Archive | January 26, 2017

Public Comment on DAPL is Now Open*

Public Comment on DAPL is Now Open*

Now until Feb. 20 is the public’s chance to push for a full review of the pipeline’s climate impacts. Here’s what to do.

By Jake Tracy

It’s been a tumultuous few days for anyone following the ongoing battle against the Dakota Access pipeline. Within the course of just over a week, the project’s backers tried to get a judge to cancel environmental review of the project, environmental review officially began, and, on Jan. 24, President Trump issued a memorandum calling for the Army Corps of Engineers to ditch the Environmental Impact Statement process and approve the pipeline.

Things look bleak, but it’s unclear whether Trump’s order will actually have any effect.

The exact wording of his statement is that the Army Corps of Engineers should “consider, to the extent permitted by law and as warranted” whether this environmental review should be canceled. Federal courts have previously ruled that agency decisions cannot be reversed simply because a new president is in power, so this order could just be a bunch of hot air.

Because the situation is so uncertain, however, anti-DAPL activists should prepare for both scenarios: one in which the pipeline ploughs forward in the coming weeks and months, and one in which the full environmental review proceeds. If you’re willing to take a stand in the streets and in the cold of North Dakota, why not take a few moments to put your concerns into writing?

If Trump’s order is not legally actionable, now through Feb. 20 is the only chance we will have to push for a full review of the pipeline’s climate impacts. Consider that Trump’s picks (and lack thereof) have not yet been appointed to the Army Corps. This means there may still be decision-makers on the inside who are committed to fully analyzing the project.

How the EIS process involves the public

As I explained in detail in a previous article, the environmental review process that has now begun is known as an environmental impact statement or EIS. This is a highly regimented form of review that is part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). An EIS is required any time a federal action (including federal permit approval) will have significant environmental impacts. It requires a full, detailed analysis of those impacts, as well as an evaluation of how alternatives to the project as-proposed would lessen or heighten those impacts. Although the Army Corps originally issued a “Finding of No Significant Impact” for the DAPL, its Dec. 4 announcement reversed that decision, citing that additional review was needed.

A standard pipeline EIS proceeds as follows:

  • Notice of Intent (official announcement of the EIS) is issued.
  • Scoping Period (public input on which impacts and project alternatives should be studied).
  • Army Corps drafts EIS document.
  • Draft EIS is published, and the public is invited to comment (on whether the report is complete or which alternative is best).
  • EIS is modified based on public comment.
  • Final EIS is published (possibly with another comment period).

Army Corps decides whether or not to approve a permit for the pipeline crossing.

Though the EIS process itself cannot deny the pipeline, the environmental information gathered through the process can be used by the Army Corps to deny a permit if the project is “injurious to the public interest”—in other words, if the project’s impacts outweigh its benefits.

One problem with that is past EISs have only looked at environmental impacts to the immediate project site and surrounding area (in this case, the sliver of land that the Army Corps owns and Lake Oahe). On the other hand, the Army Corps will be weighing those spatially-limited impacts against the overall benefits of the project, such as jobs and tax revenue.

If this seems like an unequal comparison to you, now is your chance to speak up and say so.

The EIS Notice of Intent was published in the Federal Register on Jan. 18. During the 32-day scoping period that began simultaneously, the Army Corps is reaching out to the public for input on which environmental impacts should be studied within the EIS, and what the alternatives to Dakota Access’ “preferred route” should be. Unlike the second comment period, this first comment period is solely to decide what the scope of analysis should be.

What kind of impacts to comment on

One of the most important impacts of the pipeline is the potential for oil spills into Lake Oahe and the Missouri River. However, spills are certain to be studied in the EIS, and there will be ample opportunity to comment extensively on those impacts during the second comment period, once the draft EIS is published. That doesn’t mean that the public shouldn’t include spills in their scoping comments, and the Standing Rock Sioux and their lawyers will certainly need to provide information on their water intakes, fishing rights, etc., but there are other important issues to tackle in this comment period as well.

It is virtually certain that without an overwhelming public push during the scoping notice, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts will not be studied in the EIS.

