007 GoldenHair

Video 413

007 GoldenHair

Justin Trudeau again defends himself against groping allegation

Wonderboy not as squeaky clean now that his image has been tarnished.
Will the MSM pursue this in the same manner as they do with Trump?

------------------------------

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau admitted Thursday he previously apologized to a reporter who alleged Trudeau groped her at a festival in 2000 -- but the Liberal Party leader continued to insist he didn’t act inappropriately.

Trudeau expanded on comments he made Sunday when he told reporters he didn’t “remember any negative interactions” on the day in which he's accused of groping a Creston Daily Advance journalist.

“I’ve been reflecting very carefully on what I remember from that incident almost 20 years ago,” he said. “I do not feel that I acted inappropriately in any way. But I respect the fact that someone else might have experienced that differently.”

Translation:

Trudeau denied acting "inappropriately" at the 2000 festival where the incident was said to have taken place. (AP)

If that's true why would he say this:

“If I had known you were reporting for a national paper, I never would have been so forward.”

Trudeau said he would have apologized to the reporter because he “sensed that she was not entirely comfortable with the interaction that we had,” according to The Guardian.

“I apologized at the moment,” Trudeau said, adding that he didn’t feel it would be appropriate to contact the woman in question.

Allegations against the prime minister re-surfaced last week when a Calgary law professor posted a picture of an old Creston Daily Advance newspaper editorial page that featured claims the then-teacher engaged in inappropriately "handling" a reporter. The story didn’t have a byline.

Um, what? #cdnpoli #loc #MeToo pic.twitter.com/6P7iiPQRZA

— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) June 6, 2018

Like father like son. 

Trudeau at the time was 28 years old and was helping raise money at the British Columbia event to support avalanche safety, a cause he came to support after his brother had died in one in 1998, The Guardian reported.

The woman said she felt “blatantly disrespected” at the time, though the story didn’t offer many specifics about the incident, according to The Guardian.

“I’m sorry,” Trudeau allegedly told the woman at the time. “If I had known you were reporting for a national paper, I never would have been so forward.”

The reporter was distressed about the alleged incident with Trudeau, Valerie Bourne, the paper’s former publisher, told CBC News. Bourne added she wouldn’t have classified the encounter as “sexual assault.”

“She didn’t like what had happened. She wasn’t sure how she should proceed with it, because of course we’re talking [about] somebody who was known to the Canadian community,” Bourne said.

Brian Bell, the editor of the paper at the time, believed the reporter, he told CBC News.

“I certainly believe that it happened," Bell said. "This reporter was of a high character in my opinion and was professional in the way she conducted herself, and there’s no question in my mind that what was alluded to, written about in that editorial, did happen."

Justin Trudeau again defends himself against groping allegation

Statue of Liberty climber identified as immigrant activist

If you pull a Columbo and investigate what the media calls an "immigrant activist" 9 times out of ten they're illegal. On the side chance I'm wrong and this bitch is legal (she probably claimed political persecution oppressed in her native Congo) and now feels entitled to fuck the United States with her new found freedom. Who vets these dogs? Check out her behavior since entering the US. Sound like an upstanding US citizen to you? Fly this bitch back over the Congo and drop her off minus the parachute.

The MSM is calling her a hero. 
Try this shit in her homeland and she'd still be crawling with flies right now.

Oh...and something else I find very disturbing. As we all know the Statue of Liberty is a high priority target for terrorists, a suicide bomber's dream come true, so consequently it is well protected. Therefore just how did this terrorist without a bomb get this close to the base of the Lady?

The woman who scaled the Statue of Liberty on Wednesday has been identified.

Cops say Therese Patricia Okoumou — a 44-year-old immigrant from the Democratic Republic of the Congo — was the person responsible for the Fourth of July protest.

She lives in the St. George neighborhood of Staten Island and is currently in federal custody, according to police sources.

Officers from the NYPD’s Emergency Service Unit transported her to a federal detention center Wednesday night following her three-hour standoff with authorities. Her case is being handled by prosecutors in the Southern District of New York.

