most astounding revelations from the Podesta email published by Wikileaks was that then interim DNC Chair and CNN commentator Donna Brazile leaked potential primary town hall questions to the Clinton campaign.
That was astounding in two regards — that it happened, and that the media didn’t make a bigger deal about it.
Just imagine what the media reaction would have been if during the general election it came out that questions during Republican primary debates had been leaked to the Trump campaign. It would have been non-stop, 24/7, foaming at the mouth coverage demanding Trump drop out of the race. …
…Now Brazile has confessed in a column in Time devoted to decrying Russian hacking. The admission of guilt was buried in one paragraph in that column.
Fox News reports on the confession:
Former interim Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile admitted Friday that she forwarded Democratic primary debate questions to members of Hillary Clinton’s campaign – something she had previously denied.
“[I]n October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign,” she wrote.
In October, emails from Clinton campaign Chair John Podesta’s account were released by WikiLeaks showing that Brazile – then a CNN contributor – had forwarded questions ahead of a March primary debate.
In one email, Brazile told Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” the night before a March 6 CNN primary debate in Flint, Michigan.
“Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint,” Brazile wrote.
The following night, a question along those lines was posed to both Clinton and her primary rival Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt.
In another email, dated Mar. 12, she passed on to Palmieri a question on the death penalty set to be asked in a Mar. 13 town hall and said: “From time to time I get the questions in advance.” After Palmieri responded, Brazile wrote back: “I’ll send a few more.” …
In the essay, Brazile said she will “forever regret” the decision to leak the questions to the Clinton campaign.
“My job was to make all our Democratic candidates look good, and I worked closely with both campaigns to make that happen. But sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret,” she wrote
Uhhh…don’t care. She lied, knew she was lying, threw out “As a Christian woman I know persecution” line on a Megyn Kelly interview and basically laughed at citizens who asked someone, ANYONE inside the Clinton circle to tell the truth for once.
On the other hand, Greg Gutfeld at Fox pointed out something. If Bernie had won, he may have won it all. So in a way Brazile, by cheating and helping HRC, saved all of us.
Hmmm…well if you put it that way…
There are two issues here. First, did the Brits tap the Russian Ambassador and pick up Flynn’s side of the conversation? Who knows, but the reaction to Judge Napolitano’s assertion by the Brits is a lie.
In a startling segment on the Fox News program The First 100 Days, Judge Andrew Napolitano told viewers that there will be no paper trail linking President Obama to any surveillance of telephone calls in Trump Tower during the presidential transition period. (President Obama called it “wiretapping” even though no wires were involved.) The reason is that British intelligence had access to NSA surveillance data – which captures every phone call in the United States – and were able to provide such intelligence to President Obama without a FISA court warrant or any other paper trail that would expose an American intelligence agency that used the same NSA data.
Of course, the Brits deny this. As any intelligence agency would. Unfortunately for them, there was this guy named Snowden. And Snowden proved them all liars. Communications are digital and can be hacked and stored. In fact, the revelation that the Brits were doing it did not escape the Brits.
British intelligence services acted unlawfully in accessing millions of people’s personal communications collected by the NSA, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled today. The decision marks the first time that the Tribunal, the only UK court empowered to oversee GHCQ, MI5 and MI6, has ever ruled against the intelligence and security services in its 15 year history.
The Tribunal declared that intelligence sharing between the United States and the United Kingdom was unlawful prior to December 2014, because the rules governing the UK’s access to the NSA’s PRISM and UPSTREAM programmes were secret. It was only due to revelations made during the course of this case, which relied almost entirely on documents disclosed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, that the intelligence sharing relationship became subject to public scrutiny.
The claimants in the case are Privacy International, Bytes for All, Liberty, and Amnesty International.
In a previous December 2014 ruling, the IPT held that GCHQ’s access to NSA data was lawful from that time onward because certain of the secret policies governing the US-UK intelligence relationship were made public during Privacy International’s case against the security services. Yet that belated disclosure could not remedy the lack of transparency regarding the UK-US sharing prior to December 2014, meaning that all UK access to NSA intelligence material was unlawful before the Court’s judgement.
In light of today’s ruling, Privacy International and Bytes for All will now ask the court to confirm whether their communications were unlawfully collected prior to December 2014 and, if so, demand their immediate deletion.
While we welcome today’s decision, Privacy International and Bytes for All disagree with the tribunal’s earlier conclusion that the forced disclosure of a limited subset of rules governing intelligence-sharing and mass surveillance is sufficient to make GCHQ’s activities lawful as of December 2014. Both organisations will shortly lodge an application with the European Court of Human Rights challenging the tribunal’s December 2014 decision.
The people, and they are just people, who are collecting this data are not monsters. They are doing their job. It is the guy working with them, or above them, that has access to that data and no moral compass or has political agendas that makes the collection of the data dangerous.
My very intelligent former detective partner had a local take on how data can be misused. He created a case about a high end burglary that occurred at 1am in our city. To catch the burglar we gathered all the cell traffic metadata in a one mile square around the crime scene. We throw out all the residents, all the people just traveling through. What is left we run background on and find one is a high end burglar. Through that we run down the stolen property he fenced and he gets to go to jail. Good solid police work.