In order to have the strongest argument possible when it comes to deciding if this project is “injurious to the public interest,” activists should, at this point, focus on expanding the scope of the EIS to cover the effect of the global greenhouse gas emissions that will result from the oil that will run through the pipeline.

If completed, up to 570,000 barrels of crude oil would flow through the DAPL every day. According to one estimate, utilizing data specific to the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota, the transportation, processing, and burning of that oil would result in 101.4 million metric tons of CO2 every year. To put this in perspective, that’s the same amount of annual emissions that would result from operating 21.4 million passenger vehicles or 29.5 coal plants.

The original Environmental Assessment (think: preliminary, mini-EIS) for the DAPL did not address climate issues at all, with merely a one sentence mention (“The contribution of the Proposed Action to greenhouse gas emissions during construction would be considered a minor indirect impact to climate change”). This ignoring of the project’s larger impact is inconsistent the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality’s guidance for evaluating climate change under NEPA. This guidance, released in 2016, states that agencies should evaluate “direct and indirect,” “long- and short-term,” and “broad-scale” effects of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Though the Army Corps has not yet updated their standards to match these, overwhelming public pressure might convince them to provide a full analysis of climate impacts from the pipeline.

Suggest the true “no-action” alternative

While inclusion of climate impacts in the EIS would set major precedent for pipeline projects going forward, in order for them to help the argument that the project is “injurious to the public interest,” an additional change to the EIS’ scope must be made.

Every EIS includes evaluation of alternatives to the proposed project. In addition to alternate routes for the pipeline, the project is also required to evaluate a “no-action” alternative, in which the pipeline is not built. Exactly how this no-action alternative is structured will play a critical role in how the proposed route under Lake Oahe is viewed, both in terms of local water quality impacts and global greenhouse gas impacts.

In the initial Environmental Assessment for the DAPL, the no-action alternative assumed that, if the pipeline was not built, the oil would be carried by rail and truck instead. As these methods of transportation are more dangerous and energy-intensive than pipeline transportation, the no-action alternative was written off as being worse than building the pipeline. The only problem with this is that earlier in that same report, it was noted that truck transportation of the oil was “not … a realistic alternative” and that transportation by rail would first require construction of a facility more than 150 percent of the size of the largest existing oil-by-rail facility in the United States.

Creating a no-action alternative in which the oil is still transported by truck and rail, therefore, is unrealistic. The proposed project should be evaluated against a scenario where the oil is left in the ground due to the multiple financial, technological, and logistical constraints that exist. This would mean that the proposed project’s local and global impacts would be evaluated against a true no-action alternative, rather than one that looks worse than the proposal but is unrealistic in practice.

Won’t Trump just approve the pipeline?

I won’t lie to you. Even if the full environmental review of the pipeline takes place, by the time the review is complete, the secretary of the Army and assistant secretary of the Army for civil works, who oversee the Corps, will be Trump appointees. It’s hard to imagine that anyone he appoints would be willing to rule on the side of the environment, regardless of the impacts. His Jan. 24 decree that future pipelines and other infrastructure projects should receive “expedited” environmental review doesn’t bode well either.

So it’s true. Denial of the pipeline is a long-shot. But if the water protectors at Standing Rock have taught us anything, it’s that with enough public pressure, even a long-shot is possible. So if you’re against the pipeline, this is the time to step up, not back down. As long as the public process is still in play, we should do everything we can to push back. We owe it to those who worked so hard to get us to where we are today.

Send your public comments by Feb. 20 to:

Mr. Gib Owen
gib.a.owen.civ@mail.mil

Subject Line: “NOI Comments, Dakota Access Pipeline Crossing”

Sample Comment:

Mr. Owen,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Dakota Access pipeline crossing. I have grave concerns that the scope ignores key impacts that the Army Corps’ approval would cause, and that the “no-action” alternative, as proposed in the environmental assessment, does not constitute a realistic alternative.

The EA’s no-action alternative assumes that, if the pipeline is not built, the oil will be transported by truck or rail instead. This argument is flawed, however. The EA itself points out on page 5 that truck transportation is not realistic, and goes on to state that rail transportation would require massive infrastructure investments, far larger than any currently existing in the United States. For these reasons, the no-action alternative should assume that the oil is not extracted, as there will be no realistic way to transport it to the intended markets.

