#UK & FRANCE Building WALL to STOP #MUSLIMS !!! #TERROR

UK and France to Construct Border Wall in Calais to Deter Migrants

By Jack Phillips, Epoch Times  |  

September 7, 2016 AT 5:51 PM

 

Last Updated: 

September 7, 2016 6:04 pm

Migrants watch police officers taking positions in the southern sector of the camp near Calais, northern France, Monday, Feb. 29, 2016. (AP Photo/Chris den Hond)

British officials confirmed on Tuesday that construction will start this month on a large concrete wall in Calais, France, which is intended to prevent refugees and migrants from making their way to the UK through the Channel Tunnel.

“This measure is intended to further protect the Rocade from migrant attempts to disrupt, delay and even attack vehicles approaching the port,” the British Home Office in a statement, referring to the Rocade road that connects to the port.

The wall is a joint project by France and Britain and the latest attempt curb the flow of immigrants trying to reach the UK through the port of Calais. Several fences have been erected to protect the port, train tracks, and a terminal for the Eurotunnel that goes under the English Channel, linking the U.K. and France.

Migrants trying to reach Britain have crowded into a massive, overcrowded camp called the “Jungle” on the outskirts of Calais, located along the English Channel.

In elaborating on a timeframe for construction of the planned wall, Robert Goodwill, the British immigration minister, in a hearing with the U.K. Parliament’s Home Affairs Committee, said officials are “going to start building this big new wall very soon.”

“We’ve done the fence, now we are doing the wall,” he said, the BBC reported. “People are still getting through,” he added.

The wall, Home Secretary Amber Rudd added, is “not a new initiative.” Rudd added, “We support the French with money to help them do that. It is up to them how they decide to secure their borders in Calais and around it.”

The U.K. will spend £2 million ($2.6 million) on the proposed wall, which would be about 13 feet tall and would run more than 0.6 miles.

The project is not without its critics. François Guennoc, an activist with the L’Auberge des Migrants, an aide group for migrants in Calais, said the wall won’t make roads safer. “It’s a bad way of wasting British money,” he told the New York Times. “Walls don’t work.” Instead, the wall would just push the problem inland, he said.

“When you put walls up anywhere in the world, people find ways to go round them. It’s a waste of money. It could make it more dangerous for people, it will push up tariffs for people smugglers and people will end up taking more risks,” he told the Guardian.

Richard Burnett, head of the Road Haulage Association, described the move as a waste of the “taxpayers’ money.” The money used to build the wall “would be much better spent on increasing security along the approach roads,” he said, according to the BBC.

#OBAMA WAR ON #INTERNET 'WILL WEAKEN AMERICA' !

Congressman: Move would let Russia, China, Iran regulate domain names

Published: 13 hours ago

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2014/02/gcorombos_avatar-96x96.jpg

 GREG COROMBOS About | Email | Archive

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/themes/worldnet-theme/_/images//feed.png

 Subscribe to feed

97

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/printer_famfamfam.gif

 Print

 

 

Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., says U.S. must not relinquish control over Internet

The Obama administration is moving forward with plans to relinquish U.S. control over Internet domains, but many conservatives are demanding the president not change what is working fine by ceding control to other countries, which could then limit the content their own citizens can see.

The old contract by which the United States controlled Internet domain aspects since 1987 actually expired at the end of September 2015. Since then, the Obama administration has been trying to build a framework to transition the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN, to a “multi-stakeholder” system. As more of those details get ironed out, the end of American control draws near. Extended U.S. control is slated to end later this month.

Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., is among those who believe this is a big mistake.

“Is this move going to strengthen America, or is this move going to weaken it? I think it’s very clear that if we do what President Obama wants to do, it’ll weaken America’s stance again,” said Yoho, who is a strong supporter of the DOTCOM Act.

That bill passed the House of Representatives overwhelmingly last year, but the Senate has yet to take it up. It would give Congress oversight of any transfer of Internet domain control and give lawmakers the power to kill or modify the plan.

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is spearheading the effort in the Senate to keep the Internet in U.S. hands.

Yoho told WND and Radio America his approach is simple. The current system isn’t broken, so why radically change it?

“The U.S. has been in control of the domain names of the Internet since its inception. If we relinquish this control, it goes possibly to the U.N. Then you have countries like Russia, China and Iran and any other country that wants to play, and [they get to] determine how to regulate those domain names within their countries,” Yoho explained.

He said giving authoritarian leaders control over what their people can access only means bad results.

“I think you’re going to see a decrease in access to the Internet, a decrease of freedom over the Internet to an extent we have never experienced before,” he said.

Yoho said those nations would not be in position to block what Americans can see online, but they could restrict anything they wanted for their own populations.

“They can block any country’s intellectual property or content from being accessed by somebody in Russia or China or Iran. You’re starting to limit people,” he said.

