READ MORE...

Tara can be an epoch figure for White sovereignty, will be in all likelihood; but she needs to be wary of furthering enemy interests, their tandem YKW/right-wing coalition, by coddling their plants (((e.g., Lauren Southern))) and inadvertently advancing their agenda through the Alt-Lite/ the Alt-Right - the (((co-option)))/reaction paradigm they seek to control.

Justine Damond called 9-11 for help.

Star Tribune, 18 July 2017: Justine Damond, 40, who called 911 to report a possible assault behind her south Minneapolis home Saturday night, was fatally shot by a police officer. No body cams were running at the time.

The death of Justine Damond, who called 911 to report a possible crime only to be killed by a responding Minneapolis police officer, has left her grieving family, neighborhood and nation demanding answers in the latest police-involved shooting to thrust Minnesota into the international spotlight.

The Minneapolis police officer who shot and killed a 40-year-old woman in the alley behind her home Saturday night has been identified as Officer Mohamed Noor. State investigators have confirmed that they did not find any weapons at the scene.

Fast twitching Noor, first Somali to patrol 5th precinct of Minneapolis.

Noor, 31, joined the department in March 2015 as the first Somali police officer to patrol the 5th Precinct in southwest Minneapolis, according to a city newsletter. He holds a degree in Economics and Business Administration from Augsburg College. Before joining the department, he worked in property management in commercial and residential properties in Minneapolis and St. Louis, Mo.

Noor has been sued once in his short career with the police department, stemming from a May 25, 2017 incident, in which he and two other officers came to a woman’s home and took her to the hospital, which the woman alleges constituted false imprisonment, assault and battery. According to the recently filed and ongoing lawsuit, the officers claimed they had reason to believe the woman was suffering a mental health crisis — which she denied — and Noor “grabbed her right wrist and upper arm,” exacerbating a previous shoulder injury in the process.

An exchange between police from the night of the shooting, posted by website Minnesota PoliceClips, shows one officer indicating a “female standing behind a building” on Washburn Avenue. Seconds later, another officer reports “shots fired” and “one down” in the same location, and then an officer says he’s performing CPR. An officer also notes that there’s no suspect at large. It’s unclear if the audio is edited or compressed for time.

“I know the neighborhood well” said Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges, shown here with her husband.

On Monday, the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension confirmed that officers were responding to a 911 call of a “possible assault.” “At one point an officer fired their weapon, fatally striking a woman,” the news release said. “BCA crime scene personnel located no weapons at the scene.”

The BCA confirmed that an autopsy has been completed. After confirming yesterday that there was no body camera or dashcam footage of the incident, the agency said the investigation “does not determine whether a law enforcement agency policy was violated. That would be reviewed through the agency’s internal affairs process.”

  Friends of Justine Damond mourn.

The BCA has not officially named Noor, but a source confirmed that he was the shooter. Attorney Tom Plunkett is representing Noor, but declined to identify him.

At the same time, a neighborhood has continued to struggle for answers as to what caused the shooting. Family members said Damond called 911 that night to report a possible assault in the alley behind her home.

The morning afterward about 200 people gathered Sunday to mourn Damond. Loving messages remain written in chalk on the sidewalk near the scene, at the end of the alley on W. 51st Street between Washburn and Xerxes avenues S. in the city’s Fulton neighborhood.

See also: ‘White privilege’ as a warrant for expropriation; Christianity as the executing jurisdiction.

READ MORE...

Independent, “Climate change denier Scott Pruitt’s appointment to run EPA would be ‘unprecedented assault’ on its work,” 7 Feb 2017.

One issue that state discretion would Not handle better is the overseeing and coordination of environmental matters, which are, by definition, of interrelated systems that do not heed political bounds, especially not smaller ones.

Trump’s crass assault on our earthly home was launched with his appointment of business plant and climate change denier, Scott Pruitt, as head of the EPA: fox in charge of the hen house. The assault is now going into overdrive.

Daily Caller, “House Republicans Lay Out Their Plan To Rein In The EPA”, 18, 2017:

House Republicans released their proposal to balance the federal budget in 10 years, which included their plans to rein in the regulatory power of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Republicans plan three broad reforms for the EPA: reduce its funding, cut global warming and programs and eliminate the agency’s policy office.

“The Environmental Protection Agency has long overreached in its duties,” the House budget resolution reads, released Tuesday.