Additionally, the Council on Environmental Quality has directed federal agencies to evaluate projects’ direct and indirect, long- and short-term, and broad-scale greenhouse gas and climate change impacts through the EIS process. Approving this crossing would complete the project, allowing a flow of oil that, when all is accounted for, would have the same annual CO2 emissions as 29 coal-fired power plants. These emissions would have a significant impact on air quality, water quality, human health, and wildlife, and would not occur if this pipeline crossing was denied. Please evaluate these impacts as part of your review, in accordance with the guidance provided by CEQ.

Finally, I support your decision to include a thorough analysis of the effects of an oil spill on Lake Oahe and the people of Standing Rock. Even the strictest precautions today will wear with age, as we have seen with other projects where poor maintenance led to disastrous results. The impacts of a spill on the local population and environment cannot be discounted—a spill 30 years from now would be just as impactful as a spill on day one, and should be treated as a near-certainty in the requestor’s preferred alternative.

Thank you again, and I look forward to your inclusion of the project’s full impacts, as well as a no-action alternative that takes into account the infeasibility of other forms of oil transportation.

Source*

Related Topics:

Two Major Pipelines Spill the Same Week Trump Advances KXL, DAPL*

2010 Gulf Oil Spill Caused Widespread Land Loss*

Trump Signing Executive Order Forcing Continuation of DAPL and Keystone XL*

Sheriffs across U.S. Refusing to Send Police and Equipment to DAPL as Outrage and Costs Grow*

DAPL Cops Open Fire on Prayer Circle with Rubber Bullets, Shoot Water Protectors in the Back*

Dakota Access Company Seeks to Block Pipeline Environmental Study*

North Dakota Republicans Want to Protect Drivers Who Hit DAPL Protesters*

Victory at Last? Army Denies Dakota Access Easement under Lake Oahe; Exultation Ensues*

Gov’t Cancels Oil and Gas Leases On Native Land in Montana, Stays Silent On Dakota Access*

Advertisements

Transhumanist Agenda Revealed in a Conference*

Transhumanist Agenda Revealed in a Conference*

Some people watch too much Sci-fi…

By Susanne Posel

Dmitry Itskov spoke at the Global Future 2045 Conference (GF2045) wherein he said that he would like to see technology developed that would allow human consciousness to be inputted into artificial computer neuro-brains and hologram bodies.

In 2020 Itskov envisions human brains being controlled by remote robots.

By 2025, there could be human consciousness “transplanted” into a robotic body which would replace the flawed physical bodies we now use. The end goal for Itskov would be artificial brains controlling holographic bodies in 2045.

Human directed human 'evolution'

Human directed human ‘evolution’

Referred to as neo-humanity, Istkov has begun his own political party in Russia called Evolution 2045.

Itskov said:

“We shouldn’t just observe the wonderful entrepreneurs — we need to move ahead systematically. We are really at the time when technology can affect human evolution. I want us to shape the future, bring it up for public discussion, and avoid any scenario that could damage humanity.”

Itskov wants to align his vision with governments and create a movement within the U.N. to promote a common goal of merging man with machine.

Martine Rothblatt, speaker at the GF2045, stated that just as organ transplants were once considered insane, someday the public will view neo-humanity as commonplace.

Rothblatt said that Itskov will inspire start-up corporations to capitalize on technological advancements.

Dr. Robert Thurman, scholar, author and Tibetan monk spoke at the GF2045, explaining how there can be a balance between technology and culture with a focus on Buddhist teachings.

 

Conflicting ideology in the scientific community views Itskov’s vision as unrealistic. They say that technological progress does not facilitate Istkov’s timeline.

Hiroshi Ishiguro, Japanese robotics researcher presented his android Geminoid (Latin for “twin”) that he controlled remotely through connections to the internet and is able to see with cameras for eyes.

Professor Henrik Scharfe has his own “tele-operated android” that is not autonomous. Scharfe controls the robot with transmitters connected to his body. Ishiguro designed and conceptualized Scharfe’s Geminoid.

The 2045 Program will create “a new vision of human development that meets global challenges humanity faces today, realization of the possibility of a radical extension of human life by means of cybernetic technology, as well as the formation of a new culture associated with these technologies.”

