Friday, July 31, 2015

CMP Leader: Company trying To Block Videos that could prove Aborted Babies Were Born Alive

The leader of the Center for Medical Progress, the organisation exposing Planned Parenthood, told CNN “New Day” this morning that a biomedical company is trying to silence CMP because they are “very scared” of footage coming out that will prove babies were born alive before being “aborted” and having tissue and organs harvested.
California based StemExpress, a company closely allied with Planned Parenthood that provides fetal tissue to researchers, has managed to convince a Superior Court judge to issue a temporary restraining order against CMP.
The order bars the undercover journalists from releasing any more footage of StemExpress officials.
David Daleiden explained why he believes StemExpress is taking such hefty action:
Daleiden noted that the footage shows “a meeting with their top leadership where their leadership admitted that they sometimes get fully intact fetuses shipped to their laboratory from the abortion clinics they work with, and that could be prima facie evidence of born alive infants.”
Babies born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion are protected under the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, enacted in 2002. The legislation defines a “Born alive infant” as “Person, human being, Child, Individual.”
“And so that’s why they’re trying to suppress that videotape and they’re very scared of it.” Daleiden added.
If this is revealed to be true, it raises the bar on the Planned Parenthood scandal to a whole new level – a Kermit Gosnell level.
He also stated “We’ve got anywhere from 8 to 10 more videos — the exact number could vary, but I predict a dozen give or take when everything is said and done.”
The restraining order will remain in effect until a hearing scheduled for August 19th.
Daleiden previously stated that StemExpress was using “meritless litigation” to cover up an “illegal baby parts trade.”

Will Jewish Democracts Save Or Sink Iran Nuke Deal

"Seven Jewish Lawmakers Could Tilt the Scales on Iran Deal," headlines The Times of Israel. The members -- Sen. Charles Schumer, Rep. Steven Israel, Rep. Eliot Engel, Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Nita Lowey, Sen. Ben Cardin and Rep. Ted Deutch -- are all Democrats. They must choose between loyalty to their party's president and concern about what the deal portends for Israeli and American security.
There are long and short answers to the question: "Why are Jews liberal?" The long answer traces back to the Enlightenment in Europe, when parties of the right were monarchist and anti-Semitic, while parties of the left favored pluralism and religious freedom. I don't buy the long argument. Tsar Alexander III, who instigated pogroms against the Jews, is long dead. So is Napoleon, who liberated them. In the meantime, Jews have suffered under communists, who proved just as cruel as the monarchists.
Jewish liberals often explain that their views spring from Jewish tradition, which admonishes the Jewish people to engage in "tikkun olam" or "healing the world." I'm skeptical. Tikkun olam is traditionally understood as adhering faithfully to the commandments (keeping kosher, visiting the sick and observing the Sabbath, for example), the better to prepare the world for the messianic age. Many of those who brandish the Hebrew phrase today have commandeered it to bolster support for same-sex marriage, government-run health care and the rest of the progressive agenda -- an interpretation that would, to quote the immortal words of Tevye in "Fiddler on the Roof," "cross a rabbi's eyes."
No, the short explanation of Jewish liberalism is straightforward. Jewish Americans tend to be disproportionately urban, secular and educated. Each of those categories is highly correlated with liberalism and membership in the Democratic Party -- God (you should forgive the expression) help us. Speaking of Him, Jewish Americans are less likely than any other religious group in America to say they believe in God. A 2013 Pew poll found that 62 percent of Jews reported that their identity was rooted mainly in culture and ancestry rather than religion. Only 34 percent of Jews said they were certain God exists, compared with 69 percent of the general public (though an additional 38 percent say they believe, but without certainty, placing believers in the majority).
While 62 percent of American Christians and 81 percent of Muslims report attending services at least monthly, only 23 percent of Jews do. Fifty-eight percent of Jewish adults are college graduates, compared with 29 percent of the general population. About 20 percent of Americans live in rural areas. This is true of only 4 percent of American Jews.
Even without knowing anything else about Jews, the above statistics would predict what we see: that about 70 percent of American Jews lean Democrat, while 22 percent are Republicans.
Still, for those Democrats pondering what the Iran vote will mean for their own political futures, other statistics should pull them up short. Though comparatively irreligious, 70 percent of American Jews remain strongly or somewhat strongly attached to the State of Israel. Though some liberal Jews may, at times, have been persuaded by Obama administration claims that troubles in relations with Israel are traceable to Bibi Netanyahu's prickly personality, that line is less likely to be effective now that all major parties in Israel have united in opposition to the Iran deal/capitulation.
But here's the kicker that Schumer, Cardin and others will want to bear in mind: The American Jewish world is changing very fast. The older, more secular doggedly liberal Jews are dying off, falling away from organized Jewish life and intermarrying (which means their children are no longer Jewish in most cases). Orthodox Jews, by contrast, are thriving, and they have large families -- having 10 or more children is not uncommon. In New York City, the Orthodox accounted for 33 percent of Jews in 2002, but 40 percent only 10 years later. In 2012, 74 percent of Jewish children in New York were growing up in Orthodox homes. The religious/cultural conservatism of these observant Jews affects their political affiliation. Fifty-seven percent of Orthodox Jews are Republicans, and huge majorities are very concerned about Israel.
They might forgive a vote for Obamacare. But a vote to provide billions of dollars to the paymasters of Hezbollah and Hamas; a vote to permit the Iranian regime to acquire missiles, stealth aircraft and more with which to kill Americans and Israelis; a vote that, in essence, accepts the eventual nuclearization of Iran without any corresponding concessions from the mullahs? Do Democrats want to chance it?