“While everyone supports protecting the environment and promoting clean air and clean water, the states are better positioned to address their individual environmental concerns and balance those responsibilities with the concerns of workers, small-businesses, and manufacturers,” the resolution adds.

However, the House’s plan for the EPA would cut the agency’s budget 80 percent less than what the White house recommended in its May budget proposal.

A House appropriations bill introduced days ago gives the EPA a $7.5 billion budget in 2017, or $528 million less than the agency’s 2017 budget. The bill also ignored many Trump administration requests to cut dozens of EPA programs. That bill is still making its way through committee.

The House appropriations bill would give $31.4 billion to federal environmental programs at the EPA, Department of the Interior and other agencies. That’s $824 million below 2017 levels, but $4.3 billion less than the White House’s request.

The White House recommended cutting the EPA’s budget $2.6 billion, or more than 30 percent, along with eliminating dozens of programs, particularly those enforcing Obama-era regulations and climate programs.

The budget proposal also included plans to eliminate duplicative energy programs and wasteful spending to help get “federal government out of the way and allow the private sector to do its job and flourish.”

That effort largely focuses on reducing Energy Department spending energy subsidies and stopping the agency from issuing any more loan guarantees — the same program that funded Solyndra.

“Eliminating these Obama-era pet programs will help us reduce federal spending in the energy sector and promote private-sector energy production and innovation,” the House budget document reads.

Republicans claim that their plan would balance the federal budget within 10 years.

Democrats and environmentalists are already pushing back on the Republican resolution.

House lawmakers will mark up the budget resolution Wednesday, and it’s expected to pass the chamber. Senate Democrats could pose problems for the budget resolution’s path to President Donald Trump’s desk.

New Observer, “Nonwhites Majority of UK School Population within 20 Years”, 15 July 2017:

Nonwhites will make up the majority population in British schools within the next twenty years, the direct result of decades of mass Third World immigration and their natural reproduction rates, an analysis of new data issued by the UK’s Department of Education has revealed.

       
        School class in Newham, London.

According to the report, titled “Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2017” and issued at the beginning of July 2017, nonwhites already make up over 25 percent of all school pupils in primary and secondary schools combined, and have increased their numbers by more than 10 percent in the last ten years.

According to the report, there are a total of 8.67 million pupils in all schools in England—which means that there are already in excess of 2.167 million nonwhite pupils.

The total number of pupils has grown every year since 2009 and there are now 577,000 more pupils The report reveals that the proportion of pupils from “minority ethnic origins,” has “been rising steadily since 2006. In primary schools, 32.1% of pupils of compulsory school age are of minority ethnic origins, an increase from 31.4% in January 2016.

“Minority ethnic pupils made up 66.3% of the increase in pupil numbers in primary schools between 2016 and 2017.

“In secondary schools, 29.1% of pupils are of minority ethnic origins, an increase from 27.9% in 2016.”

The Department of Education’s figures however, include white children of “non-British origin”—in other words, those of Polish or Eastern European origin.

The report goes on to a specific breakdown of pupils by ethnic origin in State funded schools in England;

State-funded primary schools

White British 67.2

White Non-British 7.5

Asian 10.7

Black 5.6

Mixed 5.9

Chinese 0.4

Any other 1.9

Unclassified 0.7

State-funded secondary schools

White British 69.5

White Non-British 5.7

Asian 10.7

Black 5.6

Mixed 5.0

Chinese 0.4

Any other 1.7

Unclassified 1.5

READ MORE...

Prof. Ewa Łętowska of Polish Academy of Sciences, explains in simple words, how PiS crushed the judiciary system in Poland.

OKO Press, “The end of independent judiciary in Poland. PiS government violates the Constitution and assumes control over all courts”, 15 July 2017:

The Law and Justice party (PiS), has been ruling in Poland for nearly two years, since the election in November, 2015 gave them a steady majority in the parliament. Yet it took them just one day to overturn the democratic order in the country once and for all. Since July 12th 2017 all courts in Poland are now under threat of being controlled by the ruling party

With two bills passed already by the lower house of the Polish parliament, and a third one awaiting the final vote, the rule of separation of powers has lost its validity in Poland.

From now on legislative, executive and judicial powers will be concentrated in the hands of one institution, which is Law and Justice government of Poland. More precisely in the hands of the Minister of Justice, Zbig Ziobro.