Transhumanists at the 2045 Program assert that humanity “is in need of a new evolutionary strategy” consisting of a balance between the complexity of technological advances and the acceleration of informational processes to expand the “limited, primitive human” into a “highly self-organized” and technologically “higher intelligence”.

Technology can organize society and integrate unification of a super collective consciousness – a super-being.

By doing away with individuality, the conclusion is the elimination of:

  • Lack of consumer provisions
  • Aging, illness and death
  • Crime and conflicts
  • Natural disasters and catastrophes

Super-people are the epitome of communitarianism and collectivism as the new globalist vision of society marches toward immortal superpeople.

Because communitarianism is the ideology of the importance of community over the individual, the creation of a communalist society is the emphatic over-reaching value that if it does not provide for the whole, it is not worth pursuit.

The concept of the neo-human and neo-humanity is the replacement for a post-industrial capitalist and consumer-based society where a new form of civilization will emerge.

The goal of transhumanism is to replace all existing laws with the purpose of destroying the essence of humanity for the sake of control.

Hybrid humans with robotic implants are expected to be released into the general public by 2014?

Humanity+, “an international non-profit membership organization which advocates the ethical use of technology to expand human capacities”.

In their Transhumanist Declaration they advocate old and new ideals of globalist transhumanism by promoting:

  • Using technology to “broaden human potential” by overcoming aging and “cognitive shortcomings”
  • Provide forums where globalist scientist and researchers can “deliberate how [to enhance humanity through science] to expedite beneficial applications”
  • Facilitate “social order, improve human foresight and wisdom” through genetic enhancement
  • Influence policymakers to include the transhumanist “responsible and moral vision”

The Transhumanist Agenda uses eugenics, reproductive controls, sterilization campaigns, genetic engineering, RFID chips and rewiring of the brain through pharmaceuticals to achieve their goals.

Their quest for immortality with the merging of human and machine is just one part in their convoluted scheme to retain their global dominance over our society.

For now, the general public is guinea pigs to be used to prefect their experiments so that by 2050, they will have full implemented their control grid and there will be no one to dissent.

Source*

Related Topics:

Humanity as a Goal

A Star Child Speaks, Calls for Humanity to Wake Up*

Reflections on the Idea of a Common Humanity*

The GMO Agenda is Planned Sterilization of Humanity*

Western Governments Are Enslaving Humanity through Vaccines*

Humanity at the Crossroads: The Crisis in Spiritual Consciousness

Consciousness Science Kept Hidden*

Public Prosecutor says Forced Sterilization of 272,000 Indigenous Women ‘not a crime against humanity’*

Australia, First Country to Begin Microchipping Its Population with RFID Implants in the Human Body*

Global Pathocracy*

Putin on the Declining Values of the West and Rising Practice of Satanism

 

Climate Engineering and the Dangers of Air Travel*

Climate Engineering and the Dangers of Air Travel*

High Low Frequencies Effect on the body

By Dane Wigington

Air travel is becoming ever more hazardous to human health for a host of reasons.

Not only are air travellers inhaling high concentrations of toxic particulates as they fly through various layers of solar radiation atmospheric haze (contributing to aerotoxic syndrome impacting passengers and crews), radiation clouds at aviation altitudes also pose a dire threat.

A recently published study in a peer-reviewed journal is now acknowledging the radiation clouds and the dangers they present to air travellers.

A new study published in the peer-reviewed journal Space Weather reports the discovery of radiation “clouds” at aviation altitudes. When airplanes fly through these clouds, dose rates of cosmic radiation normally absorbed by air travellers can double or more.

“We have flown radiation sensors on board 264 research flights at altitudes as high as 17.3 km (56,700 ft) from 2013 to 2017,” says Kent Tobiska, lead author of the paper and PI of the NASA-supported program Automated Radiation Measurements for Aerospace Safety (ARMAS).

“On at least six occasions, our sensors have recorded surges in ionizing radiation that we interpret as analogous to localized clouds.”

Though there are countless forms of anthropogenic activity negatively affecting the atmosphere and ozone layer (including the ongoing Fukushima disaster), climate engineering aerosol spraying and the accompanying radio frequency/microwave transmissions are a primary factor that is wreaking havoc on the biosphere, the atmosphere, and all of Earth’s life support systems.