“If you look at one of the basic underlying tenets of liberty, it’s freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom to access of information. If we start sequestering that and blocking it off, you’re going to have pockets around the world that are going to become more and more isolated,” Yoho said.

He said the past 29 years prove the U.S. is best at guaranteeing people around the world have access to all available information to learn and better their lives.

“One of the things that made the Internet so explosive and such an economic and intellectual force is because of the free-market enterprise in a country like the U.S. controlling access to it,” Yoho said.

Yoho sees two other dangers of relinquishing total control of Internet domains. First is the additional risks to our already vulnerable cyber defenses.

“If they take over the domain names and things like that, who knows what they’ll plan as far as malware or some type of cyber bug that’ll get into everybody’s computer? So this is a misstep by this administration,” Yoho said.

He said the Obama administration is also breaking the law by pushing this plan forward without congressional authorization.

“It’s a violation of federal law for an officer or an employee of the United States government to make or authorize an expenditure or obligation exceeding the amount we’ve appropriated,” Yoho said. “By doing what they want to do, it’s against the law. That doesn’t seem to be a concern for this administration, and we aim to stop it.”

Click here for reuse options!

Copyright 2016 WND

Share o

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/09/obama-war-on-internet-will-weaken-america/#GHBzRSuuHjOOV160.99

#BlackLivesMatter 518 DEAD 3014 SHOT in #CHICAGO !!!

Year to Date
Shot & Killed: 466
Shot & Wounded: 2548
Total Shot: 3014
Total Homicides: 518

September to Date
Shot & Killed: 19
Shot & Wounded: 95
Total Shot: 114
Total Homicides: 20

#OK Judge rules #Muslim beheader not competent ! #OBAMA

Oklahoma:  ROBERT SPENCER

This is yet another instance in which authorities ascribe Islamic jihad activity to mental illness. And this case is particularly egregious: authorities in Oklahoma are taking the fanatical attachment to Islam of Jah’Keem Yisrael (formerly Alton Nolen) as an indication that he is insane. Texas neuropsychologist Antoinette McGarrahan told the judge: “He has lost touch with reality. It has gone to that extreme. He can’t think rationally because he firmly believes he is being held captive, and we are all evil and the devil.”

Now wait a minute. He is in jail, no? So he is being held captive. And his Qur’an calls unbelievers “the most vile of created beings” (98:6), so how is it evidence of insanity that he thinks his captors and their associates are “all evil and the devil”?

SMU professor Robert Hunt, “an expert on Islamic beliefs,” claimed that the beheading was not in accord with Islamic law because “the use of beheading by ISIS is in the context of perceived crimes against the Muslim community and involves trials, however unjust, and a finding of guilt. They do not involve settling personal disputes.” Hunt did not note that the Qur’an says “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks” (47:4), without noting that one must not do this in the context of personal disputes.

Hunt also abetted the claim that the beheader is insane by noting that “Nolen would not agree to an interview in the jail. Hunt said Nolen called him a ‘white heathen’ and walked out.” Of this, Hunt said: “He appears to be living in a fantasy world.” Why? What is evidence that he is living in a fantasy world that he doesn’t want to talk to an unbeliever and refers to him as such?

Jah’Keem Yisrael “justified his actions based on his reading of the Quran and stated that he would do the same thing again to anyone who oppressed him.” And since everyone who isn’t a racist, bigoted Islamophobe knows that the Qur’an teaches nothing but peace and benevolence, this must mean that he is insane.

Impressive zebibah

“Judge Rules Alton Nolen Not Competent To Enter Guilty Plea In Moore Beheading Case,” News9.com, August 17, 2016 (thanks to Bulldog):

MOORE, Oklahoma – A judge has ruled that a man, accused of beheading his coworker at Vaughan Foods in Moore, Oklahoma, is not competent to enter a guilty plea in this case.

Wednesday morning, the judge declined Alton Nolen’s plea until further evaluation. The state mental hospital in Vinita will handle his testing and treatment.

Since the beginning, Nolen has stated he wants to plead guilty and receive the death penalty for the September 2014 attack at Vaughan Foods in Moore, where he killed coworker Colleen Hufford by beheading her and tried to attack two others.

Kashmir: Muslims tell Hindus to "leave or face death"

#BlackLivesMatter #TERROR of Reporters ! #Obama

: Protesters Too Hostile to Whites

1267

17

by WARNER TODD HUSTON15 Aug 2016Milwaukee, WS1,937

An independent journalist has quit reporting from Milwaukee, saying that the situation is too dangerous for anyone who looks like a white person to be walking the streets.

“For those that are perceivably white, it is just not safe to be here … that’s why I’m deciding to leave,” reporter Tim Pool said in a video. He posted the video to his Youtube page to inform fans that he was pulling out of Milwaukee because the rioters have targeted white people for attacks.