Sources said Okoumou told investigators she climbed up to the feet of Lady Liberty to protest President Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy on immigration and the separation of families at the border.

According to court records, she’s a Congolese immigrant who once filed a complaint with the New York City Commission on Human Rights, seeking a judicial review and reversal of a “determination” it made regarding alleged incidents of abuse that Okoumou suffered at the hands of a social services agency on Staten Island where she worked.

Specifically, Okoumou claimed that in 2005, she was treated “in a demeaning manner” by her bosses and told that she would be fired “for complaining of discrimination.” It’s unclear why her complaint was tossed out.

In 2011, Okoumou made headlines after she was hit with an astounding 60 violations for illegally posting ads for her services as a personal trainer.

The Department of Sanitation slapped her with $4,500 in fines that year after she spent five hours one Sunday posting the fliers on Manhattan utility poles.

In 2017, she was arrested and charged with obstructing governmental administration, unlawful assembly, trespassing during a demonstration at the Department of Labor, and assaulting a police officer. 

On Wednesday, Okoumou told investigators she was part of a group protest organized by Rise and Resist NYC. The activists unfurled a banner on Liberty Island less than an hour before her climb that read: “ABOLISH ICE.”

Organizers initially tried to distance themselves from Okoumou’s Statue of Liberty stunt — saying she had “no connection” with their cause — but later admitted that she was part of the group.

Members described her on social media as a “total badass.”

(More like a total waste of skin)

“She’s very dedicated to the resistance generally, but specifically to the issues surrounding immigration and the treatment immigrants have been receiving from ICE and Customs and Border Control,” explained Jay Walker, a Rise and Resist activist. “She’s been an active member for about four or five months.”

Walker told The Post that Okoumou helped plan the banner demonstration, but carried out the Statue of Liberty stunt on her own.

“She didn’t tell any of us about this plan,” he said. “We were all really shocked.”

The group had announced their Fourth of July stunt on social media moments before carrying it out Wednesday but made no mention of the climb.

“We were all really taken back,” Walker said. “At first, we didn’t realize it was our fellow member. It wasn’t until we were able to see closeup photos of her that we realized it was her.”

According to Walker, Rise and Resist have been working to ensure that Okoumou gets legal representation now that she’s in federal custody. He told The Post that she managed to make it up to the feet of Lady Liberty all on her own — without ropes or climbing gear.

“We came through all the security protocols that we needed to when getting onto the Liberty Island ferry,” Walker said, noting how Okoumou made it through the metal detectors.

“I guess she just had some hidden climbing skills that none of us knew about.”

Statue of Liberty climber identified as immigrant activist

Had to laugh when I read this one

Somali terror group Al-Shabaab bans PLASTIC BAGS to ‘protect human and animals’ despite slaughtering thousands of innocents

ONE of the world’s most barbaric terrorist organizations has banned plastic bags - because they believe they harm life on Earth.

The Somali terror group al-Shabaab, known for butchering thousands of people across East Africa, has banned them in an apparent re-branding exercise to show they care about the planet.

The sinister group's main mouthpiece, Radio Andalus, broadcast news of the ban on Sunday, reports Huffington Post.

The propaganda said discarded plastic bags “pose a serious threat to the well-being of humans and animals alike”.

The jihadist outfit - who openly boast about their violence - also want to halt logging of native trees.

Mohamed Abu Abdalla, the group’s governor for southern Somalia’s Shabelle regions, said details of how the new rules will be enforced will be announced later.

Plastic bags bad... violent terrorism good?

But given their reputation for being ultra hard-line, a fine and a nice leaflet are unlikely penalties.

Raffaello Pantucci, counter-terror expert at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), said the move was designed to show the world that the group could govern.

So far they have only shown how they can kill.

In one outrage last year, they carried out a truck bombing in 2017 that killed more than 500 people.

Had to laugh when I read this one

WaPo...Separating children from parents at the border isn’t just cruel. Its torture.