Though the chart above reflects the official narrative for UV exposure, official sources are not disclosing the off the chart UV radiation levels that now showing up even at ground levels (including UVC). At higher altitudes, much higher concentrations of radiation are present and at far more dangerous UV spectrums.

Though the chart above reflects the official narrative for UV exposure, official sources are not disclosing the off the chart UV radiation levels that now showing up even at ground levels (including UVC). At higher altitudes, much higher concentrations of radiation are present and at far more dangerous UV spectrums.

 

The full spectrum of electromagnetic radiation is much more extensive than just UV radiation.

Electromagnetic radiation exposure is a very real danger, what is the full extent of damage being done to Earth's atmosphere from the ongoing climate intervention operations?

Electromagnetic radiation exposure is a very real danger, what is the full extent of damage being done to Earth’s atmosphere from the ongoing climate intervention operations?

 

The vast majority of air travellers are not even slightly aware of the risks they are taking when they fly.

Ongoing geoengineering/solar radiation management programs have transformed skies  all over the globe. Geoengineered skies in Volo, Illinois. Photo credit: Robert Snell

Ongoing geoengineering/solar radiation management programs have transformed skies all over the globe. Geoengineered skies in Volo, Illinois. Photo credit: Robert Snell

 

The fact that air travellers absorb radiation is not news. Researchers have long known that cosmic rays crashing into Earth’s atmosphere create a spray of secondary particles such as neutrons, protons, electrons, X-rays and gamma-rays that penetrate aircraft.

100,000 mile frequent flyers absorb as much radiation as 20 chest X-rays — and even a single flight across the USA can expose a traveler to more radiation than a dental X-ray.

Conventional wisdom says that dose rates should vary smoothly with latitude and longitude and the height of the aircraft.

Any changes as a plane navigates airspace should be gradual. Tobiska and colleagues have found something quite different, however: Sometimes dose rates skyrocket for no apparent reason.

Most of the human race takes Earth’s protective atmosphere for granted, this is a grave mistake.

We are told that the Earth's atmosphere stops most types of electromagnetic radiation from reaching Earth's surface, but current metering and corroborating data greatly disputes this official narrative. (Image credit: STScI/JHU/NASA)

We are told that the Earth’s atmosphere stops most types of electromagnetic radiation from reaching Earth’s surface, but current metering and corroborating data greatly disputes this official narrative. (Image credit: STScI/JHU/NASA)

 

We are all immersed in an increasingly toxic and radiated environment that is rapidly taking its toll on our health and the entire web of life.

Of all the dangers we face, the ongoing climate engineering/weather warfare is mathematically the most dire and immediate threat we face short of nuclear cataclysm.

We will sink or swim together. If the human race is to have any chance of long term survival, a complete course correction of our species must occur in the very near term.

Who will join this epic battle to sound the alarm? Who will stand and make their voice heard for the greater good?

Source*

Related Topics:

NASA Satellite Imagery Reveals Shocking Proof of Climate Engineering*

Geoengineering Climate Change*

Paris Climate Change Conference shows Road to NWO Weather Control*

Plasma Waves and Obama’s Executive Order Regarding Space Weather Events*

U.S. Air Force to Alter Atmosphere with Plasma Bombs*

Government Quietly Admits Weather Modification*

Chemtrail, HAARP Space Fence and Weather Warfare*

Cosmic Rays Evolve Consciousness and Transform DNA*

Russia Hammers ISIS in Deir Ez-zor, Airlifts Syrian Troops There*

Russia Hammers ISIS in Deir Ez-zor, Airlifts Syrian Troops There*

Russian air force conducts huge bombing campaign against ISIS forces besieging eastern Syrian desert town of Deir Ez-zor, and flies Syrian reinforcements to the town and its besieged airport

By Alexander Mercouris

The extent of Russia’s determination to prevent ISIS from overrunning the Syrian army’s defences in the besieged eastern desert town of Deir Ez-zor is becoming increasingly clear.