Cellphones Can Cause Cancer "Radiation Study"

The scientists were right — your cell phone can give you cancer.
There have long been whispers of a cancer connection from your cell — and a new study backs up the claims.
"These data are a clear sign of the real risks this kind of radiation poses for human health," study author Igor Yakymenko said.
Yakymenko’s meta-study — basically a study of hundreds of other studies — reveals many findings of previous researchers into how radiofrequency from your phone can damage DNA.
That damage can add up over time and cause a variety of health problems, like cancer, headaches, fatigue and even skin problems.
For example, using your phone for just 20 minutes a day for five years increased the risk of one type of brain tumor threefold, and using the phone an hour a day for four years upped the risk of some tumors three to five times, Yakymenko said.
Cell phone-induced health problems could take decades to develop. David Paul Morris/Getty Images

Cell phone-induced health problems could take decades to develop.

But even though the risk of brain and related cancers is low — in 2012, there were 6.4 cases per 100,000 U.S. adults — Yakymenko says we should be on alert because ailments can take up to 30 years to develop.
“(Our) data were obtained on adults who used cell phones mostly up to 10 years as adults,” he said. “The situation can dramatically differ for children who use cells phone in childhood, when their biology much more sensitive to hazardous factors, and will use it over the life.”
To minimize your risk, use your phone less and go hands-free to keep the frequency away from your head, Yakymenko said.

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Pope Wants Global Power To Impose Climate Change Agenda On The World

Pope Francis would like to see a new global political authority to coerce the “rich” nations of the West to force citizens to adopt radical lifestyle and energy consumption changes in response to unverified and widely debunked climate change alarmism.
“Humanity is called to take note of the need for changes in lifestyle and changes in methods of production and consumption to combat this warming, or at least the human causes that produce and accentuate it,” he wrote in a draft of a papal encyclical. “Numerous scientific studies indicate that the greater part of the global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases … given off above all because of human activity.”
The leaked draft echoes one issued by Francis’ predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, who in 2009 proposed an authoritarian United Nations on steroids to deal with the world’s economic problems and injustices.
The release of the encyclical comes ahead of international climate negotiations in Paris this December.
“By staking out the Vatican’s position on climate change, the pope is telling the world that protecting the environment is not a niche issue — it’s a human, personal and moral issue,” writes Jennifer Andreassen for the Environmental Defense Fund, an organization partnered with the Carlyle Group, Walmart and McDonalds.
The draft declares Pope Francis is in sync with the environmental movement and its objectives.
No Scientific Proof of Man-made Climate Change
Some members of the environmental movement, however, are less than unanimous in the opinion that climate change is a result of human activity.
“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, argued before the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight last February.
Moore aded that “perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of extreme certainty is to look at the historical record.”
“When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than today,” he said.
Moore quit Greenpeace after the organization veered hard to the political left. The organization is funded by the Rockefeller Brothers and other globalist foundations.

121 Illegal Aliens Avoid deporataion Charged With Murder

Between 2010 and 2014, a group of 121 illegal aliens were held by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and scheduled for deportation. Despite being scheduled for deportation, they were never removed from the country and have now been charged with murder.
From ICE:

This revelation came as a result of an inquiry from Senators Chuck Grassley and Jeff Flake about Apolinar Altamirano, an illegal alien charged with murdering Arizona convenience store clerk Grant Ronnebeck. Altamirano was supposed to be deported after racking up a previous criminal history. Instead, he was able to stay and took the life of an innocent American.
As a result of ICE providing this information, Grassley and Senator Jeff Sessions have a sent a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Secretary of State John Kerry and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson demanding answers.
"According to information provided by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), up to 121 homicides in the U.S. could have been avoided between Fiscal Year 2010 and FY 2014 had this administration removed from our borders aliens with criminal convictions instead of releasing them back into society where they could commit more crimes," the letter states. "I am writing to ask whether the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the State Department, and the Justice Department are fully leveraging existing tools and resources to prevent these dangerous outcomes."
Lynch, Kerry and Johnson have until July 6 to respond.

In January, legislation was introduced in the Senate to stop Homeland Security's "catch and release" program.
The Department of Homeland Security currently has a policy in place known as "catch and release," meaning violent illegal aliens are arrested, processed and put back onto American streets if their home countries won't take them back.

According to Judicary Comimittee Chairman Chuck Grassley's office, the policy was "created by a 2001 Supreme Court decision (Zadvydas v. Davis), which prohibits immigrants who had been ordered removed from being detained for more than six months. The Court expanded this decision to apply to all illegal immigrants in Clark v. Martinez in 2005."

This catch and release policy is not only demoralizing to Immigration and Border Patrol Agents, but it's dangerous and deadly. There are countless examples of violent assault and murders committed by illegal aliens after being arrested and released by federal authorities.
In 2013, DHS admitted to releasing 36,000 violent criminal aliens charged and convicted of crimes like assault with a deadly weapon, child-rape, rape, participating in street gangs, aggravated assault and murder onto American streets.