We already knew it was inhumane. It also violates international law.

--------------------

I got one answer.

If separating children at the border is 'torture' WTF do you call this?!?

------------------------

In two speeches last week in the border states of Arizona and California, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that as a matter of enforcement, if an unauthorized migrant brings a child across the United States-Mexico border without documentation, “we will prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you as required by law. If you don’t like that, then don’t smuggle children over our border.”

This means undocumented children and parents will be separated — a tactic meant to deter migrant parents, including many asylum seekers, such as those who’ve traveled through Central America in a caravan in recent weeks, from crossing the border in the first place. Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International have argued that this policy change is inhumane, and it is. But evidence from developmental neuroscience suggests it is more than inhumane.

It’s also, by definition, torture.

Under federal law, which adopts the United Nations definition, torture is: “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as … punishing him or her for an act he or she or a third person … has committed or is suspected of having committed.” And though in theory any action inflicting such suffering is banned, that is what is inflicted by separating parents and children in border detention.

Children arriving at the U.S. border in search of asylum are frequently a particularly vulnerable population. In many cases fleeing violence and persecution, they also encounter hunger, illness, and threats of physical harm along their hazardous journey to the border. This combination of experiences puts migrant children at high risk for post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Such anxiety and mood disorders can be debilitating and intractable, particularly when they start in childhood. By the time many migrant children arrive in the United States, they have already faced harrowing events, increasing the likelihood that they’ll be traumatized by parental separation.

Parenting is, after all, a crucial ingredient in our species’ recipe for survival. It is so crucial that children’s brains have evolved to need it the same way that their bodies require nutrition and rest. Various studies demonstrate that being close to parents can buffer children against feelings of stress and threat. While children are remarkably flexible about who parents them — biological or adopted parents, other family members or even significant nonfamily members — they are inflexible about their need for caretaking.

The strongest evidence for the importance of close caregivers comes from children who have experienced caregiver deprivation. Even when their physical needs are met, children raised in institutional orphanages commonly exhibit stunted growth, cognitive impairments, heightened anxiety and stress-related health problems that often persist even after being adopted into highly nurturing homes. Even mere instability of caregivers early in life is disruptive to children’s development. For example, youth in foster care who experience multiple transient placements are significantly more likely to drop out of high school, be unemployed as adults and develop mental and physical illnesses.

The science leads to the conclusion that the deprivation of caregiving produces a form of extreme suffering in children. Separating migrant children from parents, then, increases the likelihood that their experience in immigration detention will cause lasting mental and possibly physical health problems.

Yet last year, citing cost, the Trump administration defunded a family detention program that catered to mothers with young children and pregnant women. Absent these family detention centers, there’s a risk that once they’re separated, children could wind up in facilities incapable of adequately safeguarding them while simultaneously depriving them of their most vital coping resource — their parent. That’s one reason a Texas judge held in 2016 that the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services could not license an immigration detention center as a child-care facility.

By contrast, safe and healthy alternatives to separating asylum-seeking parents and children not only are practiced in other Western industrialized countries, but they’re also meant to take child welfare into account. The European Commission’s 2016 proposal for standards for the reception of applicants for international protection calls for conditions “adapted to the specific situation of minors, whether unaccompanied or within families, with due regard to their security, physical and emotional care and are provided in a manner that encourages their general development.” Moreover, research findings clearly support that families need to be kept together. One study in Belgium concluded that “refugee adolescents separated from both parents experienced the highest number of traumatic events compared to accompanied refugee adolescents.”

If the United States won’t meet this standard, the effect will be punitive and will place the burden of a complex international challenge on the most vulnerable migrants — children. In any context, exhibiting this kind of cruelty is un-American, but particularly so in this situation. The practice of separating families at the border is morally reprehensible and — based on the science — goes against international and U.S. law, because the suffering it inflicts constitutes torture of children.

WaPo...Separating children from parents at the border isn’t just cruel. Its torture.