Yesterday Russian TU22M3 bombers bombed ISIS positions near Deir Ez-zor for the fourth time in five days.  A report by the normally reliable Al-Masdar news agency claims that the Russian air force in fact carried out no fewer than 50 air strikes on ISIS positions near Deir Ez-zor yesterday.  The report is sourced from the Syrian military in Deir Ez-zor, and given Al-Masdar’s known close contacts with the Syrian military is probably true.

Al-Masdar also reports that on 23rd January 2017 the Russian air force airlifted Syrian army reinforcements – including paratroopers – to Deir Ezzor.  The Al-Masdar report, which is based on a report in the Russian newspaper Izvestia, says the Russians transported the troops to Deir Ezzor by IL76 transports and MI17 helicopters.  This suggests that the Russians transported the troops both to the besieged airport (by IL76) and to the town itself (by MI17 helicopter).

The fact that ISIS – which is known to possess shoulder armed surface to air missiles (“MANPADS”) – is in close proximity to the landing zones, apparently meant that the airlift required “special technology” which only the Russians have.  That strongly suggests the air lift was carried out at night.

Given the extent of Russia’s commitment to the defence of Deir Ez-zor, ISIS’s chances of overrunning either the town or its airport must be dwindling.  Moreover ISIS must be suffering increasingly heavy losses by trying to sustain its attacks there.

There must be some ISIS commanders who are starting to question the logic of continuing with the attempts to capture Deir Ez-zor.  ISIS has up to now consistently avoided getting drawn into battles of attrition, in which it throws away the lives of its fighters by trying to overrun strong defences.  Instead – as in Mosul and Al-Bab – it tries to use attrition against its enemies.  However in Deir Ez-zor it is precisely a battle of attrition that ISIS is now in danger of finding itself in.  There must be some ISIS commanders who are warning against the wisdom of persisting with it.

Meanwhile, possibly in an attempt to relieve the pressure it is increasingly coming under, ISIS yesterday attempted to cut the Khanasser road – the main road linking Aleppo to the government controlled areas in central and southern Syria.  Latest reports however suggest that the Syrian army has successfully repulsed this attack, driving ISIS away from the road, which is once again securely under the Syrian army’s control.

Source*

Related Topics:

Syrian Army Kills Scores of ISIS and al-Nusra Terrorists in Deir Ez-Zor and Homs*

Clean Water Returns to Damascus as Syria Reclaims Key Water Source from Terrorists*

U.S. Coalition Airstrikes Killed More Civilians in Syria*

Israel Bombs Syrian Military Airport near Assad’s Presidential Palace*

U.S. Intensifies Operations in Syria and Iraq amidst Syrian Truce*

ISIS, Al-Qaeda and the U.S. Waging War on Syria’s Public Utilities*

Pentagon Re-Packages Al-Qaeda as ‘Khorasan Group’ to Sell Attack on Syria*

British Generals Arrive in Syria to Recruit Aleppo Terrorists*

Cuba Delivers Vaccines against Meningitis to Syrian People*

U.S and its Partners in Crime Suffer ‘Meltdown of Sanity’ over Syria’s Aleppo Victory*

14+ U.S. Coalition Military Officers Captured by Syrian Special Forces in East Aleppo Bunker*

Soros Partners with MasterCard to Profiteer from his Engineered Mass Migration*

Soros Partners with MasterCard to Profiteer from his Engineered Mass Migration*

By Edmund Kozak

Billionaire activist and arch globalist George Soros just won’t let his dream of a borderless, cultureless world free of Western values die.

Soros is partnering with MasterCard Inc. to create Humanity Ventures, with the ostensible purpose of improving the lives of migrants through investments in education and health care, and fostering economic development in migrant communities.

“Migrants are often forced into lives of despair in their host communities because they cannot gain access to financial, healthcare and government services,” Soros said on Thursday in a joint statement with MasterCard.

“Our potential investment in this social enterprise, coupled with MasterCard’s ability to create products that serve vulnerable communities, can show how private capital can play a constructive role in solving social problems,” he continued.

But while Soros’ previous political efforts have largely been almost entirely in the form of his foundation making grants to other entities, Humanity Ventures appears a longer-term, more intensive project.

“Humanity Ventures is intended to be profitable so as to stimulate involvement from other business people,” Soros said in his statement.