New pieces of legislation give him the right to appoint and dismiss practically all judges, including those at the Supreme Court. The new law goes as far, as to allowing him to hand-pick judges for particular court cases.

It is more than obvious, that these changes go in complete contradiction to The Constitution of Poland. Just like in the case of the late Constitutional Tribunal.

The civil society is not laying down its arms

New legislation caused an outrage in the entire country and was strongly objected by the opposition inside and outside of the parliament, non-governmental organizations, as well as the legal community.
The official statement of Helsinki Federation for Human Rights:

The draft law amending the Supreme Court Act, brought to the Parliament by the governing majority, is an attempt to introduce an unconstitutional change to the system of government of the Republic of Poland and contravene the principle of the separation of powers (Article 10 of the Constitution).

The termination of tenures of all the Court’s judges and granting the Minister of Justice a competence to single-handedly decide which judges will remain in office in this most important Polish court is tantamount to the revocation of the Supreme Court’s independence. Such a solution is applied only by the governments of authoritarian states.

An independent Supreme Court plays a key role in a democratic state ruled by law. Not only it exercises the supervision over common courts regarding rulings, but it also adjudicates upon the validity of the parliamentary and presidential elections.

The draft law on the Supreme Court deepens the Polish constitutional crisis, ongoing since November 2015. A day after the Act on the National Council of the Judiciary was amended, the governing majority strengthened the political influence on the administration of justice in Poland. This in consequence will lead to a situation when the basic human right to a fair trial by an impartial court becomes illusory.
The Official Statement of the Warsaw Bar Association of 13 July 2017 r.

Yesterday, at late-night hour a legislative proposal amending the Supreme Court Act (draft bill No. 1727) has been filed to the Sejm (the “Draft Bill”). On the same day the Draft Bill was referred for its first reading.

Article 87 sec. 1 of the Draft Bill states: „As of the day following the date of entry into force of this Act, all judges of the Supreme Court appointed in accordance with currently binding provisions of law, excluding judges selected by the Minister of Justice, shall be granted a retirement (stan spoczynku). As of the date of entry into force of this bill, the Minister of Justice, in his notification in the Official Journal of the Minister of Justice (obwieszczenie w dzienniku urzędowym Ministra Sprawiedliwości), shall designate judges of the Supreme Court who shall remain in active service, taking into account a necessity of introducing organizational changes resulting from the system change and maintaining continuity of works of the Supreme Court”.

According to Article 88 of the Draft Bill „If a Judge of the Supreme Court was granted a retirement under Article 87 sec. 1, tasks and competences of the First President of the Supreme Court shall be performed by the judge of the Supreme Court who is selected by the Minister of Justice”. According to Article 108 of the Draft Bill, its provisions shall enter into force within 14 days from the day of their official publication.

The above legislative proposal is a matter of an utmost concern. The draft provisions vest in the Minister of Justice – a representative of the executive power, an active politician and General Prosecutor who is superior to all prosecutors of the State – an unlimited power to appoint both, judges of the Supreme Court and the First President of the Supreme Court. The planned amendment to the law must be assessed as a clear violation of the principle of judicial independence, the principle of separation of powers and the democratic rule of law.

Warsaw Bar Association calls the Sejm for an immediate end to any further works on the Draft Bill, and authors of the Draft Bill for its withdrawal from any further legislative works.

The Draft Bill aims at depriving all citizens of right to independent and impartial judiciary guaranteed under Article 45 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

An impartial and independent judiciary is always a guarantee of an effective protection of each individual’s all rights and freedoms.

Report by Symon Grela

READ MORE...

“We gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well…” Now elected officials in 70 percent black Baltimore are protecting black criminals from mandatory one-year sentences for illegal gun possession… because it will impact blacks”

SBDL, “In 70% Black Baltimore, Elected Officials Oppose Mandatory One-Year Sentence for Illegal Gun Possession b/c it will ‘disproportionately impact black people”, 14 July 2017:

If you’ve read The City that Bleeds: Race, History, and the Death of Baltimore, you know black people there carefully protect their city by using black criminality to keep out white people from ever being a demographic threat to run things again.

Now imagine this 70 percent black having black elected officials - representatives of the state - protecting black criminals from a legal system they’ve deemed not just racist, but replete with implicit bias.