Pool, an award winning reporter who gained notice by his coverage of the Occupy Wall Street protests in Chicago back in 2011, said even though he is not strictly white, he said he felt in danger as the protests morphed from a complaint over a police shooting to an excuse to attack white people simply for being white.

Wearing his signature pullover ski cap, the reporter told his viewers that he became too frightened for his personal safety after seeing an 18-year-old white kid being “shot in the neck” as rioters screamed for whites to be targeted.

Pool insisted he understood the anger of the crowd. “These locals are angry and they’re angry for a reason,” he said. “But things started to get really tense later in the night when people started screaming ‘f**k white people,’ ‘white people suck,'” Pool said before describing several incidents where rioters were angrily egging on their fellows to attack both white people and reporters.

The young reporter went on to stress that it “isn’t every protester” actively calling for such violence but he is still leaving the city.  “For those that are perceivably white, it is just not safe to be here. And that’s why I’m deciding to leave,” he said.

“For those that are wondering, I’m actually Korean,” Pool added, “I’m mixed [race], but, you know, most people down here, you know, when I was covering this didn’t, they don’t make that conclusion, they just looked at me and they start saying things about white people … but when you hear a group directing their anger and hate towards white people, and seeing several white people be attacked, and then finally an 18-year-old white kid is shot in the neck, that’s when I’m like, ‘OK, I shouldn’t be here,’ right?”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Law Enforcement, Black Lives Matter, Milwaukee, Riots, Violence,wisconsin

#Twitter Fends Off Suit Over #ISIS Attack ! #OBAMA #TERROR

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge Wednesday dismissed a suit against Twitter Inc. that seeks to hold the social media platform liable for a 2015 terrorist attack in Jordan that left two Americans dead and was linked to the Islamic State, or ISIS.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick III of the Northern District of California, in a 15-page order, ruled that Twitter is shielded from liability under the Communications Decency Act for content that is published by third parties using the service.

Moreover, Orrick said the plaintiffs lawyers at Bursor & Fisher have failed to draw a clear line of causation between the many Twitter accounts run by ISIS supporters and the attack in Jordan, which was carried out by a Jordanian police captain named Anwar Abu Zaid.

“Plaintiffs do not allege that ISIS recruited or communicated with Abu Zaid over Twitter, that ISIS or Abu Zaid used Twitter to plan, carry out, or raise funds for the attack, or that Abu Zaid ever viewed ISIS-related content on Twitter or even had a Twitter account,” Orrick wrote.

The case against Twitter was filed in January by Tamara Fields, the widow of Lloyd “Carl” Fields, Jr., one of the contractors killed in the attack. The suit was later joined by Heather Creach on behalf of her late husband, James Creach, who was also killed.

The ruling bodes ill for other similar cases pending against Twitter, Google Inc. and Facebook Inc. alleging that their platforms provide support to terrorist organizations. Last month, families of five victims killed in attacks in Israel filed a lawsuit seeking at least $1 billion from Facebook claiming the social network is providing support for Hamas militants to commit terrorist acts.

Orrick had made clear during a June hearing that he was inclined to dismiss the suit against Twitter. But he also followed through with his pledge to allow the plaintiffs another shot to amend their complaint, giving them until the end of August to address the concerns he identified.

Joshua Arisohn of Bursor & Fisher, who argued for the families of the American contractors killed in the attack, did not respond to an email seeking comment. Twitter, represented in the matter by former Solicitor General Seth Waxman at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, also did not respond to a request for comment.

Twitter’s defense under the Communications Decency Act hinged on a provision known as section 230(c)(1), which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has interpreted as essentially immunizing “providers of interactive computer services against liability arising from content created by third parties.”

Arisohn sought to get around that by contending that Twitter can be held liable for simply providing accounts to ISIS operatives—giving them a valuable service for free that allows them to spread propaganda.

But Orrick was not persuaded by that line of argument, and said that it necessarily was tied up with the content that those ISIS operatives actually post. “Plaintiffs do not explain why this difference means that the provision of accounts theory seeks to treat Twitter as something other than a publisher of third-party content, and I am not convinced that it does,” he wrote.

In one of the more detailed points of the decision, Orrick also ruled that Twitter’s direct messaging function is not outside the reach of section 230(c)(1). The plaintiffs had argued that it is because “publishing” necessarily means putting something in the public domain.

Orrick noted that previous case law has barred claims against internet service providers for defamation by a third party, where a message was transmitted between the defamer and anyone other than the person being defamed. “Under this analysis, the private nature of direct messaging does not remove the transmission of such messages from the scope of publishing activity under section 230(c)(1),” he wrote.

Contact Ben Hancock at bhancock@alm.com. On Twitter: @benghancock