Clearly it’s not enough for Soros that he spends his money on encouraging mass migration — he wants other millionaires and billionaires to do so also and is enticing them to do so with the promise of profit.

Soros is one of the world’s most prominent proponents of the displacement of Westerners and erosion of traditional Western identity through mass migration. His Open Society Foundations has donated millions of dollars to organizations and causes promoting everything from mass migration to radical feminism.

His destructive activities are so prolific that last week, Szilard Nemeth, vice-chairman of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz Party, called for OSF and any organizations it funds to be banished from the country.

“These organizations must be pushed back with all available tools, and I think they must be swept out, and now I believe the international conditions are right for this with the election of [Donald Trump],” Nemeth said.

Nemeth’s comments follow Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s declaration in December that the year 2017 would be “about the extrusion of George Soros and the forces symbolized by him.” Every country “will want to displace Soros,” Orban said.

“This can already be seen in Europe. They investigate where the money comes from, what kind of intelligence connections there are, which NGOs represent what interests.”

Unfortunately for those who cherish national sovereignty, border security, and traditional values, OSF is not prepared to go quietly into the night and leave sovereign nations to administer their own affairs.

“The Open Society Foundation [sic] will continue to work in Hungary despite government opposition to our mission of fairer, accountable societies,” the group’s president, Christopher Stone, told Bloomberg last week.

“In Hungary and around the world, we are more focused than ever on working with local groups to strengthen democratic practice, rights, and justice.”

Source*

Related Topics:

Disaster Capitalism, Immigration, and the Outsourcing of Violence in the U.K.*

Mass Migration as Weapons of War*

Soros: Western Society Must Fall Before One World Govt Can Be Established*

War Criminal Blair to Eradicate European Culture to Create a United States of Europe*

U.N. Raises Replacement Migration for Eurasian Countries with Aging Populations*

West’s Racist Wars for Creating the Immigration Crises*

Men tired of Gang Stereotypes Launch ‘cook for refugees’ Campaign*

Some Refugees Are Being Sold For Organs*

Far-right Activists Impersonated Police, Attacked Refugees, Stole their Possessions in Calais*

130,000 Refugees Vanished after Being Registered in Germany*

Turkish Company Caught Selling Fake Life-jackets to Refugees*

Denmark to ‘confiscate’ Gold, Jewellery, and other Valuables from Refugees*

‘Stop Operation Soros’ Movement begins in Macedonia*

The Entire Senior Management Team at the State Department Just Resigned*

The Entire Senior Management Team at the State Department Just Resigned*

Demonstrating just how ideologically aligned with the Obama administration was the entire U.S. State Department, moments ago the WaPo reported that “the entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.”

The mass resignation took place as Rex Tillerson was inside the State Department’s headquarters in Foggy Bottom on Wednesday, taking meetings and getting the lay of the land.

According to WaPo’s Josh Rogin who suddenly has no more senior level sources left at State:

“I reported Wednesday morning that the Trump team was narrowing its search for his No. 2, and that it was looking to replace the State Department’s long-serving undersecretary for management, Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy, who has been in that job for nine years, was actively involved in the transition and was angling to keep that job under Tillerson, three State Department officials told me.”

Then suddenly on Wednesday afternoon, Kennedy and three of his top officials resigned unexpectedly, four State Department officials confirmed. Assistant Secretary of State for Administration Joyce Anne Barr, Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond and Ambassador Gentry O. Smith, director of the Office of Foreign Missions, followed him out the door. All are career foreign service officers who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Additionally, “Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Gregory Starr retired Jan. 20, and the director of the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, Lydia Muniz, departed the same day. That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.”

“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry.

“Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”

Rex Tillerson, President-elect Trump's nominee for secretary of state, had a rocky first day facing members of the Senate during his confirmation hearing on Jan. 11 at the Capitol

Rex Tillerson, President-elect Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, had a rocky first day facing members of the Senate during his confirmation hearing on Jan. 11 at the Capitol

Rex Tillerson, President-elect Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, had a rocky first day facing members of the Senate during his confirmation hearing on Jan. 11 at the Capitol

There were more: several senior foreign service officers in the State Department’s regional bureaus have also left their posts or resigned since the election. But the emptying of leadership in the management bureaus is more disruptive because those offices need to be led by people who know the department and have experience running its complicated bureaucracies. There’s no easy way to replace that via the private sector, said Wade.