Unfortunately, we have all that raw data, so what do we do? Do we keep it? In a criminal case we have to, discovery and appeals and such. My friend points out a possible local problem. He offers a scenario. What if a sergeant on the team looks through the data and finds that the current mayor’s cellphone was in the area and pinged off an address belonging to his secretary. The mayor is married. Worse, the sergeant’s brother in law is running against the mayor in the upcoming election. Do you think the information about the mayor and his secretary will remain confidential? Hardly.
But in an intel collection effort, what do they do with it? Do they keep it? The answer is yes, because even if they are good guys, they are lazy guys. And having all that data on hand and not have to go and find it when they are putting together a case is easier.
What they are doing is lazy policing. They are making cases in almost an opposite of the Tom Cruz’s movie “Minority Report” about pre-crime. They are using the data to make cases on post crime. Say a bad guy commits a crime. Instead of making the effort to stop it (Hello travel bans and the FBI being compromised by CAIR, thus preventing FBI agents from stopping events like the Boston bombing), the government is great on post crime gathering of already seized (illegally) data by intelligence agency. Once the bad guy does something they can track his PAST movements and contacts through the metadata. Not who is he talking to, but rather who DID he talk to.
In the case of the local sergeant using data to undermine a political opponent, Obama’s people did the same thing. IF there is a transcript, and not an all out lie pushed into the papers by never Trumpers and Obama acolytes, that means somebody illegally obtained the raw data and disseminated it.
Either way, it’s a trick bag they are now trying to get out of by rewriting history.
Good luck on that. They should check the papers- Trump won.
If this was a street beating, the judge would be in ICU! The other judges lay out the reasons why the Hawaii judge erred to an unprecedented level. In fact, he has in his warped opinion, created a constitutional crisis and exposed the danger of letting advocates inside the judicial system. You can bet the ninth will suffer for it- and they know it.
In one of the most ruthless opinions issued of fellow panel judges, five judges from across the political spectrum in the Ninth Circuit went out of their way to issue an opinion about a dismissed appeal, to remind everybody just how embarrassingly bad the prior Ninth Circuit stay panel decision was on Trump’s travel ban. The five judges included the famed, and most respected intellectual amongst the Ninth Circuit, Alex Kozinski. The others included Jay Bybee, Consuelo Callahan, Carlos Bea and Sandra Ikuta. Nobody other than the original panel came to the defense of the original panel decision, a less than promising start for future approvals of district court interference in Presidential immigration policy.
The language of the opinion was almost Scalian: the five Ninth Circuit judges noted their “obligation to correct” the “manifest” errors so bad that the “fundamental” errors “confound Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent.” The district court questioned any judge issuing a “nationwide TRO” “without making findings of fact or conclusions of law” on the merits of the matter and conducting published opinions on seminal matters of national security based on “oral argument by phone involving four time zones.”
Aside from the procedural defects of the process, the five panel jurists then noted the deep legal problems with the panel’s order: its a-historicity, it’s abdication of precedent, and its usurpation of Constitutionally delegated Presidential rights. Mirroring much of the Boston judge’s decision, the five judges then detail and outline what other critics, skeptics and commentators have noted of the prior panel decision, including critical commentary from liberal law professors and scribes Jonathan Turley, Alan Dershowitz, and Jeffrey Toobin. The original 3-judge panel “neglected or overlooked critical cases by the Supreme Court and by our making clear that when we are reviewing decisions about who may be admitted into the United States, we must defer to the judgment of the political branches.” Of particular note, the five panel judges note how the 3-judge panel decision in “compounding its omission” of Supreme Court decisions and relevant sister Circuit precedents, also “missed all of our own cases” on the subject. The 5 judges conclude the panel engaged in a “clear misstatement of law” so bad it compelled “vacating” an opinion usually mooted by a dismissed case.
Read the whole article. It is stunning in its dismissal of the whole opinion. In Maryland, another former Obama acolyte, and now judge, thinks he might force Trump to increase the number of Muslim immigrants by demanding he do it, as a simple district judge. Another crisis created out of whole cloth by judges who should be slapped across the nose for trying it. The Senate is doing just that, and you can bet Trump will sign it.
As judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals weigh the legality of President Trump’s immigration executive order, a Republican push to split up the controversial court — and shrink its clout — is gaining steam on Capitol Hill.
Republican Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain of Arizona introduced legislation last month to carve six states out of the San Francisco-based court circuit and create a brand new 12th Circuit.
They argue that the 9th is too big, too liberal and too slow resolving cases. If they succeed, only California, Oregon, Hawaii and two island districts would remain in the 9th’s judicial fiefdom.
Right now, Flake said, the circuit is far too sprawling.
“It represents 20 percent of the population — and 40 percent of the land mass is in that jurisdiction. It’s just too big,” Flake told Fox News on Wednesday. “We have a bedrock principle of swift justice and if you live in Arizona or anywhere in the 9th Circuit, you just don’t have it.”
Flake says it typically takes the court 15 months to hand down a decision.
“It’s far too long,” he added.
Conservatives have mocked the 9th Circuit for years, often calling it the “Nutty 9th” or the “9th Circus,” in part because so many of its rulings have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The court has a reputation as one of the most liberal in the country, in large part because of its makeup. Eighteen of the court’s 25 active judges have been appointed by Democrats. Former President George W. Bush appointed six justices, while former President Barack Obama appointed seven.
Unless Congress runs into a problem, you can bet the ninth’s days are numbered and they know it. It’s long overdue.