Oh, it’s true. [Baltimore leaders propose mandatory sentence for illegal gun possession, Baltimore Sun, 7-14-17]:

READ MORE...

Visigrad Post, “Poles would rather leave the EU than take in Muslim immigrants”, 12 July 2017:

By Olivier Bault.

Poland – The question does not really arise, since the European treaties reserve the right for each country to accept immigrants of its choice on its soil, except for immigrants from other EU countries benefiting the freedom of movement. Nevertheless, in a country where, as in the whole of former Eastern Europe, membership in the European project is particularly high (although this does not prevent a critical view of the abuses of this project), it is Interesting to know what the Poles would choose if they had to choose between taking the immigrants under the compulsory relocation plan (from Italy and Greece) or leaving the EU. Or even, since there has been talk of abolishing European funds to recalcitrant countries, and in particular to Poland, the Czechia and Hungary, what would the Poles answer if they were given an ultimatum of that kind: if you do not take in immigrants, European subsidies will be abolished (which would be totally illegal under the treaties but has been suggested by high-ranking officials in Berlin, Paris and Brussels).

An IBRiS poll for the left wing liberal and pro-EU weekly Polityka was published on July 5, which answers these questions. Here are the results:

First question: “Should Poland refuse to accept refugees from Muslim countries even if this should lead to the loss of European funds? “

– YES: 56.5% (of which 48.6% were “yes” and 7.9% “rather yes”).
– NO: 40.4% (of which 31.4% were “no” and 9% “rather no”).
(Percentage of undecided: 3.1%)

Question 2: “Should Poland refuse to take in refugees from Muslim countries even if this should lead to the obligation to leave the European Union? “

– YES: 51.2% (of which 33.4% were “yes” and 17.8% “rather yes”).
– NO: 37.6% (27.6% of “no” and 10% of “rather no”).
(Percentage of undecided: 11.2%)

Precision: survey carried out in June on a sample of 1000 people.

It should be noted that the weekly Polityka, favorable to the reception of immigrants and to multiculturalism, tried to influence the answers by speaking of “refugees” rather than “asylum seekers”, since the immigrants concerned by the relocation program are people who have applied for asylum (which sooner or later all illegal immigrants do in order to avoid deportation) and not those who have obtained it. It can be assumed that without this manipulation there would have been an even greater proportion of “YES” for both questions.

This is the first time that a polling institute has been interested in the question of how far the Poles are prepared to go in their refusal of the immigration and multiculturalism model that Western Europe wants to impose on Central and Eastern Europe. A May survey by the OBOP institute (on a sample of 1004 people) and published by the public information channel TVP Info simply showed that 73% of Poles were against receiving Muslim refugees and immigrants (46 % absolutely opposed and 27% opposed) when asked: “Do you think Poland should welcome Muslim refugees and immigrants? ”

This opposition to the relocation of immigrants arriving illegally in Greece and Italy (even if it is with the help of European ships) is reflected in the popularity of PiS. After an empty run in early spring, the PiS reached 41% for the first time (against 26% for Donald Tusk’s Liberal party PO) in an IPSOS poll commissioned by the liberal-libertarian newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza at the end of June. This was when the European Commission had just announced the launch of a sanctions procedure against Poland, Czechia and Hungary for their refusal of the immigrant relocation program. Thus, if Brussels continues on this path, it could allow the conservative PiS party to win easily the next elections, possibly even with a constitutional majority. The PO suffers from its contradictory statements on the issue of the reception of illegal immigrants. This is most likely due to the commitment made in September 2015 by Prime Minister PO Ewa Kopacz (who replaced Donald Tusk after his departure to Brussels) to take 7,000 immigrants under the relocation program that the PiS, firmly opposed to this program, was able to obtain an absolute majority in the Polish parliament at the elections of October 25, 2015. It was the first time since the fall of communism in Poland that a party alone obtained an absolute majority in the parliament.

The government of Beata Szydło therefore has every interest in continuing to resist, especially as it has the support of most of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe on this subject and that it has received strong support from the United States with the speech pronounced by Donald Trump on July 6 in Warsaw. A speech where the American President called on the peoples of Europe to fight for their family, for their homeland, for their civilization and for God! This explains why the French mainstream media, in order to conceal this point, have preferred to relay the fake news of the Polish president’s wife refusing to shake President Trump’s hand.