“Diplomatic security, consular affairs, there’s just not a corollary that exists outside the department, and you at least can afford a learning curve in these areas where issues can quickly become matters of life and death,” he said.

“The muscle memory is critical. These retirements are a big loss. They leave a void. These are very difficult people to replace.”

Whether Kennedy left on his own volition or was pushed out by the incoming Trump team is a matter of dispute inside the department. Just days before he resigned, Kennedy was taking on more responsibility inside the department and working closely with the transition. His departure was a surprise to other State Department officials who were working with him.

Rogin’s conclusion: “By itself, the sudden departure of the State Department’s entire senior management team is disruptive enough. But in the context of a president who railed against the U.S. foreign policy establishment during his campaign and secretary of state with no government experience, the vacancies are much more concerning.”

On the other hand, if Tillerson wanted a real clean slate, he just got it.

Source*

Related Topics:

Trump Dynasty: Federal Appeals Court Judge Barry is his Sister*

Obama not Trump Ordered the Voter Fraud Investigation*

The Caribbean Supports Venezuela against U.S. Interventionism*

Two Major Pipelines Spill the Same Week Trump Advances KXL, DAPL*

Trump Will Sign Order to Build Wall, Ban Refugees, Muslims*

Bill Quietly Introduced to Withdraw U.S. from the U.N.*

Trump to end Obama Funding of Foreign Abortions by Sunday, Claims Report*

Ebola Didn’t Work so, U.S. Pushes AIDS-Causing Drugs on U.S. Black Population*

Colour Revolutions? Soros-Funded Groups Back Anti-Trump Women’s March*

 

Trump Dynasty: Federal Appeals Court Judge Barry is his Sister*

Trump Dynasty: Federal Appeals Court Judge Barry is his Sister*

By Ronn Blitzer

Maryanne Trump Barry

Maryanne Trump Barry

President Donald Trump has been known by the American public for decades. First as an outspoken New York real estate tycoon, later as a reality TV star, and now as Commander-in-Chief. But despite his occasional disdain for the legal system, his sister Maryanne Trump Barry is actually a prestigious federal judge with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

Judge Barry, a graduate of Hofstra Law School, began her career as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey, before President Ronald Reagan appointed her as a U.S. District Judge there. In 1999, she began her current role on the Third Circuit bench, after being appointed by President Bill Clinton.

In addition to sharing a family, not to mention a penchant for well-kept hair, Judge Barry and President Trump also seem to share a distaste for political correctness, particularly when it comes to how men interact with women. Judge Barry got some backlash for remarks she made about sexual harassment to the Interagency Committee on Women in Law Enforcement.

“I stand second to none in condemning sexual harassment of women,” she insisted.

“But what is happening is that every sexy joke of long ago, every flirtation, is being recalled by some women and revised and re-evaluated as sexual harassment. Many of these accusations are, in anybody’s book, frivolous.”

Judge Barry claimed that such “frivolous” claims of harassment eliminate “any kind of playfulness and banter” between men and women. “Where has the laughter gone?” she asked.

Despite some similarities, however, Judge Barry does not share the same political views that the President has espoused in recent years. While President Trump has been touting himself as pro-life, Judge Barry has drawn criticism from the right for ruling in favour of abortion rights. Trump’s former rival Senator Ted Cruz even called her a “radical pro-abortion extremist.” In reality, her stance on abortion isn’t as controversial as that, being that the source of her opponents’ ire is a case where she voted against a New Jersey law that would ban “partial-birth” abortion because it was so vague that Barry felt it could be used to bar almost any abortion.

President Trump had once commented in jest that his sister would be a “phenomenal” Supreme Court justice. While this may be true, Judge Barry’s record does not appear to be as conservative as the jurists currently rumoured to be on the President’s short list.

Source*

Related Topics:

Trumps Seems to be Doing the Cabals Bidding with Goldman Sachs Heavily Entrenched in his Administration*

Keep it in the British Royal Family: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are Related*

Obama not Trump Ordered the Voter Fraud Investigation*